User talk:Cuchullain/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cuchullain. 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 5 |
Welcome!
Additional tips:
- Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
- If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
- If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
- Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
- You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
- You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
- If your first language isn't English, try Wikipedia:Contributing to articles outside your native language
Sorry that this is so late in coming — someone should have spotted you before now. You already know all the stuff above, I expect, but welcome anyway. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:33, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Striped Knight
In response to your question at the List of Arthurian characters, it sounds like you are talking about Feirefiz, Percival's Saracen half brother in Parzival by Wolfram von Eschenbach. Percival's father married a Saracen woman and had a child, but he left and couldn't return, instead remarrying and having Percival. Feirefiz later goes to Europe, proves himself Percival's equal, and becomes instrumental on the Grail quest. His skin was supposed to be black and white in patches (black in the earlier, European understanding).--Cuchullain 02:53, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
Geraint
Thanks for helping to further clarify the Geraint articles. I was wondering if you could cast an eye on a short article I've just written for the Battle of Llongborth and improve it as you see fit. Best, QuartierLatin 1968 19:12, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Saint Eustace move
Thanks for renaming Saint Eustace, but I think the way you did it is less than optimal; when you just copy the content, the editing history gets left behind. See Help:Renaming (moving) a page. ←Hob 00:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Sir Balin
Thanks. No, I don't object the move. The standard does seem to be to omit the "Sir", however — e.g. Lancelot, Galahad, Gawain (though admittedly those names are unique, or nearly so, unlike Balin.)
Good call on the Post-Vulgate reference, and thanks for switching the spear link from Holy Lance (relic) to Spear of Destiny (legend). However, Malory doesn't actually give that name to the weapon, referring to it instead as "the same spear that Longius [sic] smote our Lord to the heart": I'd like to put the rename back into the link (unless the Post-Vulgate calls it the Spear of Destiny.)
Final picky point: "soubriquet" and "sobriquet" are equally correct; I don't think it's a US/UK English thing (the American Heritage Dictionary seems happy with both.)
Anyway, thanks for the supportive comment. Look forward to working with you on other Arthurian articles. Franey 08:55, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
The Fisher King in Malory
Added a bit on the Morte d'Arthur. As you can see, Malory made a bit of a dog's breakfast of his sources (understandable, really, considering the poor guy was in prison). — Franey 11:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Beckjord
Hi. I see you have interacted with this guy. I have made an effort to help him (@ User talk:Beckjord), but kinda feel like I'm missing something. I kind of feel like I've met The Tar Baby. Do you think this person is trolling, per your comment on one edit? He's kinda wild, and I'm curious to hear other ppl's thoughts, and I don't want to pour effort down a black hole when I could be doing something else. --DanielCD 22:12, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think I'll just try to discreetly back off... Anyway, thanks for the response. --DanielCD 23:22, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
The Erik Beckjord article is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erik Beckjord. I thought I would mention it to you because I think your input would be of value. --DanielCD 14:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank you
I can't say how much I appreciate that Barnstar. Lots of ppl would like to see that article flushed, and I can say I wouldn't shed any tears to see it go. But he does deserve a small article, perhaps one smaller than the current one. I guess what gets my goat is that I think some ppl are looking at the subject matter and just saying, "aww that's just a bunch of crap, delete it." But, regardless, he's had some impact on things, and to throw it out for the wrong reasons...that's what is sparking me. Also: the recent news stories about Wikipedia. This kind of sloppy thinking affects Wikipedia as a whole and has an impact on how it's seen.
But lemme climb down from my soapbox. Thank you once again for your kindness and noticing and appreciating my efforts. --DanielCD 22:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
PS. I can't wait until that damn vote is over with! --DanielCD 22:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Anglo-Manx
Like the page? User:Dougefresh42
It uses portions of a 1934 text. Dougefresh42 23:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Beckjord says
No sockpuppets here. None.
Since when is it up to masses of only moderately educated people here to determine who is to be written about or not? They hung "witches" at Salem on no evidence. Every major encyclopedia has articles on Bigfoot, and some have them on Bigfoot hunters. I have an article on my name in MYSTERIES OF THE UNEXPLAINED by Readers Digest editors, pp164-165, 1982. I am also referenced in ten other books.
