User talk:Dsp13/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Belated thanks (Rede Lecturers)
Wanted to thank you for the link to that search on the Rede lecturers, and to let you know I haven't forgotten about it yet, Most of them are the new series, with one from the old series. Did you have any luck in finding out how the older stuff is handled by that database at the moment? Carcharoth (talk) 01:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- The database is basically a digital version of Venn's printed Alumni Cantabrigienses: it looks as if the old series of Rede lecturers (which were fairly junior university teaching appointments, I think - by contrast to the new series, which was a relatively prestigious invited lecture at the university) just weren't included in Venn; they may be among the addenda which is to be (at some point) added to the database. I've asked about this, & should hear soon, but there's quite a lot of addenda to be added (tens of thousands of card slips) so don't hold your breath! Dsp13 (talk) 11:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Link & category intersection tool
Thanks for the tip about the Link & category intersection tool, I combined "Living people" with "2008 deaths", "2007 deaths" etc. and "Year of birth missing (living people)" with "1980 births", "1981 births" etc., and was able to resolve a couple of hundred conflicts. That tool is invaluable, and thanks again.EmanWilm (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Looking at this article, was his name Morison or Morrison (one or two 'r's), as both are used in the article and references. CultureDrone (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hi! Both seem to have been used (& in the 16th century variant spellings of names are routine) - but one 'r' rather than two seems slightly more common in the secondary literature. So maybe it's worth a move to Richard Morison (ambassador). If not, there needs to be a redirect from there at any rate. Up to you! Dsp13 (talk) 21:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Another meetup?
How is the new job? Could you bear to think of another Cambridge meetup in February? Charles Matthews (talk) 09:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- A February meetup sounds a very sound scheme: I can certainly bear to think of it now, and even do something about it in early Jan? (Though I'm reminded I have evidence of the last languishing on a digital camera, and keep being to lazy to remind myself how to upload it.) The new job is pretty fun. Quite a bit of effort there goes into mining structured knowledge from wikipedia: you might be interested in a list, generated to see how our parasitism might be more symbiotic! Comments welcome Dsp13 (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- London 18 would presumably be on the second Sunday - we should check with James Forrester or WJBscribe. That means the fourth Saturday/Sunday would be best. Saturday seemed to work out, since people came from London and the Sunday travel is not to be trusted. So, whatever day that implies? Charles Matthews (talk) 14:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
It would be about time to get definite about 28 February ... I've been away for a few days, but have vowed to give up procrastination (tomorrow). Charles Matthews (talk) 22:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
DNB proposal
User:Charles Matthews/WikiProject DNBMerge. Trying to "think outside the box" here. (Sorry, but if you will work in the private sector, I'm going to have to try to talk your language.) Charles Matthews (talk) 05:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- who would ever choose to do their thinking inside a box? B. F. Skinner? I didn't know my language had changed ;) Dsp13 (talk) 15:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC
- Pedimerge 2.0, then. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Birthdates etc.
Hello. This is the guy who supplies mostly birthdates for celebrities. You didn't indicate who it was that I had changed that you were questioning, but it's my forte to research and find out biographical information on celebrities, such as their birthdates, mates, etc. I find this very odd, putting this information down, because you don't even know who I am, yet are going by my ISP address, I assume. Anyway, I use a service called www.publicbackgroundchecks.com to locate the celebrities. 99% of the information contained in this site is correct. If you have any questions, you may write back to me. Thank you. User:207.217.37.2 (talk) 22:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Dsp13, I could find a birth year but no date as of yet. Best, gidonb (talk) 18:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- no problem: in fact, I think, for living people who aren't extravangantly famous (see WP:BLP) the standard practice is to restrict things to year of birth for privacy reasons. Dsp13 (talk) 20:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Venn
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| Your Venn contributions are excellent. Well done, you are improving good articles and making them better. Victuallers (talk) 12:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC) |
Wranglers - thanks
Thank you for your help with correcting the misidentification! Mrh30 (talk) 08:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- no problem! at the mo I'm just checking Camb alumni born in the C18th against ACAD - A Cambridge Alumni Database, a digital version of Venn's Alumni Cantabrigienses Dsp13 (talk) 14:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Alice Hext
Thanks for tidying up the Alice Hext entry. Vernon White . . . Talk 18:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you
The article you created, Cambridge_Network maybe deleted from Wikipedia.
There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:
The faster your respond, the better chance the article you created can be saved. This is because deletion debates only stay open for a few days, and the first comments are usually the most important.
