User talk:Hroðulf/Archive 1

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #90

Welcome!

Hello, Hroðulf, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Mushroom (Talk) 11:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind welcome. I hope I can contribute something to make the encyclopaedia more informative or more interesting. I will certainly ask for help when I get stuck.--11:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Helpme

When I write my signature, with four tildes ~~~~, I see only the time, but not my username, nor a link to my talk page. What have I done wrong?--(or Hrothulf) 11:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

This time I see my signature from preferences, but I didn't do anything differently. I will improve my sig, but I am still puzzled by intermittently seeing only the timestamp and not a sig.--11:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Make sure you are using 4, not 5 (which produces just the date). Also make sure your signature is normal; in Special:Preferences blank the "Signature:" box and untick "Raw signature".

{{helpme}} is for building the encyclopedia, not for personalising signatures.--Commander Keane 11:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, CK, and sorry. I think you solved my problem! I am not asking for help personalizing anything - I just wanted to make sure that my comments on discussion pages are not anonymous, so that editors can discuss improvements to the encyclopaedia with me. I had thought that the WP:Talk page link was standard, not personalised. I was wrong. I will personalise my sig in my own time! Thanks again.--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (User talk:Hro%C3%B0ulf|Talk) 12:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Hello. My understanding is that the Pisky page is a (very short) article page about pixies, with a link to another meaning of the word. Disambiguation pages are non-articles. A disambiguation page is something like Oo. So I'm removing the disambig template you added. Gimmetrow 22:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I was doubtful but bold. I stand corrected. Do you think it is a 'stub'? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 22:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

List of groups referred to as cults

You're cool, mate, I appreciate you getting in there, rolling up the sleaves and really contributing to the conversation on this page. cairoi 14:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks cairoi. You too. I disagree with your strategy and intended outcome, but I appreciate your thoughtfulness and consideration, and your commitment to edit the article over a lengthy period (which I doubt you will see from me.) Best! --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Westminster Chapel

I think your new edit strikes just the right note.

I had originally thought that their withdrawal from the Congregational Union happened at the time of the merger with the Presbyterians (to become the United Reformed Church), but I see this did not happen until 1972. I'm fairly sure that Westminster Chapel had changed their allegiance well before Lloyd-Jines resigned the pastorate. – Agendum 22:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Agendum. Do you have access to good books about the chapel and about Lloyd-Jones? I stumbled on the chapel article when someone mentioned in Talk:Puritan that he has been called the last Puritan. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I have several books by Lloyd-Jones (which cast a little light on his theological stance), but have also recently acquired a biography by his grandson, Christopher Catherwood, which gives a good overview of his ministry. He certainly was a great fan of the Puritans, and founder of the Puritan Conference. Because of other commitments it may be a few days before I can add more to the articles about Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Westminster Chapel, but I will try to do so soon. – Agendum 22:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:username similarity

I created User:Hrodulf/disambuigation and linked to it from my userpage. You can do likewise, if you want. That should solve the problem.

As for the spelling 1)I didn't know how to make that letter and 2)now that you're using it I can't anyway because then it will be completely impossible to tell us apart. Hope that helps. --Hrodulf 03:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Cool - thanks Hrodulf. Done. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 06:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Pietism

Hi Hroðulf! I am relatively new at this Wikypedia thing. Did you mean that you liked the sentence (below) and that you feel it should be integrated BUT that you want to place it somewhere else in the text? If so I have no firm opinion on where it may be placed. Or did you just remove it because you think it does not belong in the text at all? And by the way, are you Icelandic (Islendingur)?

“In Europe, in the 17th and 18th century, a movement within Lutheranism based on puritan ideology became a strong religious force known as pietism.”

Greetings from Sweden: asgeir

I didn't remove the sentence. I moved it up to where I thought it fit better (in the first paragraph after 1660). I am not Icelandic - but good guess. Look at my user page to find out who Hroðulf is. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ben Bagby Beowulf website

Don't know if you're interested, but in case you are, here's the website:

[[1]]

--Hrodulf 20:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Languages

I have to make mention of your interest in languages (amongst other things that we have in common). I for one didn't need to look up the pronunciation of your ð in you name.... <grin>

I speak some French and Danish, and have always been fascinated by the similarity of Danish to English and the other countries of "the Lowlands". Friesian is particularly interesting, as it is almost understandable to someone who has both of the above - and I am developing an interest in lowland Scots too, ever since reading a little Robert Burns. Fascinating stuff!

Glad to see we have a few things in common! – Agendum 23:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Scots is greatly endangered. Very few teachers know enough Scots to be able to help kids develop fluency, literacy and confidence in their native tongue (those that spoke Scots at home had it taught out of them at school.) It is only in the last decade that it has started to lose the stigma of being a language only suitable for colloquial speech and for January 25. In this sense, it is in the position that the Frisian languages were in 50 years ago. You will notice I have tried to do a little editing on the Scots language, Frisian language and Ulster Scots language articles. The latter article is very much in need of a critical eye and some more research. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

reply

See my reply on User talk:Bluebot. thanks Martin 11:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Dean Radin: One spoon of many

I think the photo of Dean Radin's spoon should be connected to some of the other photos of psi bent dinner ware. It gives the curious reader a clearer sense of proportion. User:Kazuba 26 Aug 06

The page you linked to doesn't have any photos of bent dinnerware. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Not happy, Jan

See the note above. Please do not remove this link to Maynooth. What I have said before is correct and verifiable. Are you aware of the significance of Maynooth? Arguably it was the single most influential modern Roman Catholic Seminary in the English speaking world (and I am not Irish). You undermine the NPOV of the article on seminaries by leaving the multiple references to (later and minor) Protestant foundations while removing this link to a Roman seminary of great significance in the international English Speaking world. I am very surprised you did this, when from a more NPOV, it is a fact that the prototype of modern (Protestant and Catholic) seminaries were founded during the Counter Reformation. I remain unhappy with the Protestant bias in this article (which has, at least, improved since the original Mormon bias) - and have been working to balance it better. PLease leave Maynooth alone!

Cor Unum 09:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I know Maynooth is significant. I will take a look at the article. In the meantime, Category:Seminaries and theological colleges links to every one with an article, so is fairly even handed. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Reviewedfairuse

Thanks for pointing this out to me! I actually didn't know this template existed. I'll use it from now on. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 18:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Moore Theological College

Hi, I just thought I should leave a note about the categorization of Moore College. Although Moore is an Anglican college, I thought it would be worth putting it in the Reformed category because of its theological views. I'm not asking for it to be put back, just explaining why it was there in the first place. Keep up the good work. Blarneytherinosaur 08:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I guessed that was the reason. I think the Reformed category would be tidier if it only had colleges affiliated with the Reformed churches. But that is just my view, since I was thinking of classifying the colleges by denomination rather than theology. Anglicanism is a denomination with Reformed theology, and not just in the Sydney diocese (see also Ridley Hall, Cambridge.) It is not normally considered a Reformed Church.

I thought the categories would be useful to take the long and unbalanced list of seminaries out of Presbyterianism.

Did you notice that our new categories lose focus completely in the Indian sub-continent, where the colleges have tried to maintain affiliations with several Protestant denominations, including the United Churches?

I probably won't do too much more on cats, except where it takes biased or uninformative lists out of articles. I suspect most encyclopedia readers don't use categories, and they rarely appear on Google results pages. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I think if you ask any Sydney Anglican or check any online reference (just to assure you this is not original research) the moniker "Reformed" is exactly what Moore College thinks of itself and how it describes itself. There is no ambiguity about how Moore sees itself; it is definitely "Reformed" and it sees itself as a distinctive college of the protestant heritage. They would call themselves catholic (with a very small "c"). Moore would not even be particularly comfortable with the name "seminary" since this title has a fairly Catholic pedigree (despite modern usage which is more inclusive). Cor Unum 13:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Right, I agree. I met a conservateconservative Presbyterian minister (and so 'Reformed') who is now a conservateconservative evangelical Anglican priest. I don't think he changed his theology (much.) However, you won't find Sydney diocese or any other Anglicans on the Reformed churches article, partly because they are not a denomination but a diocese, and partly because they are among many conservative protestants that have a 95% Reformed theology (such as Methodists, Baptists, Brethren, Pentecostal) yet have never been considered, nor considered themselves, as part of the family tree of Reformed churches.

It sounds like I am making an 'angels on the head of a pin' argument, but actually all I was interested in is making the Category:Reformed seminaries and theological colleges readable, instead of a list of _all_ Protestant colleges. If you disgree, go ahead, it is no big deal to me. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Not every church that formed as a result of the Protestant Reformation would qualifies as "Reformed" (with a big R). A "Reformed" church teaches Calvinism or Reformed theology (the two terms being synonomous). However, many churches that came out of the Protestant Reformation do not hold to Calvinism. A large number of Methodists and Baptists teach Arminianism, and the Lutheran Churches definately descended from the Reformation, but they don't teach Calvinism either. Although they are not Roman Catholic, and did in that sense "reform", they are not "Reformed". Blarneytherinosaur 09:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Finally, the British and Australians see the word 'seminary' as Catholic; the Americans do not. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I see by looking at the introduction to the category that it is clearly spelt out that it is for Reformed church seminaries rather than seminaries with reformed theology. As long as this distinction is clearly made on the category page I don't think there will be any more confusion. Perhaps I was being a little mischevious adding Moore in the first place. Blarneytherinosaur 09:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

No, no, no! Not at all mischievous. I have seen mischief on WP, and that is so far away from it. You have a very sharp mind that is very useful on a number of article on religion. Keep up the good work!

I think we should move Category:Reformed seminaries and theological colleges to Category:Reformed Church seminaries and theological colleges. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, nominate Category:Reformed seminaries and theological colleges for renaming, and I'll vote for it. Blarneytherinosaur 02:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Northern Ireland constituent country

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Northern Ireland, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Anglican Communion Network

Can you look at Anglican Communion Network? It is now claiming that the ACN is taking over as the de facto Anglican church in the USA after Lambeth 2008. This was news to me. How does one go about reporting a problem?

