User talk:Richard Keatinge/Archive 16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Thread at WP:AE about Gibraltar in which your name is mentioned

Please see WP:AE#Arbitration enforcement action appeal by Wee Curry Monster. The May 2011 sanction about Gibraltar named yourself as well as Wee Curry Monster. That AE led to a proposal for an RfC about the disputed matters. It appears that the RfC was never conducted, and admins may need to decide if an RfC should still be required before all the restrictions are lifted. You may find this whole matter of little concern if you are no longer planning to actively edit at Gibraltar. You may comment in the AE thread if you wish. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The appeal by Wee Curry Monster against the May 2011 Gibraltar restriction that was also imposed on you and two others is successful. Please see this result. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Followup RFC to WP:RFC/AAT now in community feedback phase

Hello. As a participant in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion article titles, you may wish to register an opinion on its followup RFC, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion advocacy movement coverage, which is now in its community feedback phase. Please note that WP:RFC/AAMC is not simply a repeat of WP:RFC/AAT, and is attempting to achieve better results by asking a more narrowly-focused, policy-based question of the community. Assumptions based on the previous RFC should be discarded before participation, particularly the assumption that Wikipedia has or inherently needs to have articles covering generalized perspective on each side of abortion advocacy, and that what we are trying to do is come up with labels for that. Thanks! —chaos5023 20:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

I personally wish to thank you for reverting vandalism from my user page! :) I appreciate it :) Thank you once again! Ahmer Jamil Khan (talk) 17:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! Richard Keatinge (talk) 17:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hi Richard,

Thanks for your edits on the bicycle helmets in Australia article, that removed the subjective content. I was a big shocked by the censorship of another editor, disguised as a "correction". Sticking to verifiable content is a better approach. Harvey4931 (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

It certainly is. There are strong feelings on the subject but we need a truly neutral article. Thank you. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:39, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gros Ventre people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Algonquian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hepthalite Empire

So what happened this time? I was source presented. But however you again get change back. EMr KnG (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Hunnic Empire

Hello. You set according what is unscholarly claim? Substantially you do unscholarly claim. I've given resource. You changed according to your unscholarly claim! EMr KnG (talk) 11:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Perhaps this conversation would be better on the appropriate talk page, Talk:Hunnic Empire? Richard Keatinge (talk) 12:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I have not deleted any source. And I added to the presented source of information. So you can not say it is unscholarly. I think it is unnecessary to have source presented the discussion on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EMr KnG (talk • contribs) 17:08, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Again changes you get back. But I highly reliable and verifiable sources presented. If you claim otherwise, you need to submit the source. Otherwise (as far as I know) you can not undo the changes. EMr KnG (talk) 14:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Please gain consensus on the appropriate talk page before repeating this type of edit. Richard Keatinge (talk) 15:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Note

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#EMr_KnG. Regards. --Lysozym (talk) 10:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Crow Nation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crow Reservation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, such as the one you made to Balamber. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but you may want to consider creating an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (85.99.73.72) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! Richard Keatinge (talk) 19:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I have a account. But I can not log into my account for a while. Although there isn't a problem, the wrong password error. 85.99.73.72 (talk) 20:46, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

You got mail with a JSTOR file

Hello, Richard Keatinge. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tito Dutta (contact) 11:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Roman Empire

Hi, Richard. I just made a massive revert at Roman Empire that unfortunately included your last edit. I'm sorry to be a prima donna, but I couldn't live with that citation system. Shall I restore your edit, or could I ask you to do it? It's a little hard for me to see to work with that section. Thanks, Cynwolfe (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll sort it, thanks for letting me know. If it means saving your valued self from an early and miserable death it's a very small price to pay. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Edward and Walter Hungerford

Thanks to this edit it was easy to extract the information on the father and place it in a separate biography article. If you have time please look at Edward Hungerford (died 1522) and amend it as you see fit. -- PBS (talk) 12:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Occupational health psychology