There are several tools and other editors who can help you keep the page from being deleted forever:
- You can list the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. If you need help listing your page, add a comment on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
- You can request a mentor to help explain to you all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted, here: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond on the deletion page.
- When try to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you.
Here is a list of your own acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.
Acronyms in deletion debates are sometimes incorrectly used, or ignore rules or exceptions. - You can merge the article into a larger or better established article on the same topic.
If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. Good luck! travb (talk) 22:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
The recent Venn link does not seem to work - or am I doing something wrong? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks ever so much - I've corrected it. I'm impressed by the speed with which you noticed the mistake! Dsp13 (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Darwin at Cambridge
Thanks for adding the Venn link to Charles Darwin, it's a rather detailed addition to that article which we're trying to keep concise as an overview, so I've moved it to Charles Darwin's education#University of Cambridge which goes into the complexities of when he became a "pensioner", when he actually started at Cambridge and when he matriculated. Much appreciated, dave souza, talk 21:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Useful!
Hi. Regarding this edit, that's a useful template to know about. Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 08:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for yr message. Yes, it's a great resource. I reckon that out of the 10,000 or so people in the Australian Dict Biog, about 1,200 have wikipedia bios. Around a third of these use the template at the moment, while the remainder either link in other ways or don't link to the ADB at all. Best, Dsp13 (talk) 09:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Changing topic slightly, I gather you do a bit of work in the area of Oz bios?
- I notice that DAB frequently seems to be the primary reference, and I believe there's an Oz Bios workgroup that has the aim of creating a WP bio for every entry in DAB.
- Personally, I think the quality of DAB is very poor; I've found many examples where it is not only wrong, but worse, it is misleading. ADB articles seem to be much more accurate, comprehensive and balanced.
- Yes, ADB probably doesn't cover as many people as DAB, but do you know why that group seem to primarily use DAB and seem to ignore ADB?
- Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
Greetings Dsp13 - Thanks for picking up my SOS at the Hulton article. I didn't have time to do any more work on it just then. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Incompatible DOB contest?
Greetings! I noticed your SOS in the Community Portal a while back regarding Biographical pages with several incompatible dates of birth, and I've been helping out every once in a while. Unfortunately, I noticed that progress seemed to slow down once your announcement was removed from the portal; you and I seem to be the only editors working on batches 41–60.
I came up with the idea of having a contest whereby the users that fix the most articles will be awarded some kind of cool barnstar. We can hash out the details later, I just wanted to see if you were interested. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- yes, it would be nice to invigorate the process. I don't have much time to put into it at the mo, but will try to enter into any scheme you think up! :) Dsp13 (talk) 07:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Cool! Here's one idea: It seems to me that if we award various levels of barnstars for arbitrary milestones (fixing 100 entries, 250, whatever), we run the risk of missing the mark completely. It may be that no one actually reaches the milestones we set, or that a dedicated few manage to fix a much higher number, or that a vast group of editors all manage to earn the barnstars. With more than 4000 remaining and no idea of how large and involved the participants will become, that just seems like a bad route.
- Instead, I think there should be a more competitive structure to it: The top three fixers earn gold, silver, and bronze medals. The next 7, 12, or 22 best editors, or those who manage to surpass an arbitrary milestone which we can figure out later, get a generic runner-up barnstar. Also, there could be a similar award system for the editors who clear out the most entries from a single batch. If, for a certain user, the highest number of entries cleared from a single batch was 96, their score in this category would be 96. If someone manages to clear out an entire batch by himself, I suppose we could just add 100 to whatever their next highest number is.
- As for keeping track of scores, I think we should set up a subpage wherein editors, upon getting bored or the drive being completed altogether, can submit their scores backed up by a series of individual diffs and groups of diffs if they weren't interrupted. Once the drive is over, we can go through and verify the numbers provided by the winning participants. Sound good? --Cryptic C62 · Talk 20:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Gillow
I've just noticed that the text of the Joseph Gillow five-volume biographical dictionary is up at www.archive.org, which is promising. (The DNB effort at wikisource is just getting going - don't know if you'd been following all that - but the scans need really painstaking correction.)
So how are we doing on the meetup?
