User talk:JW1805

Talk page archives
Archive 1 (13 Sep 04 - 7 Dec 05)
Archive 2 (9 Dec 05 - 31 Mar 06)
Archive 3 (3 Apr 06 - 22 Jun 06)

From Ancheta Wis 18:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC). I award you this barnstar for your contribution to the Civil Rights Memorial article. Thank you.

Template:British subjects

Thanks for updating the layout of Template:British subjects. I created this in April and assumed that someone with more experience would fix the ugly appearence. Restoring the British flag is also a good idea. I started this as a list of different classes of "Britishness", but it turned into commonwealth template. -- Petri Krohn 21:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Diorama photo

Great photo of the Battle of Blenheim diorama, it fits well with the article. Incidentally, I have rewritten most of the article. In my opinion it is now much better and clearer so I hope the Epic Barnstar is still justified. Thanks Raymond Palmer 22:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

England and Great Britain

It is you who have messed up the talk pages, all I did is re-name the article. I shall continue to revert by copy and paste because I don't know any other way. I have done a lot of work on this article today and it is clear that you haven't read it. TharkunColl 02:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not merge two articles. The Kingdom of England article has often contained the monarchs to the present day, I simply retitled it. I touched no other article. But now, because of you, its talk page and history is lost. TharkunColl 02:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The British state is the successor to the English state. It makes no historical sense to draw an arbitrary line at 1707, because very little changed in that year. Some of the very earliest kings of England were also kings of Britain - please have a look at the article. PS I was the one who wrote the Great Britain article! TharkunColl 02:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

All reference books list English and British monarchs in one list. Scotland was annexed by the English state - it was not a merger of equals. Anyway, I'm going to bed. I shall continue to revert tomorrow. TharkunColl 02:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Agree with redirecting the said article to List of monarchs in the British Isles. The seperate lists for England and Scotland should only exist under different names eg King of England; and King of Scotland. Astrotrain 18:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Florida

Hey, JW1805, I know you had good intentions when you added back the state seal of Florida after Lovelac7's efforts for standardization, but if you look at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/state templates, you'll notice that only Florida's and Vermont's templates still have the state seal. We've currently got a discussion on about what to incorporate into state templates as part of the standardization Lovelac7 and I are trying. That's an important topic to discuss over there: whether state seals should be incorporated into templates. Feel free to join in. Thanks! ;) — Webdinger ^{BLAH | SZ} 23:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Back to Lilliput

Thanks to you and others like you I have finished with this whole project. I will be nomintaing Scotland in the Late Middle ages for deletion; I will certainly be doing no further work on it. I do not mind constructive editing and thoughtful debate; I loath petty-mindedness. Sadly, petty-mindedness is the dominant mood in Wikipedia. Rcpaterson 00:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

• Well, best wishes to you. Every time you make an edit, you see the disclaimer "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." You shouldn't take it personally and lash out at everybody when someone offers suggestions about your writing. --JW1805 (Talk) 01:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Abner Doubleday

Was the president of the American section of Theosophy. Wjhonson 18:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyright

Just a little thing, your image at Image:Map_of_Florida_Parishes.png should have the copyright details change. I would have updated it for you, but I'm not sure if editing someone elses copyright would be seen in a negative light. Pauric 17:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Photo of Gonzales Cannon Mural

JW1805 - I am interested in contacting you directly regarding your photo of the Gonzales Cannon Mural. Did you take the photo yourself? Do you have a higher resolution version than the version posted on WIkipedia? If so, please let me know how I might contact you to discuss using it on a book project. I am new to Wiki and created a user account just for this purpose. ThanksPr1510 19:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Pr1510

Chickamauga Monument

Awesome Photo of the Chickamauga Monument! Zanter 15:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Pascua Florida

Sorry, I apparently was reading your edit in reverse. -- Donald Albury 02:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Conch Republic

Centauri and his sock puppets keep reverting your change to Conch Republic. I am going to report him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FairHair (talk • contribs) 22:35, October 10, 2006 (UTC)

Template:Changes to "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church"

Hello Friend, are you familiar with this (WP:DR) "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DR"? Have a read or two of it, you may be educated... that you should improve on an article and not simply revert it. Or how about speaking to the person that changed it first on the discussion page? Thank you so very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psalmuel (talk • contribs) (19:33, October 29, 2006 (UTC)

Confederate Presidents

What was ur reasoning for editing my Head of State list for the CSA? What more proof do u need? government structure documents? How else can you explain who lead the CSA before Davis was sworn in since he diddn't take office from the country's start? Just like Washington couldnt be 1st president since the Articles were removed in 1787 not '89... Vital Component — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.132.108 (talk • contribs) 06:58, November 18, 2006 (Presumably Vital Component (talk · contribs)) (UTC)

Democrat Party

Back in June, you participated in a wiki discussion about deleting an article called “Democrat Party (United States).” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Democrat_Party_%28United_States%29). It was agree to delete this article and redirect it to Democratic Party (United States) -- the real name of the Democratic Party. However, someone has revived the Democrat Party article. Would you care to weigh in on this at that article’s Talk page? I think a redirect is in order in accordance with the decision we reached last June. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.139.38.76 (talk • contribs) 05:58, November 29, 2006.