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Echriscopal (talk • contribs) 03:05, September 7, 2006.

Since your message someone else has fixed this rather surprising forecast (see diff.

There are several ways to deal with problems. If a problem is aggregious and will mislead readers, and you can't quicky fix it by editing, there are various tags I would consider to alert the readers and the editors, such as {{fact}} {{verify source}} and {{NPOV}}. Useful tags, and instructions for using them, are listed at Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles and Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes. It is important to assume good faith, and engage the original editors on the talk page of the article. If they were intending to be neutral, unconscious biases probably got into the text, so it is easy to negotiate improvements.

A useful antidote to bias is verifiable facts WP:VERIFY, so continually to ask politely but firmly for references.

This particular article makes a lot of (surprising) assertions, a few of which are controversial. Everyone editing a controversial article like this should make themselves familiar with WP:CITE.

If you can't persuade anyone to fix an article and you can't resolve the dispute by negotiating a 'win-win' (I don't think you are there yet) then there are other ways of getting help - see Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I think I am probably too close on the other side of the equation to try to negotiate any kind of solution with the person who would write these things. Knowing this about myself and having at least a crude understanding of the point of this project, I'm reluctant to go there. Thank you for the insight, though, that will come in handy as I look for how I can best contribute.

Echriscopal 02:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Article

You left a message on my talk page about mediation for the NI page, and I'm not quite sure what to do. I was only trying to clean up the article a bit, I'm not very informed on the issue, but I'd be glad to read the discussion and try to help come to a conclusion to make everyone happy. I just don't know if it'd be a good idea since I'm not half an expert on the issue, please let me know what I should do -- I'm not even sure what's being asked of me, haha. Omishark 14:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

OK - I contacted everyone in the 'constituent country' thread. Mediation is when someone on the mediation committee helps those of us that have lost the ability to talk to each other to start talking again. In this case I might need it to get talking to Mal User:Setanta747. It doesn't sound like you need that, in which case do nothing, but you have the option if you think you do need it. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!Omishark 17:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

link disambig; language or dialect.. etc.

Hi Hroðulf,

I replied to your comment on link disambiguation on my talk page.. and "Most language experts do not seem to care about the difference (between languages and dialects)" depends very much on the context of the discussion... these distinctions are more important in some contexts than in others. Cheers and thanks again! --Ling.Nut 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Of dialects and churches

Hroðulf, I pasted your "Episcopal Church" comments here; you can add more if you like. I'd be happy to dialog with you about dialects v. languages, but not today. I have a Chinese test to study for. Later --Ling.Nut 22:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

re: Bexley Hall (disambiguation)

Thanks for the heads up. It appears that the only work I did on that page was to fix a double redirect, and I see no reason for keeping it, but thanks for telling me anyway. -Mysekurity 00:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

another little question (not urgent)

Hi Hroðulf,

Do you know anything about this issue (or is it even an issue; I'm hoping not 'cause that would save me some time disambiguating the relevant links) surrounding use of the term "Evangelical" in Anglican churches? The link is here, but to save time I'll copy paste the salient bit:

Disambig doesn' cover the anglican (main1: Church of England & main2: Anglo-Catholics) divide into High Church and evangelical groups, and the low church article does refer to evangelical, while no specific clarification exists on the page.

See also: Evangelicalism and the POV disputed Evangelism ... FrankB 21:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Tks, --Ling.Nut 18:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Good question, easy answer - I will answer it over there. By the way the Low church article (unreferenced thought it is) should link to Evangelicalism. I will fix it. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

dialects!

1. The first point is that the uncertainties surrounding this issue are real ones to linguists, in many contexts. This is what I wrote on the Formosan languages page: "It is often difficult to decide where to draw the boundary between a language and a dialect, causing some minor disagreement among scholars regarding the inventory of Formosan languages. There is even more uncertainty regarding many extinct or assimilated Formosan tribes, since our knowledge of these is often sketchy at best. Frequently cited examples of Formosan languages are given below, but the list should not be considered exhaustive."
2. Secondly, it is true that many if not most linguists are far from eager to get involved in debates with non-linguists about this issue, because these debates tend to involve people who hold relatively uninformed but extremely rigid positions. The debates generate far, far more heat than light. So it is very true that linguists say "A language is a dialect with an army and a navy."
3. It is true that.. there really is no test you can apply that is 100% valid and reliable.. like taking someone's blood pressure or something.. that can tell you that A is a language and B is a dialect of A. Mutual intelligibility is of course the first criterion that is appealed to.. but.. where do you draw the boundary? If two languages/dialects are 75% mutually intelligible, is one a dialect of the other? What about 60%? There are no universal standards. There are rough rules of thumb linguists might apply loosely, but.. no tests per se.
4. Since even linguists themselves have no really valid and reliable test, it tends to be difficult to take a position on the issue with non-linguists.
5. However, in a room of linguists, absent anyone holding rigid political positions, many linguists would some better-defined feelings about the distinction. Sometimes there is no clear answer. But.... take the case of the usage which ascribes the term "dialect" to every single language spoken in China other than Mandarin. Some (but not all, of course) of these languages are not even from the same language family as the Sino-Tibetan languages. Calling these particlar languages "dialects" of Chinese is a purely political paradigm. Moreover, there are some separate "languages" which are perhaps 90% mutually intelligible, but the two groups have a long history of separate (and often antagonistic) cultural identities. They both claim the "languages" are separate in order increase the salience of existing political/cultural distinctions between the groups. --Ling.Nut 18:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hroðulf, I added more on my talk page.. but howzabout we discuss Anglican issues on my page, and dialects on yours? Tks, --Ling.Nut 20:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Mandarin, edit notes

Someone left a link to the edit notes you were wondering about on my page - the list is here. Yes, I'm studying Mandarin, and mangling it atrociously (I once tried to say "I'm sorry, I'm powerless," but said (literally) "I'm sorry, I have no milk" which also means (idiomatically) "I'm sorry, I have no breasts." And yes, I spend too much time on WP. ;-) --Ling.Nut 18:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Eths

Hello, very minor point...on your user page you tell people that the ð in your name is pronounced like the th in three, but in fact eth is only unvoiced (/θ/) when it's at the end of a word. Otherwise it's pronounced like the ‘th-’ in ‘that’ or ‘the’ (/ð/). Widsith 09:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Very useful, thank you! As you know, I don't speak the Old English language, so I am vulnerable to errors like that. I will fix it.

Did you notice that Pronunciation of English th implies that 'ð is always voiced? Could you apply your skill to that article, please? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Mandarin userbox

I noticed that you say you know specifically Standard Mandarin, so wondered if the absence of Chinese among your userboxes is because you have the same problem finding a suitable one as I did. Anyway, you might like to take a look at User:JRawle/No hanzi. JRawle (Talk) 14:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

good suggestion, thanks. Actually (a) I thought one userbox was enough, and (b) I know some pinyin, but not many traditional or simplified characters. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There is not yet a pinyin Wikipedia, nor an automated translator among the various Chinese scripts. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It's taken me this long to notice your reply! I know it's useless as a language box as there's no pinyin Wikipedia to contribute to. However, a knowledge of spoken Mandarin can still come in useful when editing language or Chinese-related articles (especially when combined with useful web-based tools [2]) Best regards, JRawle (Talk) 19:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Diocese of Newark questions

1. Do you think my section on the election of the tenth bishop at Episcopal Diocese of Newark is balanced?
2. Do you have access to sources (such as church newspapers) that can fill out the bio of John P. Croneberger? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

It seemed so when I read it the first time but I will read it again more closely and let you know what I think.

I do have access to the diocesan paper and other resources and would be glad to help build up the entry on John P. Croneberger. I even have access to him if need be, if there are specific things you think it should include that can't be found, I can ask. Thank you!

Echriscopal 02:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Evangelical

Hroðulf -- There used to be some interesting info on the dab page for Evangelical. It was too much, tho, so I deleted it. But now I don't have enough time to give those bits of info a new home. If you want a small project, that's one option. Later! --Ling.Nut 14:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Bexley Hall

Have you show that the seminary is significantly more notable than the MIT dorm? That's the usual criteria for the moves you've made. To quote WP:D, "where there is no such clearly dominant usage there is no primary topic page." It also talks about consensus of the editors, could you point me to that discussion? --J Clear 21:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't move Bexley Hall (Seminary) to Bexley Hall; an admin did that about 10 days ago, in response to my request. No-one objected to the formal move debate, which is now archived at Talk:Bexley Hall. You can request that an admin revert the move if you disagree. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Category:Flags of Northern Ireland

Hello, WP:PROD does not handle categories, as it requires special handling. Please use WP:CFD process instead. 132.205.45.206 01:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

List of English words of Bengali origin

Your response to the AfD on "List of English words of Bengali origin" confused me some. I read "There is but one word on this 'list'. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf)" and spend some time surprised that an eth would end up in the middle of a Bengali word.--Prosfilaes 18:38, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

LOL. I assume you discovered that the word was Mhaney (not my username.) Thanks for the message --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

African National Congress

When you reverted this a few days back, you also appear to have reverted your own last edit. Was that intentional? - Jmabel | Talk 21:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Well spotted. No it wasn't intentional - some bug in popups, or, more likely, I misused popups. Thanks to your message, I restored the edit a few moments ago. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 22:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: CFD

Currently the issue is the category doesn't update on redirected templates. So far, replacing has been the only solution that works. --Sagabot 22:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The category is changed on all templates - the issue is the old category won't empty because the old template got redirected. Now there is no way of reversing it all successfully, so the only option is to replace the old template with the new one properly. The problem arises because redirected templates don't update the category properly to the server, and purges don't have any effect. --Sagabot 22:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I understand that part. Why not undo the redirect of the old template? Will that update the server? (Sorry, I don't have my own copy of MediWiki to test, and I don't think I should mess with live WP :)) --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 22:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

No - we've tried that before and it doesn't have the desired effect. And thinking about it logically, we'd rather have all the pages using the new template than relying on a redirected old one - incase we get all this kerfuffle again, should we decide to rename the category...again! :) --Sagaciousuk ^(talk) 11:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Process question

