|
User talk:Mike Christie/Archive02Archive02: October 12 2006 to ?
Hello. I see that you created this article. I was considering moving it to List of Ace Science Fiction Specials, to match the other articles in Category:Lists of Ace Books. I just wanted to check with you to see if you viewed this as controversial before I did it. If you would prefer, I can list it at WP:RM. --After Midnight 0001 21:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you created this article. I was considering moving it to List of Ace Science Fiction Specials, to match the other articles in Category:Lists of Ace Books. I just wanted to check with you to see if you viewed this as controversial before I did it. If you would prefer, I can list it at WP:RM. --After Midnight 0001 21:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
GIen's RfA: Thank you!
PS: YES YOU'RE RIGHT HARRY POTTER USES A BROOM! (BUT GOOD MOPS ARE HARD TO FIND!!) Jaws-FA CandidacyI've put Jaws up for FA candidacy. Thanks for your overall help and suggestions. Take a look. That article, which you reviewed once, has been substantially improved and is now undergoing FAC review. Your comments, as that of a person familiar with the article, would certainly be appreciated.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 02:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC) A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin
Archimedes PlutoniumPlease revisit the discussion. Uncle G 10:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Your edit to Venture Science FictionYour recent edit to Venture Science Fiction (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 15:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC) George P. Burdell GA on holdJust a note to let you know I've placed the GA for George P. Burdell on hold; it just needs a fair use rationale for the image. Mike Christie (talk) 01:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Please reconsider that deletion at Controversies about the word niggardlyHi Mike, I'm asking a couple of other people interested in the article to comment on removing that part of the article. I also put a short comment there about why I had included it. Not a big deal either way, but please look over my comment and reconsider. Thanks, Noroton 00:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
The article Asser you nominated as a good article has passed
GAC talk noteThanks for the heads up. MahangaTalk 14:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. I've made some changes, would you care to have a look? Lampman 23:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC) Btw, congratulations on having Asser promoted to GA. I was really fascinated by the DMIS graphics, and I'd like to do something similar myself. Would it be possible to ask if you could give some pointers on how to get started? Lampman 00:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the GA promotion, and for the DEMIS intro, I'll have a look at it. Lampman 12:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
BOT to keep on top of WP:GA statsHey, I just wanted to point out, in case you don't have WP:BOTREQ on your watchlist, that I would be happy to work on the bot you suggested, if it is still desired. I got the impression from the request and GA talk page that you are still fleshing out what would be desired by a bot, so I'll keep my eye out there, and you can let me know if or when you'd like to proceed. I've only recently become acquainted with the GA process (by nominating one article and reviewing another), but I think that a bot as you suggest would be a good addition. If you are going to be taking it to the GA "community" for opinions, I would suggest, if the decision is to go ahead, figuring out what specific criteria you would like tracked, so I can have something to work with Cotton libraryI'm sorry. I didn't realize the Cotton library was that famous. I've removed the tag and replaced it with an expand tag. Cheers! Cool BlueLight my Fire! 23:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC) 2007 Texas Longhorn football teamHi Mike, thank you very much for your note. I admit it is a little annoying, but that is mainly because the GA process is so slow. I listed that article about a month ago, so it is sort of like waiting for Christmas morning only to find coupons to be used on a later date. :-) I don't blame you though, you did what you thought was best and I respect that. As you say, it will be good to talk this out a little and see what the consensus is. I am of the opinion that if an article is stable today but might change in the future, that we should review it on the basis of what it is today. Otherwise, we may as well delist Mars and Pluto and for that matter we may as well take away FA from Solar System. We will undoubtably learn more about these topics in the future and in fact we have probes at or on the way to Mars and Pluto right now. I admit this is not a perfect analogy, but I do think it helps to illustrate what an article should be judged for what it is today. I think the "stability" criteria is more about whether the article is changing too fast for the GA reviewer to decide what version to review, and whether (once reviewed) the article will just immediately change to fall out of GA standard. That is not likely to happen here for several months at a minimum. In the best case, GA standards will be maintained through the whole season. It really only