Hi Richardkeatinge just a brief respectful notification of a message I have left for all editors on the occupational health psychology page. You are more than welcome to comment on my talk page also. Thank you. Mrm7171 (talk) 09:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ammianus Marcellinus may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • in Ammianus Marcellinus", ''Classical Quarterly'', new series, '''35''' (1985), pp. 193, 195) http://www.jstor.org/stable/638815</ref> He was not blind to the faults of Christians or of pagans;
  • Christianity in Ammianus Marcellinus", ''Classical Quarterly'', new series, '''35''' (1985), p. 198) http://www.jstor.org/stable/638815</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Ammianus Marcellinus

I figured your edit was simply meant to clean up my awkward style. However, there is a surprisingly wide spectrum of opinions about what Marcellinus' attitude towards Christianity was; this spectrum ranges from him being an actual Christian (the demands of the ancient historical genre forcing him to assume a pagan persona) to being deeply & darkly ironic, if not sarcastically hostile, toward Christianity. My edit was to give the reader (& hopefully a future contributor) a clue about that wide divergence of opinion. Hunt's paper in the Classical Quarterly surveys the views before offering his own analysis. If you're interested in Hunt's paper, use the "Email this user" link on my page & I'll send you a pdf of his article from JSTOR. -- llywrch (talk) 06:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Just saw your latest revision. It works for me. -- llywrch (talk) 22:44, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Your latest edit on Mounted archery

Is there a reason why you reverted my copy edits and cleanup templates to Mounted archery with no discussion? As a courtesy, I have not reverted your edit, but I am requesting that you self-revert and manually remove any unsourced content that you find objectionable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

My apologies; there was rather a lot of unsourced rubbish and I didn't notice your improvements. Richard Keatinge (talk) 16:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Shark_Island_Extermination_Camp#Requested_move_2

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Shark_Island_Extermination_Camp#Requested_move_2. FOARP (talk) 10:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss content not behavior

Hi RK. I have had the 2 'content' questions on the base of the talk page for a day or 2 now. If interested in adding your comments, please do. I am only interested in discussing content, moving forward and making this article what Wikipedia wants it to be. I'm sure you would want a Medical article to be just as encyclopedic. Thanks.Mrm7171 (talk) 13:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC) RK, when you have time, could you please assist with archiving some of the talk page as has been done previously for edits older than 30 days. I have tried but failed in my own attempts and lack of technical competence with code. Thank you.Mrm7171 (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi RK. You just deleted without discussion, 2 reliable sources. In other parts of the article there are 4 sources for a statement. The two sources were not needed to be removed. Do we really need to go to an administrator just to get this ridiculous situation sorted? There were originally 10, now you remove all of them? and say no reliable sources are needed? Wikipedia is based on reliable sources RK. Please feel free to reply on my talk page or the article talk page, as required.Mrm7171 (talk) 09:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary could you please discuss before 'blindly reverting' without any discussion, only days after dispute resolution and with obvious editor conflicts on the OHP article. I would appreciate it if you undid your revert please RK. So we may have a civil discussion first. I will not engage in edit warring and therefore have not reverted it again. Thank you.Mrm7171 (talk) 10:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
See this diff.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roman villa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subiaco (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Roman military personal equipment may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Parma.html Parma, in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, at [[LacusCurtius]</ref> It had a handle and a shield boss (umbo).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Hunnic language

Dear Richard Keatinge, I do not understand your deletion of the referenced facts associated with the Hunnic language. If you have problems with any cited fact, we can discuss it further, but a wholesale deletion of the citation appears to be unjustified, rather the intent is to curtail the studies pertaining to the Huns and their language. You retained Pritsak's reference, for example, although Pritsak's study is miniscule in scope and the sources used, and was limited to the onomasticon, which is recognized to be only a supplementary material, to corroborate observations drawn from the other sources - historical, ethnological, archeological, etc. Please reconsider your deletion of the cited reference, or find reasons to refute any of the cited material. I will be more than glad to supply you with any additional pertaining material. Barefact (talk) 22:36, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; this needs further discussion and I suggest that Talk:Hunnic language is the place for it. Richard Keatinge (talk) 08:04, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Richard Keatinge. You have new messages at Talk:Hunnic language.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hunnic language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Turks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Minas Tirith may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • along with the whole of its surrounding environment including the Pelennor Fields and Mindolluin (but not the Rammas Echor, which was visually omitted from the films (despite being mentioned in the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Health psychology