It is the deleting admins responsibility. I cannot see any incoming links to that image. -Nv8200p talk 11:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I got rid of them just after I messaged you. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Melksham railway station

I'm a little concerned that you have merged the above article with Melksham without any consultation/debate. There are a large number of British railway stations with their own articles in a similar naming format to that of Melksham railway station. DuncanHill 16:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• Melksham is one of the smallest and least notable stations in the UK, but it forms an interesting section of the Melksham article.
• The naming format is unaffected as I tagged Melksham railway station as {{R with possibilities}}.
• That said, I would like to see someone expand Melksham railway station. If you liked the status quo prior to my edits, please discuss it at Talk:Melksham, or simply hit revert.
• Are you aware of a Wikiproject who would like to discuss it? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. I agree that the Melksham article benefits from the transport section with info about the station. I also feel that it is likely to be useful to users to have the seperate article for the station as well as this, so will revert Melksham railway station to the previous version, but leave Melksham as it is. I'm not immediately aware of a Wikiproject for stations, but will have a look for one - I'm sure the station could be usefully expanded. DuncanHill 16:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. I responded at Talk:Melksham railway station --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

"Welcoming Congregation" restructuring

Please see my comment on reorganization of the "Welcoming Congregation" topic (replying there). Thanks! --Haruo 06:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Historical reference to City of Derry/Londonderry

Hi, sorry to drop this message onto your page but I'm trying to invoke a discussion on the WP:IMOS page as to what to use for the historical references to the city of Derry/Londonderry. I am trying to obtain a non-POV neutral discussion over what terminology to use for this or whether the IMOS as it stands should indeed cover this. Since you have been involved in discussions over Derry or County Londonderry and the likes in the past I thought you may like to get involved in the discussion. See the appropriate talk to get involved. Thank you for your time. Ben W Bell talk 16:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

L.A. Vote

Since you recently voted on the Philadelphia article name change, I thought you might be interested in participating on the vote to make a similar name change for Los Angeles (and, with respect to your common on the preceding vote, Los Angeles already has plenty of incoming links. See Talk:Los Angeles, California. Also, if you put my user page on your watchlist, you'll see notifications of other similar votes. --Serge 18:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Colonial era - Imperial Flags in Irish flags page

Check the facts before throwing accusations of a lack of objectivity and vandalism at me for calling English royal flags relics of the colonial era. Last time I looked the article was "List of IRISH flags" not "List of Republic of Ireland flags " or "List of N. Ireland flags" by no stretch of the imagination can some of those obscure flags be called Irish - try to be realistic if you can't be objective. How many "union flags" do you want on the Irish flags page before you're happy?--Damnbutter 16:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

UK election changes

Hey Hroðulf - just wanted to say how grateful I am for the work you are carrying out on the UK election pages, such as the Boundary change article I de-merged earlier this month. I hope in the lead up to the election itself we can all work together on these articles. doktorb _words^deeds 12:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The Wales changes were okayed by Parliament this summer. England should be done by middle of 2007. If an election is called prior to Parliamentary approval, the election will be run on existing boundaries (which will cause all sorts of issues, I'm sure!). doktorb _words^deeds 14:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

AfD Pathological skepticism

Thanks for pointing out my voting gaff! --Iantresman 10:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Semington & K&A

Hope you are happy with the changes I made? I would suggest leaving the village & locks articles as seperate.— Rod ^talk 15:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the locks (& associated bits) are worthy of a seperate article which will be of interest in the context of the canal & fits with all the others (hence the upstream & downstream box) - but I think the village has more & seperate info (you can always do thelisted buildings your self by registering at Images of England). Your comment "This phrase doesn't sound right: "and this stretch of the river is ... known as the Kennet Navigation.". Is it right?" is a good one & it isn't right - my error when doing aticle for all the locks I copied one from the Reading end & didn't edit it properly - but I've now removed that phrase from both Semington & Seend Locks articles.— Rod ^talk 16:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Semington contribution

Hi there

I just wanted to thank you for the great job you did on the Semington article. I am living in Semington for 2 years now and it's really a beautiful and peaceful little spot. I have informed the village and hopefully we 'll try to add a bit more information in the article. Thanks again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dimitris1974 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

tom wright link

I noticed you removed an external link to ntwrites.com from the Tom Wright page this morning - curious why and what the determination is for what links are kept and removed. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ntutak (talk • contribs) 21:28 October 25, 2006 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

what makes you feel bad?

Criticising my removal? Bah - I've got a thicker skin than that (too much time spent around Scots and heralds!), so don't worry about it. Feel free to reorganize/improve on any of my edits, or just comment again on the talk page. Cheers. -- nae'blis 22:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Rowan Williams

Please have a look at my revision and comment to me. Roger Arguile 17:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Episcopal Church USA Shield.png

You said :

episcopal church shield up for speedy deletion - nothing personal

No offence taken :). It;'s part of the learning process.

-- Bob K 10:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Bishop John P. Croneberger

Sorry for the delay but I have good news. A bio of Bishop Croneberger is on its way to me via snail mail. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Echriscopal (talk • contribs) 01:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

May, 1934 Cooperation excerpt

In addition to the note I put on the discussion page of Consumers' Cooperative you might want to consider that the intent of this issue was to convey a summary overview of Consumers' Cooperation to as wide an audience as possible. The cover page:

Vol. XX. No. 5

MAY, 1934

10 cents

A Special Issue

This is a special issue of COOPERATION. It consists largely of a summary of Consumers' Cooperation. There is a constant demand for such a presentation for general distribution and it is to meet such requests that this special issue has been prepared. We believe our readers will appreciate having the whole Consumers' Cooperative Movement placed before them in this way. The inside 16 pages will be reprinted as a pamphlet for widespread distribution. It is intended to be the primary pamphlet for use in general educational work and it is anticipated that 'it will be ordered and distributed in large quantities by Consumers' Cooperative Associations. The title is America's Answer—Consumers' Cooperation, and the following subjects are covered:

The Four Proposed Solutions—'Capitalism, Corporatism, Communism and Consumers' Cooperation.

Why Consumers' Cooperation is Necessary. What Consumers' Cooperation Does. How Consumers' Cooperation Grows. Organize a Consumers' Cooperative. Study Consumers' Cooperation. Leaders, Speak Definitely—'Lead Out! Join The Cooperative League. What an Opportunity!

Bkobres 01:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I replied at Talk:Consumers' cooperative --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jim Clark full protection

Sounds good to me. Looking at that page's history, all I see is "rv vandalism." There is no way to know which edits are legitimate and which are the block-evading socks. As long as there are people watching the article, I will reduce the page to semi-protection. I also have it on my watchlist now. Thanks for the update. Zsinj^Talk 04:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jim Clark thank you

Of course. :) Having dealt with a few interesting cases of sockpuppetry, in the past, I know it can be quite a pain. Luna Santin 09:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for telling me about how you can't use a firefox logo on a userpage :D

~Clarifying nothing forever and ever :D 07:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jim Clark

WP:SSP would be an alternative. I recommend WP:RCU in conjunction with whatever alternative you try. Basically the request at WP:RFI belonged in another section. Watchlist requests usually apply to multiple random vandals rather than a single puppetmaster. Regards, Durova^Charge! 14:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, you might as well follow up with me. I've got some familiarity with the problem now. I've indef blocked the sockpuppet and extended Pflanzgarten's block to 3 months. Report to RFI if it happens again. Durova^Charge! 14:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Replying on your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sandra L. Smith

That's strange, I never made those edits. It must be a glitch in the system. I dont copy stuff at all. -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Airshow photos

Yes, they are allowed (and encouraged). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 15:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Revert on Elder (Religious)

Hroðulf - thanks for your enthusiastic defense of the content on the elder page, in making sure that it does not violate copyright violations. I assure you that I developed those thoughts myself, gave proper attribution to both the Scriptures and the external authors, and release them for use in both Wikipedia and on Theopedia as well. I understand they may not stand the test of time nearly as well in such a public and neutral forum, but I think they are a fine beginning of a biblical understanding of eldership and I look forward to seeing how they are developed here. Please let me know if you have additional concerns. Oh, and regarding the blogpost from http://bowingdown.wordpress.com/2006/05/26/sheep-make-baaaaad-shepherds, I hadn't seen that material before, but I think it's very well thought out and is good reading. I didn't however, see any connection that would make it appear it had been plagiarized. HokieRNB 18:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for dealing with Episcopal polity

I want to send you rather belated but hearty thanks for dealing with the Episcopal polity merge. I don't think I could ever have managed it. Mangoe 21:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Replying on your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

UCCF revert

I'm not sure why you restored the {{db-atk}} tag on there. The attack page as tagged by Quendus was inappropriately tagged in the first place as a glance at the edit history shows that the attack page as tagged is simple vandalism of a good article that should have been cured by reversion, not deletion. (And yeah, I often forget to check the history as well). I've detagged it as reverted to the last good version. Tonywalton  | Talk 13:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing this! I reverted at the same time as you. As my revert removed the tag, I restored it with {{hangon}}, since I assumed Quendus had a reason for the tag. I am not an admin, so I am not supposed to remove speedy delete tags, only contest them. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an admin either, but your understanding of speedy delete tags seems to differ from mine. My understanding is that if an article is inappropriately tagged anyone may remove the tag (and if an article on CAT:CSD can be salvaged then there's nothing wrong with salvaging it (by adding content or references, perhaps) then removing the tag. {{db-meta}} mentions only "pages that you have created yourself". {{hangon}} is a convenience to "hold" an article from immediate deletion while a rationale is put together as to why it shouldn't be deleted (not too relevant at the moment as the backlog of speedy deletions is such that things are taking a day to disappear). And ultimately, of course, WP:IAR may apply :-) Tonywalton  | Talk 13:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:IAR only helps when I understand the rules to ignore–I wasn't aware that any user could remove a speedy delete tag, but I couldn't anyway as I wondered if the tagger knew the rules better than I did, or had actually intended to request the attack to be excised from history. I did use {{hangon}} to write a rationale on the talk page. Thanks again for the help, and thanks for the extra info. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Excising the attack from history is hardly ever a good idea as each entry in the edit history adds to the body of evidence that gets vandals blocked. Cheers, Tonywalton  | Talk 13:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Please warn the users of the images

You said: "When you add an {{rfu}} tag to an image, please consider adding these tags to the image caption:

{{speedy-image-c|[[2006-11-22]]}}<br />{{replacethisimage}}

I have found that it stimulates quick action in finding replacements."