Charles Matthews (talk) 11:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Over at the page the view is CB2 again. I'll call them tomorrow, unless you get there ahead of me. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Great. Dinner, now. "Al Casbah" went down fine. "Cotto" on East Road is a very fine restaurant in my view, but is much more upmarket and "slow food". These seem like the opposite extremes, to me. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I've edited the page and added it to the meetup template; and updated the UK page that already linked to it. I'm working on drumming up some business! Charles Matthews (talk) 21:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- thanks! sorry to have been so absent-minded about this meetup: I've been more than usually busy offline these last few weeks. Dsp13 (talk) 22:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of James N. Parker
A tag has been placed on James N. Parker requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
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. Apoc2400 (talk) 21:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of The Cambridge Guide to Women's Writing in English
I have nominated The Cambridge Guide to Women's Writing in English, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Cambridge Guide to Women's Writing in English. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Christopher Kraus (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I created this article, which is not the same person you are looking for. Bearian (talk) 19:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- thanks very much for letting me know - seeing that Alice Stopford Green now exists, I added a hatnote Dsp13 (talk) 23:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you added this chap to the dab at Charles Davis - here. I've tidied up the dab page after adding a couple from the names disambiguation project, but can't find out where this man comes from! Any ideas? He's linked a lot... but all seem to be from one template, Template:Media General, as "Corporate director" which I suspect is someone else. Any ideas? PamD (talk) 09:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for querying this one: I think I had in mind Charles Augustus Davis, who was a businessman as well as an author under the pen name Jack Downing. I only noticed him as he was considered noteworthy enough to get an essay-length treatment in vol. 11 of the multivolume Dictionary of Literary Biography: Trachtenberg, Stanley, ed. (1982), American Humorists, 1800-1950 (Part 1: A-L, Part 2: M-Z), Dictionary of Literary Biography, vol. 11, Detroit: Gale Research Co. Best, Dsp13 (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
DNB
Current organisational thoughts at User:Charles Matthews/DNB Working Lists. I think I might be motivated to produce the rough lists piecemeal now - it's really the first hurdle, but quite a high one from where we are. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- I wasn't able to find an alternative way to get the lists. Shall I have a go at your list 63? Dsp13 (talk) 12:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- Um, thought not. It will be several more weeks getting the listings: I'm around 30% of the way through now. Have a look at Template:DNBListing which is intended to be at the top of these pages. Discussion of tweaks on Template talk:DNBListing will be welcome. Of course you can start in on any of the pages doing the actual work! Charles Matthews (talk) 11:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Henry Pelham
I've looked into this most carefully, and I believe that it's in fact Venn who is in error. As you can see from Henry Pelham (disambiguation), there are two Henry Pelhams more or less contemporaneous: Henry Cressett Pelham, the son of Thomas Pelham (of Lewes, senior), who lived from c.1729 to 1803, and Hon. Henry Pelham (British Army officer), the son of Thomas Pelham, 1st Earl of Chichester, who lived from 1759 to 1797. From the fragments on Google Books, both Narnier and Brooke, in The House of Commons, 1754-1790 and Judd in Members of Parliament, 1734-1832 identify the Henry Pelham who lived 1759–1797 as being the Member returned for Lewes in 1780. Furthermore, The Parliamentary History of England, pub. 1803, identifies the member returned for Lewes in 1780 as being "second son of lord Pelham [later Chichester]; an officer in the foot guards", clearly a reference to the 1759–1797 Pelham. Meanwhile, the parish registers of Cound clearly identify Henry Cressett Pelham as being the one who died in 1803. Venn appears to have hopelessly muddled their parentages: it was Thomas Pelham of Lewes, not of Stanmer, who married his cousin Elizabeth; Thomas Pelham of Stanmer married Annetta Bridges and was the father of the 1st Earl of Chichester. See for instance Collins' Peerage. None of the Henry Pelhams on our current disambiguation page (most of whom were MPs) have a birthdate consistent with a 1760 matriculation. Choess (talk) 02:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- It looks as if you're likely right. (Though I've silently corrected in yr note above the date of HP entering Parliament for Lewes!) Thorough and speedy stuff! It might still be worth keeping a note to the effect that Venn (who's normally rather careful) gets things muddled on the wiki page.Dsp13 (talk) 21:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- I've changed the notes on Henry Cressett Pelham to reflect what I understand to be the situation (and corrected two of my typos above). The onomastic austerity of the Pelhams does make it rather difficult to sort out the Henries and Thomases. Choess (talk) 01:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Venn refs
Hi Dsp. Sorry to bother you but would you mind checking that the article you are adding these sources to has a "references" section? I'm cleaning up the broken ref category and this is maybe the fourth one I've found following your edits. Still, good work on the sourcing! Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 20:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- sorry about that - thanks for letting me know, & I'll try to be more careful to check. cheers, Dsp13 (talk) 21:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Proposed Cambridge3 meetup
I'm proposing a lunchtime micro-do, Tuesday 28 April. Any immediate thoughts to my talk page: I'll post a meetup page when we have some suggestions on venue. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Meetup confirmed
The third Cambridge meetup is confirmed for the Free Press pub, 12.30 pm on Tuesday 28 April. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Biographical pages with several incompatible dates of birth
"The 24 May 2008 Wikipedia dump was used for this work."
