Claro, si puedo echaros una mano, estupendo, de todas formas lo que tienen aquí sobre escritores españoles no está tan mal, de alguna manera he querido ser un puente entre las distintas culturas de las que he mamado y si hay algo que me gusta de la wikipedia en inglés es que suele abarcar bastantes culturas, de hecho hay categorías en las que llega a haber bastante más artículos sobre escritores de un país o actores o lo que sea que en la lengua original, pero sí que es cierto que l@s hispanohablantes son un poco reaci@s a traducir artículos a otras lenguas. En lo que respecta a poesía española, mmmm, me temo que es un artículo de bastante envergadura, pero se hará lo que se pueda :)
Te he hecho este artículo en inglés y francés: Luisa Castro, que había visto que la habías puesto. No tengas miedo en hacer artículos, esto no es como la wikipedia en castellano, aquí t ayudan y no t suelen quemar mucho. No dudes en acudir a bibliotecari@s para lo que sea, l@s de aquí (administrators) son en general bastante maj@s, d l@s de la wikipedia en castellano, sólo t puedo recomendar a mi Rupert de Hentzau, que por cierto tiene por estos lares su website.
I'm a little busy, that's all i can do, but you don't take amiss this, right?
You were right to restore the image, although I don't quite understand what you mean by International Baroque. I have little time for Wikipedia these days but plan to add some stuff to the article in question. If I revise some of the text on Spain, I invite you to review my edits. Cheers, Ghirla-трёп-15:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yo soy el responsable inicial (creo) de la sección Castilians as an ethnic group. No debes verlo como fruto de intenciones nacionalistas (catalanas o vascas). Mas bien al reves. Creo que si los Catalanes tienen derecho a considerarse nación o grupo étnico, no veo porque los Castellanos no pueden disfrutar del mismo derecho. Castilla tiene una cultura, historia y conciencia propria y no tiene que ser sinónimo del "Estado Español" como les gustaría a los nacionalistas.
España es plural y no debemos caer en la trampa dialectica de "Españoles vs. pueblos oprimidos por el estado Español".
Estoy un poco de resaca tras el palo que nos metieron ayer, pero creo estar de acuerdo con todas tus reflexiones... Es verdad que solucionar la confusión mental que resulta de las diferentes definiciones de Castilla debe ser prioritario...
En cuanto al tema de grupo étnico. Yo no lo interpreto como grupo homogeneo con orígenes comunes, sino tan solo una comunidad cultural que se autodefine como tal. Creo que la explicación de lo que es ser Castellano es bastante acertada (porque los castellanos existen) y el articulo tiene en cuenta lo complicada y difusa que es la identidad castellana.
Thank you for your warm words. I welcome your efforts at expanding the coverage of Spanish art in this project. Make sure that the term First Romanesque is really used in serious publications, however. If your purpose is to discuss Catalan Romanesque churches, I believe the best name for the article would have been Vall de Boí. You may also have noticed that we still lack the article about Spanish architecture, although we have Russian architecture or English architecture, for example. You may want to fill in the void. Happy edits, Ghirla-трёп-16:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your kind message, Garcilaso. You never know, I might need your help soon if I try to edit the Spanish Wikipedia!
I added a message at Talk:Kharjah (component of muwashshah) about combining the three articles Kharja, Kharjah, Jarcha. I belive they should be combined, and my view was that the heading should be Kharja, but I am not certain, and if you disagree I shall be interested in your thoughts. I agree with you, very strongly, that they should NOT be merged with Muwashshah! Andrew Dalby18:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Why don't you add the material from the other pages into this one and then edit them to redirect to this one? Kharjah can then stay as a disambiguation page which it should be. Dlyons493Talk14:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Estamos incorporandolas una a una (con la ayuda de la RAE). Empezamos con listas básicas que encontramos en internet pero ninguna de ellas estaba completa. Si vas al talk page puedes ver, abajo del todo, una lista de palabras que hemos encontrado pero que no estan en ninguna de las listas de arabismo que hemos encontrado hasta ahora. Al parecer se estima que hay unos 4000 arabismos en castellano. Por ahora llevamos solo mil y pico... Total, existe una página correspondiente de arabismos en Inglés, Francés y en Alemán. Me parece un crimen que no exista en Español.