Could you weigh in on an editorial dispute between Mrm7171 and me on how to edit the health psychology entry? Thank you Iss246 (talk) 15:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Added the reference from iss246 and whatamidoing that Occupational health psych is a specialization of health psychology. 'Their supposed' reliable source, not mine is attached. Are they wrong? I'm confused Probably best to discuss rather than blindly revert their reliable source. I Have no idea what OHP is actually?Mrm7171 (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I suggest that this is best discussed at the talk page for occupational health psychology. Richard Keatinge (talk) 11:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

You just seem so certain OHP is occupational health psychology? Is it? If it is a specialization of health psych, how can it be also OHP? Which is which. You just edited the acronym OHP, so thought you could answer this conundrum seeing you seemed so certain? I'm confused? Oh well, I agree iss246 and whatamidoing need to answer it on talk page.Mrm7171 (talk) 12:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I was wondering if you had any disagreements with the points I listed, and if so what those disagreements might be. They seem to lie at the root of some recent problems and your views would be particularly welcome. Richard Keatinge (talk) 18:31, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion you placed on my talk page earlier today. Iss246 (talk) 19:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Religion in Carthage, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Porphyry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Richard (Harte) Keatinge

Hi, Richard Keatinge. Richard Harte Keatinge has been moved back. JamKaftan (talk) 15:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Richard Keatinge (talk) 16:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Help with article please

Hi Richardkeatinge, could you please take a look at a reliable source I added today to the occupational safety and health article. Would appreciate your opinion on this inclusion. There is an entire section in this 2013 source, discussing OH&S, as one of the key areas in occupational/work psychology. Thanks. Appreciate your input.Mrm7171 (talk) 06:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to mention it was the addition to the last sentence, second paragraph of article. I made an addition to the psychosocial hazards section also, including fatigue (safety) but that's accepted. Thanks again. Mrm7171 (talk) 06:13, 31 January 2014 (UTC)


Industrial/organizatonal psychology

I need the help of a veteran editor like yourself on the industrial/organizational psychology talk page. Iss246 (talk) 02:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fall of the Western Roman Empire may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Arelate]] when Honorius's general [[Constantius |Constantius III]] arrived from Italy with an army (possibly, mainly of Hun mercenaries.{{sfn|Heather|2005|p=244}} Gerontius's troops deserted him and

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Huns may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Huns may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fall of the Western Roman Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantius (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Advice on the Highland Clearances dispute

I note your comment: "Valid options include Wikipedia:How to lose and Wikipedia:Dispute resolution." Do you think I should disengage from the debate and leave the IP editor to do what he wishes? We succeeded in cleaning up the lead but do not seem likely to make any more progress. What normally occurs when Wikipedia encounters a determined individual such as this one who cannot be persuaded to respect Wikipedia conventions? Camerojo (talk) 21:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

The comments were more meant for the IP. I think that there are enough editors prepared to watch the article and that we should simply continue to edit, politely, to give a well-sourced and well-balanced encyclopedic article. It's difficult for a single editor to win an edit war of their own choosing against a strong and well-founded consensus. If the matter goes on much longer, we might have to involve an administrator. Richard Keatinge (talk) 22:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Were there British Roman client states?