Will do! It looks like someone made the effort to add a refu-c to the templated warning so this should basically just be a matter of copying and pasting. Thank you for the excellent suggestion. --Yamla 15:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Copyright issues

Hroðulf - the more I read and discover, the more I'm frustrated by what can't be used on Wikipedia. While I have no choice to agree with you in terms of what needs to be deleted, I disagree in principle that the use of these images actually amounts to copyright infringement. The whole point of the use of logo images is to point people back to the products for which they were created. The one that really gets me boiling is Google... give me a break. Sorry I just needed to vent. I submit. Please delete the images. HokieRNB 13:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Replying on your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Images Not Allowed

Hello, I have been reading a great deal of Wikipedias rules and they seem to deter one from actually making an article what so ever. I have been looking and adding to this site ever before I was registered, however now I am registered and it seems to me that rules have changed somewhat up this site. I don't quite understand the rule "Do not upload images found on websites or on an image search engine. They will be deleted" Do they want people to post any pictures whatsoever or not. I can understand about copyrights however once something is upon the net is it not free for all to use? I would like to post images of a model that there is a small article on link Ramona Cherorleu However all her pictures are on the net so I would images that I cannot use them. Also, not just this article but others without images. It seems may images that were once are now gone.

Reply here --Margrave1206 21:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You asked "once something is upon the net is it not free for all to use". Short answer, "No! sorry."

It was very smart of you to ask before you donated your time uploading images. I hope you like the answer Luke gave you at Wikipedia talk:Fair use#Images!. The rules haven't really changed; in fact the law stops us from copying most images from the web. Here is the full warning.

If you are uploading a file under a free license (not fair use!), consider uploading it to the Wikimedia Commons where it can be used across projects.

Do not upload images found on websites or on an image search engine. They will be deleted. (For exceptions, see Wikipedia:Fair use and Wikipedia:Free image resources.)

If you can find or make images that meet the exceptions, then we are delighted if you upload them here or at http://commons.wikimedia.org . If you meet your subject, she may allow you to photograph her yourself.

If you have more questions that aren't answered from the links on the Upload form, then please reply on my talk page, or better, ask at Help desk --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Anglicanism COTM

The Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month has been reactivated! Please consider going to the page to either vote for one of the nominated articles, or nominate one yourself. Thanks! Fishhead64 02:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Merged Mutual into Mutual organization

Hi. On 7 Nov 2006 you recommended merging the Mutual organization article with the Mutual article. I commented 3 weeks later, agreeing with the merger, but the final destination should have the clearer name. There was no further discussion, and today I did so. Since you were the original editor suggesting the idea, I'm closing the loop here. :) 2*6 03:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Spong2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Spong2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 22:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Calvinism

Hi Hroðulf, I see you're inactive at the moment, but when you're back into it, you might like to consider this invitation. Blarneytherinosaur talk 02:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Calvinism The goal of WikiProject Calvinism is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Calvinism available on Wikipedia. WP:WikiProject Calvinism as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Calvinism, but prefers that all Calvinist traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

Revived discussion concerning fair use in portals

I am contacting everyone who participated in the discussion that became inactive in December. Due to the length of the previous discussion, I have proposed a new amendment and you like you to weigh in so that we may actually have a consensus on this matter as it doesn't seem there exists one either way. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria

Missing image Image:Chase Philander-Bishop Episcopal Church USA.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Chase Philander-Bishop Episcopal Church USA.jpg, by Strangerer, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Chase Philander-Bishop Episcopal Church USA.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Chase Philander-Bishop Episcopal Church USA.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Chase Philander-Bishop Episcopal Church USA.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Gallagher-Croneberger-bishops-newark_med_-_3.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Gallagher-Croneberger-bishops-newark_med_-_3.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 22:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Apologies regarding Meditation

You may not remember me, but I was your meditator in the meditation case regarding [Northern Ireland]. I, however, was affected by China's ban on Wikipedia. I apoligize for my sudden inactivity and disappearance from Wikipedia, causing the meditation case to end prematurely.

Again, I apologize.

¿Exir?¡Kamalabadi! 10:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Anglican collaboration of the month

Wassupwestcoast 02:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Evangelicalism

Hey, I saw you removed the other uses disambiguation tag from Evangelicalism. I think it reasonable to assume that, since a disambiguation page redirects there, we need some sort of disambiguation tag, even if it isn't quite the same as the one you removed. I'd like to hear your side of the "debate," though. Let me know what you think. Thanks for the updates/edits in general. Good stuff. Aepoutre 23:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. I responded at Talk:Evangelicalism#Disambiguation_hatnote. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:AFC Backlog Drive

WikiProject Articles for creation needs your help!

WikiProject Articles for creation has done a tremendous job in working at WP:AFC over the past 7½ months. Thank you all for your hard work and dedication! Together, we've made the submission process easier and more streamlined, developed tools to make the process go faster for reviewers, and cut the backlog down to a mere fraction of what it once was. Well done! As you all are aware, however, our work is not quite yet done. The project still has 10 archive pages left to complete, which include over half a month's worth of submissions, many of which have not been completely reviewed. We need your help to finish looking over these neglected submissions so that we can finally remove the backlog notice from the page, and put an end to the more than two year old backlog that has been a thorn in our side for ages! Participants will receive an AFC Barnstar, so hurry up and help out while there's still work to be done! Make sure to sign in on the WikiProject's talk page so we know who is involved in what promises to be our final effort to complete this goal. Thank you for all your help! - Happy editing as always, Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this letter because you are listed as a participant in the Articles for creation WikiProject at WP:WPAFC. To avoid receiving further notices, please remove your name from the list. Thanks!

AFC Backlog is GONE

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		For your help in finally putting an end to the monstrous backlog at Articles for creation, I, Hersfold (t/a/c), hereby award you the Articles for Creation Barnstar! Well done, and thank you for your dedication to the project! Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hercules (chef)

Great work on the New Page Patrol. I appreciate you have to be hasty. I think you erred on the over cautious side when you marked the Hercules article as a CSD. I thought I would do you the courtesy of letting you know I challenged the db tag. The article was created by an anon IP at WP:AFC, so its style is similar to a lot of spam, but there is at least one hyperlinked reference to the notability claims that is verifiable, and the others look plausible. Please respond at the article's talk page if you want to follow up. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 22:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• I originally tagged this one for notability par WP:Bio, Section Invalid Criteria. Simply said: His notability came from the fact that he knew a notable person, or in this case, served under one. However, looking closer at the rule itself, this little part kind of jumps into my eye"(unless significant coverage can be found on A). In this case, there seems to be coverage on the individual itself, which means he might just as well be notable. This is actually a case i never ran into before, so at the time of the tagging, i was not aware of this little sub line.

Does this make him notable? Well, of course we can argue over that, but at least it means that a speedy is not warranted here. And actually, this is to debatable to prod or AFD it as well. So let it be, let it free i say :) Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 22:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Cape Catch

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Cape Catch, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

re. designated

with your succession table which you put in Lord Monk Bretton's page can you get rid of the 'designated' part of heir? 'Designated' implies a choice, which does'nt really exist with an hereditary peerage. 'Heir' would suffice. Rodolph (talk) 13:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I will put 'heir for now. I will explain at Talk:John Charles Dodson, 3rd Baron Monk Bretton. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Wiltshire College

Hi Hroðulf, I see you have this linked from your Sandbox; if you'd like to give it a look, a second pair of eyes would be welcome. (I have a feeling we've met in the Two Pigs sometime). Regards, --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #90

ProseTimeline template

Not sure why you think Ta bu shi da yu would care about the TFD for ProseTimeline. He never contributed to the discussion, and he's not in the history! Not to mention - he's not an active user any more. - 122.107.11.230 (talk) 09:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_October_31&diff=168932354&oldid=168900049

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Longleat House

listen, I don't know what this page does but I hope that I can get through to who ever is making the changes on this site. I made a change on the Longleat House page saying that hung up amongst old masters within the house itself is a copy of The Fallen Maddonna With The Big Boobies by Van Clompt. You have obviously never seen, let alone heard of, "'Allo 'Allo" - a British comedy set in France during the German occupation of WWII. In the series there appears this picture (it's a work of fiction of course). Anyway, after the series finished, Lord Bath accquired a copy of the picture and hung it up in his house - Longleat.

Look, here is an extract from your own page on Wikipedia! So don't say I'm making jokes if you lot are just as responsible!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fallen_Madonna#Lord_Bath

Yours

X —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.65.53.81 (talk) 21:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Answered at the user's talk page. Also see this diff at Longleat --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Exenatide

I should have read that closer, it just appeared to be a general comment rather than something related to the article. Thanks for clarifying the information.Awotter (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I don't know what prompted me to click on the user's contributions link, because if I hadn't, I never would have noticed the connection with the article edit. You notice that I only restored the last sentence of the comment. The rest of it really doesn't belong on a talk page. That must be the one-in-a-million exception to: "if it walks like a duck ...". --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 07:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

- Tinucherian (talk) 10:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Investment

Hi
Just wanted to thank you for this [3].
Zain Ebrahim (talk) 16:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't normally edit other people's talk comments, but fixing a disambiguation page link is just one click with popups :) Thanks for being so nice about it. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I also use popups but how would you do that using one click?

Zain Ebrahim (talk) 18:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

As a test, hover over this link CFA. You should see, at the bottom of your popup, a bunch of green links marked 'Disambiguate this to..'. Click on one and watch what happens. And actually I was wrong - it takes 2 clicks (and about 10 seconds). --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't have the green links. How did you get your popups?Zain Ebrahim (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

// User:Lupin/popups.js // See Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups Hope that helps. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Turns out I had edited User:Hroðulf/monobook.js to turn on this optional feature. Instructions are in the Configuration section of the above link. I added this code:

popupFixDabs=true;

Sorry I forgot about that in my earlier answer. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I tried and still couldn't get it so eventually I just replaced my monobook page with what's in your's and now it works great. Thanks!

