User talk:Hroðulf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hroðulf is taking a long wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia some later time.


Perhaps you're looking for Hrodulf? (not Hroðulf aka Hrothulf) See User:Hroðulf/disambuigation
Wikipedia:Babel
en This user is a native speaker of English.
fr-3 Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau avancé de français.
de-1 Dieser Benutzer hat grundlegende Deutschkenntnisse.
sco-1 This uiser can contreibute wi a laich level o Scots.
Search user languages

Contents

[edit] 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:

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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)


[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] reply

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] "Welcoming Congregation" restructuring

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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 wordsdeeds 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 wordsdeeds 14:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Pathological skepticism

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] Rowan Williams

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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. ZsinjTalk 04:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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, DurovaCharge! 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. DurovaCharge! 14:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Replying on your talk page. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

[edit] Airshow photos

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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 BabelAlexandria

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/r/o/User_talk%7EHro%C3%B0ulf_0e3a.html"