User talk:Bertaut/Archive 2015

Archive 2010

←

Archive 2013

Archive 2014

Archive 2015

Books and Bytes - Issue 9

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more
• New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more
• Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Wikipedia Library and Persian Wikipedia" - a Persian Wikipedia editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Nice coincidence

Hello B. I hope that your 2015 is going well. I feel sure that you've seen the second series of Shakespeare Uncovered. If not this message will contain "spoilers". Last night I got to see the eps on Taming... (thus the coincidence as I just saw your edit for that article) and Othello. The clips of the Meryl Streep / Raul Julia TotS were a treat. The whole series makes me wish that I had a TARDIS so that I whoosh myself into each audience that we get to see. I wonder if the series will get to keep going and explore the lesser performed plays. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 03:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey Michael. Sorry about the late replay. Things have been a bit hectic here with correcting exams and the like. Yeah, I agree, The Shrew episode of My Shakespeare was excellent. I really enjoyed seeing the clips of the Freeman/Ullman "wild west" production too. You can find a summary of all the episodes here, although, confusingly, they have the seasons the wrong way around! As regards the rest of season 2, the Antony and Cleopatra episode features some Janet Suzman clips. Enough said! Joseph Fiennes on Romeo and Juliet is very enjoyable, as is Christopher Plummer on The Tempest (featuring Helen Mirren, once again, enough said!) The David Harewood episode on Othello is superb if only for his reaction whilst watching Olivier's Othello, which, it has to be said has (and we'll be kind) dated a little! A Midsumer Night episode didn't do much for me, but that's probably because I'm not overly fond of that play (as far as woodland romps go, I'd take As You Like It anyday). As regards, The Shrew, I'm currently working on the first of the two branch pages (the on screen one), I'll wait until I've done both, and then break the main article up. It's mainly just going to be a copy and paste job, with some extra wiki-linking and an intro, but it will serve to take the main article down to a much smaller size (as well as removing over 200 references!). Hope all is well on your side of the pond. Bertaut (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your reactions. I agree that the Freeman/Ullman production is another one that would have been wonderful to see. We get two episodes each Friday night so we only have R&J and A&C left to see. Harewood's sharing of how the moment almost overwhelmed him that first night at The National was a treasure. I had one minor quibble with that episode - I wanted them to mention what Venice was like at the time and add some insight into why WS set the play there - but that was selfish on my part as I had recently read a couple books about the Serenissima and was hoping they might add to that learning - also I know they can only fit so much in with the time allowed. I was glad that they honoured BBC Films at the Bafta's last night. Enjoy the rest of your week! MarnetteD|Talk 01:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for thee!

A Shakespearan tea for a great Shakespeare article. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you sir, very much appreciated. Bertaut (talk) 03:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 10

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

• New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
• New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
• TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Responding re. Taming of the Shrew