Is it possible to rerun the analysis on a more recent dump? 131.111.216.15 (talk) 09:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
This was done by one of the miners at True Knowledge, where I work. They've recently changed the way they keep abreast of wikipedia, so I don't know if they would find it easy to do exactly the same thing for the most recent dump. But I'll have a word with them - & if you can think of any other sorts of semantic consistency checking which would be useful to wikipedians, do let me know any ideas you have. (I see you're also at camb. univ., btw - my hermes there is also dsp13). Best, Dsp13 (talk) 22:37, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Penhall date of death
Thanks for the Venn ref to the William Penhall page. I notice that the Venns give his date of death as 4 August 1882 while his gravestone in Grindelwald[1] gives the date as 3 August 1882. Which is the more authoritative? Ericoides (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- hard to say: Venn is usually pretty careful working with English written sources, but this of course happened on the Alps & in fairly unknown circs. There's a fairly detailed letter written 5 August by Howard Barrett to the Times, published 16 August 1882, which gives a chronology: the pair seem to have left 00.30 on Thursday 3rd August, intending to return by 2pm. When they weren't back by 7pm, someone was dispatched to see if they had changed their route and continued over the mountain to Rosenbain; by 4.30am Friday he had returned with the news they weren't there. A search party, including Barrett, set off at 6am Friday, and at 3pm found their bodies lying on an avalanche which had swept them to their death. To quote from the letter: "The watch of the guide had stopped at 6 30 (a.m.?) [sic]; that of Mr Penhall stood at 4.10, and had not been wound up. The former is the probable but not certain time of the accident." Dsp13 (talk) 18:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Birth year from "LC name authority file"
I'm trying to find a source for the death year for J. G. Phillips. Would you be able to help? I'm asking because you made this edit. I think I know what the "LC name authority file" is, but would you be able to confirm that as well? The reason I'm at this article is on the talk page. Carcharoth (talk) 21:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- the library of congress name authority file I mentioned is no help for yr query: that only gives a date of birth. I'll have a quick scout, though, & if I can find anything will put it on the JGP talk page.Dsp13 (talk)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi, I notice that this article is linked to your list of those mentioned in the Biographical Dictionary of the History of Technology. Can you add any more info from this source? Mjroots (talk) 18:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- the basic biographical information there is essentially in the wikipage. One paragraph from the Biog Dict summarizes the sort of wind engines he made, and might be worth integrating into the wikipage - but to be honest (I'm not very mechanically minded) on a quick reading I don't understand the details either there or in the wikipage very well. The Biog Dict also has two suggestions for further reading:
- J. K. Major, The Windmills of John Wallis Titt, 1977, The International Molinological Society
- E. Lancaster Burne, 'Wind power', Cassier's Magazine 30:325-6 (1906)
- Hope that's helpful. Dsp13 (talk) 23:10, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
DNB
I'm nearly done with the major indexing - three more evenings' work in it. So I'm beginning to move ahead with other matters. I've been editing Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/DNB to place various things there into pages hanging off, and make it look more like the central place for the project. The pages in my user space will gradually be moved into project space, hanging off Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/DNB Epitome, which is mostly redlinks now but will become bluer. There is a fair amount to do that is purely organisational, and I'll set up a category for the sub-WikiProject. What is interesting now is to worry about to get some good topical lists. You might have ideas - redlink lists to promote activity in particular areas (I know from the Catholic Encyclopedia that this is motivating). Basically, by profession is one way to cut it up; I was wondering about by date (not all birth dates available, of course). For me it's still mainly 17-th century folk that are of interest. But there are other ways to classify, also: "Scottish history", for example. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry not to have replied earlier: what you've got up is wonderful. I've just managed to borrow a couple of vols of the DNB, & have started to have a go at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/DNB Epitome 10. Do let me know anything that occurs to you. Dsp13 (talk) 23:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
- One thing: I have been moving the peerage titles to User:Charles Matthews/DNB Peerage, but I haven't got to vol. 10 yet, so feel free to do that. Since these don't have actual articles in the DNB (some few families may), I think they are better in another place as checklists. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Another meetup