The Kingdom of Dyfed has suddenly become a client state of Rome. And who are these kings during the Roman period? I reverted [3]. Not sure where is the best place to discuss this. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 18:59, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Probably best on the individual talk pages for the time being. Requests for citations may be in order. I presume that these Roman-period kings originate from some over-interpreted version of the Harleian genealogies. I'd require very good secondary sources before I'd describe minimally-attested, presumably-federate commanders as definite "kings". Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Highland Clearances". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 23:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

OHP article issue

For your information [4]. Psyc12 (talk) 14:02, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I shall keep an eye on it. Richard Keatinge (talk) 14:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
I strongly suggest that you personally RK, start making those substantial changes you believe, are required. But you do need to make a start, as talking about an 'overhaul' has proven futile and has been ignored by other editors. As I say, you will quickly see what opposition you get from these other editors once you actually start. So, I encourage you to just do it!Mrm7171 (talk) 12:37, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

New development.[5]Psyc12 (talk) 23:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

POV-Warrior

Hi. It's better to report this user to admins. I've reviewed his edits. His blanking and unsourced edits (sometimes he did falsification) show that he is not here to improve the articles. I think other editors reverted almost all of his edits. --Zyma (talk) 04:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I see he's been blocked now. Richard Keatinge (talk) 09:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Notification

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

QuackGuru (talk) 13:07, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Misleading and out of context

Jayaguru-Shishya did not respond to my comment. You misplaced my comment. QuackGuru (talk) 20:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Let's keep talk to the page of the appropriate article. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:10, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Fall of the Western Roman Empire

I was just reading this in-depth and well-written article when I noticed that quite a few of the citations refer to a 2007 book by Halsall, which for some reason is not listed in the References section. I don't know how to rectify this error with the proper formatting, so I decided to let you know about it, since you seem to be keeping track of the article.Huntthetroll (talk) 14:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked the article, I wrote most of it and still warden it. Thanks for letting me know about the problem. I have fixed it. Richard Keatinge (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

HUNS

I CITED PERFECTLY GOOD SOURCES YOU FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT. LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE. YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING BUT YOU THINK YOU DO JUST BECAUSE YOU ONCE DID SOMETHING GOOD FOR WIKIPEDIA. I CITED GOOD SOURCES GO AND FUCKING LOOK AT THEM. FUCK OFF YOU LOW LIFE CUNT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HistoryAddict2000 (talk • contribs) 04, 5 August 2014

Well, that earned him a nice 3 day holiday. With homework to learn about sources. He knows not to make personal attacks but doesn't seem able to control himself. Dougweller (talk) 13:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
And his response to my block convinces me that he is WP:NOTHERE for long. Dougweller (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
He seems to have convinced several other Admins so he's gone now for good. Quite an amazing series of rants. Dougweller (talk) 15:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Good block, though I've been called worse and survived. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:JSTOR access

Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to JSTOR through the TWL partnership described at WP:JSTOR . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email User:The Interior or User:Ocaasi sent several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 21:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are recieving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved.

DYK for Liu Fei, Prince of Jiangdu

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:08, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bradshaw rock paintings, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages San and Sandawe. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Article Revision

Regarding your revision to the article on the Highland Clearances: I would appreciate it if you negate what I said with a source. I can understand it is a delicate issue for some people, yet it remains in the written record and I was as fair about this in my wording as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.173.7.13 (talk) 15:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Hunnic language

So I spend hours of researching about the Hunnic language, I edit the Hunnic language page TO ADD to Wikipedia, and you come and tear it down, what is wrong with you? I cited my sources, and I abided by Wikipedia's policy, why do you want to wreck hours of my work? Please tell me what I was doing wrong. You could have at least come to me and told me you didn't like it before ruining my work... you said in your user page you revert vandalism, THIS IS NOT VANDALISM IT IS A HUGE CONTRIBUTION TO WIKIPEDIA. Sorry for the cap spam.

This conversation will be more appropriate on the relevant talk page. Richard Keatinge (talk) 19:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

It is more than 1 historian, Attila appearance confirm by Mongoloid Denis Sinor

World leading historian of Central Asia Denis Sinor also claimed his appearance was Mongoloid. Please do not write only 1, as there are few more Hungarian I know

The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia, Volume 1 edited by Denis Sinor

This is what he said:

'"The eye-witness description of Attila given by priscus is that of a Mongoloid "'

The description of Huns given by the Romans has prompted historians to believe they were of East Asian origin. Denis Sinor, noting the paucity of anthropological evidence, wrote that:

"there is no reason to question the basic accuracy of the western descriptions, and the absence of massive supporting evidence by physical anthropology cannot weaken the point they so tellingly make. It is the unusual that most attracts attention.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ST6TRNuWmHsC&pg=PA202&dq=denis+sinor+attila+asian+appearance&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zIVLVNyWAquV7Abb4oDgCA&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=denis%20sinor%20attila%20asian%20appearance&f=false --Spiritclaymore (talk) 04:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Clarification motion

A case (Gibraltar) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 21:58, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

How do you get to decide who is notable and who is not?