--Guzman ramirez12:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pues me has convencido. Es verdad que lo de la plata no viene a cuento... Ví parte del documental en la 2 pero no recuerdo que hablasen de la etimología del nombre. Sí. mejor ponlo en la sección de etimologías por comprobar y tambien en la lista general de palabras por añadir con un (?) al lado.
Ah y si quieres ayudar con el artículo en sí... es cuestión de traducir las palabras al inglés y luego meterse en www.rae.es para encontrar la etimología árabe...Nos vendría bien algo de ayuda, sobre todo con la A que da fatiga solo de verla.
--Guzman ramirez18:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ghirla is notorious for having issues with article ownership and reverting over tiny stuff (in three instances he reverted me over image locations). I'm not sure whether or not he has effectively left the wiki, as I am now avoid avoiding editing the same articles as him. If you can give a specific, reliable souce for your material, Ghirla cannot revert, per Wikipedia:Verifiability. Also adding the material to Spanish Baroque would be pertinent, though. Circeus14:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am unfortunately currently making it a point not to interact with Ghirla, for lack of the incredible tact necessary to deal with him without setting him off. I'd suggest requesting suggestions from another administrator (full list is at Wikipedia:List of administrators, look up the contribs to see who's online at the moment). Just make sure you are not rambling about what's going on. Administrators have little patience over inconsistent, unclear reports. Circeus14:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please dont let yourself be intimidated by Ghirlandajo. He will try to revert you into submission with "menacing" edit summaries. Please dont let him get to you. 83.5.250.9822:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to build a consensus for a Wikiproject Peer review process. I've opened a discussion page here. Would you like to comment? Would you be prepared to take part in the peer review process? Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Chinwag12:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I posted the IG Farben Building on the FAC on the 17th July. It currently has a support consensus, but only from 4 people. I'd be more comfortable with a stronger consensus and was wondering if you might be prepared to comment on the article? Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Chinwag12:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hola Garcilaso. Gracias por informarme de lo que está pasando por allá. De verdad que nunca he notado eso y además nunca ví a Tigeroo ni caminando por los callejones de wikipedia ni editando. Segùn sus contribucíones, veo que se juntó el dia 20 de Junio 2006.
Normalmente, y tú lo sabes muy bien y estoy totalemente de acuerdo contigo, categorizar es una tarea muy delicada a lo qué parace. Pero hay unos "guidelines" y logicas. En nuestro caso, por ejemplo, Crown of Castile no tiene nada que ver con la categoria Al-Andalus. Si, es cierto que hay una relacion pero tiene que figurar en el "see also" y no en la categoria.
Como no tengo tiempo por hoy, dejo esta tarea para este fin de semana. Voy a hablar con el y ire averiguando toda la categoria Al-Andalus para ver que tengo que eliminar. Claro que vas a aconsejarme en algunos casos. Saludos. -- Szvest18:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Just wanted to explain my categorization and I guess check if I am doing something wrong or how to it can cataloged a bit better.