If you have a page on BIGFOOT and Nessie, you need articles on major researchers...like Dr Rines, Tim Dinsdale, Rene Dahinden, John Green, etc.
PLEASE MAKE THIS POINT ON DECISION PAGE.
Thanks
beckjord205.208.227.49 20:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
New handle
Do you know how to move my watchlist and contributions to the new name? Also you were part of the inspiration for the new name. Or at least your username. I decided to select a mythic hero close to my heart and there is none closer than Arthur Philip Dent. The late dentarthurdent I'm sure you'll remember refers to the exchange he had with slartibartfast on magrathea.
TheLateDentarthurdent 22:35, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Have you seen that you can change your language to one of forty-odd languages? Including Occitan and Basque?
TheLateDentarthurdent 22:40, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Lost Philosphy
Thanks for the complement. I wanted to split the two, however the names they derived from were so similar wasn't sure how. However, you did an excellent job, and it looks great. Cheers Synflame
Holy Grail
I reverted your edits re: Holy Grail because the legend tends to stand on its own and has interpretations independent of Arthurian legend but I would greatly appreciate any additional contributions you have. Wandering Writer 05:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I noticed from Category:Wikipedians in Florida that you are a floridian and I have created a state wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida. So far is it very small but it could be expanded later. Join it if you want and help set tasks etc. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 04:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Nudity inaccuracies
Could you explain what some of the inaccuracies were in the paragraph you removed from Nudity? Tverbeek 22:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Anzu
Why did you revert the redirect? "Anzu" doesn't only mean something Zu mythology. It can refer to the names of characters from anime and manga series. WhisperToMe 06:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, you were setting up a double redirect to Zu (god)
EDIT: I redirected all instances of "Anzu" to "Zu (god)". WhisperToMe 06:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
"Anzu" on Google brings up a few things not related to anything on the disambig page... and then a few sites about the Yu-Gi-Oh! character Anzu Mazaki (known as Tea Gardner on the TV show and Anzu Mazaki in the comic books). It'll be hard to prove that "Anzu" the God is the most famous meaning since a lot of Yu-Gi-Oh! fans set up websites on the internet. WhisperToMe 06:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the input! Please feel free to be bold :) - FrancisTyers 23:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I recently added info regarding Stargate SG-1's take on the Fountain of Youth. I saw that you deleted it. Why? Tobyk777 04:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the revert. Bishonen | talk 12:52, 15 January 2006 (UTC).
Hi! I don't mean to intrude, but I noticed you have made some edits to the Cheers article in the past! I've given the article a serious reworking and I hope it can garner your support on it's FAC. Thanks again! Staxringold 01:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I have nominated this category for deletion in accordance with recent discussion at WikiProject Florida. As the creator of this category, I'm informing you of that nomination so that you have an opportunity to dispute it if you like.
You may join in the discussion here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Floridiana. ℬastique▼parℓer♥voir♑ 23:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Spam?
You removed a site based on specific witchcraft and yet NOT links like http://www.silverbroom.com/ http://www.avalonia.co.uk/ and http://www.reclaiming.org? All three of those sites are new agey, unspecific and irrelevant.
Fort Caroline
Do you have any more information about the image you added to that page. The caption reading just Fort Caroline. Do you know who made the drawing or when, etc. Otherwise perhaps no caption would be a better option. Rmhermen 21:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Cheers
Cuchullain,
Thanks so very much for supporting the recent FAC of Cheers. It was successful and Cheers has been promoted! I'm looking forward to hopefully getting Cheers on the front page. In the mean time, please accept this Beer as a token of my gratitude.