Bow in the U.S. TV series Black-ish may not have her own article, but most TV characters don't.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability usually. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:23, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
But that's for articles. Lots of people and ideas get to have entries on disambiguation pages as long as there's a blue link. Let's say someone remembers only that there's a sitcom where the wife/mother is called "Bo". Now I have a hard time making a case for that on the Bo page, but on Bow, that's completely logical.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:11, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
The idea of mentioning under Bow the nickname of a minor character in a transient show itself of marginal notability seems absurd to me, but perhaps we could get a third opinion? We might apply the answer to the article Rainbow as well. Richard Keatinge (talk) 16:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Not a minor character, and whether it's a "transient" show is debatable. For now it is a hit. And she gets second billing. I appreciate you considering a third opinion. I'll consider Rainbow too.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:20, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

January 2015

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to WP:DRN, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:15, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

...Must have been a misclick, definitely not intentional, very sorry. Richard Keatinge (talk) 12:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Xiongnu

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. Khorichar (talk) 04:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Since you are dealing with the Uniquark/Khorichar socks?

See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Bicycle helmet laws

The editor was changing links in references to advertising sites, leaving the rest of the reference looking genuine. Blocked. Dougweller (talk) 13:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

This one is almost amusing. Dougweller (talk) 13:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Uniquark9 reported for edit warring

If you were interested.[6] --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:50, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 9 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fall of the Western Roman Empire

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fall of the Western Roman Empire you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Llywrch -- Llywrch (talk) 00:40, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I've kinda left this nomination hanging, & should update its status. Which would you prefer? Leave it in its present status, put it on hold while you work on it, or simply decline it, & when you've rewritten it to your satisfaction you can re-nominate it? In any case, I'd be happy to look at what you've written, either formally or informally & offer my input. -- llywrch (talk) 03:23, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Probably best to simply decline it, thanks. I haven't had time even to get the references in order, and the comments on the scope of the article will take some time to think through; expressing a solution clearly will take longer. Richard Keatinge (talk) 06:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fall of the Western Roman Empire

The article Fall of the Western Roman Empire you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Fall of the Western Roman Empire for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Llywrch -- Llywrch (talk) 05:57, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services


Sign up now


Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Inaccurate anthropology data

There is obviously cherry picked bias data on wikipedia. Either remove it or stop being otherwise you might as well claim that the Huns were Yuezhi or some iranian people. The anthropology data edited by 93.152.143.113 ( you need sign up to see the data )

THIS IS BLATANTLY CHERRY PICKING DATA TO SUIT THE USERS TASTE. If you're going to mention the anthropology data at least be accurate and mention the whole story so it don't mislead others.

93.152.143.113 edited from the source of medscape

"The taxonomic analysis of the artificially deformed crania from 5th–6th Century AD (Hun-Germanic Period) found in Northeastern Hungary showed that none of them have any Mongoloid features and all the skulls belong to the Europid "great race".[34] "

However from the very same source of medscape it mentions in page 2 and 4, it mentions they have problem assigning these graves and skeletons as Huns.

Archaeologists have problems assigning graves and skeletons to the Huns for several reasons. The origin and the culture of the peoples who lived in the Carpathian Basin in the Hun-Germanic Period (5th–6th century ad), are still a matter of debate. However, it has been pointed out that the custom of artificial cranial deformation appeared with all these peoples; that is, with the Sarmatian, Alan, Gothic, Gepidic, and Hun populations equally.[39]

An than user 93.152.143.113 included data from " Otto Maenchen-Helfen. E. A. Thompson, which has nothing to do with the medscape study at all.

