User talk:Llywrch/Archive8

Saw you blog and thought you might be interested in the launch of [wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Welcome_to_Debatepedia%21 Debatepedia.org] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.196.126.69 (talk) 18:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My blog has a comments section. If you want to leave me a message on something I wrote there, please do it there -- unless they are related to Wikipedia. -- llywrch 18:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for working on Injibara again! I think we had this discussion before, and you didn't like Injibara classified as a city. So, with the new category of Ethiopian Towns, I know it is tempting to re-categorize Injibara. Still, when I look at what is left in the Cities category (places like Manbuk or Mankush), then I feel strongly that Injibara is a metropole in comparison with those. The new census is on its way, and you will find that the new figures will confirm my assessment. I agree that Injibara is not playing in the same league as Bahir Dar or Dessie, but still it is quite substantial. I might be happy having it classified as a town, but then other places should appear there, too. Landroving Linguist 20:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I'm not insulted. In fact, what you intend to do makes a lot of sense to me. Go on reducing all the small places to towns, because this is really what they are, including Injibara. Landroving Linguist 18:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted 4 redirects on 04/19 and am wondering if you can please provide a more detailed explanation of why you rejected them besides merely "this article is not suitable for Wikipedia"? 69.140.164.142 17:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the bottom of those articles, you will see my response: "It appears someone was having trouble submitting an article for creation here." You did not make it clear that you were submitting four requests for redirects, so I made my best guess at your intentions. To anticipate your next question, I'll admit that I'm hazy on this, but I believe there is a policy or guideline against redirects that cross name spaces: articles that begin with "Wikipedia:" are in a different namespace than articles beginning with "User:" -- or none at all. You can check to see if my memory is correct with a query at Wikipedia: Village pump (policy). -- llywrch 17:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You made an edit saying that I would probably change the spellings you used. Well, I don't really have a problem with any (using an accented e should probably be avoided for an article name) except "tselemti." IMO, there's no problem with using that term to refer to the modern district, but it was historically known by its Amharic and Ge'ez name, Tselemt. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 19:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that there has been some vandalism on your user page seen here. I noticed it and reverted. I guess this just means to be on the lookout for similar blanking/vandalism. Good luck. MrMacMan ^Talk 18:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, vandalism strikes pretty randomly. I mean I've been vandalized and I'm just a regular editor. Just want to make sure you knew, goodluck. MrMacMan ^Talk 19:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The April 2007 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Care to get involved in Council of Jerusalem again? Looks like User:Roger Arguile is proposing some major edits. 64.149.82.195 21:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I detect that 64 etc. is, like me, seeking assistance. I fear that, like others, I shall feel obliged to leave the field to those who advance no arguments but are chronic reverters. WP is too important for this. As you will have detected, I took some time to remove and adjust marginal material. Edit wars are tedious and it is a matter for you whether you respond to any further reverts from anonymous editors. I am happy to respond to any specific queries and defend my ground, though some of the material was extraordinary. Roger Arguile 10:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I had no idea that I was butting heads. I thought I was merely refusing to allow blanket reversions to stand which I thought, mistakenly evidently, was legitimate. Having been the recipient of three reverts in a day, I thought it was then up to others to determine what should happen. My frequent requests for reasons were, as you know, ignored. I am not sure what, apart from allowing my work to be wiped out without explanation, I could have done. Thank you for taking the steps you have and informing me of that route should such problems arise again.

Secondly, I am not sure that had the editors registered (so that one could be sure that this was several people rather than one using different machines) things would have been any better; but I wonder if, when administrators communicate, the matter might be raised that unregeistered editors' powers could be more closely monitored. It's a matter for you, but I assure you that my blood pressure is not raised: the irritations of WP are much less than those in life; it delays the process of tightening up articles which contain a certain amount of tosh, but the project remains, overall, a splendid one. Roger Arguile 14:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki meetup sounds fun. Also, I hope you will take a look at the outline I've put together for reforming the copyright status of Oregon government-produced works. Feel free to hack away at the outline, and if you're able to pitch in at all, that would be great. Stay in touch! -Pete 19:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Three days ago I nominated Amenhotep I for FA, but it's not getting a great of attention by reviewers. I think it may have be because it's now halfway down the page and not big enough to grab the attention of people skimming the page. If you have any comments about it, dropping by the nomination page might help instigate some discussion. Thanks. Thanatosimii 23:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hagos's edits have been nothing but disruptive, involving some detrimental page moves and the addition of copyrighted material from the MIPT terrorist database on the TPLF to various pages (whether or not it is relevant, and deleting information in the process). I have given him or one of his sockpuppets (see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Hagos) warnings, as have other users, including Gyrofrog. He moved Oromo Liberation Front to Tigrayan liberation front, then moved Oromo liberation front (the article's current location) to the same place. I was able to revert the second move, but I can't move the uncapitalized Oromo liberation front to the correct Oromo Liberation Front as I'm not a moderator. Could you make the page move and block him for me? I've also asked Gyrofrog to help me out, btw. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 03:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Llywrch, I've already taken care of this. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know you did not do it, but here is something that really bugs me: Why on earth is the article on this Ethiopian region called with this name? I have never seen this spelling (it also crept into the article of the Gumuz, as an alternate reading). Take my word for it, there is no basis for the Gumaz-spelling. The people are called Gumuz (ጉሙዝ), they speak Gumuz, and the region is called nothing but Benishangul-Gumuz. I don't know how to change this all across the board, but could you take care of this? Likewise I don't see where "Benishangul-Shamuz" came from, which appears in the article twice. Landroving Linguist 21:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick action! Now I'm happy! Landroving Linguist 19:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recently I (probably foolishly) stuck my foot in the Ancient Egypt and race article to try to diffuse things if possible. Now, that's been having some limited sucess, unfortunatly both editors, User:Urthogie and User:Taharqa have followed me over to Dynastic Race Theory and are causing a ruckus. In particular, they bicker over a statement I wrote, summing up Redford's summary of what the material culture of Ancient Egypt does and does not tell us. His quote was somthing to the extent of (I don't have the book on me, but I can get it) "Though this is not to ressurect the moribund Dynastic Race theory, there are certain elements of Egyptian predynastic remains which indicate a trade of ideas and possibly small amounts of people between Egypt and mesopotamia." I summed this up as "However, Scholars still note that while the Dynastic Race Theory is probably fallacious, the evidence upon which it was based does still indicate significant predynastic Mesopotamian influence." I felt justified in writing it as a broad statement, based on similar statements I found in a few other works I have frequent access to, such as Shaw's dictionary of Ancient Egypt, as well as Gardiner's Egypt of the Pharaohs.

Now, Taharqa and Urthogie are edit warring over whether the statement accuratly reflects Redford, even though both have admitted that neither has read the source! On May 5, Taharqa deleted it, with an edit summary of misrepresentation of Redford source, he makes no such argument. [1] She did this several times that day. I put it back twice, since I had read the source and knew she had not. Now, on May 8, she removed it again, claiming that it was Urthogie, and not me, who wrote it, and thus it wasn't in the book. Quote, removed false interpretation of source, editor who provided wording never even read it as was admitted and not claimed by me. [2] I dispatched a notice to her talk page that I was the one who wrote it, [3] and she reverted just recently once again, citing, This isn't true, the person who wrote this didn't even check his source. [4] I then recieved a message on my talk page asking me to defend my inclusion of a sentance which she still didn't believe I actually wrote. [5] Then she amends her claim after checking to see, lo and behold, I wrote it after all. [6]. Now she wants me to prove that indeed the book does say what I say it says, despite the fact she's never looked at the book itself! Normally I'd oblige, but in this case, I find it absurd that I should be on the defensive here. We can't have editors just barging onto other pages and denying that a book says what it says, while admitting they've never read it. Could you by any chance lend a hand and drop her a note, or at least let me know where to go to get this kind of behavior dealt with? Thanks. Thanatosimii 06:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll back up Thanatosimii here, these two editors and the accusations, edit warring and personal attacks that follow in their wake has grown disturbingly disruptive. Anyone attempting to improve the article and/or interject between these two editors is reverted and has their head bitten off. Both just got off a 5 day block and it took no time at all to get back to the unpleasent status quo. A mediation was opened but since has sat with little progress. Something needs to be done but short of Arbitration my hands are tied. I've tried to discuss the problem with both but all I got was venom, more accusations of bias and the occasinal attempts at currying favor so I'd "take sides". I even prompted the mediation, to no avail. Thoughts? NeoFreak 02:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I swear no one even takes the time out though to get me or Urthogie's side, it's frustrating because people have so many opposing views, but to say I'm personally attacking people is an overstatement, all one needs to do is hit my discussion page and ask whatever they need to ask. I'm not unreasonable, it just seems that others are and I stand my ground. At least that's my take, obviously others see it differently, but probably because no one reaches out and seeks to judge me and Urthogie at a distance.Taharqa 04:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you do make personal attacks, calling editors you don't agree with "vandals."[7]--Urthogie 17:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no context for that edit, so I don't know whether Taharqa's use of the word "vandal" is justified or not. We do have a problem with vandalism on Wikipedia, so not every use of that word is a personal attack. However, if you want to talk about Taharqa's behavior, I see that Eagle 101 has accepted to mediate the dispute between you two; I suggest that you discuss your concerns with Taharqa's behavior there, not on my Talk page. -- llywrch 17:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no vandalism on that section of the page. There has however been a disagreement. I was just bringing up Taharqa's behavior in the context of this discussion. Thanks, --Urthogie 17:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writing as someone with no dog in this fight, I'm puzzled about why this appears so controversial. This paraphrase merely acknowledges something that has been accepted for a long time: that ancient Egyptians borrowed ideas from ancient Mesopotamia. For example, Jared Diamond in his book, Guns, Germs and Steel refers to the hypothesis that the ancient Egyptians borrowed the idea of writing -- not the form of its implementation -- from the Mesopotamians; and there are a number of writers who mention this