Basically it started off with me attempting to populate Muslim history sub category Al-Andalous with existing articles available and more over on the on Al-Andalous. I have deleted the category: middle ages in some instances because i felt it was a redundant category as both the reconquista and al-andalous are listed under middle ages and fall within the same period. My concept is to not limit the Al-Andalous category with just Arab kingdoms and peoples as obviously others lived and afected the area as well which is why I have added other states to the Al-Andalous area as well. I don't beleive Al-Andalous refers to just arab lands under control but includes all of the lands of iberian peninsula during the time of both the arab governance, the reconquista uptil their subsequent ejection. Technically the arabs still call the iberian peninsula Al-andalous as it is a geographicaly descriptor but it has also synoymous with a certain period and so my aim is to cap the category during this time period because it is impossible to trace the history of the arab and the spanish in isolation for this period. I stopped removing history of spain category after one or two occasions but because that was my error in ascribing a tree structure to al-andalous and the reconquista as also being cross-listed under history of spain and will let you work out how to handle those. I just wanted to cross-list Al-Andalous into muslim history and populate it with existing articles that will allow someone interested in the history of al-andalous to come in and find all the information that is available on wiki for the time period, the people, the culture, the customs, the history, the politics, and some of the more direct affects. This is why i put crown of castile, category:reconquista there as well because it is related material and to aid people in finding what i thought was related material. We can work together to develop a better policy or guidleline or if one exists let me know, there is too much for me to do on my own. Definitely my own thought process on this are still evolving. Hope that helps. It is not an attempt to "claim" anythying merely to help people navigate through relate information.--Tigeroo05:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Garcilaso: I dont agree with your position on this: Castile and Mudejar are topics related to Al Andalus. The former because most of what is modern Castile was part of al andalus and because most of al andalus was incorporated into the kingdom of castile... The latter (mudejar) for obvious reasons! Cheers! --Burgas0017:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
After checking i believe that nothing was wrong w/ Tigeroo categorizing. I also believe that the discussion between yourselves are leading to a mutual comprehension and agreement. -- Szvest23:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with Castile being under Reconquista because reconquista is cross listed with Al-Andalous and this keeps them both seperate and together. I volunteer that we do the same with Spanish Inquisition and Al-Andalous instead of creating new category for Muslims in Spain after Al-Andalous and before expulsion type, as that will all fall under the Spanish Inquisition. Yes, I know Spanish Inquisition was about more but unless there is a sun-category within the Spanish Inquisition dealing with the moors that will have to do.
P.S Also about Mujedar, I really don't know what category of Architecture it should go under if not Muslim architecture, because it sounds as if it was inspired by the moors during the time of Al-Andalous. Muslim architecture is not just mosques!! Let me know how to recategorize it or something.
Garcilaso, gracias por tu respuesta. La verdad es que practicamente me has convencido y no hay razón para discutir puesto que lo has solucionado ya con tigeroo. Solo quería decir que la categoría Al Andalus debe interpretarse no solo como "España Islámica" o como "musulmanes en España" si no mas bien como un periodo histórico de la peninsula en su conjunto ademas de sus repercusiones posteriores en todos los sentidos: históricos, culturales, económicos y artísticos. Incluso un artículo sobre (me lo estoy inventando sobre la marcha) la metáfora de la reconquista y del Islam en la ideología franquista, podría llevar la categoría al andalus. ¿No deben ser las categorías expansivas en lugar de restrictivas?
--Burgas0012:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Un proyecto sencillo pero útil que se puede hacer es crear los "redirect" para artículos que tengan nombre con acento o que deban tenerlo. Es decir, si uno descubre que al teclar "Gaudí", no encuentra el artículo, pero al teclar "Gaudi", sí se encuentra, es cosa muy fácil crear un "redirect" para la versión alternativa. Es un problema que encuentro con frecuencia en la Wikipedia en inglés, y es buen proyecto de pasatiempo para el/la hispanoparlante en momentos de cansancio. Que le vaya bien. ... Lawikitejana06:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC) (turista ocasional que anhela regresar a España un día en el futuro cercano)[reply]