Also why was this data removed, it was on the Huns wiki page for at least a 1 year. It at least deserves a mention. At least list on the reason why there not realible.

Hungarian archaeologist István Bóna argues that most of Europeans Huns were of Caucasoid and that less than 20-25% were of Mongoloid stock.[1] Turanid was most common among the Hun, According to the Hungarian anhtropologist Pál Lipták (1955) the Turanid type is a Caucasoid type with significant Mongoloid admixture, arising from the mixture of the Andronovo type of Europoid features and the Oriental (Mongoloid).[2] Cheboksarov noted that typical Mongoloids of "Central Asiatic type, " with a large, flat face, a great morphological facial height, and a wide bizygomatic breadth, were unknown in Europe until the appearance of "steppe nomads in the fourth century A.D., "i.e., the very same Huns . The Mongoloid character of the anthropological type of the Huns, who penetrated Europe in the fourth century[3] is also confirmed by the historical sources." -Lev Vasil´evich Oshanin, Henry Field, "Anthropological composition of the population of Central Asia: and the ethnogenesis of its peoples", Peabody Museum, 1964. Page 18 [4] (talk) 86.138.237.156 17:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Bóna, István: "A Nagyrév-kultúra településeiről", 1991, p.30. In: Hyun Jin Kim, "The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe", Cambridge University Press, p.187
  2. ^ Lipták, Pál. Recherches anthropologiques sur les ossements avares des environs d'Üllö (1955) - In: Acta archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, vol. 6 (1955), pp. 231-314
  3. ^ Russian Translation Series of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University[1]
  4. ^ Anthropological composition of the population of Central Asia: and the ethnogenesis of its peoples, Volume 2[2]

Acupuncture

Sorry about the uncommunicative comments from others at Talk:Acupuncture#Original research?, but I'm hoping you can ignore that and consider my response at the bottom of that section (07:54, 26 September 2015). I don't know why, but the talk is very quiet at the moment and now would be a good opportunity to settle the issue. Johnuniq (talk) 02:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I shall. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Proscription

I just wanted to thank you for taking the time in writing your explanation and the recommendation of the histo-fiction. I'll add that to my list. Which Hazel? (talk) 05:56, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

My pleasure. Richard Keatinge (talk) 09:49, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Menai massacre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paulinus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bow and arrow may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Panticapeum Ukrainia 4th century BCE.jpg|thumb|[[Scythians]] shooting with bows, [[Panticapeum]] (known today as [[Kertch]], 4th century BCE.]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reminding me that there's only one thing that is truly important on wiki.

I needed a reason smile today, so thanks for providing it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad to have made your day a little better. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Does this seem similar?

Did this edit seem quite similar to you? Perhaps a sockpuppet of EMr KnG? --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

It does. I see some IP has already labelled him as the newest account of Tirgil34. WP:DUCK applies. Richard Keatinge (talk) 07:36, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity

Hi!

I'm sorry to bother you, but I didn't really realise, that Attila's name was a topic of flaming discussion, until I read the comments on the talk page - that is the comments above mine, all capitals and stuff like that. :-)

As for me, I just browsed the article and left a comment. Still, the accepted version among scholars is the Gothic one. What would you consider to be adequate evidence? I have the bible in Gothic studies, so that part of it isn't in doubt. Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Sigh! Don't feel obliged to answer any of my remarks. I just took a look at the article about the Hunnic language and it's a hornet's nest. Count me out. :-) Cheers Sorte Slyngel (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


28 November 2015

Dear Mr Keatinge,

I would like to express that i am deeply saddened with your warning, as a new user trying to serve and contribute to wikipedia objectively... I would also like to suggest you to review the Xiongnu's revision history, there you can obviously see that the editing war is being done by a user named Persia2099 who is tyring to make his own nations propaganda. In brief,with complete and utter disappointment i would like to state that i will be truely glad if you would reconsider this situation as an old and more experienced user...

Kind Regards

--Yakbul (talk) 03:08, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Richard_Keatinge/Archive_16&oldid=1143264463"