^No, see, the problem is that people are so quick on here to brush you off and not even take the time to address concerns, assuming me to be outrageous when this is not the case. I agree that there was contact which is pretty much confirmed, but the extent of that contact is disputed and I believe Yom corrected you on this particular issue with updated research. I had a problem more or less with two words, "significant" and "influence"(weasel words), which are not words used in concern to state formation in Egypt. Trade and contact, maybe, but "significant influence"? Who says that? All I asked for was a quote of where this is said, I don't see why my concerns are so unreasonable?Taharqa 04:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My first reading of this response left me almost as puzzled about your concerns as before: if you have no objections to the content of the edit (e.g. that there was contact between the two regions), then why would a paraphrase not be as acceptible as a direct quotation? The point of the additional information was that the archeological evidence was once interpreted one way (i.e. to support the Dynastic Race Theory), but is now interpreted only to illustrate cultural contacts between ancient Egypt & Mesopotamia.

However, after giving your response some thought -- & having read your exchange on NeoFreak's talk page -- I suspect that the conflict here is not so much the content, but that your writing does present you as very assertive. Not that that's wrong (no, I am not making an allusion to the line from Seinfeld -- there is a Wikipedia guideline WP:BOLD), but in my experience being bold does cause unwanted problems with other Wikipedians. After several months of interaction with a wide selection of other people, even the most thick-skinned Wikipedian starts to "brush off" or even respond with some hostility to assertive contacts from people they don't know online. Some of us have tried to avoid this reaction by being reconciliatory when we approach another Wikipedian for the first time -- which has better results. I hope that success is because Wikipedians are here to start a conversation with other people about things they are interested in, & appealing to that interest can sometimes be successful. -- llywrch 22:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the backup over on the Betacommand image throwdown. The thing is, I think a lot of the people arguing for BC's deletion rampage do have a problem with fair use images, they're just not stating it because their side lost the argument. It was stated up the thread a ways that some other-language WPs have completely disallowed fair-use images, and held up as an example. It's a legitimate position, I guess, but my view is that it's an essentially ideological crusade in direct opposition to the practical goal of building a good encyclopedia. Consequently, since they lost the argument on its merits, they've moved toward throwing up practical roadblocks to use of these images, and supporting virtually any action (such as BC's) that makes this harder -- even if it ruins a wide swath of sports articles. VT hawkeye_{talk to me} 13:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be linked to some "issues" I've been fighting over in a few discographies I work on. You seem to be a voice of sanity, can you give me links to these discussions about fair use. A certain editor is claiming to be following policy by using an interpretaion which I consider to be, shall we say, contentious. I'd like to see where fair use was discussed so I can be better informed & possibly get some ammo ;) All the best Megamanic 09:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article was deleted on December 9th, 2006 for being non-notable by Srikeit. It appears that it was never put up for AFD (at least no such page exists here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bingham Academy). Could you possibly undelete it so that Srikeit or someone else can put it up for deletion if they feel it is not notable? IIRC, the article was on a prestigious (secondary?) school in Addis Abeba. I have a feeling the reason has more to do with the fact that it's in a third world country and therefore not known by outsiders, even if it may be notable and important within the country. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 17:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know anything about it myself, but it seemed to be a notable school from the article, IIRC. A quick google search turns up some 3,720 hits, all of which (at least on the first few pages) seem to refer to this academy in Addis Abeba. It has its own website here for instance. It's also mentioned by UNDP as a private school in Addis that foreigners can attend, and noted to be the 91st best high school in Africa by Africa Almanac (not sure of the latter's notability). From what I can find, it seems to be notable enough. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 18:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The CSA is undertaking a new census this year starting on May 29. I've also found this CSA page that seems to have July 2007 estimates for the entire country (all woredas and zones). You may or may not want to start including some of that data in the pages you've made thus far. It would take a while and be, if the census comes out soon, a little unnecessary, depending on if you have a bot to replace the numbers and how fast it would take. It seems that the pastoral census won't be taken until November (see [www.statssa.gov.za/asc2007/Presentations/day%202/session%207/ETHIOPIA/Ethiopia.ppt this powerpoint presentation]), as opposed to May, so perhaps replacing only Somali and Afar numbers would be worth it. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 19:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I figured you wouldn't be to eager to replace all those figures you've been adding for the past year or so now. But is there no one with a Bot that can do this? Maybe someone from the U.S. regions WikiProject might know, since they have to deal with large amounts of census data. I didn't think about it, but you're probably right in that it might have updated Woreda and Zone division information that could clear up the confusion generated by some maps. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 01:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Llywrch. I know you're pretty knowledgable in Ancient Egypt, and I thought you could help out here. The long-standing disputes at Race and ancient Egypt and Egyptians have unfortunately spilled over to the Fayum mummy portraits article. There's been edit warring by both sides and removal of sourced information. I've tried to keep all sourced info intact and describe where there are conflicts between different sources, but it's been hard to initiate any type of dialogue. Care to help out? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 20:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment at the ANI page. I hope you don't mind me asking this question here at your talk page: were you able to see any harassment at all by me prior to when Bishonen accused me of harassment? Any? Thanks in advance for answering.Ferrylodge 02:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Llywrch, Looks like someone slipped up again on the TE matter. I just tried to add a web link from touregypt.net on Necho II here [8] and got this automatic anti-spam message (below) reverting my edit:

"Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Leoboudv! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule touregypt\.net, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 04:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Leoboudv"

Can you contact the Admin or whoever is in charge here? Touregypt.net shouldn't be added to a touregypt\.net spam list Its not like touregypt.com which is truly spam. Regards, Leoboudv 04:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to add another TE article on Ahmose II or Amasis and got the same message from Shadowbot. [9] Someone has put TE on the spam list again! I didn't actively add any TE links until today--so this change in the spam list must have occured recently. Leoboudv 04:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be working now...and hopefully it will stay that way. I don't know who makes the decisions to ban TE or other web site once they have been whitelisted. By the Way, if you're interested, I mentioned an unknown female 18th dynasty king here until now: Neferneferuaten. Hope you find it interesting. Leoboudv 05:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. For me this female king is a 'work in progress' but feel free to nominate her for the 'Did you know' section if you wish. I have no problem with that. Regards, Leoboudv 20:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to respond to the discussion here. Why it's not a requirement for someone coming to ANI not to inform the other party is beyond me... --Fredrick day 14:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to reverting - it's a tricky one - I think in general, you are right it shouldn't count. However I asked for clarification because it's one of those things that as an admin, if you don't answer, certain people will hit you over the head with forever. If it was a heat of the moment thing and I guess it was - then I have no problem at all with your actions - but it's best for you to document that in a response - either on the relevant project page or at the ongoing discussion at ANI - other people will mind-read all sorts of motivations behind your actions. Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to catch you out - just trying to provide you with an opportunity to clear the matter up - but those sorts of subtleties are lost on the Internet. :-) --Fredrick day 20:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Llywrch. I know you've contributed a lot of info regarding Sennar and its relations with Ethiopia, so I have a question for you. I was reading Foreign Relations of Ethiopia 1642-1700 by E. van Donzel, where I stumbled upon the following claim (made by the French traveller Jean de Thévenot after speaking to Hag Michael Abu Yusef, an Ethiopian envoy of Syrian origin):

The four kings of Sennar, Naria, Bugia and Dongola are tributary to the Ethiopian king. The king of Sennar, a very hot country, pays in horses, the king of Naria in gold. In Naria there are shallow mines, the products of which are to be found along the coast of Sofala and Guinea; that region also produces civet. [...] Dongola is the capital of Nubia. [...] The king of Dongola pays his tribute in cotton.