Zain Ebrahim (talk) 20:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Exchange-traded fund

Thanks for fixing the cite; I hadn't noticed that the footnotes referred to different page numbers. John M Baker (talk) 21:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

No worries. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

British Spelling

Thanks, that's good to know. I wish the British would standardize whether they want to use an 's' or a 'z', it would sure make it easier. I think they all look better with a 'z', but I see, according to your userpage, "It bugs me if you try to "correct" my spelling to your preferred one" so feel free to change it to whichever spelling you think is right. Useight (talk) 14:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Spelling is not quite as fixed as some schoolteachers seem to imply. There are a number of variations like that in the English language, including some other British examples I listed on my userpage. I think the person who was behaving in an irritating manner was not you, but the unregistered user who changed -ise to -ize without even an edit summary. However, it does not irritate me (much) as it was not my prose in the first place. I added RBS to my watchlist a few weeks ago, but only made a few small edits to the article. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oxone

Hey there

I moved the MSDS to the chembox, because we're trying to standardize where you can find information for ease of use. Just to let you know. Hope this helps. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK. What if there are different MSDS from different manufacturers and for different jurisdictions? Won't that clutter the infobox? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, only one MSDS will show, and one MSDS is enough. WP:NOT#DIR WP is not a directory, so we need not attempt to list all online MSDS'; a representative one is sufficient. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK. I guess if one goes offline, or seems to be missing important info, another one can be easily substituted. I shouldn't imagine a distributor will be too upset by the apparent bias of linking a competitor's MSDS. Multiple SDS are often relevant for different physical forms, but I imagine that when that occurs, you deal with that as an exception. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #90

Congrats

		The Original Barnstar
		I hereby award you this barnstar for your outstanding edits and also your highly intellectual philosophy. Thank You! Buddha24 (talk) 08:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Singapore Airlines request for formal mediation

Hi, as the informal mediation in relation to the various issues regarding the Singapore Airlines article was not successful, I have now instigated a request for formal mediation on these issues at MedCom at this link. As you have been involved in editing this article in direct relation to the various disputed issues and/or have been active in discussion regarding these issues on WP:AIRLINES, previous dispute resolution attempts, or on the talk pages, if you believe that you are involved, then please take a look at the MedCom request, and add yourself and any issues as you see fit. Thanks --Россавиа ^Диалог 18:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Kagome Co., Ltd.

On 17 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kagome Co., Ltd., 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 01:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The Co-operative brand

On 17 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Co-operative brand, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 16:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't write that; I just nominated it. Thanks for promoting my nomination. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Musselburgh and Fisherrow Co-operative Society

On 18 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Musselburgh and Fisherrow Co-operative Society, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 10:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems

Response at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems. Jeepday (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

How to safely test live templates in a sandbox?

I sometimes sandbox test templates in my user pages. However, sometimes, transcluding a template automatically places a page in an article category. This is bad, as it makes my user page look like an article. For example, I have a sandbox demo of {{Ise}} at User:Hroðulf/AIlist. It makes User:Hroðulf/AIlist show up on Category:Companies listed on the Irish Stock Exchange. I wish!

How can I safely demonstrate a template in a sandbox, when that template has article categories?

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 22:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Use substitution ("subst:"). For example, {{subst:Ise}} pulls that template's wikicode into the sandbox, where you can edit it. Then you can comment out or remove the lines setting the categories. That turns the sandbox into a template, and you then may need to test it in another sandbox (so you can pass parameters to it, etc.) The Transhumanist 11:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

re:WABCO

Hello Hroðulf, I placed both the text and talk page at User:Hroðulf/WABCO and User talk:Hroðulf/WABCO, respectively. If you need anything else, just let me know. Parsecboy (talk) 12:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

I have 1 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Co-operatives

Hi Hroðulf -- thanks for your note on the co-op talk page today. Your work on co-ops has been great, and that puts you in a very small (and deeply misguided!) group making any progress on them. I hope you keep it up! Sorry I can't help you on the Scottish one you mentioned but I hope you can find more info and photos for it. Far too little of the history -- the co-ops, the pioneers, the practices, the challenges and achievements -- is recorded here (even though the future of the movement, especially in the developing world where it is still very much needed, could depend on it). As a matter of practice I don't rate articles I've contributed to Wikipedia, but I'd be quite happy to rate yours if you want to rate mine.Brett epic (talk) 01:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Brett. One admin candidate caused a brouhaha recently by agreeing to review another editor's Good Article Candidate, in return for a review of his. There was no suggestion (that I saw) that the reviews were dishonest, but other editors still bandied about phrases like 'corruption' and 'off-wiki collusion'.

In the meantime, I tend to assess articles from stub to B class as I see them, whether I wrote much of them or not. I can't imagine that is controversial, but I understand your reluctance to do so.

Good articles, in contrast, I take much more seriously. When I saw an article that was clearly well above B class (Somerset Coal Canal - not a co-op) I put it in the Good Article Review queue. About a month later, an uninvolved editor came by and gave it its stripes.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 07:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarism VPP comment

Thanks for the comment at the VPP thread on plagiarism. We are trying to move discussion on from there to Wikipedia talk:Plagiarism. Would you consider reposting your comment there? Carcharoth (talk) 11:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Private Equity Task Force

Hi, I wanted to invite you to become an inaugural member of the Private Equity WikiProject Task Force. I think this might be a good fit and your contributions would be welcome. This is intended as an inter-project task force to focus on private equity concepts, firms and investors. If you are interested, please visit the Private Equity WikiProject Task Force project page.

Also, please feel free to add the following banner to your user page:

{{Userbox/privateequitytaskforce}}

I look forward to working together, if you are interested. Let me know if you have any questions.

|► ϋ r b a n я e n e w a l ◄| (talk) 22:54, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I have now watchlisted the task force page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:10, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I added a number of additional resources to the project page that will help |► ϋ r b a n я e n e w a l ◄| (talk) 15:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Constituent country

There has been a long centralized discussion at Talk:United Kingdom, in which it was decided with 83.33% consensus that constituent country would be used to describe England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. However, users at Scotland are saying that they will not accept a consensus made on another page, so I would like to inform you that there is now a similar vote on the Scotland talk page. Cheers --fone4me 20:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 24 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lothian, Borders & Angus Co-operative Society, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 09:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Unitedlogo2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Unitedlogo2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Cooperatives

Hi Hrothulf. Thanks for the invitation to join WikiProject Cooperatives. I will be glad to join and start contributing to the best of my ability. Regards, --Zlerman (talk) 10:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Lightbot

Hi, I was just wondering if you got a satisfactory response about the date linking business. I can't help feeling this is in the 'ignore it and it will go away' basket now, but perhaps that is ungenerous. It does seem to have annoyed quite a lot of people so you would hope there would be a better response than, ‘I’m right, you’re wrong’.

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 08:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

It seems that Lightbot was stopped on June 23, and Lightmouse is happy to engage in debate (User talk:Lightmouse#Bot; you also saw him at WT:MOSNUM). He did turn it on again and it made a couple of hundred entries last night (now stopped.)

I wonder if there is a win-win to be found somewhere. The discussion at WT:MOSNUM doesn't seem to have progressed since June 24, but I have don't really have anything to add to what I already said.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Cooperative principles

Dear Hrothulf: I have started familiarizing myself with the structure and contents of WikiProject Cooperatives in the interest of "bringing cohesion" -- easier than writing new stuff. One thing that struck me immediately is Category:Cooperative principles. I see that there have already been suggestions to merge all the specific articles in this category into Rochdale Principles and I have today posted my comment in the discussion on Talk:Rochdale Principles. However, there has been no response to Gobonobo's original suggestion from February 2007 to streamline the category by creating a new article Cooperative principles (distinct from Rochdale Principles), and nobody will probably pick up my comment either. Should we continue to wait for the discussion to develop or act now by merging the separate principles into one page named Cooperative principles, while keeping Rochdale Principles alongside (with necessary changes)? Regards,--Zlerman (talk) 13:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I, personally, think the idea of an article on Rochdale Principles separate from one on Cooperative Principles is confusing, as 'Rochdale' is kind of an arbitrary name given by whomever is writing a list, from the ones in the 1860s through to the 1990s Statement on the Co-operative Identity. However I don't have strong feelings, and if you think a new article is needed, then do it, or give some more people a nudge for their ideas at WT:WikiProject Cooperatives. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Corsham

Hi again; I've added some stuff into this article, particularly the "Flemish Weavers' Cottages", but also the "Two Pigs", and I've tried not to make the latter too much like an advert. My impression is that it's missing a few things; no mention of schools or twinning arrangements, for example. Let me know what you think. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 23:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Good progress. Certainly still missing a few things: do you use the guide at WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements?

Also, there is a to do list at the top of Talk:Corsham, but something broke in {{WPUKgeo}} a few months ago, so right now it is invisible unless you edit the Corsham talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 07:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't write about settlements much (except Trowbridge, which is mostly copyediting and adding pictures) so I haven't seen that guideline; however, I will take a look. I'll also look at the ToDo list but I've got several projects running at present. I think I have a photo somewhere of the peacocks from Corsham Court wandering about the High Street- that's probably interesting enough to go in (it's unique in the UK as far as I know). I'll start a list. --Rodhullandemu 15:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Peacocks will be cool! I didn't intend to ask you to do anything, only to put your "missing a few things" comment in context. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

User name concern

Can you please take a look here and add your opinion? Bearian (talk) 19:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Northern Co-operative Society DYK

On 9 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Northern Co-operative Society, 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.