Wikipedia:Meetup/Cambridge 4, just kicking off the discussion, prompted by someone who wanted one around then. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
FYI, the fourth Cambridge meetup will occur on the afternoon of Saturday 1 August. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, Charles: I won't be able to make it unfortunately, but hope it goes well! Dsp13 (talk) 14:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Shame. BTW I have been adding {{Venn}} with increasing frequency. Do you know the person running the database? It occurs to me that the claim that Venn invented the Venn diagram is well known to be shaky historically, since Euler had them (?). In any case it would be appropriate to ask for that claim to be tweaked - there is probably some more interesting pedagogic history of 19th century logic behind it all (Boole, Dodgson, whatever). Charles Matthews (talk) 16:22, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I do know the Cambridge ppl running the database, who've been working at it on a shoestring for decades: principally John Dawson of the soon-to-be-defunct Lit & Linguistic Computing Centre, ex-university archivist Elisabeth Leedham-Green, & John Pickles of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society. (Since there's an ongoing process of correcting it & marking it up, I'm letting them know of mistakes in it if I spot them. So there's a COI case against me adding the template links, which if others thought was important would make me stop. But it seems a systematic & authoritative source of otherwise inaccessible detail.) I agree the claim that JV invented venn diagrams is over the top. (A more genuine first: I think he was the first to plot a random walk in the plane.) My general take on him is that (though from an intensely evangelical family) Darwin turned him agnostic, removing the sense that there were fixed natural kinds underwritten by a superintending deity. Since he had a frequency theory of probability, all that was left in this Logic of Chance were the brute empirical counts in overlapping observable categories at any one time. Perhaps the flatness of the Venn diagram captures this pedadogically. (Boole, who with his wife tended towards theological mysticism, would be an obvious contrast.) Dsp13 (talk) 09:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I have just been using it to chase the more obscure translators of the King James bible - and I'm impressed. Not that the people concerned are always identified as such in the database. The only feedback mechanism seems to the be the one email address. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
John Saddington
Thanks for rounding off the tail of the John Saddington article neatly. It's appreciated. That I didn't do it myself is not rank laziness, it's just that everytime I try it, it ends in failure at best and textual destruction at worst. So, chickening out is a kind of negative common-sense! Coxparra (talk) 12:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- no problem - thanks for taking the trouble to contact me. Your articles seem great to me - referenced carefully - hardly evidence of rank laziness! (anyway, division of labour is often praised as efficient) Dsp13 (talk) 14:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
You added a reference to this article but there was no actual reflist/reference section so I added it which made your reference display but it turns up some sort of search page with a nothing found message. Looks hopeful and references are needed for this article so if there is a way to tune it up, that would be dandy. Cheers. --KenWalker | Talk 02:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- thanks for that! I must have been getting tired - all fixed now I hope.Dsp13 (talk) 08:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Cut and paste move from your draft page
Hi,
A user has made a cut and paste move of some draft material you were working on to List of women treated in George Ballard Members of British Ladies. See here for some context. While I have merged some of his other articles with their draft counterparts, you appear to be working on general George Ballard work and I don't want to disturb that. Also, I'm not entirely sure that the list meets our inclusion guidelines (though I'm not prepared to nominate it for deletion). However, the list is your work and our license requires that it be attributed to you. What do you think should be done? Please respond either on the AN/I thread or my talk page as I probably will miss a response on my watchlist. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 06:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Re the above, I think it is OK to go into userNAMEspace - do you mind if I have a little edit, or would you prefer it back under your wing. I'll have to unmangle the title - I don't think the the cut and paster had a clue what the article was about. If you're OK with it being in mainspace, Protonk can merge the history so you get the original credits. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 17:23, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Gah!)