Hello Garcilaso! Thanks for your attention. First of all let me say that I'm not, by any means, knowledgeable in the subject of Kharjas. So my reasons for including the category of Portuguese Literature are of another sort. I Know I have, somewhere, a book about Arabic and Mozarabic poetry done in what was to become the territory of Portugal. I'll try to find it and shed some light on the subject of your inquiries, if possible. As for my reasons for adding the category, they have to do with the fact that the Al Andalus was not divided in accordance with the frontiers of modern Spain and Portugal - these, as you know well, did not exist then. Moorish Iberia was a relative cultural unit of reciprocal influences and communication. Sign of that is the fact that the Kharjas seem to have influenced Galician-Portuguese Cantigas de Amigo. Do you agree with my reasoning? The Ogre16:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Garcilaso. I didn't quite understand your comment on Tartessian being included in the article Languages of Portugal. You doubt the geographical veracity of the claim, is that it? Well, as you can see in the map depicting the Pre-Roman languages of Iberia in Iberian languages, the southern part of Portugal is represented as "Antigua área sudlusitana posteriormente celtizada". What this means is that the population of, basically, the Algarve, the Cynetes, before the arrival of the Celtici, had strong connection with Tartessus, wich make many believe that they spoke a variant of Tartessian. Furthermor, inscriptions in Tartessian have been found in the area, in a variety often referred to as Southwest script. The Ogre16:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Te digo. El Salvador, cerrado. Santa Maria la Blanca, en obras (pero algo sale en las fotos). Casa de Pilatos, exterior solamente y parte del patio. Las Dueñas, solo por fuera obviamente. Buenas noticias para todas las demás (San Luis es dificilisima de sacar entera de una vez) y alguna que otra cosilla que ha ido saliendo. Ya te cuento luego. E Asterionu talking to me?01:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hoy no creo que tenga tiempo te editarlas pero creo que mañana estarán. Acabo de llegar del aeropuerto. Aquí la cosa está que arde. Hasta me han parado y hecho preguntas estúpidas de si alguna vez he tenido problemas con la policía o si he estado en la cárcel. Por Dios santo, llevo viviendo en este país desde hace más de siete años y ahora me vienen con estas. Vaya estado policial que se está convirtiendo el Reino Unido. Da pena. Bueno perdona la divagancia, ya te dejo una nota cuando pueda cargar las fotos. Un saludo, E Asterionu talking to me?19:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the page and updated all the relevant links I could find. Anyone can move a page, so long as the new location doesn't exist yet. Once the page is moved, however, redirects have to be updated and such to prevent double redirects (which don't work with the MediaWiki software). Let me know if you need anything else! --Spangineeres(háblame)14:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Articles related to architecture over the past two weeks are listed automatically by AlexNewArtBot.
This list was generated from these rules. Questions and feedback are always welcome! The search is being run daily with the most recent ~14 days of results. Note: Some articles may not be relevant to this project.
Hola otra vez, me acabo de dar cuenta de una cosa: corrígeme si me equivoco, he creído entender que tanto en Commons como en la Wikipedia inglesa, cuando se categoriza como "Monuments", se refieren a fuentes, estatuas, mausoleos...y cuando se refieren a edificios utilizan "Buildings and structures". ¿Podría ser adecuado renombrar "Category:Monuments in Granada" a "Category:Buildings and structures in Granada"?--Garcilaso12:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. But whenever an article gets too long, people complain!
Aaaand, I think that all the different countries need to be discussed individually.
My grand plan from here is to write about
The influences- social, philosophic etc
The Style of Renaissance architecture, broadly speaking - the things that are common to Renaissance architecture in most regions and how it may be recognised by contrast with what went before.
Then- remove Italian to a page of its own, with just enough general material on the Italian Renaissance to keep the whole page intact.
But- I can't do it with a snap of my fingers, so be patient!
In the mean time, an understanding of what went on in Italy is the key to what happened elswhere.
As for Baroque, if you read what I have written about Baroque you will see that it does not mention buildings or architects. It does not describe the Baroque style. The paragraph merely states that the "true" Renaissance style occured only briefly in some countries before moving on to Baroque. The paragraph is not about Baroque. It is about putting Renaissance architecture in context in countries outside Italy. Spain, for example.
Now, there is a page on Architecture of the Spanish Renaissance that needs the work of someone with much more specialised knowledge than I have. What about you?