Cheers! Staxringold 11:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)DYK
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Tristán de Luna y Arellano, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--Gurubrahma 16:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Five Civilized Tribes
from User talk:Pollinator ==5 Civilized Tribes== + Hey, the reason I removed the South Carolina category from Five Civilized Tribes was because not all the tribes were from South Carolina. Why don't you just add the category to the individual tribes that were from there?--Cúchullain t / c 20:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's a point of pride for some South Carolina Native Americans. It seems reasonable to me to link it also. I just don't know... Pollinator 20:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cuchullain. In all honesty, I've never read Anderson so I can't be sure if Irishpunktom is write or wrong. I reverted mainly because I had understood that Irishpunktom was simply contesting the validity of the book, and the books he read had a better theory: but from what he said in his counter-revert edit-summary, the assertion made by the article is only falsely anchored to the Anderson reference. Bye :-) Aldux 23:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've substituted the Anderson reference with one from Stoneman biog. of Alexander: at page 37, after speaking of his legendary enter in Jerusalem, it adds "Despite his depredations in the Levant, he has remained a hero in Jewish lore". Hope this helps. Cheers. Aldux 18:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Mistaken Cleanup?
Why are you reverting my cleanups? Betacommand 00:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
In regard to Red Links, they should not be used unless your about to make the article or you know someone who is. Betacommand 02:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Mabinogion
Hey, I just wanted to say I really like the idea of having a Mabinogion category. I frequently see your name pop up in my watchlist, and am always impressed at the quality of the changes. As you are probably familiar with the topic, I've been slowly (very slowly) working on a rewrite of the Arianrhod page (User:Straif/ArianrhodNotes). This is an area of particular interest, and I've been doing a lot of research. However I seem to find that in the more "popular" works, Robert Graves' additions take precidence over Medieval sources. I'm a fairly new Wikipedian, and I understand the ideals of "everyone can edit", but I'd hate to see my careful research be written over based upon someone's misunderstanding of a New Age author's misinterpreted understanding of Graves' hallucinations. My thought is to add a very NPOV section on "modern additions" or "modern interpretations" where Graves (et. al.) could be mentioned. This would keep Math ap Mathonwy, Taliesin, the Triads, Lewys Mon, and so forth seperate from modern additions. No judgement, but a logical seperation, and let the reader judge the quality of each. I guess this would be writing defensively. Am I on the right track? --Straif 15:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the complement! I think your idea is a great one. I think the main reason the New Age material is so frustrating to deal with is that its well-meaning proponents tend to blur the lines between analysis of the sources and modern interpretation. Treating the newer additions separately but truthfully and without judgement will go a long way in correcting that. Keep up the good work!--Cúchullain t / c 20:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Al andalus
Asking someone to stop vandalising articles on their user page (it seems he does not read his messages) is not vandalism.--Burgas00 12:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Message moved from user page
Cuchullain - I have redone my User Page CliffR, mostly for your benefit. I would liike to suggest that you read it, then all of Chapter 16 in the Revelatorium, titled 'The Fountain of Youth', then all of the Revelatorium. When you see how the rising fluids relate to the whole contecxt of Chapter you have a better sense of what's going on. When you relate the whole Chapter to the Revelatorium as a whole, you have an even bigger picture of what's going on. When you relate the Revealtorium to the whole Age of Aquarius, the 'Age of Enlightenment', you have complete picture of what's going on.
History was made at the time of Mlchizedek and became part and parcel of the old Tesiment. It was made again two thousand years ago as the New Testiment. It is being made again now at the advent of the Age of Aquarius and its out pouring waters of truth. As a scholar of these matters this should be your most exciting moment. - CliffR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CliffR (talk • contribs)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Prose Tristan, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
Wandering Jew
I'm concerned about your repeated uncommented pulls of "Related Legends" entries in "Wandering Jew". There's discussion about this in the article's talk page. Care to contribute more specific thoughts on why pop cultural characters that are influenced by the legend are not appropriate for the article? Should there be a specific section for them? Thanks! -- Richfife 23:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Cleanup tag on Wise Blood
Why did you put a cleanup tag on Wise Blood? The article is very well written, as far as I can see. (It's mostly the work of User:Geogre, author of many Featured articles.) And a Cleanup template branded on its forehead is very disfiguring and shameful. I think you ought to put an explanation on the article's talk page when you add that tag — certainly when the reason for it is far from obvious, as here. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 19:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC).
- That was a mistake, I thought I had taken it off after I added it, but I guess got messed up somehow. Thanks for pointing it out.--Cúchullain t/c 20:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)