takes one or two well-written updates a week. At worst case, the article could be delisted if/when it no longer makes the criteria. Anyway, thanks for your note and your opinion. I don't take it personally that you failed it, and I am glad you don't take it personally that I asked for a review. Best regards and Hook 'em! Johntex\talk 16:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC) Insertion of pejorative termsMoS states to write formally, also please do not insert pejorative terms. Addendum: Care to point out the consensus as per WP:CONSENSUS? :-). Matthew 21:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Ethelbald of MerciaHiya Mike, good to hear from a fellow Anglo-Saxon enthusiast! Ethelbald is a very 'big' figure, and this article may possibly get longer before it is finished with, but you have made a very good stab at saying something sensible about him! Therefore if I make a number of points below, I hope you will realise that this is intended as constructive and not picking holes in your work. 1. 'Bretwalda'. I don't remember what the WP article on this title says, but in general the Chronicle use of the term is retrospective (Bede doesn't use the term) and may be part of a later (West Saxon) propagandist way of looking at their history, which might account for why AEthelbald and Offa were left out, despite being so important! In other words, they can justify making Bede's 'top rulers' into bretwaldas (whatever that really means), but they are not going to dignify the ruddy Mercians with such a title if they don't have to. 2. Maybe worth saying what a big dynastic crisis the end of Ceolred was: the end of the whole dynasty from Penda, so that they had to find a descendant of his brother Eowa, who died in the battle in which Oswald was slain. Therefore this whole business about Guthlac is important, because Ceolred was persecuting Ethelbald who, in turn, was probably aspiring to rule while Ceolred was still alive. Glance at my WP articles on Ealdwulf of East Anglia and Aelfwald of East Anglia. ceolred's widow was the great Werburgh, whose christian life was a key aspect of the reign of AEthelbald. 3. 'began a long period of mercian Domination' - some would say it had already been growing pretty much since Penda's time, and had reached considerable heights in the time of Wulfhere and Aethelred. And there are times in the 9th century when the reign of Wiglaf (after his recovery) looks pretty impressive too. 4. I don't think the big Clofesho of 746/7 or whenever was a response to Boniface's letter - I think it was at a time when the whole English church was looking to Boniface as leading a huge movement on the continent, and reforms in England were earnestly needed and being prompted through Boniface. Boniface's letter to Aelfwald of East Anglia is clearly in relation to two of the capitula of the Council, and he was writing to these rulers in advance of the Council trying to get them to support his reforms, precisely because he was worried about the path Ethelbald was following. But clearly the early to mid 8th century Mercian church (eg Peterborough (and it colonies), Breedon (Tatwine going to Canterbury), the painted book art of (say) Rome Gospels, Leningrad Gospels, Stockholm Codex Aureus, etc are showing developments which imply that patronage of the church was very strong in Mercia, and linked both to Northumbria and Canterbury. Boniface is being more political, and in his fiery letter to Ethelbald he doesn't really mean that Ethelbald is in danger of becoming a pagan or anything like that - at this stage Boniface is a Very elder statesman in Europe. 5. On Beornrad, glance at my WP thoughts on Beorna of East Anglia. 6. Would be good to quote the Biddle discussion of Repton sculpture and mausoleum, (if you haven't already, I forget). 7. I seem to remember that Ethelbald's regnal styles in his charters are important as evidence of his projection of the royal image. 8. Personally I think (see Aelfwald of East Anglia) that Ethelbald, although the senior ruler, made the Mercian ascendancy by having a completely friendly relation with East Anglia from the start, and therefore had all the East Anglian allies with him, i.e. he didn't dissipate Mercian energies in pointless hostility with East Anglia, he had a friendship policy through the Fen religious houses and so was able to concentrate on controlling the West Saxons (though he lost out to Cuthred) and the Northumbrians. Just some ideas to mull over - do what you like with them! Best wishes and keep at it! Dr Steven Plunkett 22:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC) Great job on AceAs near as I can tell, you're the editor who did all the great work on the entry for Ace Books. I hope you don't feel I've messed things up with my recent additions -- if you think there's duplication or unnecessary additions, by all means revert or re-edit. (I seem to care more about the non-SF authors than you do.) I'm going to be working away at all the paperback entries as time permits, with particular attention to Dell mapbacks, but since your expertise on Ace is both wide-ranging and obvious, perhaps I'll leave that one in your good hands. Accounting4Taste 01:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Venture Science Fiction MagazineThe article Venture Science Fiction Magazine you nominated as a good article has failed Your GA nomination of Venture Science Fiction MagazineThe article Venture Science Fiction Magazine you nominated as a good article has passed