Me alegra que te guste. Todavía le falta atar algunos cabos, como traducir al inglés el poema de Ibn Zamrak, que me da un poco de pereza, porque la traducción al español de Emilio García Gómez es tan bella que es difícil estar a la altura con mi inglés chapurreao. A Asterion ya le he votado, faltaría más. Pues nada, ¡a mandar!--Garcilaso16:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hola Fayssal, sólo quería comentarte respecto a las fechas de la construcción del Palacio de los Leones, creo que son erróneas. Ya me di cuenta cuando escribía el artículo de que le faltaba una cronología, y agradezco el esfuerzo para mejorarlo, así como la traducción al árabe. Yo no tengo el dato concreto de la construcción del patio, ni de su finalización, pero 1230 - 1354 a.D. no corresponden con el reinado de Muhammad V (1354–1359 y 1362–1391). Como expongo en el artículo, la construcción tuvo lugar durante su segundo mandato, con lo que la fecha de inicio del patio debe de estar entre 1362 y 1391. La página web de la que has tomado el dato debe de ir "de oídas", como mucho de lo que se ha escrito sobre la Alhambra, que tiene una atmósfera tan especial, tan "mágica", que ha sido objeto de muchas bienintencionadas invenciones para "decorar" la historia. Lo mismo pasa con, por ejemplo, el Camino de Santiago. Ambos son temas que me interesan mucho y que no sé cómo empezar a "atacar" en Wikipedia sin crear polémica con tantos editores, pero muchos de los contenidos de dichos artículos son de de escasa fiabilidad. Así que mientras que me había apartado del tema por pereza, por no buscar y reseñar una a una las referencias (muchas veces no tan accesibles) que rebatan todos y cada uno de los "pufos", éstos siguen en los artículos. Igual me es más cómodo escribir otros artículos desde cero, del estilo de Court of the Myrtles, Palace of Comares, Mechouar of the Alhambra, Gardens of the Partal, Generalife...Gracias por animarme a meterme en esa vía que estaba postponiendo indefinidamente. Doy por hecho que cuento con tu inestimable ayuda.--Garcilaso12:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! thanks for getting back to me. I meant the Portuguese picture, which is good. I agree about the palace.. Something else would be better, but it wasn't me who chose it. Can you locate a better one, particularly one that is a left hand pic ie it faces into the page from the left side? Or a straight-on pic that can go equally well left or right.
I notice that you have added to the page on the Architecture of the Spanish Renaissance. Do you know anything about Portugal? It needs an article. My library doesn't cover it, only a few lines here and there. I have some information on Spain but almost nothing on Portugal which I believe is rich in beautiful architecture.
Thanks for your support on my successful Request for Adminship (final result 78 Support /0 Oppose / 1 Neutral)
I have now been entrusted with the mop, bucket and keys. I will be slowly acclimating myself to my new tools over the next months. I am humbled by your kind support and would certainly welcome any feedback on my actions. Please do not hesitate to contact me. Once again, many thanks and happy new year!All the best, Asteriontalk15:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hola, Fayssal, excelente artículo, no sé cómo podría mejorarlo: mi conocimiento de ese proyecto era más limitado de lo que ya has escrito. En cuanto al túnel, es una gran idea, sería mucho más que un símbolo de unión entre pueblos, algo histórico! --Garcilaso10:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hola, Garcilaso! Thank you for your kind reaction to my meddling with the article about beautiful Cádiz. I have done as you asked. I have made some small improvements. Before I touch the Carnival article, however, I would like you to look at what I have done and give me any suggestions you may have.
By the way, I don't think you are being fair to yourself when you refer to your English-language skills as "Spanglish"; it is obvious to me that your English is excellent. I can only hope that someday my Spanish, which is riddled with Cuban, Mexican, and Puerto Rican expressions, will be half so good as your English. I spend a good deal of my time correcting French and Italian translations, and, believe me, by comparison, your work was a pleasure to read and edit.
One last thing: among my memories of Cádiz landmarks is the newly-discovered (maybe twenty years ago) Roman amphitheatre near la Playa de la Victoria. If you are in a position to find out some facts about it and add them to the Cádiz article, let me know. I will help in whatever way I can. Your friend, PeterHuntington19:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I note that you have identified the people of Cádiz as the most humorous in Spain. I do not doubt that this is true, but, whenever I was in Spain, people would tell me the people of Lepe de Huelva have this distinction. Are the Lepenos as funny as the people of Cadiz? Not that it is important, but I would enjoy hearing your opinion. Your friend, PeterHuntington21:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks a lot for those images. Wasn't quite what I was looking for but they are great images. I'd want to use Image:Chulapo barquillero en el rastro de madrid.jpg however I have to get these past another editor who isn't quite as enthusiastic about using down-to-earth images (I'll try anyway!). Do you know anything more city-ish? I mean like a broader view. Say for London I found images of the tube (very day to day life) and parks (third of London is green) as well as things like markets (lots of people, staple out of the centre).