Congratulations! --PeterSymonds (talk) 11:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Stroud & Swindon Building Society images

Free works containing copyrighted logos are only considered copyrighted if there main purpose is to illustrate the copyrighted logo. Since, Image:100807fiestaPG-045.jpg is a hot air balloon containing a copyrighted logo used in an area discussing Stroud & Swindon Hot Air Balloons it is not copyrighted due to the logo as its primary purpose is to illustrate the balloon. However, if it was placed in the article infobox of Stroud & Swindon Building Society, it would be a primary image of the entire Stroud & Swindon Building Society and its copyrighted logo. However, Image:Melk_branch_1.jpg is copyrighted in its placement in the article because it is in a section discussing the whole Stroud & Swindon Building Society not its individual offices. If it was placed in a section discussing Stroud & Swindon Building Society offices then it would not be copyrighted even though it had a copyrighted logo. I hope this clears up the issue.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 15:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

2D signs Thanks for the clarification on signs and logos, Natl1. Is this explanation on a WP (or Commons) policy page or article yet? Good to know that individual uses really are free (and not fair use) if the positioning and captioning is ok.

While I have your attention, could I ask your opinion on the shop and bank signage photos discussed at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Co-operative_brand&oldid=224005639#History ? I am still not quite clear whether it is free to use, fair use, or unfair use? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair use- It is not free because its primary purpose is to discuss logos not the buildings, but since it is being done in an educational context it is fair use.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 16:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The image is to discuss branding, which includes choice of colour (not copyrightable) and wording (too brief to be original text), as well as logos (copyrightable in the UK but probably not in the US in this case as it is just typesetting). That said, I agree with your conclusion. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Unusually shaped balloons I think I did not express my balloon question clearly, and it feels like I am picking on the editors of one article in particular. But my thought was: since the balloon's 3D shape itself is (arguably) not functional, it is probably a copyrightable work of craftsmanship, and so I was concerned the photograph is probably derivative of the shape of the balloon, and so needs a fair use tag, not a free content one. The law is an ass if it stops you photographing the airspace above your house (as it appears to) but if so, it would not be the first time the law has been an ass. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictures of copyrighted buildings (or balloons) are not considered derivative works and are not copyrighted because the buildings design is copyrighted. "The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work – but only if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place."-Mary Cullen Yeager and Katherine A. Golden LLP: Owner vs. Architect: Who Owns the Design?--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 16:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Isn't there a U.S. case that says eligibility for copyright in the country of origin is pertinent? Which means Section 62 of the Copyright, Designs and patents Act 1988 for the house-shaped balloon (see also Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#United_Kingdom). The drafters of that clause were not thinking about balloons: if a balloon is a building, then it is free content (and we can put it in a gallery of balloons, or even use it decoratively!), but if it is a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship, then the photo is fair use in this educational context (as it is not permanently installed,) but other uses may be not fair use, or at least not NFCC. Grin! --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

No, natural philosophy is not physics.

Although physics in some sense developed from natural philosophy, natural philosophy is much broader than just physics, and as such does not really fall within the scope of the project. (If it were to be physics it should also be astronomy, geology, biology, chemistry, etc.) It is covered fine by the history of science and philosophy WPs. (TimothyRias (talk) 13:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC))

Fair enough. It seems to me that natural philosophy is much more physics and applied maths than any of the others (except astronomy, which is a branch of physics, isn't it?). And, I think of Newton and Maxwell as the towering giants of natural philosophy. But that is probably my own personal view, and as you say, the other projects should attract the interested editors. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Corsham - Economy

Hi Hroðulf, you know every time I see this page, the more I feel that the Defence Section tends to overwhelm the rest of it. I'm not so familiar with it myself but do you think we have too much detail here? Some of these must be small enough just to give a passing mention, and the tabular format doesn't help, in my view. Any ideas on this? Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 19:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I kind of agree but I am not much more familiar with it than you are. In real life, defence has overwhelmed the economy of Corsham for the last 70 years, as I understand from my reading, so overwhelm is probably unavoidable, but it could be a bit tidier: less of a list and more of an explanation of how many people play which roles. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for replying, I'll see if I can get some figures and then look at a rewrite. Otherwise, I think this has a good change of getting to Good Article status before very long. I plan next to write up the Town Council in the Local Government section. --Rodhullandemu 20:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

DYK 23/7

On 23 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Farm assurance, 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.

weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 09:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Corsham

Please de-confuse me. I thought the original unopposed by-election for the BNP was in April 07, and the full election in the last few weeks wasn't. Feel free to correct, but this is still very much a work in progress, and I think it's getting closer to WP:GA. I'll try to get over & do some photos in the next week or so. --Rodhullandemu 22:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Please don't be offended: I am happy to correct accidental errors now and again (as I did last night) but I never had the patience to get this to GA standard myself. I agree that you are making a lot of progress.

1. The 2007 unopposed election of Michael Simpkins (politician) for Rudloe ward was part of the United Kingdom local elections, 2007. Thanks for the BBC link: it shows that the BNP had 2 or 3 candidates for Corsham Town Council that year who did not get elected. I did not know that. I suspect really good information on town and parish council politics takes a trip to the library or town hall.
2. In July 2008 there was a by-election in the Corsham Town ward: which partly explains the 8 candidates.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Not in the least offended, it's just that I misread the sources; apologies. However, it is now correct. The next thing to tackle is that list of military units, I'm sure it would be better as prose and could be cut down a lot. I'll see what the MOD website says about it. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 15:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Use of flagicons

Beg too differ re your deletions.

Flagicons are a good idea, even though this is not a sporty topic, because:

1. Helps teach the flags, especially where flags of different countries are similar.
2. Helps find things, flags are easier to read than words.
3. E. Brittanica probably doesn't use flagicons.
4. Am copying others who think it is a good idea.

Tabletop (talk) 06:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Tabletop#Use of flagicons --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Constituency names

Hi, please see this discussion. Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 16:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Neston Park DYK

Just had a look at this. Good article but you need to fix the bare URLs before it can be approved. Thanks.Nrswanson (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed & some MOS improvements. --Rodhullandemu 21:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. For future reference, bare url's are a WP:GA criterion, not a DYK one (though I didn't add that one: I just nominated the hook). --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Grosmont and Hawkshead

Hi!

I see you've added Grosmont and Hawkshead societies. I have no verifiable information to counter these additions so I've not done an edit. It's just that I really don't believe they're still in existence. On checking a database of CRTG food stores, the one in Hawkshead is on a different street and managed by TCG N&NE so this could either be a different store or the current situation since a transfer of engagements, perhaps. Also, there's no store, at all, in Grosmont - was/is Grosmont a non-food society (like Langdale)?

I've seen the pages on the FSA and these make me doubt what I'm suggesting as when you look at the same register for United it's bang up-to-date. The Co-op Online website is not being updated by TCG and it can't be relied upon to be correct.

I hope you don't mind my question as I realise how it comes across as arguing against the proof you have provided!

Secondly, have you heard about Lothian, Borders & Angus' proposed transfer to TCG? If you don't beat me to it, I'll add something to those article.

Richard ^{( T | C )} 22:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You'll probably beat me. More thoughts to come. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 06:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Some comments at Talk:The Co-operative Group. See also http://www2.co-operative.com:8080/Ext_1/ShHistory.ns4/$WebSharebook/HAWKSHEAD?OpenDocument and http://www2.co-operative.com:8080/Ext_1/ShHistory.ns4/$WebSharebook/GROSMONT?OpenDocument . Though the co-oponline share book search is not always as accurate or up-to-date as the FSA database, I find it to be useful clue. (No mention of mergers in the newspapers that Google indexes.) Since your CRTG database says different, perhaps a footnote in the articles to say the independence is questioned would be helpful to readers. Could you add it?

Whoever added Langdale to the list put them as "Food" (was that me - I hope not.) I was not aware they did not do food - please fix it. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Why farmers form cooperatives

Please visit my sandbox to review the section "Why farmers form cooperatives" that I have written in response to a comment on Talk:Agricultural cooperative (13 April 2008). Should we incorporate this section in Agricultural cooperatives? Your comments will be much appreciated. Many of the reasons for the creation of agricultural cooperatives are valid also for cooperatives in general, and perhaps you could suggest if and how a similar section could be incorporated in Cooperatives. --Zlerman (talk) 11:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Responded at User talk:Zlerman/Coops. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Invitation to CfD Category:Pseudoskeptic Target Discussion

I noticed that you have edited in related areas within WP, and so thought you might have an interest in this discussion.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Electronic trading, Espiscolopian?

Hr, I just added a WSJ reference to Electronic trading and realized how horrible that article is (again). I gave it the old once over, but it needs at least a ten times over. Any help appreicated.

I noticed that you know something about the use of Espicopal vs, Episcopalian. You might check the usage at St. David's (Radnor) Episcopal Church. My suggested compromise of Episcolopian was for some reason not adopted (adapted?).

Smallbones (talk) 19:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not, and have never been, an Episcopalian myself, but I don't feel it is worth an edit war. Both words mean the same thing when captialized, but Episcopalian feels informal to me, except when used as a noun. I noticed that the introduction doesn't mention the country, so I proposed the alternative phrasing:

parish of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America

I will drop a polite note to Jonclodfelter (talk · contribs), since they are inexperienced and edited in good faith

When I look at the state of finance articles, I often feel overwhelmed. I hope their parlous state didn't contribute to the credit crunch!

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Douglas DC-3

Thanks. However, the instructions for approving a nomination are:

If the article under review meets the criteria for approval:

1. Remove it from the list.

...

I have removed it from Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations for you. Oakwillow (talk) 20:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Thanks for fixing my omission. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 05:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Entity

Public service company

I probably should have contacted you first, so please accept apology for revert. That wording came straight from a legal definition here in Virginia. Perhaps, it varies in other places. At a practical level, what problem do you have with it the way it was? If nedd be, I can live with your edit, although I thought it less descriptive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaoverland (talk • contribs) 16:20, 2 October 2008

Entity is a term of art in common law countries: it means it can be sued. In some jurisdictions, partnerships can't be sued. Is the article intended to be worldwide, or only apply to some places? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar love!