He then describes the Ethiopian provinces, relatively accurately:

The provinces of Ethiopia are Goujan (Gojjam), where a viceroy reigns, Beghandir (Begemdir), Dambia, Amara, a big province with many mountains and strong castles, Damoud (Damot), Tegré (Tigre) and Barnegas (the "sea-province"). Therea re also several provinces that are ruled by princes who are vassals of the Ethiopian king. Finally, the kingdom contains twenty-four "tambours" or vice-roys. The capital is called Gonthar (Gondar) and lies in Dambia. The country is cool, like Aleppo and Damascus, with the exception of the regions along the Red Sea and in Sennar.

From the way he describes the four kingdoms' relations with Ethiopia, he makes it seem as if they're not only tributary (in the sense that they pay tribute but are independent politically) but a vassal of the Ethiopian Emperor. Naria refers to the region of the Nara people it seems, with Bugia being Beja lands and Dongola being Nubia (from the Sennar Wikipedia page, it seems that it was a province of Sennar). Do you know what exactly the relations between these regions and the Ethiopian Emperor was, at least during the mid-17th century? I know that (from your contributions) at least by Iyasu II's reign Sennar would seem to be independent. Was this exaggeration on the part of Jean de Thévenot, or is there some truth behind his words? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 23:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarifications, Llywrch. Yes, I'm planning on adding some info from his book to the relevant articles (Fasiledes, Yohannes, and Iyasu I, plus maybe Foreign relations of Ethiopia). Could you clarify on Sennar, though? Here are my categorized responses to your points:

• Sennar - Okay, but were there ever claims by any Ethiopian Emperor before Iyasu II that it was part of his realm? What about regarding tribute? Are there any recorded instances of it giving tribute that you know of (without being politically submissive), or is de Thévenot (or Hag Michael Abu Yusef) exaggerating here? Thanks for that info on Lebna Dengel. You may want to add it to his page. I wonder why they went to Ethiopia so early in their existence when most of their (Muslim) neighbors would have been outside of its interest and probably influence.
• Naria - Ah, okay. I should have seen that. The "mines" comment led me to believe he was speaking of Gold, which for some reason I associated with the Gold sources known in Eritrea that might have been used for Aksumite currency (although gold from Innarya might have also been used).
• Bugia - Well, in the Ge'ez inscriptions they were often referred to as Buga (also Bugas, I think, with other variants), Bougaites in Greek. It might refer to the Bilen, however, who were called "Bogos" (possibly related to the word for Bejas?).
• Dongola - Speaking of the Afar Sultanate (actually there were many such sultanates, so I'm going to work on moving the page and creating the others, soon), de Thévenot makes an odd statement indirectly regarding Dongola's location. Speaking of amole, Ethiopia's salt currency, he states that "[t]he salt is cut in pieces on the shore of the Red Sea, five or six days' journey before Dongola, if one is coming from Cairo, in a place called Arho²⁵." I'm guessing he means "going to Cairo," since it would imply Ethiopia's salt source was not in the Afar desert but rather somewhere in N. Sudan otherwise (the note doesn't explain the comment, btw). — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 02:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might as well ask this question too, do you know when exactly Northern Sudan became independent from Aksum? IIRC, one article stated that an inscription from one king or another during the early 6th century AD made its independence clear and (this part I'm less sure that I'm remembering correctly) even control over Aksum, though this latter claim was obviously a fabrication. I don't have access to the source (I think it was on JSTOR) right now, but when did the Nubian Christian kingdoms rise up? Was it during the 6th century, or later during the 7th century, when Aksum began to decline somewhat? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 03:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found some new info on the situation that may explain those comments. This is from pp. 368-9 of Pankhurst's Ethiopian Borderlands (I've taken some liberties with the transliteration for simplicity and ease of typing):

The market town of Chelga, to judge from Susneyos's [sic] chronicle, was frequented by both Ethiopians from the east and people from the borders of Sennar in the west. The Emperor, who was much interested in the Chelga trade route, appointed the deposed king of Sennar, 'Abd al-Qadir, as his governor of the market town. Later, in 1616, Susneyos [sic] proceeded to the Tenkel area on the frontiers of Sudan, where he received the allegiance of a local chief, Nayl Agub, whom he decorated with a bracelet and dagger of gold, and vestments of silver and silk. Nayl later guided the Emperor to Serki, a territory under Fung rule, which Susneyos [sic] conquered, after which he burnt it to the ground, and took many women and children as captives.78

An Ethiopian local chief, Kentiba Ze-Giyorgis, made his way to the area three years later, when he too captured many slaves. King Erubat of Sennar, who had earlier detained Abba Yeshaq, an Egyptian bishop bound for Ethiopia, responded by intervening with a large army, and killed on of the Emperor's officials, a Muslim called Muhammed Sayd. Susneyos [sic] reacted by marching to the frontier, where he defeated Erubat's men. The King of Fung, 'Abd el-Qader, [different from the earlier one apparently] thereupon came to the Emperor' [s] camp at Dehana, and paid him hommage.79

Susneyos [sic] subsequently ordered his son-in-law, Abetahun Welde Hawaryat, to make war on the Atbara country on the empire's north-western borders, i.e. the Gedaref area, while another official, Dejazmach Tekle Giyorgis, was detailed to attack Taka, or Kasala. The monarch's troops reportedly ravaged "all the country of Fung and the Arabs", and captured numerous swords, helmets and horses, as well as many rifles and drums. Welde HAwaryat later returned for further loot. The Emperor, according to his chronicler, thus made his power felt all the way from the Red Sea port of Suakin to the gold producing country of Fazughli.80