SF pollHow did you count User:Orange Mike's self-seemingly contradictory votes? --Belg4mit 02:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
StatisticianBotJust to let you know, StatisticianBot has been approved by B/RFA! It will now run automatically each night. —Daniel Vandersluis(talk) 13:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
You failed this GA candidate because there "was no response" to the initial comments. In fact the article was substantially overhauled since the original comments were left. Please look again and re-consider. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Image:ASC Parker page.pngThanks for uploading Image:ASC Parker page.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged. As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Your GA nomination of Ethelbald of MerciaThe article Ethelbald of Mercia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. `
Arthur SullivanDo you think the Arthur Sullivan article is GA quality, and if not, what would need to be done to it to get it up to snuff. I note that in the Italian Wikipedia, the article is rated FA, so their standards must still be lower. Still, I think it's a pretty good article. -- Ssilvers 17:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm taking the liberty of copying most of this over to Sullivan's talk page. -- Ssilvers 20:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Ethelbald of MerciaCongratulations!!! The article Ethelbald of Mercia you nominated as a good article has passed
Ethelbald againHiya Mike, thanks for your message! I think there are a few papers by the Biddles floating around about Repton, and I am scratching around for my refs at present, but try:
The claim that East Anglia (under AElfwald) and Mercia under AEthelbald were friendly, is based on the East Anglian patronage of Guthlac during Aethelbald's exile in Crowland (see Felix Life of Guthlac) and from the matriarchal prominence of Werburga as Mercian abbess and patroness, in whom the Kentish, East Anglian and Mercian dynastic lines and interests were united. As a daughter of Wulfhere and Eormenhild, granddaughter of Penda, Seaxburga and Eorconberht, great-granddaughter of Eadbald and Anna, and widow of the discredited Ceolred, her maternal side religious personal heredity is entirely Kentish and East Anglian, and it is likely that her father Wulfhere's conversion (and initial apprehension of Mercian power) came through his Kentish marriage, which came at or soon after his accession and provided the necessary southern alliances to reinforce his reign against the rivalry of Northumbria. Notice also the apparent extension of Medeshamstede patronage over the Middle Anglian and Mercian church, as a twin hub of religious hegemony together with East Anglian Ely, centred around the Fen. (Possibly Tatwine, who (probably at Repton) recommended Guthlac to go to Crowland in 699, was the same who later ruled Breedon, and rose in 731 to Canterbury? - as I suggested in 'The Mercian Perspective' in Sally Foster's St Andrews Sarcophagus volume, Dublin 1998.) The prosperity of Aelfwald's East Anglia, especially Gipeswic, the rising monasteries, and the development of the coinage, indicate that its substance was not dissipated in hostilities towards Mercia or suppressed by Mercian exploitation. Hence it was no doubt affiliated to Mercian superiority, but retained its dynasty at least down to Aelfwald's death (and probably right down to Edmund). I presume that if there is a connection between Beorna of East Anglia and Beornred of Mercia (identity or kinship), the last years of Aethelbald before his assassination may have been coloured by changing East Anglian policy. At that point it is hard to tell whether Beornred has represented a party hostile to Athelbald, perhaps prompting his assassination in order to seize power, or whether he may be an Athelbald partizan stepping in to try to hold off the ambition of Offa. In the latter case, it might be that the partition of East Anglia in 749 was an external policy of Aethelbald's: alternatively East Anglia may have been seized by the 'B' dynasts as a stronghold against him. Difficult to know, but it is clearly a departure from the apparent long peace of the period 713-749. If as Huntingdon or Malmesbury says (I forget which), the East Angles were with Aethelbald at the battle of Burford Bridge against Cuthred of Wessex in 752, they were his allies even after the death of Aelfwald. The most recent reference for this case being made is, I'm afraid, to me! e.g.:
I hope that is helpful. Best wishes and well done for your continuing efforts, Dr Steven Plunkett 08:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry and CommerceDear Mike, Thankyou very much indeed for that note. I seem to have extended myself in reply! Wp can be like that on certain afternoons, but I don't mind since it allows me to declare my allegiances a little without advertising them. I deeply value your courteous supervision Dr Steven Plunkett 13:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Beyond Fantasy FictionThe article Beyond Fantasy Fiction you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. FACThanks for the help. :) I'll admit I overlooked the method in which to make a nomination - I guess I looked pretty stupid in doing so, huh? Anywho, thanks again. ElectricTurahk 19:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC) FA!
