User talk:Gwinva

This user may have left Wikipedia. Gwinva has not edited Wikipedia since 7 September 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.

Archives

Mbw Archive 1: til 8/07 2: 9/07 - 7/08 3: 7/08 - 1/09 4: 1/09 - 12/09

Hello Gwinva! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 5 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 5 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Ann Hyland - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. David Nicolle - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. John Sadler (historian) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Christopher Gravett - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
5. Geoffrey Irwin - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, G. There's another "public encyclopedia" website that's using the article you posted on Horses in the Middle Ages (or 80% of it, word for word). Wiki doesn't have an SOP for reporting "reverse plagiarism" that I could find, so I commented on it here. (Nice article!) --Cuchulainshound (talk) 04:30, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was just reading through Early thermal weapons, an article you were the primary editor for. Nice work! If that's a topic that interests you, you might like Adrienne Mayor's book on the subject, Greek Fire, Poison Arrows & Scorpion Bombs. A fun read... assuming you like descriptions of people getting red hot sand thrown at them. Cheers! Matt Deres (talk) 00:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely enough, I'm still waiting to be allowed to post on the forum. The "Sword Forum International" seemed to be the larger forum and had a less commercial feel to it, so I signed up for it. For some reason, they require manual acceptance by their administrator before being allowed to post - I'm on my second day waiting now. I don't know what all the fuss is about, but I'll give it another day or so before giving up and trying the SBG forum instead. Matt Deres (talk) 10:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm sort of back, how are you? Mhicaoidh (talk) 11:02, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am a person from Germany. Possibly you can look on the discussion of the article: Audio theatre, because you have made edits in the past on articles which are related with it. (Hodder Headline which produced Audobooks) with friendly greetings, Soenke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 00:46, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articles Paternity (House), Occam's Razor (House), Maternity (House), Damned If You Do, The Socratic Method (House), Fidelity (House), Poison (House), DNR (House), Histories (House), Detox (House), Sports Medicine (House), Cursed (House), Control (House), Mob Rules (House), Heavy (House), Role Model (House), Babies & Bathwater, Kids (House), Love Hurts (House) and Honeymoon (House) are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternity (House) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 10:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work keeping us up to date on the earthquakes! Keep up the good effort! A Very Manly Man (talk) 07:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been awarded the Manliness Award for helping to construct a great encyclopedia.

Keep up the great work!

A Very Manly Man (talk) 07:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! You're around! Good to see you here! Good work, too! Montanabw^(talk) 21:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I'm back, having fun. Will drop you a note if I can tear myself away from WP again. Gwinva (talk) 00:21, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gwinva, I wasn't aware that there was any standard format for earthquake articles (as suggested by your edit summary). Much of what is now in the 'geology' section is about the earthquake and is really seismology (in my view) rather than geology as such. I'd rather not have to go back to all 60 odd earthquake articles that I've created or expanded and change them unless I'm convinced that it's necessary. I'm not saying that these articles can't be improved, they surely can, but I don't really understand the need for reorganising them, but I am willing to be convinced. Mikenorton (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, thanks for your note. I'm not sure I can convince you of the need to reorganise your earthquake articles, and quite agree that 'seismology' seems a more appropriate heading for much of the information. However, having worked on a couple of earthquake articles recently, I've had other editors change the headings on the basis of an "established format". WP:QUAKE doesn't seem to specify it, but a random sample of FA and major earthquake articles does seem to provide some consensus. As a rather casual editor of earthquake articles, I've just gone along with it. I only popped into the 1978 Miyagi earthquake article to transfer some information someone had added to peak ground acceleration and thought to tidy it up, merging the small sections and applying the heading I was told was de rigueur at the moment. Change it back if you like. Gwinva (talk) 01:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That probably came over as bit irritated, apologies for that (I copied your reply on my talk page here as I personally find it easier to follow threads that way, hope that's OK). I probably tend to break my articles down into too many sub-sections, something that helps me write them in the first place, so it's not the first time that I've had the structure of one of the articles that I created 'simplified'. I should probably give some thought to producing an 'ideal' layout for articles on older earthquakes (contemporary ones are rather different) and put that up at WP:Earthquakes for discussion, as there is a lot of inconsistency between articles, although the project is a bit quiet these days (more than you can say for the earth). Mikenorton (talk) 10:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo G! I put this on the Discussion page at the top. "Eight references refer to "Bennett et al." but the reference isn't in the list and it appears to me that it never has been. I have no idea what it is, or I would try to insert it.GOR42 (talk) 01:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)" GOR42 (talk) 04:46, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed this, there was a formatting glitch in the list. Montanabw^(talk) 04:51, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Gwinva! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

I have translated Army Gold Medal and added to the article on the Dutch Wikipedia. To us, in the Netherlands, it would be of some interest to know the six military engagements that were remembered on the Prince's cross and his two clasps. Our Prince, later King William II of the Netherlands wore his Peninsular Gold Cross on many occasions.