- Elen, thanks for taking the trouble - and do with it just as you think best.Dsp13 (talk) 01:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Passing comment - the status quo doesn't seem to be so bad as to be really annoying. It is definite, useful list associated with a notable work. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
Bronze Barnstar | |
| For taking third place the Total Corrections contest for Biographical pages with several incompatible dates of birth, I hereby award you this bronze barnstar! Not only did you create the listings, but you also helped significantly to clear them out. Thank you for leading by example and congratulations on your prize! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 23:00, 1 September 2009 (UTC) |
Yet another meetup
How about October? Any time better for you? Early November? Feedback from the fourth Cambridge meetup is accumulating, and I'll get onto this at some point. (It seems, by the way, that mid-afternoon at CB2 hardly needs a booking.) Charles Matthews (talk) 15:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Identification issue: I'd like to say that the Theodore Bathurst who is in the DNB as a translator of Spenser into Latin (Venn ref BTRT602T) is also the Theodore Bathurst of the List of the Westminster Divines; which is OK as long as "died 1651, rector of Orton Waterville, Hunts." = "(c.1587–1652), Overton Wetsville, Huntingdonshire." Which must be right, really. But does this seem like "original research" to you? (If the ODNB entry has this, it would be OK.) Charles Matthews (talk) 08:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, it's not so original, noted in a bibliography, but for "Theophilus Bathurst". Unless identifying variant names is really bad practice, this now seems OK to me. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, the ODNB has his dates as c.1587-1652, rector of Orton Waterville from April 1618; "His later professional standing may be gathered from his nomination by parliament, as Theophilus Bathurst, to the Westminster assembly of divines on 12 June 1643" (W. H. Kelliher, ‘Bathurst, Theodore (c.1587–1652)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004, accessed 30 Sept 2009)
Cambridge meetup 14 November
Another Cambridge meetup is planned for the afternoon of Saturday 14 November. Please contribute to the page and come along if you can. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The article FemBio has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- no evidence of notability
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 07:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, following this edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Herbert_Knatchbull-Hugessen&curid=8270535&diff=325108369&oldid=310704261 of you, I re-checked Debrett's and discovered that he had attended indeed Trinity College Oxford - and not Cambridge; my fault. Thanks for the hint. Best wishes ~~ Phoe talk ~~ 20:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- pleased to be of help, & thanks for letting me know - you're putting up very nice stubs btw! Dsp13 (talk) 20:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
DNB lore
Assuming you're there on Saturday at the meetup, you'll be able to fascinate with how you can know that Lumsden only wrote one DNB article. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'll bring along my copy of Gillian Fenwick's The Contributor's Index to the Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1901, which you're always welcome to borrow. (I tried to find a photocopiable copy of The Catholic Encyclopedia and its makers - which looks as though it should have a good deal of otherwise inaccessible biographical info about the Cath. Encyc. - but it doesn't look as if there is one in Oxford or Cambridge libraries, only in the BL.) See you there. Dsp13 (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Please do. It's about that time for the WS end of the DNB project to get listings by author together, and the ODNB site apparently has only part of the information as lists. Charles Matthews (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Autoreviewer
Hi, after reading one of your articles at newpage patrol I was surprised to see that an editor whose been here since 2006 and who has contributed as much as you have hadn't been approved as an wp:Autoreviewer. So I've taken the liberty of rectifying that. ϢereSpielChequers 23:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
You copy editied the Charles Hotham (rector) article and made it much more readable, [2], but in doing so you removed the citation from some of the information. I have put it back, but please be careful as without the citations a reader can not be sure that the facts come from a reliable source such as the DNB. -- PBS (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Dsp13! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 940 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
- Pat Schneider - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Peter H. Falk - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Shahin Assayesh - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
- Richard Lawrence (artist) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:14, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Abdy Baronets
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
~~ Phoe talk ~~ 17:12, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Potential DNB issues
Hi. There's a conversation at my talk page about a potential widespread issue with copyright infringement on the ODNB, and User:Charles Matthews, who found the problem, suggested you might be in position to help out. This might lead to a full scale contributor copyright investigation or might not; it's soon to say whether it will meet that threshold. Issues do, however, seem to be substantiated in at least four articles from one contributor. If you're interested and have time, your feedback would be welcome in that conversation. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- To explain where this is coming from: s:Wikisource:WikiProject DNB/Data capture is the working list for checking over all cases here of {{DNB}} not filled in with an article name. A small percentage of those titles correspond to the template misapplied (person in ODNB but not in the Victorian part of the DNB). I'm showing those names in strikethrough on the list: they all correspond when looked into to copying of ODNB text. What could speed up finding these is any way to determine quickly the names on the list that are ODNB but not the public-domain DNB. Charles Matthews (talk) 18:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Good work with the tool! I've replied in detail over at the other talk page. (The first search revealed that Sid Vicious is in the ODNB!). Charles Matthews (talk) 19:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Is this the one from your list of the Biographical Dictionary of the History of Technology? Charles Matthews (talk) 10:42, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- thanks, Charles - no, John Herman Merivale (engineer) was a grandson, son of Charles Merivale (where I've added a ref).Dsp13 (talk) 12:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I readded the category "Living people" which you removed. They're both alive. Regards Hekerui (talk) 12:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
- THanks for the heads-up. My understanding is that the category living people is for individuals who are alive, rather than for groups of people all of whom are alive. You're right, though, that this policy would leave us lacking a category for groups who are all alive - I'll leave a query at Category:Living people and see what people reckon. Regards, Dsp13 (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Meetup?