		The Guidance Barnstar
		For your helpful and kind words of wisdom and guidance, I'm... er... awarding both you and that other guy who lives in Canada and drinks Alexander Keith's this nice little compass thingamabob barnstar. Isn't it just pretty? QuadrivialMind (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know where these go, but isn't it just fun to give them away? --QuadrivialMind (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

They go on talk pages! This is my second barnstar in over 8000 edits since I registered, so I am delighted. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Well since you've got so much experience and I've got so little, you can manage to move it yourself, I'm sure :P

By the way, second barnstar? Where is the other one? And 2 barnstars in 8k edits? That's long overdue! --QuadrivialMind (talk) 21:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

You put my barnstar in the right place, as I understand it! When I archive my talk page, and I feel like bragging, I might display it at Hroðulf: I put my first barnstar right at the top of that page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, my bad, you said talk pages, d'oh. I was quite distracted when I wrote that message, haha. It's just that I've seen a lot of people display their barnstars on their user page instead of their talk page, but I guess everybody moves them!

And by the way, I had seen your first barnstar but because of the (in my opinion) strange description, I didn't think it was given to you... Usually there's a message and the name of the person who gave it to you. But I didn't see neither --then I read your explanation and I got it :)

And I think you should totally brag, haha. Everybody loves warm and fuzzy, it's no secret that even the most discreet of the wikignomes appreciates recognition. I know I'm just starting to edit and already realise that by the time I become fairly active, I will want my user page cluttered with barnstars and userboxes :D --QuadrivialMind (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Cooperative Banking

Hroðulf, it's great to see how much initiative you're taking in the field of Wiki coops these days. I'm afraid I'm totally tapped out right now; my life in microfinance, combined with insanely slow processing speeds in the developing world, is not highly conducive to Wiki editing. I'll try to keep an eye on what you do with the article and make contributions where I can, but don't count on much. Good luck with it!Brett epic (talk) 15:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

It is a bit more useful to help people implement microfinance, than for me to write a few words in an online encyclopedia. What is the reaction of people when they find they can actually buy tools and raw materials they have wanted for years? Hope you find a low latency connection soon. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Nonghyup

On 10 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nonghyup, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 05:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Su-hyup

Thank you, Hroðulf, I am new editor and I lerarn a lot from watching your doing here. Right now I travel abroad until early next year. I try to look at this page in my B&B but it is only for MS IE 5.5 or higher! The computer this B&B is MAC and it use the Mozilla. Anyway, you might find some English here if you use MS IE: www.suhyup-bank.com . I will try to find some more English information about it. Nxo (talk) 16:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, I look briefly at Korean encyclopedia about Chukhyup. It show the Chukhyup became somehow affiliated or joined with the Nong-hyup in 2000. But I notice using the Goggle that there seem to be the website of several the independent branches of Chukhyup. Right now I got some tiredness becuase of the changing time from airtravel and so I must sleep. I will try conform the details. Nxo (talk) 16:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Chair

"Chairman" IS a well-established term for the office, even though somebody's dictionary doesn't mention it. Robert's uses it throughout. Since we seem to be working together on this article, I don't want to revert the edits of my partner, even when IMHO they aren't correct. Regards, Lou Sander (talk) 14:59, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh. Thanks. Dictionary.com cites about 10 different dictionaries, and I had never personally heard of it used for the office. I don't have Roberts :(. Please go ahead and revert me: don't worry about it. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. Coincidentally, I've been working on a few Scotland-rleated articles lately. I see reference to Scotland on your user page. Can you tell me more? Lou Sander (talk) 17:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

When I first came to Wikipedia, I did a little work on the Scots language and Ulster Scots (linguistics) articles, but made no progress. I even registered at sco.wikipedia.org, but I am not literate enough to do any useful editing there. It is hard to hear any Scots where I live now (internet radio gets me a few snippets), and I have not spoken in my clumsy attempts at the tongue for 30 years.

I also hang about at Presbyterianism and Presbyterian polity, which I hear have some connection with Scotland :) (This may explain my enthusiasm to get moderator and convener mentioned at Chair (official))

However, 2 years later, I did the lion's share on some short (English Wikipedia) articles about Scotland, that I am unjustifiably proud of:

• Lothian, Borders & Angus Co-operative Society (Scotland's oldest co-op)
• Musselburgh and Fisherrow Co-operative Society
• Northern Co-operative Society (sad tale)

Which articles about Scotland caught your interest?

By the way, since you have Roberts, perhaps you could expand the chair article by highlighting some of the key roles of the chair in a formal debate: I suppose things like granting the floor, calling to order, and the casting vote figure highly. You can tell my school didn't have a debating club!

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

There's no end to the stuff in RROO about what the chair does, though it doesn't refer to debates. It's a general work about "assemblies" and how they are conducted. I'd definitely be interested in expanding on those areas, but maybe it's beyond the scope of the article right now.

I got interested in Scone (bread), which led to Bannock (food), which led to Pitkeathly Wells. In the U.S., there's a lack of easily identifiable sources about Scone and Bannock. My dream is to find some sort of authoritative book about their history, etc. Like the Chair article, Scone and Bannock were pretty lame when I found them. I've improved them quite a bit, but I have my limits. Lou Sander (talk) 22:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

You wrote: I'd definitely be interested in expanding on those areas, but maybe it's beyond the scope of the article right now.

I think you are right that it is beyond the scope.

I am afraid I didn't realise Wikipedia has a whole series at Template:Parliamentary Procedure. Since the chair is involved in almost every piece of procedure, I wonder if a description of the role of the chair might grow to become a description of procedure in the round: I suspect that would be a thankless task of reproducing material already easily found in Wikipedia.

It would be nice to see half a dozen sentences on the highlights, though, if such highlights exist.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 06:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Administrators Noticeboard

Hello, Hroðulf. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding my concerns with copyright issues in User:Chrisieboy's contributions. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Labour party edit

Could you please not revert on the goruounds of wikipedia can't be its own source as there is no wikipedia sources and other articles have critiscisms sections so I don't see the grounds for merging into main body. I'll think you'll find it conforms with NPOV and would ask you to tell me if this not the case please so I can fix a problem if theres a problem please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.44.79 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't be its own source: you cited the Opposition to the Iraq War article. See the reliable sources policy.

Criticism sections are discouraged by various style guidelines in Wikipedia, and are completely unnecessary in the case of the Labour Party (UK) article. I did not delete the criticism, but merely included in the section above, about the 1997 to 2008 Labour governments. However, I would like to delete it, as it is criticism of the government not the party.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Tag and commons

Thanks for adding the correct tag here; I'll remember that for future cases. I did have a go at uploading it to Commons, but the form there has so many extra fields that I just gave up. I wouldn't mind doing it if I knew what to enter in those fields, but the thought of the time it would take me to dig through help pages to find out what to do was just too daunting. Maybe I'll get the time to figure it out one day; then I'll go through and upload all my files. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 03:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For the info about Ullans. I must say that if the UFF supporters are more inclined to speaks Scots it is even more sad again because unlike any of our other neighbors of England, Scotland, Wales or Southern Ireland we seem to have plenty of claims but no real nationalism (sounds very racist doesnt it, not me anyway). The UFF are the only crowd I heard of claiming N Ireland as its own place but I know it really has its own identity so much as any of the the neighbors. It came last when integrated to England and came first when distinguished in mythology. We have it but over all the trouble nobody wants it :) everybody else wants it. Anyway I didnt get language from llans so its some more sense for me thanks. ~ R.T.G 01:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. There seem to be lots of people at Wikipedia that think Northern Ireland should be called a "constituent country". Seems pretty odd to me. One more link for you: Ulster nationalism --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, hopefully not to annoy you but if it sounds odd I will try to explain the whole thing because it is worthy of it. In my experience people of Northern Ireland don't really give Ulster much thought except as a tribal unionism concept but that is the child of an even stronger and more ancient tribal Ulster in its own right, strong as any natural cultural boundry. The term "right" or "rightful" meaning ownership or deservedness could be said to come from the Red Hand of Ulster, a part of the Ulster flag and an older than old story in which a man removed his right hand so that he could throw it on to the shore where the first man to place his hand on Ulster soil would have a claim to the province as its king. He got his right to it. I am trying to be brief I swear! I will try to describe to you some reasons that Ulster is naturally and historically its own nation already just a very tiny one and very easy for the neighbours to want to integrate it. Maybe I can't tell it so good but maybe the idea is not so odd if I try.

There are four or five parts of the island of Britain where they speak their own way, Scotland, Wales, and two parts at least of England. Even when they do not fight about it or suggest seperating, they mutually respect at least four of these as some sort of culture - North and South England, Scotland and Wales. So... on the island of Ireland there are also four or five very distinct cultural areas where they speak English nowadays but very differenty including Dublin areas, Ulster, Cork-Kerry-Limerick areas, Mid to Western areas and Mid to South Eastern areas but you can certainly divide it in at least four as distinct as Glasgow culture from London culture. These cultural type differences are pretty much the same as in the days when they all spoke different languages and were seperate countries, Ulster, Munster, Leinster and Connacht the four provinces, England as divided north and south by the Saxons, Scotland and Wales. Although in these places they all speak more or less the same language today, cultural difference is ancient and has held firm regardless of power and fighting, language or freindliness. The invasion of Ireland and seperation has thrown the southern parts together in a strong way but as this is so, it also made a new cultural seperation with Ulster (and it has, the Ulster counties in the republic get no special treatment apparently). Your Ulster unionist and your Ulster nationalist will not sound very different and will share some Ulster heritage somewhere but they don't sound Welsh or southern Irish and have that Ulster heritage for sure whatever they think of it.

Old Irish culture is largely based on mythology and Ulster is usually described as strong and wild with giants and warriors as well as the most difficult to conquer as it is sealed of by hills and mountains guarded by a strong people and rich enough in stories of love, magic, betrayal and heroes to challenge any Grimm or Tolkien. Recent history of Northern Ireland seems not to have reflected that kind of heritage for a long long time (hence odd all round). It's a bit like someone from India telling the Dali Lama that he is maybe Chinese or Indian and he beleives it. Is he not the Dali Lama in his sacred home? Apparently he is. Saint Patrick is part of Ulster, Cuchulain, Fionn mac Cumhaill, Giants Causeway, Lough Neigh, Red Hand of Ulster, mad dogs are nothing new, etc. etc.