Gilbert and Sullivan GA reviewHello. Do you know anything about the status of the GA review? Is there a reviewer? It seems like it's been under consideration for some time, and we made substantial changes based on the comments we had received, but haven't had any new comments for awhile. If you have any info about the process, can you leave a note on the article's talk page? Thanks! Best regards, -- Ssilvers 16:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
ÆthelbaldI do beg your pardon. It's a few days now since I read the whole article through, and I had forgotten that was there. I've removed it now. Don't ever worry about reverting me or changing my edits, especially when you're right. I'm in the placid category of editors. qp10qp 00:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
My RFA
(I really, really, really wanted to tell you about it in advance, but I didn't want to leave the impression I was canvassing, so I didn't. If I can do anything for you, just shout! -- Katie)
Thanks, Mike!Hey! I just wanted to thank you for your really nice compliment here. A lot of work goes into WP:DINO articles, and I cannot tell you how nice it is to be recognized by a comment like that (and of course, I agree with you that Project "rubberstamping" shouldn't occur). It helps when quite a few of the members are professionals in the field, but clearly there's still a lot more work to be done. I'm just spamming your talk page to say thanks; you made my day! Good luck with all of your contributions (Hey! I didn't know Ace Books was a FA!). Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 16:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
GA nominations on holdHey Mike Christie! Thank you for the note on my talk page. I can't make Herpes Zoster a GA as long as I have minor problems with the article (I listed my suggestions on the talk page). I also don't want to end the nomination as those are just minor suggestions. I hope I can solve this problem in some days. NCurse work 16:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!Thank you very much for your support at RfA. I don't mind if there are some opposes, or indeed particularly if I fail, but having everyone opposed would have been quite distressing! DrKiernan 14:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Read through again. I’ve also looked at Æthelbald of Mercia and Óengus I of the Picts (which I saw linked in the Aethelbald FAC discussing this issue). I think I originally didn’t realise the extent of the uncertainty in anglo-saxon history, and my original comment was unfair. I'm going to note on the FAC to that effect. That said, it’s an issue that could come up with reviewers unfamiliar with anglo-saxon history (i.e. most of us!), and I feel I ought to try to quantify my initial impression for you. I believe I can see what the original reviewer was getting at with Oengus - it's more a matter of presentation. It seems to me that Oengus tends towards presenting the sources and telling us what they say, rather than telling us how few sources there are, and how big the gaps are. Your way may well be the better one, but Oengus (to me) reads the better for it. As an example of what I'm driving at, consider the first paragraph of Early sources, with three strikethroughs:
"There are Hope that helps in some way, and very good luck with the FA. J.Winklethorpe talk 19:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
IvoShandorShow me some diffs, and some articles he's reviewed (I didn't see them in his edit history) and I may be persuaded further. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Ceawlin of WessexUnfortunately there isn't a picture. He chose a rather random selection of monarchs! I've uploaded all fourteen pictures to the Commons, and have included twelve of them in the Wikipedia articles - the two exceptions being Penda and Æthelbert of Kent, which already had images. Warofdreams talk 11:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC) Cnut and Emma Minster Register imageI believe that this image is of Emma, and so does the British Library. I have posted a full explanation at the talk page. By the way, you made some good solid contributions in the last several months, I'm always glad to see anyone with medieval interests. Dsmdgold 04:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on getting this article to featured status. I look forward to seeing your future contributions and will work on the discussed addition when I have references in front of me. Warofdreams talk 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
My recent RfAThanks for your support in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC) I'd like to reiterate the comment above. After yesterday, I think I just needed to be at home overnight in order to get some sense of perspective back. Thanks ever so much for your support. DrKiernan 11:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Once again, many, many thanks. :) <- Me, now! DrKiernan 14:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
GA nom - Natascha KampuschHi., i did not pay a lot of attention to the dates. I have however reviewed the article and put it on HOLD pending addressal of two comments. Once you address them, ping me and i shall be glad to close the nom. --Kalyan 05:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC) Hi Mike. I noticed that you took the above off hold. I had planned to fail it when I found the time (I did get your message last week) to put together some stuff. I had been taking some advice from more experienced editors (including my adopter, see my talk page) and this was the consensus I was getting. I realize that this has taken a long time but the author hadn't responded to my concerns. How should I proceed in your view? I do feel strongly that the article is unlikely to pass GA I just haven't been bold and failed it outright which I should have done sooner. I do appreciate your reminders. Please advise. Regards; JohnJardine 17:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Lung cancerThank you for the note. I just had to finish my exams, but now I found time to review it. Best, NCurse work 21:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC) Ceawlin of WessexHi Mike. I'm happy to have a look at it. The only issue is that I'm currently out of a computer at home (hard drive death, grrrr), and so I'm limited in wikitime. I'll certainly get to it, though. J.Winklethorpe talk 22:24, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
|