Is this a proper place to respond to your reverting of my entry regarding the Virginia Museum Theater's Taming of the Shrew? It has been a long while since I really focused on my Wikipedia postings, so I am not exactly clear on the protocol. I would have replied to you sooner, but I did not understand the deletion markings and took them for a processing error of some kind. Anyway, now that I've found this page, I want to acknowledge your reasons for deleting my entries. I appreciate that there is always a problem when one writes about events and projects that are so close to home. Unfortunately, much of the history of theatrical production in Richmond VA has been forgotten-- and I have been writing in a serious attempt to restore some of it. I am no longer an active actor or director, but am a professor (full time, though close to retirement) of drama (University of California, Irvine) and see now that someone must try to fill in the blanks--for the Richmond area, but also for the New England theater scene in the late 20th century, the places I know best. I take it as a serious task to record persons of note, several whose articles I've created-- artists like Nikos Psacharopoulos, Jules Irving, Marie Goodman Hunter, M. Elizabeth Osborn, and others. Along the way, a number of theatrical achievements deserve to be noted. Specifically, the Shrew that you monitored was distinguished for addressing racial issues in the newly desegregated capital city of Virginia and for demonstrating how flexible the play can be in period and locale. Richmond was a very touchy place to assert these issues, and I don't believe those steps should be lost to memory. The high success of the show marked a progressive step in the local culture, although that is difficult to demonstrate. (Our subscription sales jumped afterward, but that's too general a reaction to cite as "proof" of the significance of one show in a popular season.) My production information was also meant to address the ongoing controversy noted by other Wikipedia writers regarding Shakespeare's ending, whether Kate really capitulates to Petruchio. The VMT version provided an answer different from any of the others, one that shouldn't be ommitted from the discussion. Perhaps I can make that clearer? The show addressed other issues, to the extent that this "New Orleans" Shrewbecame a teaching topic as part of the curriculum for MFA students at Yale Drama when I later headed the directing program there. I do appreciate your care in closely reading new entries. I hope this explanation will lead you to reconsider blocking the entry. Maybe you can suggest other ways to support the data? The original production reviews would support my claims, but sadly, Richmond Newspaper archives do not go back that far on line. MacDUFFY (talk) 21:52, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. Yeah, this is an okay place to respond. You could also have used the talk page of the actual article. As your edits were also reverted by Seraphimblade and MarnetteD, I've pinged them so they may add their opinions. Right then, to address what you've said. The issue of WP:SELFPROMOTION wouldn't be a major problem, and I certainly don't question your sincerity regarding your knowledge of this production. Unfortunately, personal knowledge of a production isn't adequate grounds to include it in Wikipedia. If you look at all the productions on the The Taming of the Shrew in performance article, and check the references I've used, you'll see I've essentially only used two different types; academic records and major news reviews. The basic problem you're facing is pretty simple; no matter how significant you feel the production was (and from what you say, it does sound like an interesting presentation) unless you can provide some kind of reliable and verifiable source, including it in the page is not really justifiable because it fails WP:NOTABLE. I certainly appreciate archives not going back that far, it's a problem I've encountered myself from time to time, but if you can find anything, a review in a newspaper (the bigger the circulation the better), a reference in any kind of academic publication (journal or book), even something from the course the production was used in, then there's no problem. Blogs, Facebook, personal websites, things like that, aren't considered reliable sources. Even if you could find an old newspaper review and upload a scan of the review onto a photo sharing site, and link to that. Please understand, I personally have no problem with the inclusion of this production, but as you can see, other editors have also removed it, for the same reasons I did - lack of notability and lack of adequate referencing. I do realise the paradox; you're trying to record an event for which not many references exist, and it's being deleted because it's not adequately referenced!! But like I say, if you can find any reliable source at all that can be verified by other users, you're good to go. Bertaut (talk) 22:29, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

My problem is (aside for your involvement with nearly every production that you are adding to articles which, with due respect to Bertaut, is WP:SELFPROMOTION and also brings up WP:COI) that there are 1000s (10s of 1000s more like) of performances of the Bard's plays every year. I don't find the ones produced at VMT to be any more or less worthy if inclusion than those at the Boulder Shakespeare Festival or the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. These are just a couple US festivals - there are numerous ones all over the world. No doubt most of the are notable and memorable for those who took part onstage and off as well as those in the audience. That does not mean that they all merit mentions at Wikipedia. That is just one editors opinion and I apologize for the offense that I am sure it causes. B would it be worth bringing this to the Shakespeare Wikiproject to get more input? MarnetteD|Talk 22:54, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both for your full and quick responses. I appreciate your attention as much as I do your reasoning. Yes, you hit the problem perfectly in noting the dilemma of trying to restore an historical record that is, by definition, missing. Of course, a great many of my postings have to do with productions and people that I knew personally, as that is both my familiarity and what is missing. I am motivated not so much by vanity (although it may certainly seem that way) as by the fact that my co-workers and I were often up against major establishment pressure during our Richmond years. The highly conservative trustees of the Virginia Museum and the editors of the major papers were always happy to downplay our company's advancement of new forms of theater and, of course, to keep silent on racial matters. Our first production in Richmond, Marat/Sade, was praised by the major critics and roundly condemned in the lead editorial of the largest paper. You may have noticed that I left Richmond during a controversy over Museum censorship. Now that I am far away, I have only a few friends remaining on the scene, one of whom is an archivist at the Museum. He reports that some of the particular records I would use seem to have vanished, and so that is another handicap (along with the lack of newspaper files) to providing supporting references. But with your tolerance, I will persist. I may have some old articles and/or reviews buried in the file boxes in my garage. Although I am somewhat disabled, I may be able to enlist some student help in going through those during spring or summer break. MacDUFFY (talk) 02:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

@KFFOWLER: I largely agree with the above. The Taming of the Shrew is a very well-known play and has been performed thousands upon thousands of times. To mention a specific performance in articles about it, the particular performance would have to be exceptionally notable. The way we determine that is that it's been extensively noted, that being, a lot of sources wrote a good deal about it. If that's not the case here and it was just a few passing mentions, I'm afraid mentioning this particular instance of the performance really isn't appropriate, and it must stay out. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:51, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 11