Thoughts on 27 February as a day for another Cambridge meetup? Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
- Now discussing 27 March at Wikipedia:Meetup/Cambridge 6. Charles Matthews (talk)
- Now confirmed. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know I deleted this as it was tagged "G6: it's a cleared backlog". But as this was done by another editor I thought I'd let you know as it was in your userspace. If you want it restored just let me know. Cheers, Peter 19:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The article Robert W. Richardson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- non-notable
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. After Midnight 0001 03:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of Robert W. Richardson
I have nominated Robert W. Richardson, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert W. Richardson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. After Midnight 0001 23:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Cambridge meetup
The next Cambridge meetup will take place on 29 May. Hope to see you there. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Eden and Cedar Paul Sources
Dear Dsp13,
I'm a researcher writing biographical statements about twentieth-century translators for the Oxford History of Literary Translation in English. I'd be much obliged if you would point me in the direction of the sources for your Wikipedia biographies of Eden and Cedar Paul. Thanks for your fine work on these translators.
(JCGTU (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC))
- Thanks very much for getting in touch - your research topic sounds fabulous! I remember at the time I wrote those bios being impressed at how little biographical information is readily available on (even, or perhaps particularly, C20th) translators. The fullest source I think on these two was the 1927 Labour Who's Who - I didn't pull it off library shelves, but I was in a library with the British Biographical Archive, which reprints its entries. The BBA is available in either digitised or microfiche form in several academic libraries & some public libraries in Britain - it's a fabulous collection of entries in biographical compendia of all sorts. The digital CD Rom version categorises people, & might have a category for translator - I can't remember. It's possible I used sources beyond those I listed on the page - Google Books and the Times Digital Archive would be places I'd think of searching - but I don't especially recall doing so. If there's anything I wrote which you can't find in the sources I gave, then do get back to me (better still, raise your query on CP & EP's talk pages, or edit the pages themselves by adding {{fact}} at the point where you think material is unsourced).
- Hope that's of some use - and if there are any other obscure translators you'd like help researching then I'd always be happy to help. Dsp13 (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
- Cedar & Eden Paul I now recall were also in Who's Who (so now accessible in Who Was Who), which I've added a ref to.Dsp13 (talk) 22:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Question about User:Dsp13/Wanted articles about Africa
In several places you refer to "Mcfarland"; who or what is this source? The title would be most useful for turning the red links there into blue ones. (FWIW, I came to this page looking to see if there was an article on the "shamma", a traditional garment of the Ethiopian highlands, & simply followed the links.) -- llywrch (talk) 17:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- thanks for the query - I've tidied the page a bit, so hopefully it's a bit clearer. The sources on the page are mostly various volumes in the series Historical Dictionaries of Africa, published by Scarecrow Press. The earlier editions in this series are a mixed bag, with some mistakes etc., but they collect together a substantial list of topics of potential interest. If they were more easily accessible, I think they would be good candidates for Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. Dsp13 (talk)
- I'll see if I can have a look at the one on Ethiopia some time: Shinn, David H.; Ofcansky, Thomas P. (2004). Historical Dictionary of Ethiopia). African Historical Dictionaries. Vol. 91. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Dsp13 (talk) 23:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
The article Marilyn Sewell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- The article appears to fail Wikipedia’s notability criteria. It also reads like a promotional message.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —ThorstenNY (talk) 19:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
The article Gyula Szentessy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- no evidence of notability
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Kwadjokrom
Hi. Any chance you could expand/reference this? Dr. Blofeld 12:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- not sure I can, much - I've made a minor correction & reference, but don't have anything to hand to to do more. Thanks, Dsp13 (talk) 14:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
The article Elvania Namukwaya Zirimu has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 12:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 12:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
New DNB WikiProject
For information: I have set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography, since the time has certainly come when there should be a place for collective discussion of the DNB adaptation effort. Please come and participate. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Further to that, Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography/Topical lists attempts to understand how we might get some good listings by topic. This, I think, is something on which your views might add some needed sophistication. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
I see your finger prints on this article, and just wanted for you to note that I have done the WS work, in case you wanted to blend it into the WP article. billinghurst sDrewth 10:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
The DNB project and the ODNB
It seems clear enough that the project should take an interest in the effective checking of old DNB material against the ODNB: log checks done, and annotate at Wikisource so that there is a record of serious problems of accuracy. That seems not to be all of it, though. There are nearly 9000 ODNB links here, and in a proportion of cases the DNB at Wikisource can provide a link to a version not behind a subscription wall. Something can and should be done to {{ODNBweb}} to make this slicker. What I particularly wanted to mention to you is the issue of matching the ODNB ids to the WS titles. We are looking now at a triangular matching ODNB id <-> WS title <-> enWP article, and this correlation is something we need to handle in the longer term. I suspect you have thought about some of the points involved already. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
More Schelling
I'm working now on Naturphilosophie, by the ship of Theseus method of gradually replacing old EB1911 material by modern references. It's certainly a lively one. I also did some honest history at List of Captains, Lieutenants and Lords Deputies of English Calais - instructive about 15th century history.