This seems like a pretty reasonable origin for the Frenchman's comments. How much of this continued to be the case under Fasiledes is another matter, of course. The comments about the King of Fung and King of Sennar are confusing, though, since the Wikipedia article makes it seem as if they were one in the same. Could you help clarify the matter? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 08:17, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access to it, unfortunately, just Ethiopian Borderlands. Parts of his chronicle are in Pankhurst's Ethiopian Chronicles, though, if you have access to that, you could check, but I doubt it'd go into much detail (all of the chronicles presented are highly abridged and limited to specific campaigns). I'm certainly open to hear your theory, though. Shoot. (P.S. another interesting people I just remembered from the same book, are the Dobe'as, a group described as "black" from the Royal Chronicles, and who lived in between the Afar and Tigray/Wello. Where they came from, I have no idea, but it's pretty interesting. There seem to be a lot of these small groups that disappeared through assimilation and warfare over the years.) This is totally unrelatd, but I thought you might like this paper I found here, which has some beautiful Gondarine-style (and era) illuminations. They'd make great additions to articles on the style and the books that they come from (and churches). I've already used one image for the Mentewab article. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 20:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep adding, as long as you cite like you have. Don't forget to add to the Copperfield article too! Happy editing. Aboutmovies 03:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, thanks for expanding it. Aboutmovies 04:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! There is an up to date (I think) source published by the CSA that contains Woreda and zone boundaries. The Atlas of the Ethiopian Rural Economy (warning: 170+ MB file!) was just recently released and has a map of all the woredas, zones, special woredas, etc. I can't say for sure that it includes all new special woredas and the like, but given that it was just released and is a map from the CSA and not from a non-governmental source, it should be pretty up-to-date. For instance, in its map for Debub Omo Zone, it does not include Basketo, which is outlined separately in black (zone color), rather than the light gray used for woredas, implying that it's separate and indeed a separate special woreda. It also, as its name implies, includes an enormous amount of agricultural data and maps for 464 out of 583 woredas (how many woredas are in the 2005 list?). Btw, what's the copyright status of publications of the Ethiopian government? They aren't PD like those of the U.S., are they? Because there's a number of maps that we could use otherwise. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 09:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The May 2007 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I saw your comments on David Gerrard's blog, and I agree with your edit to that Egyptian article. I too feel that a lot of articles now throw a lot of names, and alternative names, and different spellings, at people in the first sentence. In my opinion, a lot of these should wait until after the topic has been introduced, or relegated to a footnote. I can't think of a good example right now, but I think you know what I mean. Carcharoth 08:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keith, If you remember, I am User 24.87.XX.XX and I did the postings on Tiye. On my old computer, I could just enter Wikipedia under my user name but with my new computer, I have to sign in--which trips me up because I may be too tired to do this; so the stuff I post goes under my user 24.87 IP number. Its not intentional. BTW, I also created a new article on [[Neferneferuaten]--which I notice you saw--who was a real queen of the 18th dynasty and is apparently recorded in Manetho's king list as a certain Akenkheres. Leoboudv 23:49, 10 June 2007 Also made a mention of Kiya's last dated appearance at Amarna before her fall into disgrace and created a chapter titled 'Relations with others and legacy' for George Vancouver whose name applies to the region of Greater Vancouver where I live. The Vancouver Sun paper did a special 250th anniversary coverage of him. Leoboudv 00:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem man ;-) It's good that the info got added.--Konstable 02:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Llywrch, I was cleaning up some genealogical data on Mentewab and noticed that it came from this site that I've seen a couple times. It has some legendary data for the early Solomonic lineage, but after that it seems to be pretty legitimate, and has a lot of data in it. Problem is, it doesn't list its sources. Do you think we could use it as a source, or should we email the webmaster for his sources so that we can attribute the lineages to their individual sources? We could also start making genealogical trees for various branches, although in my experience it takes a long time, even for a couple generations without listing siblings. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 21:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your bold comments on WP:RS page regarding realiability of Tamilnet as a source. As a test case to check whether use of that source fails WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV, we are discussing further in here. Your neutral opinion will be appreciated. Thanks Taprobanus 15:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking your valuable time to try to resolve this conflict. Taprobanus 22:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The King Arthur Project has begun a collaboration to bring its main article, King Arthur, to WP:FA status. If you wish to contribute, please review the to-do list on its talk page. Let's make this article an FA! Wrad 03:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2007 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:16, 8 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

If you know how to block a sock puppet, please let Thanatosimi/Thomas know. See this discussion page on the Hyksos here: [[10]] on the 'Indo-Iranian dispute.' This sock puppet is stubborn and arrogant. He keeps harping on his POV pet theory that the Hyksos came from Armenia! How inconvenient for him that the native Egyptian king Kamose calls Apophis a Canaanite ruler while other Hyksos kings like Khyan and Sakir-Har have Semitic names suggesting a Canaanite background--certainly not Armenia. Anyway, this sock puppet should be stopped. I spoke to Thomas about him but so far no one has created an anti-sock puppet software on Wikipedia. Leoboudv 10:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forwarded your message to Thanatosimi. Maybe he can do something about it though he sounds really weary of all this sockpuppet nonsense. Leoboudv 06:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet invasion of Poland (1939), an article reviewed by you for the A-class of WP:MILHIST, is now a Featured Article Candidate. You may want to see how it has changed since then, suggest further improvements, address current comments and vote.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say THANK YOU for the kind words and support for my nomination as an admin, and you can count on my working!!!old windy bear 10:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments on my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me; however, this time around things just didn't work out. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read your blog post here, and I wondered if you were aware that around 380,000 articles are tagged on their talk pages with {{WPBiography}}. In other words, more than 1 in 5 articles on Wikipedia (1 in 4.7 to be precise) are about people (though this tagging has also included many music groups). I think that is the sort of statistic that is not that widely known, but is very illuminating. There are efforts underway to gather and analyse biographical data. See User talk:Carcharoth/Polbot3 trial run. Hopefully that will shed some light on exactly what the 1.8 million articles consists of. If you know of similar efforts to produce statistics (I know there are some statistics produced somewhere, such as the pages linked from Special:Statistics), but would be interested to see if there are similar bulk categories on Wikipedia. Carcharoth 13:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know why this only goes up to October 2006? When the notes at the bottom claim it goes up to May 2007? Carcharoth 13:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you do flatter me too much. That's the second time I've been convinced that someone has mistaken me for someone else, and this time I'm positive this is a case of mistaken identity... Since when do I gather and analyze stats? I'd love to, but I don't do nearly enough of that. In fact, as far as I'm concerned I don't do any regular stats gathering or analysis. Or if I do, I've forgotten about them! :-) But maybe this biography thing will really produce something. As for the general thing, I agree entirely with "It fails to help improve Wikipedia if the spelling in a biography article is correct, for example, but of its 1500 words, 1000 deal with a trivial part of a person's life -- say allegations of an unpaid parking ticket or someone's alleged sexual preference." - maybe part of the problem is that it takes a long time for new Wikipedia editors to get the hang of how things work around here, and there isn't enough being done to demonstrate what is acceptable and what isn't. Endless September is a very real phenomenon, in my view. Carcharoth 16:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Carnildo? Yes, I think I remember reading some of his stuff. Well, I suppose it is still flattering to be mistaken for someone. I'm currently reading a thread on the mailing list, including posts such as this one. Some good stuff there. Carcharoth 17:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you move it back to Ge'ez alphabet from Ge'ez syllabary? A user moved it there without discussion, and it is no more correct than the alphabet description which is far more common. It is neither a syllabary, nor an alphabet (since it's not made up of distinct consonants and vowels), but this latter term is by far the more used one, used in its general sense of a "writing system," used even more so than the more correct "abugida" appellation. Moving it back would require a moderator, however, as the Ge'ez alphabet page has of course been edited numerous times. Could you move it back for now until we get some discussion? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 08:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think you watch WP:ORE, but I thought I'd let you know about our new subproject in case you missed it. I don't believe you actually belong to the Oregon Project, which is surprising since you seem to have an interest in things Oregon, but maybe you're not a joiner... Anyway, Aboutmovies has created a subproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oregon/Portland, and I thought you might be interested in joining. He made a really nice userbox for it, if those sorts of things entice you. :) P.S. Thanks for the offer of help with the Dante's article. Things seem to have stabilized there but I'll be sure to let you know if we need some admin wisdom injected into the discussion. Happy editing! Katr67 16:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I lost my sense of humor there for a while, thanks for the words of encouragement. Katr67 16:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add my voice to the choir…we have a good thing going at WP:ORE, and it's nice to have good editors like you at least watching the talk page. If you're inclined to get involved on any level, I encourage it! -Pete 21:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup? Tell me more! No, I'm most assuredly not going to Taiwan or wherever that mania thing is. -Pete 21:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What time is the meet-up? I'm guessing in the evening, which means that I wouldn't be able to make it as my wife isn't keen on me spending too much time on Wikipedia. Something about spending time with her and not with the computer. She has no idea how much time I actually spend, so I don't think she would approve. But if its before 5:00, let me know I could probably make it. Aboutmovies 15:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So is this "Wednesday" is happening on the weekend because of Wikimania, I take it? I'll actually be in the Portland vicinity, but I'm traveling by bicycle so I don't think I could make it, but please e-mail the details. Depending on whose definition of "Portland" we're talking about, maybe I'll be nearby. Katr67 16:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry. I won't be able to make it tonight. —EncMstr 20:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Llywrch, How long is a 'current event' tag placed on an article? Is there an automatic expiry date or is someone supposed to remove it eventually. The article on Hatshepsut is listed as a current event even though the announcement of her discovery was made exactly 1 month ago on June 27 and traffic to her site has slowed down considerably in the last week. I am just contacting you about this minor matter since you seem to know a lot about technical issues on Wikipedia Leoboudv 20:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

In regards to the Mary Ramsey Wood discussion, I'm flabbergasted at the facts that people simply react based on emotion, not facts.

First: the 'argument from silence' is not valid. Mary Wood was located in the 1880 census, aged 69, in the correct town, with her daughter.

Second, if we turn the tables, please find the citation that this woman was 120...or that she was notable for ANYTHING other than age. Note the article begins with a lot of banal information such as who her parents were and where she lived, etc. The assertion of notoriety includes that she 'rode a horse to Oregon at the age of 66'. But if she were 42 instead, is that still notable? Or that she died at '120.' But if 97 instead, is that still notable?