The sources that I have ar not specific.

The exact name of the decoration is somewhat ambigious. Was it instituted as simply "a gold cross". Was it instituted by an Order in Council, a warrant or a simple order by the Ministry of War?

Faithfully yours,

Robert Prummel (talk) 11:07, 25 July 2012 (UTC) Groningen The Netherlands[reply]

User:Gwinva/Castles south, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Gwinva/Castles south and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Gwinva/Castles south during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Are you REALLY back? If so, hooray! Montanabw^(talk) 01:10, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Remains to be seen, but after eighteen months' absence, the bug is still strong... Gwinva (talk) 02:30, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Email me! Also, some of the links in Horses in the Middle Ages went dead when the external websites were redone. Update of link rot would be useful. Montanabw^(talk) 17:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your name at the reference desk too, Gwinva. Long time no see. We haven't had any more questions about Kathleen Lindsay while you've been gone, so you haven't missed anything. Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Real Life intervened and I didn't stay around as intended! But it was good to log in and see your message Jack, and the reference to our favourite author made me laugh, since that was what prompted my return. I came across a reference to Kathleen Lindsay the other day which I knew I must share.

Now, we suspected things were a bit off: 904 books hardly suggests a literary genius, and my forays into her books certainly didn't do much to inspire me otherwise, but now I can confirm that she is also a Plagiarist. Her book Winsome Lass blatantly took off the work of Georgette Heyer to the extent lawyers were involved, but it never made it to court. Lindsay practically admitted it but downplayed its significance ("What does it all amount to? About four incidents and two lines"). Heyer's opinion was scathing: "There is scarcely a character in it who wasn't suggested by me, or sometimes, two of mine, but since none of them has any life, far less charm, I hardly think I can be hurt by this utterly blatant piece of piracy. The woman hasn't a clue!...Utterly without wit or humour...You know, I can't imagine how she contrived to get some 6 books published, because she can't write!" Gwinva (talk) 22:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely anecdote, Gwinva. I suspect she had some OCD-type condition that caused her to type endlessly, in the mistaken belief that typing = writing. You will be adding the new material to her article, no? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have added to her page, Heyer's page and.. also to Barbara Cartland - Lindsay's rival for plagiarism as well as output. Gwinva (talk) 23:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a but after the fact, but I wanted to say good work on writing the articles on yetts. I was reading Christison's paper and idly looked the topic up on Wikipedia and was delighted the see the topic was well covered. Nev1 (talk) 22:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gwinva! Email me (I have a different email address than when you were last here!) Montanabw^(talk) 06:21, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. At the above article, you cited Taylor as a reference, in this edit. I'm checking certain facts but attempts to identify the publication have proved impossible because the citation has not been done in a way that conforms to Wikipedia's expectations. The publication has not been named, an ISBN number has not been mentioned, and only the author's last name has been cited. If you're still around and remember the book or still have it in your possession, I'd like to hear about it. Thank you. Akld guy (talk) 23:26, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Page New Zealand Climate Science Coalition that you started on 25 Sept 2008 has been nominated for deletion. Notagainst (talk) 20:34, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Medieval History Magazine has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced since 2007. I cannot find any sources to support notability for this short-lived publication.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Schazjmd (talk) 23:56, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Historical novels by Nigel Tranter set before 1286 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There's three of these, apparently. WP:INDISCRIMINATE at it's finest.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:48, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Historical novels by Nigel Tranter set between 1286 and 1603 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Again WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Does not meet WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:49, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Historical novels by Nigel Tranter set after 1603 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Pure fancruft WP:INDISCRIMINATE.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:50, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Wikipedia talk:Village stocks, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DHSchool2003Student (talk) 01:06, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TVreview2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 23:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]