Not asking you to trawl though commons again, if you say anything before though please say. Or if you could just tell me what is typical is Madrid! Thanks for your suggestions though, I'll try to use them if I can, they're great! - J Logant: 12:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What you are saying is true, but there is no room for it all there. Needs separate article.
The most diverse by far is English Gothic. None of the others compare. Spain is the next diverse. Germany and France have considerable regional diversity, but not the huge stylistic development that occurred in England. Italy is not so diverse, except Milan and Sicily They all need separate articles.Amandajm10:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK! I just added a couple more details- in particular, reference to the Mudéjar influence, and so on.
I have not named various periods. When I first worked on this article, it had relatively meaningless lists of the various periods in each country, but no useful comparisons. I moved all that to Main pages, for willing workers to expand into full-length articles. And I greatly expanded all the stuff that pertains to Gothic in a general way. Also, what i said above, that as far as diversity, none of the others compare with England, is an exaggeration. What I should have written was, only Spain compares with England. ;) Amandajm11:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for your comments. I agree that merely summing up the styles "by comparison" for the sake of brevity does not deal fairly withh any of the regions' architecture, but to go any other way will mmean a quite mmassive expansion to the article.
Because the period covered was long and stylistically diverse (unlike Romanesque which was extraordinarily homogoneous under the circumstances) I would then have to return to dealing with each country in a series of historic pprogression and simply not have room to say anything at all that was descriptive.
Simply naming historic periods without any description doesn't do anything to give a concept of what the style was about and how it differed regionally. But I simply cannot sum up the differences between the periods of French Gothic and the considerable differences in the structure of buildings in the north and souuth of France, the various periods and regionally stylistic differences in Spain, the development of Gothic in Portugal, the way in which Flemish Gothic differed from that of France and Germany, Gothic in Holland, Gothc in Norway and the influence of English masons, German Gothic as influnced by FRance, Gothic in southern Germany and Milan, the regional differences between the Gothic of Venice and Sicily and the rest of Italy and the very long history of Gothic in England and the stylistic diversity within every single cathedral (except one) that makes English Cathedrals look very dfferent to all the rest. This is the summary of what I could write, if I was writing a large thick book.
About the diversity of English cathedrals:- more than anywhere else, they were built piecemeal. So when you walk through the building, you move between styles and centuries. This is not simply about the addition of chapels, towers, monuments and decoration. No attempt was made to follow through an earlier plan, or, in many cases, even maintain the proportions of the earlier elevation. So at Canterbury (a typical example) you have major parts that unashamedly display every stylstic period between the Norman Invasion in 1066 and the Dissolution of the Monasteries in 1523. Of the 14 larger cathedrals (between 120m and 170m), only one is stylistically unified in its major structure, having only two building stages, 100 years apart (the difference in this case isn't obvious). At Ely and Gloucester the stylistic departures are so radical that it is like looking at the Pyamid at the Louvre. Amandajm02:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pleeease attend to the article on Spanish Gothic! I'm sure you have more indepth knowledge and more references available than I do! Aaaand you can put up your own photos!
I forgot to mention:- Attilios and I have had a long co-operation over the articles about specific Italian buildings. He writes or translates them, and I check them over, add to them and tidy up the English expression. I am very happy to edit the language of any Art/architecture articles that you write, if you leave me a message. Amandajm02:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Though it's not important for the article Castile (historical region), I think you should know that Celtiberians were different from both Iberians and Celts. They are thought to speak Celtic languages but were different in some ways from the Celts in northern and Western Iberia. They had also contacts with Iberians, but they were not a mixture of other peoples, contrary to what the official History books in Spain used to tell. --Jotamar (talk) 13:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I deprodded this. The ELs provide sufficient referencing, even if not perfectly formatted. If you disagree, please take to Afd. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Garcilaso! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 23:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I nominated today's Driehaus Architecture Prize laureate Pier Carlo Bontempi to be featured on the start page of Wikipedia at "In the News". It'd be great for the whole discipline if you could support this nomination.
Wiki me up ® 11:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Wiki me up ® 11:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Gótico Isabelino, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