I challenge you to find a single reference that asserts that she is the American recordholder instead of Sarah Knauss. It can't be done. Therefore, it would wrong to write this article from a POV that asserts that her age is factually correct. Furthermore, the burden of proof is upon the claimant, not the other way around. There are some 6.4 billion people on this planet now, and if we include everyone that ever lived, how many have claimed to be '120'? Quite a few. But what if we simply accepted the claim at face value? Well then, I'm 256 years old.Ryoung122 20:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I would like to discuss this matter further. I do agree that, unfortunately, my style grates against others. Further, to do what I do is akin to announcing that the Tour de France winner tested positive for drugs. Sometimes, we don't want to know the truth. However, I do know that statisticians calculated (before I was born) that the chances of living to 115 are about 1 in 2.1 billion, and since the death rate is about 50% annually, that equates to a 1 in 10 billion chance that Mary Ramsey Wood really was 120, given no documentation. Note the articles cited for the case even mentioned that evidence of her age was 'lost' and even then, based upon a letter written. But the article (written in 1908) concludes that she was, indeed, 120 years old! The real question is whether we as a society have advanced enough in the past 99 years to put science first, or to put mythology first. Surprisingly, some react the same way a child does when told there is no Santa Claus. Yet I do feel that adults should be more accepting of fact than children; perhaps that is not the case. And that is not a reflection of you but humanity in general.Ryoung122 21:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to participate at the discussion in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project. I listened carefully to all concerns, and will do my best to incorporate all of the constructive advice that I received, into my future actions on Wikipedia. If you can think of any other ways that I can further improve, please let me know. Best wishes, Elonka 05:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gebre Hanna, 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.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:51, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I haven't responded in a while. I've been a bit busy IRL. The article is a good start, but I can't really comment on it, since you already used the only source I'm familiar with about him. ;)

Also, could you take a look at Ethiopian calendar? User:Zeragito moved it to Ethiopian/Ge'ez calendar on the basis that it's called the "Ge'ez" calendar in Eritrea. Now, while that's the case, there's little question that the most common English name is the "Ethiopian calendar," where the page should be located, as dictated by WP:N. The alternative name should definitely be noted in the article, but the page move and constant use of "Ethiopian/Ge'ez" by Zeragito is undesirable, not to mention awkward. As I'm not an admin, I can't move the page back to its original status, and I'm a bit too busy to deal with Zeragito right now? Could you give it a visit and give your opinion and move it if you agree with me? Thanks; cheers! — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 06:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving aside the fact that the meaning of "trolling" has changed to mean something considerably more antisocial than it did 15 years ago,[11] do you really think I've made 6000 edits to 2393 individual pages as part of an elaborate troll, rather than to productively contribute to Wikipedia? Come on. THF 02:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a second request for you not to post personal information about me. You're an admin and should know better. Do I really need to ask for oversight? THF 11:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think [[12] I failed to admit]? I pointed out that your accusation is rather pointless: I was a valued contributor to AFU, whose contributions were noted in multiple reliable sources, including the book I linked to, the WSJ, and Wired; and I have been a valued contributor to Wikipedia. You, on the other hand, are violating numerous Wikipedia rules, and this is a third and final polite request that you redact the personal information you posted. Again, you're an admin and [know better] than to post personal information. THF 21:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. I asked you about publicly accessible information. In response, you insist that there is malevolence where there is none. You're being silly. Go away. -- llywrch 22:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care whether your intentions were malevolent or innocent. I'm happy to assume that you mistakenly thought it was appropriate to post a link to my phone number and address so that it would be easier for me to receive even more off-wiki harassment from Wikipedia editors than I already do. Your comment violates WP:HARASS. This is a fourth and final polite request that you redact personal information you posted. THF 03:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Llywrch, if an editor asks, politely, that you don't post personal information about him, then the correct response is to cease posting personal information about him. Even if he had previously posted it himself, by redacting it he is clearly indicating he no longer wants such information freely available. Labelling him as a troll and telling him to go away is troubling, and a sign you are not capable of dealing with this in a neutral and dispassionate manner at this time - would you like an uninvolved administrator (ie me) to deal with any concerns THF has? Neil ム 08:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw you are a member of the Ethiopia WikiProject. When you get the chance, please improve Ethiopian Civil War as the article is a two sentence-stub. Thanks, Perspicacite 02:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Gebre Hanna link (and for creating the article). The witticisms remind me of Hodja (based on the very little I've read about him). Hope you are doing well! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 17:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really, this is the first time anything like this has happened to me, and I'm probably evenly split between bemused and annoyed. I did feel better when I found this, because I realized then that I shouldn't be taking it personally. -- But|seriously|folks  05:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's correct. CSD, and one or two were flagged as copyvios as well. I think you have read the situation spot on and appreciate your encouragement. I'm ok with it, really, just vaguely annoyed. I still think this is not a valid article here, btw. -- But|seriously|folks  06:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know -- writing articles is really hard. That's why I toil away at admin tasks. To each his own! -- But|seriously|folks  06:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! Actually, I'd never heard of AboutUs until you just mentioned it, but it looks pretty cool. I do not get off work tommorrow until about 6:30, so is it okay to be a bit late? VanTucky ^(talk) 03:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked out my schedule so as to be prompt. Done some looking on AboutUS.org too, and it looks very interesting. See you there! VanTucky ^(talk) 04:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be there! Thanks for keeping this up despite the mixup first time around. -Pete 23:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2007 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I noticed your removal of {{non-free reduced}} tags on numerous images - I wanted to see if you were aware of the purpose of that template, and if you know that it has nothing to do with the fair use rationale, or the image in its current state, only with old revisions in the history. Could you possibly self-revert those edits and restore the tags? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 22:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, what that tag means is to delete only the old revisions in the history (the ones that were too large, or too high of a resolution, per WP:NFCC#3b), and to leave the current "resized" revision of the image in place. Once that's done, the tag is removed. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 22:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This clarification[13] might help preventing further damage but comes probably too late for MartinDK who took your initial post personally and badly. --Tikiwont 08:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for elaborating your reasoning which in my opinion reflects that our policies mostly describe what we're actually doing and are hence in the last consequence inherently unenforceable. I posted here to alert you in the spirit of your header that the original statement was not only potentially offensive but has actually been taken as such. I hardly know Martin and can't really say how decisive your comment was, or if not asking for a clarification and closing the door implies that he really would not consider listen to one. --Tikiwont 10:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had become concerned about MartinDK a few days beforehand and would recommend that you don't lose sleep over what happened. He was already on the edge - writing what he himself would later call ranting about the state of the 'Pedia, making an effort to be polite to start with but reverting to expletives and accusations in prolonged discussion. Two days before he appeared to proclaim that he'd take an article with an ongoing AfD to DRV if it's kept, regardless of the grounds. I wanted to tell him to take a frickin' break, but alas. Someone so incensed tends to see the world in nailvision in desperate need for his hammer, and react accordingly to statements about it. --Kizor 19:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Responding here to both Tikiwont & Kizor)

Which is why I wrote the response to Tikiwont that I did. I honestly can't believe I could write a post which by itself would make anyone quit Wikipedia. (Believe me, 'veI tried to do just that in the past, & failed miserably; you can't drive the people away from Wikipedia that you want to leave, nor can you keep the people you want to stay.) I still believe that if he hadn't already made up his mind to leave when he read my post, his response would have been an angry post on my Talk page. He put far too much effort into that farewell page for this to have been a snap decision.