People of importance in Northern Ireland rarely seem to consider it so strong in its own heritage when applying for its future but it is just that, with or without Boyne battles, IRAs or Orange Orders which are fairly new. No small country could survive happy without its neighbours as friends and the smaller the sovereignty the more difficult to keep straight and narrow I reckon but with the world joining together in ways we might all be more comfortable to find our cultures acknowledged where they exist such as the recent trend in Welsh and Scottish politics. No need to fight just because you are seperate. Although people feel strong about tying Ulster to Britain it is a tie, and should be under no threat by acknowledging culture.

I would compare it to Belgium where they have all been speaking different languages for hundreds of years which is a more obvious difference to them but talk about seperating them culturally? It makes a big deal. But they don't even speak the same language? If that is what they are debate is only human and no harm in recognising each other especially when people have been fighting.

Look at Sinn Fein as regards the closeness of Irish culture North and South. Gerry Adams and Co. are seen to be the voice of a lot of people in northern Ireland but anywhere else they don't want them. Although they are tied in with some bad stuff they are also tied in with civil rights movements which had real grounds and although tied to bad stuff they may have helped some people a lot more than anyone else did. Sinn Fein got something like one seat in the last election in the south, even though we are represented in Europe by Mary Lou Macdonald of Sinn Fein and Sinn Feins normal policies were not completely off the wall and fairly in line with what people wanted. They don't go on about Northern Ireland for instance, except when it comes up. I am no political buff but I listened to the election and even if Sinn Fein werent the best they werent complete idiots and theyve been laying it down for peace and working for a real place. You may say thats because of their bad links but when the IRA were fighting for death Sinn Fein were the in thing. In fact Labour has got better seats than Sinn Fein for ever down here. Nationalism regarding the border is usually described as a sympathy. Claiming the Irish as one people in heritage or the British is true in a way but only in one way. This sounds like a lack of support from the south but to be fair they seem great friends but about as traditionally tied in as any other local parts are with Ulster. Lot of language, good freinds, relatives, different place. Same difference.

My sympathy is with Northern Ireland as itself and the fact that even when its people have seen awful sorrow over the identity, the place itself is only shown as a connection to some other places (not even to only one place). The red hand is not only an Irish symbol but it is a champion one of old confused with more recent history of battle by the same people more or less as were before. How crazy is a place that a person can give his right hand for it and be given the place in return? What local country flys a flag like that? Ulster. Who dares claim it as some place else? Where is this persons hand? Quis seperabit? Well, sovereignty is not so important as putting it back together as is the new trend but it does have that sovereignty.

Describing some of Ulsters heritage without making excuses would be a lot shorter. A place claimed yet not owned or owned yet not claimed. Hopefully I made some sense for you and not just annoying you. Ulster heritage is not so shallow as to be only supported by the battle of the Boyne and the Orange Order although they are a heritage of the place as any other but unfortunately thats the only hype it has today. The other stuff is all old stories and natural beauty but some of it must be true and it can't be all bad. All best. ~ R.T.G 10:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

While Ulster may still be a nation, I think it is a minority view to call Northern Ireland a “country.” However, the current Wikipedia consensus is in favour of “constituent country”, and I accept that. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

AfC news

Dear AfC participant,

1. Msgj and Tnxman307 are organising the AfC challenge! It's a little competition to help improve some of the articles created through AfC and we are hoping that everyone will get involved. For level 1, you just need to bring a stub up to Start-class. Level 2 is improving a Start-class article to C-class. And so on. To get involved or for more information please see the competition page.
2. Those of you who haven't reviewed an article recently might not have noticed the new process that was implemented this year. Reviewing articles is now more enjoyable than ever :) You might like to give it a try. All articles waiting for review are in Category:Pending Afc requests. (Please read the updated instructions.)
3. Please consider adding {{AFC status}} to your userpage to keep track of the number of articles waiting for review. At the time of writing we are officially backlogged, so help is needed!
4. There is currently a proposal to bring the Images for upload process under the umbrella of WikiProject Articles for creation. The rationale is that both processes are designed to allow unregistered users to take part more fully in Wikipedia, and partipants in each process can probably help each other.

If you no longer wish to receive messages from WikiProject Articles for creation, please remove your name from this list. Thank you.

Ulster Scots

"I had thought that your native tongue was Scots-influenced Tyrone English....." Tee-hee - well spotted. Cooke (talk) 00:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Flat to APR Calculation

Dear Hroðulf, I've added a section to flat rate (finance) on calculation. It turns out that no one with a mathematical mind seems to have actually written out the equation according to standard protocols, so I've provided an example without using mathematical equations (I don't know the protocols myself). I believe anyone can easily do this on a excel spreadsheet from what I've added. Happy New Year!Brett epic (talk) 14:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

rewrite Marcome page

Hi Hroðulf Thanks heaps for the feedback rewrite Marcome page, I would not like to see Wikipedia full of spam or self referential egomaniacs. I would like to rewrite the page and try to satisfy all the criteria including the criteria you very helpfully pointed out "Conflict Interest".

My previous contributions were under the user name Nigelsa, I lost my password and my old email address was closed so following the suggestions in the help section it said it was easiest to set up a new account.

My main article previously is Humanistic Sociology

I am not in a rush to get this page up especially viewing the previous deletion, I just wanted to follow the correct procedure also if you were willing you could drop by the link to my subpage when it is finished you could let me know if you would recommend it for deletion

Once again thanks for your feedback and the helpful link you provided for constructing the page as a subpage really appreciated. Nigel447 (talk) 09:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Roll numbers

Great save: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Building_society&diff=270527204&oldid=265805513 A complex issue distilled into a few clear words.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

It was either that or delete the section. I'm still not 100% sure about its significance compared to the rest of the article, but maybe someone else can decide to delete it - I certainly wouldn't object!

Thanks for the comment, anyway.  :) MarkyMarkD (talk) 21:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Drawing board

Just wanted to tell you that your suggestion of asking for help at WT:AFC was fantastic. Not only have I already found help, but I believe I've found eager and willing help. :) I didn't even have to try your other suggestions. Thanks so much! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I am delighted! AFC people seem to have the positive attitude you need. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject?

Hi, haven't seen you around for a while, but have started Sheldon Manor and added some info on Corsham Priory to Corsham; a second pair of eyes would be useful. Meanwhile, I've also added a comment here, and you may wish to throw your hat into the ring. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 18:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I am distracted with other things at the moment, but thanks for drawing my attention to your additions. I learnt a lot of new facts! Also I didn't know the Victoria county histories were published on line: a great new resource. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Merging Henry M. Jackson Visitor Center into Mount Rainier National Park

Hi Hroðulf, I removed the merge tag you added to Mount Rainier National Park because it had been there for ten months with no action. Feel free to replace it if you want to reopen the discussion. -- Patleahy (talk) 18:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. That is fine. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:29, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Accountancy task force

Hello, this message is being sent to you since you are an interested participant of the Accountancy task force. This is just a heads-up that the task force has been expanded with new features and its main page modified. Now that the task force has assessed over 800 articles in its scope, a breakdown can be seen of the quality of articles. A new userbox can be added to your page, and if you know of a editor contributing to accounting articles, a welcoming template can be used to invite the editor to join the task force. If you haven't already, consider watchlisting the main discussion page. There is currently a discussion about adding a template to some main accounting topics that would benefit from input by other editors. Feel free to leave feedback on the discussion page for further improving these new features. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 07:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of BIBS

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as BIBS, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind - I didn't scroll down far enough to see that the version you created had been vandalized. Will fix asap. Sorry!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem - thanks for your vigilance (twice)! --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Chiliogon

Hello, Hrothulf. A page you created, Chiliogon, is currently being discussed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chiliogon. --Professor Fiendish^MWAHAHAHA!! 11:33, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Chuggington Episode List

Hello Hroðulf, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Chuggington Episode List - a page you tagged - because: Not an unambiguous copyright infringement, or there is other content to save. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Closedmouth (talk) 12:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

As far as I could see, the original version of the article was posted by an IP user and copied straight from TV listings. Lets post it to the copyright problems page. Thanks for your assistance. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 06:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Stephen Eyre

Hi there. Last year, I proposed this article for deletion and you removed the {{prod}} template, arguing he 'seems to be on the borders of notability'. I have now taken the article to Articles for deletion, as I feel that notability is still lacking. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Eyre. Robofish (talk) 22:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Irish Stock Exchange

It seems that your user page is in the category Companies Listed in the Irish Stock Exchange. I don't think you are a company, and I much less think you are listed in the Irish stock exchange ;) This seems like a joke, vandalism or possible just unintentional, but I wanted to make sure before I removed it. - Bobber0001 (talk) 17:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I fixed this mistake by editing Template:Ise. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 05:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Caution suggested re. Who's Who

Thanks for you note. I replied here. Moonraker2 (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Zoo

I would like to know if you are still an active participant in the WP:ZOO, If you are please confirm by way of responding on my talk page. I am just trying to get an idea of how many people are still engaged in the project as to better work out how to manage and address things that are listed in the project. Kind Regards ZooPro 14:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

British shilling coin

FYI: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Numismatics#Article_naming —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.168.199 (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Unionized Cooperative

Hi Hroðulf. Thanks for all your contributions to cooperatives articles. I'm hung up on the unionized cooperative at the moment and wonder if you could let me know how you see it. I'd argue that the subject is not deserving of an article because it describes a cooperative that happens to be unionized and not a unique type of cooperative. I think this article serves to push the point of view that cooperatives (and especially worker cooperatives) should be unionized. The references seem to all be opinion pieces as well. The worker cooperative has a section devoted to trade unions here, which has the same issues. Your input would be very appreciated. Gobonobo ^{T C} 22:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. My comment when I contested the deletion was only: "seems to be enough potential material to build an article in the referenced sources - please keep or merge". I think the 'trade unions' section you mentioned would be a good place to merge it to. I am no social scientist, but I bet there are a few dozen academic papers on the topic a suitably knowledgeable person could distil into an article. There are many more trivial topics that survive Wikipedia's AFD process. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)