Next Cambridge meetup in January, I think. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
- Good to hear from you. Nothing necessarily dishonest about working on Schelling! I've left some comments on the Naturph. talk page. More to come once I've had a go at Beiser's blow-by-blow account.Dsp13 (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Glad to see you have put up an article.
I was in Ghana in 1966-8 when LO was being established & have a full run of the early issues - do you know any library etc that could use them?
- 86.24.102.89 (talk) 11:19, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message and kind offer! I've inquired at a couple of places, and if I hear back will certainly let you know on this page. If you want to discuss it further, you're also welcome to use the 'email this user' option in the toolbox on the left to email me direct. Best wishes & thanks again, Dsp13 (talk) 21:09, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of List of women novelists before Jane Austen for deletion
The article List of women novelists before Jane Austen is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of women novelists before Jane Austen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 15:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Another bash at the Tractarians. Detailed commentary tract-by-tract is a big job; but seems to have some interesting aspects. For example specifics of someone's claims that Christina Rossetti was influenced by the ideas of Isaac Williams, in particular. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'd admired the page in userspace. Will have a look at it in the next couple of days I hope. Dsp13 (talk) 15:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
One point I'd like to clear up is whether the Bingham mentioned in a couple of the Catena Patrum tracts is actually Joseph Bingham. It seems quite possible but I didn't see anything conclusive. For the other names there seemed to be enough clues. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I think so: e.g. tract 76 has extracts from his history of lay baptism, mentioned e.g. at [3], tract 74 extracts from his Sermons and Letters on Absolution. Dsp13 (talk) 17:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I obviously didn't look closely enough - but then those guys obviously read a lot of old theologians, and I was actually struck by how many I could identify. Charles Matthews (talk) 18:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I have also done a little work on the Library of the Fathers, which is a much neglected one of those highly ambitious Victorian publishing projects. See the first link: the basic bibliographical information seems scarce. One of the translators was C. Dodgson, and I think that's Lewis Carroll's father Charles. Charles Matthews (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- added a bit to the LF page. Suppose the next thing is to do a table... Hadn't realised Dodgson pere was involved: Tertullian too, which is stern stuff. Dsp13 (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Other stuff round the edges: the British Critic page. I have trawled the ODNB. The paper cited by Esther Rhoads Houghton from 1979 is on JSTOR and looks useful from the first page, which is all I can read. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
- even more useful, her later intro to the BC co-authored with Altholz - also on JSTOR, I'll try to have a look tonight.Dsp13 (talk) 11:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm actually quite interested in writing up the Hackney Phalanx, referenced there; but it seems to be one of those treacherous areas (membership of the "Phalanx" is indeterminate round the edges, for sure). Hackney itself was a place where there was a dissenting academy, and these were High Church people on the ground in opposition to both the nonconformists and the up-and-coming evangelicals. There is a fair amount in the ODNB about the Phalanx, but it appears to be a sort of academic cottage industry. The High Church establishment was in part reforming itself and taking initiatives (e.g. the Encyclopaedia Metropolitana, which has interesting connections to the Tractarians).
Anyway the British Critic material is confusing. The date 1813 for the change over from the first to second series seems a bit suspect: could this be taken from the dates of annual bound volumes, rather than the publications themselves (which perhaps switched over time, from an intended twice-a-year, to monthly, to quarterly ...)? Charles Matthews (talk) 11:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)