As for Tikiwont's implicit suggestion that I try to contact MartinDK ... I'm not sure that it would be wise. I was offended at how he treated another user, & how he misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron -- which is why I wrote what I wrote. I probably should not have been as harsh as I was but I still believe he acted badly, so I doubt emailing him & telling him that -- no matter how I word the statement -- will bring him back. Although this sounds as if I'm rationalizing laziness, I think the best thing I can do to get him back is to leave him be. If, deep down, he wants to come back he'll come back. -- llywrch 20:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hardly disagree with anything you say and your last point is certainly head-on as Martin was already back with a new account and has now also fully disclosed that. So let's close this before I start to feel silly for making the hunch of a suggestion or meddling in the first place.--Tikiwont 12:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for introducing me to blogging :-D - What a marvelous conception, thankyou. I did, in fact, find your blog on your user page and read into some of it (I am the one who commented on one of your posts). But anyway, I signed up for an account [14] and I just wanna say thanks real quick! Cheers, buddy! Scarian^Talk 23:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou :-) - Oh and don't worry, since you replied to my comment I'd automatically assumed that nothing had gone wrong! It's good that you know what's right and wrong, hehe. See you around, friend, take care! Scarian^Talk 09:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Merhawie -- Could have alook at this article? It mentions some landmarks that I don't recognize, so I suspect that they are in modern Eritrea. Not that this is a strong argument; there are a lot of placenames in Ethiopia I don't recognize, but Jacobis did a lot of missionary work from Tigray northwards so I think it's likely. And I'd like to correctly say in which country he died. Thanks. -- llywrch 22:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He did die in modern Eritrea...particularly in the Alighede Valley, at Hebo. --Merhawie 23:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per our conversations a year or so ago, you might be interested that discussion seems to have perked up lately at WP:NOR and Wikipedia:These are not original research. I think things may be headed in a more reasonable direction: we seem to have a loose consensus that NOR was never meant to be a straitjacket. Anyway, you may want to look in. - Jmabel | Talk 23:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you are listed as a member of Wikiproject:AncientEgypt, I'd like to recruit your help in reviewing the article Ancient Egypt. The article is listed as top priority in the Wikiproject and as a vital article by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, but appears to have failed to meet Good Article criteria at its last nomination. The article is in need of some serious attention.

In the past week, I asked for (and got) the article to be semi-protected to protect against the constant barrage of vandalism. This protection lasts for two weeks. I also did a little clean-up, added a map and so on. I would like to see everyone in Wikiproject:AncientEgypt have the chance to add their input to Ancient Egypt, and get the article up to featured status as soon as possible. I believe the article is at least 80% of the way there, and some focused attention will bring it the rest of the way.

The most pressing concerns seem to be the culture/architecture section, and the achievements/unsolved problems sections. Also, the entire article, especially the achievements section, the sources, and external links need to be seriously checked for accuracy. These sections also require a little organization too.

Ancient Egypt ought to be the top priority of Wikiproject:AncientEgypt, and I look forward to working with everyone to get this article cleaned up and hopefully promoted to featured status. Thanks for your help, Jeff Dahl 03:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there:

I appreciate that I would have received your support for my RfA nomination. One of the recommendations is that one does not canvas for support, so (perhaps naively) I did not. Next time I do this (which will likely be some time from now) I'll post the RfA notice on my User page, so if you bookmark that you'll at least have a head's up next time.

I know what you mean about edit counts, and in some ways I would much prefer a measure of quality additions to be taken into account (words added over pure edit count) -- but that may speak more to my editorial leanings rather than the type of work admins are entrusted with. I actually hadn't realized that you were already an admin, so you will likely hear more from me in the future over issues/concners that I am unable to resolve myself as an editor.

My short-term plan is to improve the Wikiproject Ancient Egypt space specifically, and look to contribute more to wikispace in general. Any suggestions you might have in this area would be appreciated!

Cheers! Captmondo 16:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thanks for your comments. I had hoped that the RfA process had already progressed beyond the need of politicking and was based more on merit, but I guess I was naive in thinking that way. So in addition to my regular additions and edits to article on the site, I plan to devote more time to infrastructure as well, and will inevitably "meet and greet" more of the people who were more likely than not vote against me because they didn't "know" me (as one neutral vote explicitly said).

In terms of the quality vs. quantity issue, I can't help but wonder if anyone has thought to tally the additional word count attendant to edit counts. If one doesn't take into deletions of additional content made by vandals, anything on the positive side ought to give a true sense as to who is contributing actively to content rather than just whacking vandals. If no-one else has tackled this I may lend my PHP-programming skills in this area. Any thoughts on the idea in general?

Have already started on my efforts to improve the WikiProject Ancient Egypt page, and would appreciate any suggestions you might have as to Admin-like areas you think I might be interested in.

Cheers! Captmondo 12:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Llywrch, I've been involved in the PHG/Mongols dispute from the beginning, and I am watching it closely, but I haven't had time to pontificate about it lately (I moved this weekend and I am currently without an Internet connection). To be honest I think the whole situation is hopeless and nothing will solve it except blocking everyone and deleting everything, but I doubt we'll get that to happen. Oh well. Nice to hear from you again! Adam Bishop 00:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind the moving or the lack of Internet, but I do miss my books, which are packed in boxes in the garage at the moment! Adam Bishop 02:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, plus it's hard to get any TA work done without books or Internet. I'm going to have to pretend I know the difference between gerunds and gerundives for another week! Anyway, I commented on the ANI section about PHG. Adam Bishop 03:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it seems glib to say "naturally I didn't mean you!", but I really didn't :) You are trustworthy, and there are lots of other non-historians I trust here (like Choess, and perhaps Srnec although I forget what Srnec does). It's not brain surgery, but it is still a discipline and sometimes the undisciplined to muck it up (but then, so do the professionals...). Adam Bishop 04:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the analysis at ANI, it's good to get some uninvolved opinions here. You may also wish to add this page to your data-gathering: [15]. --Elonka 20:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Axis plans for invasion of the United States during WWII, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axis plans for invasion of the United States during WWII. Thank you.

please contact Briangotts. Electionworld Talk? 07:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2007 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for the note re: Ethiopia. I have adjusted the image accordingly. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• No, was just on vacation for 2 weeks. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was just reading through the WikiProject Oregon talkpage where you'd mentioned you'd be willing to help out in any content disputes. Well, how about taking a look at Howard W. Robertson? I've started a tutorial-type thing to help the principal contributor, but maybe you could chime in about policy. Thanks! Katr67 04:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm waiting for him (the article's author--he hasn't said whether he's the article's subject) to come back from vacation. If you could keep it on your watchlist and step in if things get nasty again, that would help--I'm not sure how many editors weighing in will be what he considers "the community". Three didn't do it, maybe 4 will... Thanks again. Katr67 05:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, an editor thinks you didn't mean exactly what you wrote and has changed your comment to match his interpretation. I reverted this, but your meaning might be slightly ambiguous. Could you clarify your comment, to avoid any conflict on this? Thanks Tim Vickers 01:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Llywrch:

To try to explain. The problem was the sentence: "Now, I'll admit that the standards that the other side have in this discussion are higher than I would prefer -- there are often many potential sources for a given article that aren't peer-reviewed, gilt-edged & immaculate."

I believe you meant "lower" rather than "higher". That is the entire controversy. I did not try to explain what you wrote - it is quite clear - I just asked about the one word. Sorry for any confusion I created. I left a more detailed note on Tim's talk page. Wanderer57 02:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Wanderer57 03:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abebe Aregai, 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.

--Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 04:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Llywrch, thanks for your comments at WP:AN/I#Edit warring, incivility, and WP:POINT by Duke53. I am very sensitive to the need to keep AN/I pared down. Do you recommend that we move the whole matter over to RFC? If so, can you help us out with that so we can close off the discussion and move content to the right place? I don't want to give the appearance of forum-shopping or pulling a bait-and-switch to gain some sort of unfair advantage in the dispute, so if a neutral party were to do the job it would hopefully minimize fallout. I'm also fine to leave it at AN/I if that would be better at this point. Thanks, alanyst ^/talk/ 20:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the response. I'm truly sorry about the mud fight; there's a bit of a balancing act between providing a coherent rationale and sufficient evidence, and overwhelming the discussion with detail and rebuttals. I guess we tipped too far into the latter. On a practical note, would it be appropriate for me, an involved party and non-admin, to mark the discussion as closed if I were to move it to RFC? Or should I ask someone like yourself to do it once it's moved over? alanyst ^/talk/ 20:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'cause no one ever asked me. I bump up against things from time to time, but not at ramming speed, so I've never really pushed for it. Though I wouldn't mind if I had it ;-) --Thespian 20:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