Zephram Stark

The Mirror of the Sea (talk · contribs) reverted Coving back to an old ZS-version. Do you think it's a sock puppet? -Will Beback · † · 03:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Formation of the UK

Wales did not play any part in forming the UK - the earliest signs of which can be traced no earlier than the Union of Crowns between Scotland and England. To say otherwise goes against the grain of both academic and lay thought on the matter. If the annexation of Wales into England is to be included then so should the annexation of the Northern Isles by Scotland, the Lordship of the Isles by Scotland, the creation and abolition of the Cornish Stannary Parliament, Northumbria officially becoming part of England under the Treaty of York etc etc. Seeing as the inclusion of Statute of Rhuddlan would mean the inclusion of the treaties which formed/were relevant only to the nations which THEN went on to form the UK you would also have to go back to Dal Riata and Pictavia which merged to form Scotland as well as the Heptarchy which preceeded the single Kingdom of England and so on, so forth. The two primary and only independent participants in the formation of the UK were England and Scotland - there is absolutely no controversy or ambiguity over this - and if earlier treaties specific to internal politics of either of those nations are to be included in the template then there are myriad others beyond these Anglo-Welsh ones which should also be included and this would simply be ridiculous. The only legitimate inclusion of Wales in the template would be under mention of its de-annexation from England in 1955 as shown in a template at the bottom of the talk page of the template as this was, unlike Rhuddlan, relevant to and occurred within the UK. siarach 11:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Cadwalader Ringgold link

Hi JW,

You recently removed a link at the Cadwalader Ringgold article, giving as the reason that it linked to a book seller. That's generally a good reason to remove a link, but in this case it happens to be the best source on the Web for a lot of information about Ringgold — information I just couldn't find anywhere else when I originally added that link. In these circumstances, without any other way of allowing readers to check the information, I think we ought to keep it. Please reconsider and tell me what you think. If there's another way that would help readers just as much, I'm open to any ideas you may have. Thanks. Best, Noroton 04:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

2nd Continental Congress

Good job cleaning up the intro, it looks much more like an intro now.Aervanath 02:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Burnet Flag.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Burnet Flag.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Remember the dot (t) 23:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

RFC/discussion of article sulla

Hello, JW1805. As a prominent contributor to sulla, you may want to be aware that a request for comments has been filed about it. The RFC can be found by the article's name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found on Talk:sulla, in case you wish to participate. Thank you for your contributions. -- Nick 15:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Zn'rx

Marvel's Zn'rx as "Snarks" may be mentioned at the Snark disambiguation page, but it doesn't change (or even mention) the fact that it's an example of The Hunting of the Snark's impact on literature. A disambiguation page is hardly the place for the note, and the section "Impact on literature" in the article on "The Hunting of the Snark" is exactly the place, don't you think? AvatarMN 17:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The problem is that there are a million obscure things that are called Snark, that don't really have anything to do with the actual book. The place to put them is at Snark. Feel free to expand the entry you are talking about if you think there is more information. --JW1805 (Talk) 17:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AvatarMN"

A character directly states that he's chosen the nickname "Snarks" based on Lewis Carrol's poem. That has something to do with the actual book, and the article on The Hunting of the Snark has an "Impact on literature" section, so it seems reasonable to think that's where short mentions of it's impact on literature belongs. The note I left provided a link to the Zn'rx article, where more information is available. You don't think the fact of the Zn'rx being a reference to The Hunting of the Snark belongs in a section of the article built for such things, but instead would like expanded information that belongs at, and would repeat, the "Zn'rx" article? AvatarMN 17:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Fort Blount / Fort Gadsden

Fort Gadsden, according to its article, was built on the site of the "Negro Fort" destroyed in 1816, which was called Fort Blount:

Fort Gadsden (State Historic Site) Built on the site of Fort Blount (1) (or Blount's Fort (1)) (1814 - 1816) or British Post, which was renamed Fort Nichols (1) and left to former slaves and fugitive Seminoles. The Americans from Fort Scott blew up the "Negro Fort" (2) in 1816. In 1818 the Americans rebuilt it and named it Fort Apalachicola. It was soon renamed to the present name. It was abandoned. Confederates used it during the Civil War, armed with four guns. Remnants of both forts still exist.

FORT GADSDEN, up the Apalachicola River a short distance from Apalachicola Bay, was built on the ruins of FORT BLOUNT in 1818 by General Andrew Jackson during the First Seminole War.

There are several other sources as well.

In terms of what should be at Fort Gadsden, I added a "See also" with a link to Fort Blount Revolt. If you wish to incorporate more of the slave revolt article into the Gadsden article, go ahead. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 04:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Does this help? — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 22:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the initiative and merging the articles. I was planning on doing it "soon." :-) — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 03:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Astronaut diaper

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Astronaut diaper, by Mschel, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Astronaut diaper is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Astronaut diaper, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Astronaut diaper 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. --Android Mouse Bot 2 00:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)