question for you; no admin has actually touched the page after all the work I did to straighten it out (not unexpected, as it had stayed that way for a long time because no one was watching it). Since you brought it up, I'm wondering if you could take a look at my edit history and such, and give your opinion on whether an RfA would possibly pass at this time. As part of Gnome Week, I'd like to commit to eliminating the backlog at the whitelist, but that admin bit will be necessary. Thanks for your help! --Thespian 14:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. It lines up with my own self-assessments, and that's *really* valuable to hear from someone outside. I had kind of had it in my mind of taking a swing at it at 1000 mainspace edits and 2000 total edits, just as my own personal goal. I just keep watching the Whitelist grow and it's bothering me. :-) But I do think I'll hold off until I reach those goals; I don't expect it will take more than a fortnight, right now. Does self-nomming handicap a user at all? I know a half dozen admins who would nominate me, but since I *do* know a half dozen admins who'd nominate me, I'm confident enough not to feel that I need them to. Then again I don't want to shoot myself in the foot because of prejudice against people who 'want the power' ;-) --Thespian 22:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter much to me how we correct Blundell's error, but I thought my method might be preferable given that it doesn't change the translation, but instead inserts the correct name in the form of a bracketed comment. This shows the reader that it is not in the original, but at the same time preserves the quotation cited without technically having been modified. Maybe we could do that, adding a note to the bracketed [Mo'a] about the error. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 08:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read your blog post "It was bound to happen". Lately I've been compiling statistics on book citations and ISBNs. Sometimes I find an ISBN where two digits were swapped by mistake, so the checksum doesn't compute, and the same error has been copied to 40 articles. If anybody had tried to click that ISBN link, they would have found no book. So the fact that the error remains in place indicates that nobody clicked that ISBN. We can only imagine how bad this problem is for older books that don't have ISBNs. Even if the book is relevant, up-to-date, the citation can be incomplete and need improvement. But the current system forces us to do this in each place the same book was cited. Currently, my best practice is to organize a standard bibliography for a topic (or WikiProject) as a template, such as template:Ref Stockholm, from where standard reference works can more easily be cited. Pages that use such a template can be easily tracked down, and holders of the book can see if citations support the facts quoted in the article. If such a routine was applied to more areas, we could perhaps start to distinguish "standard reference" citations from non-standard ones. I think we have a lot of work ahead of us in this area. --LA2 12:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"how do we know that editor X is telling the truth about source Y?" - I don't claim to have a full solution for this problem. My hypothesis, however, is that the inclusion of a work in a template such as Ref Stockholm would be subject to review by the relevant WikiProject, so it would serve as a quality indicator of sorts. I'm interested in learning about any other model. There is now a parallel case in template:Ref Kentucky. --LA2 17:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ready.

I hit the 1000 mainspace, 1900 total last night. I'm ready to go, I think. --Thespian 20:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, some of us have been around longer than it would appear. ;) -- !! ?? 21:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there- are you aware of this discussion? It's something Katr and EncMstr have been keeping track of, they're better versed in it than me. Essentially, changes to the Geolinks template -- which seem to be very well-intentioned, and will be a big improvement if/when they are complete -- have temporarily resulted in lots and lots of content being blanked (external links to mapping sites.)

Katr recently requested that an admin not involved in the discussion review the issue; she wants to have some recent changes to the protected template reverted, so that content remains intact until consensus is reached. I think she's right. Have a moment to look it over? -Pete 19:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch on the tyop, sorry =) -Pete 20:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The October 2007 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I really appreciate that you took the time to look over my edit history and work with me a little ahead of time to help me get ready. Thanks a a lot. - Stephanie.

Remember, remember, the fifth of November? Thank you to everyone who participated in my Request for adminship, which was successful at 50/5/0 on November 5th, 2007. It became, as you may know, rather contentious toward the end (though fortunately no gunpowder was involved), and I appreciate the work of other Wikipedians to keep it focused. --Thespian 02:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind and funny words Geoff. Good to see ya again, I'll see at next month's WikiWednesday! Happy editing, VanTucky ^Talk 05:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember what the dispute with you was, please refresh my memory.Ryoung122 11:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please leave your comments at a Davit Vitter RFC? The issue is mostly about process -- is Wikipedia an encyclopdia? Does it have too many rules? etc. Thanks. ∴ Therefore | talk 15:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you self-promote your blog! :o) Actually, it's interesting reading. You're obviously an intelligent person and quite willing to employ a little mental exercise. The latter is sadly rarer than I would like. I hope you don't mind if I bookmark your blog and check it out from time to time. Food for thought is always welcome in my book. Vassyana 23:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, an interesting blog and well written to boot? Hey, we need more people like you doing copye-diting ... many articles in WP, are sooo poorly written... ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I said it didn't assert notability. I'm not arguing that it is or is not notable - but why is this junction of two roads that has been given a joke name notable? The article needs to show why it is significant. Is there any press coverage? Any sources discussing it (as opposed to a nearby restaurant that has appropriated the name)? The paragraph just after the quote reads like advertising, also. Neil ☎ 18:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If its sole claim to being notable is it has a name, then we could conceivably have an article on every lane, street, hillock, duckpond, soccer pitch, tree, house, dog, boat and Morris Minor ever created. The article even admits it's "not a recognized community". Also - your user name is pronouncable in Welsh! (but I can't write it phonetically ...) Neil ☎ 13:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to but in on this trivial matter, but I always thought it was Welsh and pronounced something like IPA /ɬɪwɹtʃ/. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 15:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it's trivial, it's okay -- & you're both right. It is based on the name of the Welsh king Llywarch Hen. About 13 years ago, when I was setting up my first account at an ISP, I had to pick a username that was 8 characters or less & my first choice ("Hebdomeros", after the character in the novel by Giorgio de Chirico of the same name) did not fit. I had to pick one that did, & I happened to see Llywarch's name on the spine of a book on the book shelf across the room, & the rest is history. -- llywrch 15:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you voted in my RFA...

...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers and Wikidudeman for their co-nominations.

Thank you again and, best regards. VanTucky ^Talk

This RFA thanks was inspired by Lara❤Love's

As someone whose opinion I value, I am asking if you would take a peek at Talk:KV62, and voice your opinion on the suggested move. I am not trying to solicit an Oppose vote, but instead am trying am asking people who have an active interest in things Ancient Egyptian to contribute to the talk as well. Cheers! Captmondo 17:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding your opinion/vote to the Talk:KV62 re: KV62 -> Tomb of Tutankhamen. I wanted to solicit opinions/votes from those I thought might have a real interest in the issue. Ultimately the main thrust of the argument for centers around WP:NC, which I think is being too broadly applied in this instance (but that's my opinion). Though I read more oppose votes than for, in the end there was no consensus (a simple majority may not apply in this case) to move, so there's every chance the debate will continue sometime in the future. Cheers! Captmondo 11:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Gimbi, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.territorioscuola.com/wiki/en.wikipedia.php?title=Dembidolo. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with. What more needs to be said? -- llywrch (talk) 03:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. One of your userboxes is being covered up by your other userboxes. You may want to get that fixed for clarity purposes. Chris (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking at your userboxes from the default skin and the Seattle meetup userbox is covered up by your other userboxes under the Monobook (default) skin. Chris (talk) 22:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. I don't know why the Seattle meetup userbox was being covered up by the other userboxes you had, but it was something a little odd I noticed. Thanks. Chris (talk) 23:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are a champion of pointing out the difference between CDPs and unicorporated communities, if you would care to comment on the removal of such clarifications, which I have been trying to uphold, here: User talk:Nyttend#Oregon communities. Feel free to find a better venue to continue the discussion, thanks! Katr67 (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The November 2007 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 02:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fayssal, I just noticed that you created an article about the refugee camp (which is not much linked), while I've been busy creating articles on towns in Ethiopia. Both are currently stubs, & I was wondering if you would have any objections if I merged your article about the refugee camp into the one about the town. -- llywrch 18:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Llywrch. The articles are complementary and mutually supplying each other's lack. The merge is the best idea. Thanks for the note. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 14:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on Endlessdan's candidacy for arbcom is probably best placed here, on the talk page for his voting page. I would move it, but I already voted on his page. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 21:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. No problem at all. Thanks, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 21:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because of your participation in discussions relating to the "PSTS" model in the No original research article, I am notifying you that a request for arbitration has been opened here. I invite you to provide a statement encouraging the Arbcom to review this matter, so that we can settle it once and for all. COGDEN 23:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you figured out the Ethiopian geography in Black Gold (film)? Sources are so hard to come by that those things often go unfixed for such a long time. Badagnani (talk) 04:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I got the info on the locations from Meskela himself. The location near Irgachefe is complicated because it's not clear if it's in Oromia or the Southern People's zone. I guess it's in Oromia, *near* the Southern People's Zone. Badagnani (talk) 04:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't seen it yet? I saw the premiere in Cleveland, Ohio. I assume you're in the UK; the filmmakers are from there so it must have been shown there, but is probably now available on DVD. Perhaps you could get your local public library to order a copy. Badagnani (talk) 04:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the woredas, Yom says the government has constantly changed the borders, sometimes keeping the same names. So that makes it even more complicated to keep up with their surveying vagaries. Badagnani (talk) 04:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're in Oregon. You were using British spellings and have a Welsh name so I assumed you were in the UK. I think the film must have shown in Oregon, but maybe some libraries near you already have copies. Badagnani (talk) 04:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know Canton very well. Here's an example of a page that gives two different (incorrect?) zones for the town of Yirgachefe: Coffee varietals. Badagnani (talk) 04:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote "tonnes" instead of "tons." Badagnani (talk) 04:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case you're near Portland: [16]. Badagnani (talk) 04:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It still says Sidama instead of Gedeo. Badagnani (talk) 05:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm sending you this message since you were involved in the August 2005 survey on year pages. As I don't know if you've gathered, somebody has been fighting for a change to the house style on how to notate multiple events on the same date. A discussion is currently in progress - your contribution would be appreciated! -- Smjg (talk) 15:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Setting new lows in thank-you spam:

Click there for my RfA spam haikus! → → →

Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will new mop act?
Ooops, .com blocked

New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well Main Page

New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault

A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out DRV

A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye

Qatar is blocked
Shucks those range blocks are tricky!
Will get it straight soon.

Colbert's elephants
stampede Wikipedia
Must protect, protect

Wiki fortress not.
Open gates, knowledge wings free
But fiends are about

Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ... A. B.

This RfA thank you card is based on a card originally done by Phaedriel

There -- spam and you didn't even !vote.
--A. B. ^(talk) 17:35, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

some comments have been posted at User_talk:Muntuwandi#Consensus_can_change. Systemicbias (talk) 19:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get the Canna plant translation from? I know Dengel (more accurately translated dingil, ድንግል in fidel assuming you've finally learned the alphabet after acquiring so much historical knowledge ;)) as meaning "virgin" (as in Lebna Dengel). The Nordic Institute also offers "dengel" for "papyrus reed," but I'm not familiar with the word and so can't offer the native spelling (and therefore any difference in pronunciation). The two interpretations they offer are "gate of the Virgin" (which sounds right to me) and "papyrus gate," implying a single pronunciation (and spelling); this latter interpretation could just as well be correct since it's located on Lake Tana, where papyri grow abound. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 00:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing about Dengel Ber: Your wording so far implies that the place is only accessible by boat, but I have been there twice with my famous Landrover. There is something like road access, both from Shawra and from Kunzilla (you can actually drive around the whole lake these days, but I would not recommend doing it with every car). How can I include this information without it being original research? One more point: Given that Lake T'ana has a surface level of 1833 m (our article Lake Tana even claims 1840 m), the elevation given by you would make it a rather moist place. It is moist in rainy season, I'm sure, but you can still navigate the streets of Dengel Ber without boats. And, yes, I concurr with Yom on "gate of the virgin". It being a very narrow place, it is quite obvious how this name was coughed up, but I won't elaborate that here... Landroving Linguist (talk) 09:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I need to backtrack a little. I always assumed that my one map which claims 1833 m for Lake T'ana got it right, but now I have looked at other maps, and they have it at 1785 m, just like you said. My own GPS reading for Dengel Ber gave 1829 m and for example 1825 for Bahir Dar, but on the other hand 1796 m for Kunzilla, which is also right on the lake. These GPS figures are not very accurate anyway (they have a tolerance of something like 100 m up and down), so I guess we leave the figure as given in your article. Sorry for bothering you with this. Landroving Linguist (talk) 07:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your contributions to some of the related articles, you may be interested in this discussion. Mike Christie (talk) 21:05, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, saw you dab'd William Overton (Portland founder), so I went ahead and stubbified it based on Harvey Scott's book. All this time seeing nice blue links, it never occurred to me there wasn't an article on this guy! Just FYI. Catch you next week I hope! -Pete (talk) 22:05, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fittingly enough, I'm at AboutUs right now, so I just asked around. General hunchensus (did I just coin that?) is that it's the 9th, as you say, though nobody recalls anything really definitive. I'm thinking I'll send out an email saying it's the 9th, but that if anybody had specific plans for th 2nd (like if they invited a bunch of people) they should email back ASAP. Sound good? -Pete (talk) 22:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and re: Overton, I loved the "desperate and rollicking fellow" bit -- seems to fit right in with the "man of mystery" persona! Might make a good halloween costume. -Pete (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Llywrch, I've noticed all of the Ethiopia geography stubs you've created over the past months. I just wanted to tell you that the template {{Ethiopia-geo-stub}} is out of date. You should use the region stub, such as {{Oromia-geo-stub}}. Thanks and keep up the good work.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, let me rephrase that. It was decided that it was outdated, but that, from a stubsorting perspective, we decided to break down the geography stubs by regions, as is the norm for all countries when the stub is too large.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 16:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a problem with the breakdown, bring it to the stub sorting wikiproject. Secondly multiple stub tags are effective and please do not disrupt the stub sorting process. Lastly, it would be greatly appreaciated if you could sort the stubs you have recently created (or will create in the future.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 17:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stub-sort when creating new articles. Instead of {{Ethiopia-geo-stub}}, please use the assigned provincial template. I am currently handsorting the massive Category:Ethiopia geography stubs and would appreaciate if you could help out by sorting your creations at the very least. It is also a good idea to add the region category.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, obviously I meant they sailed across the Atlantic and burned Casablanca! Happy New Year to you too! Adam Bishop (talk) 01:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure you should refer to a Living Person as a shmuck. On consideration, how do you feel about that? "The Foreskin that is removed from the Penis during a circumcision is the correct definition of shmuck." http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shmuck Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An RFC on content you have commented on has opened, comments are welcome. MBisanz ^talk 01:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007)
Project news The Intelligence task force has been created. The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries. Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome! {{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Albuera Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081) Battle of the Gebora Constantine II of Scotland Francis Harvey Vasa (ship) Wulfhere of Mercia New A-Class articles: 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing Evacuation of East Prussia
Current proposals and discussions A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.
Awards and honors Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic. For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.
Tag & Assess 2007 Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows: 1. Bedford — 7,600 2. TomStar81 — 5,500 3. Parsival74 — 5,200 4. FayssalF — 3,500 5. Roger Davies — 3,000 6. Ouro — 2600 7. Kateshortforbob — 2250 8. Cromdog — 2,200 9. BrokenSphere — 2000 9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000 9. Maralia — 2,000 12. MBK004 — 1,340 13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250 14. Sniperz11 — 1100 15. Burzmali — 1000 15. Cplakidas — 1000 15. Gimme danger — 1000 15. Raoulduke471000 15. TicketMan — 1000 15. Welsh — 1000 15. Blnguyen — 1000 Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Were Ilu, 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.

--Wizardman 20:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Llywrch, could I get the benefit of your advice? I know you're a very long-time editor here. I am starting to get the impression that User:Yorkshirian has no intention of really discussing the map issue that is being discussed at Talk:Mercia#Map. Obviously I will give him a day or two more to respond, but at this point I don't see much option except to revert to the current consensus (you, me, Deacon, RepublicanJacobite), which is the new map. Based on what he's done to date, I would expect him just to revert again. I don't want to edit war (and I won't), but I'm not sure what to do if he won't talk. Mike Christie (talk) 23:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting the note to Yorkshirian. If you decide to talk to him again, you might check his talk page (and the history -- he's twice deleted a similar note from another editor); it's apparent he is not inclined to talk first on some of these issues. Mike Christie (talk) 20:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article Iyasu V of Ethiopia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Iyasu V of Ethiopia for things needed to be addressed. VanTucky 22:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite sure what you mean, but if it's a question pertaining to the review, you can ask me. If you don't agree with one of my requests, I'd be happy to work it out with you. If you have question pertaining to a review, I'd also go to the talk page of WP:GAC (where the nom is listed). Hope that helps, VanTucky 06:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per ANI request, do you have an e-mail address listed? If not, mine is located on my respective page. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 21:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Llywrch, and thanks for the inquiry. I really can't use an e-mail address with my name on it. I'm a minor public figure, and it would cause complications. It's just better for me to go with just my handle. I'm sorry, and I wish I could help. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've created spectre1234@gmail.com --Tenebrae (talk) 21:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment at Wikipedia:ANI#History merge needed indicating your interest in this issue and think that you might want to comment at Talk:Taxing and Spending Clause#Requested move. MilesAgain (talk) 14:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]