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - MIT Press Journals, Sage Stats, Hein Online and more
• New TWL coordinators, conference news, and new reference projects
• Spotlight: Two metadata librarians talk about how library professionals can work with Wikipedia

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Template:King Lear

Can you look at recent changes to Template:King Lear. I want to revert them, but Robsinden and I have been at odds on so many templates, I want to step back and allow another set of eyes to evaluate his efforts.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey. I've had a look through them and here's my thoughts. I agree with the removal of Son of a bitch, "Tears of Rage" and Wheel of fire, but Flibbertigibbet should definitely be put back. The last edit is also very problematic. Lumping the direct film and TV adaptations in with the loose adaptations is contrary to every other sizable Shakespearean template. Nav boxes are supposed to aid a reader. Burying the direct adaptations like this doesn't aid anybody. As for the removal of the character names, I'm in two minds. He is correct insofar as the links go to titles, not characters, and there may be an element of WP:EGG for users who were to click on the links expecting character articles. Let me ping Five Antonios and get his thoughts. He hasn't been active on here in a good while, but I do know he's about and he's not overly busy, so he may weigh in. Bertaut (talk) 21:43, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Since you didn't ping me, I missed your response. Basically, I am asking you to revert as you see fit or call on others for more opinions. This is an important enough template that maybe we should just bring it up at WP:SHAKESPEARE.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:53, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi gentlemen, apologies about my tardiness. My interpretation of the edits is similar, but not identical, to Bertaut. I too agree with the removal of Son of a bitch, "Tears of Rage" and Wheel of fire, and I too think Flibbertigibbet should be returned. In relation to the links in the character list, I agree with their removal; linking to the titles is pointless. As for the final edit concerning the filmic adaptations, I think a straight revert is justified. Moving the direct adaptations into the indirect ones is a highly questionable idea. Five Antonios (talk) 20:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Well there you go Tony, there's mine and Five's opinions. If you want to raise the issue at the Project talk page, that's fine, we can hang off doing anything for a few days. The Project isn't exactly very active these days though, so not sure you'll get much of a response. Bertaut (talk) 00:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

• Since we now have three people welcoming conversation regarding a fourth editor, I have moved the discussion to a place (Template talk:King Lear) where a broader discussion will be kept with the template.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Early Performances of Pericles

Hallo Bertaut!

You did a great work in the Article Chronology of Shakespeare's plays. I always look into it for References, when I am working on Shakespeare. Now I am busy with Perikles, Prinz von Tyrus. Regarding the early Performances you said The earliest known datable production was at Whitehall on 20 May 1619,. But Suzanne Gossett tells in Ard³ pg. 87ff, the story from the Pericles-Performance of the Cholmley Players in 1609/10. She gives no Date, but Ina Schabert's Shakespeare Handbuch pg. 462 says the performance was at 02, Febr. 1610 at Gowthwaite Hall, Niderdale. And Roger Warren tells the same Date in the Oxford Shakespeare pg. 1: "we know of one (performance) given by a touring company in Yorkshire on 2 February 1610." He references CJ Sisson, "Shakespeare-Quartos as prompt-copies", RES 18 (1942) 129-43. So we might have an earlier datable Performance. What do you think?

Greetings Andy -- Andreas Werle (talk) 11:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Andy, nice to meet you. Thanks very much for bringing that to my attention. It certainly seems I've made an error alright. I'll get a chance to look into it in more detail over the next few hours, and I'll correct the article accordingly. I'm not entirely sure how I made that mistake, but whatever the case I appreciate you making me aware of it. As soon as I've fixed the article, I'll give you a shout back. Cheers. Bertaut (talk) 21:44, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

All done. Many thanks for pointing that out to me. Bertaut (talk) 00:27, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

• Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
• Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
• Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
• Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.

Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Your reversion to my contribution

please could you tell me the reason. I assure you it was done in good faith and I meant no harm.please respond in my talkHisExcellencyAadi (talk) 09:04, 30 June 2015 (UTC) Hey thanks for telling the reason. Much appreciated. Could you tell whats barnstar n how to make or edit infobox.Thanks a lot.HisExcellencyAadi 13:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

If you reply here, ping me by adding @HisExcellencyAadi: somewhere in your message.

took a lotta hard work that kitty for I dont know how to get those things

Check out my new contribution to coc page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HisExcellencyAadi (talk • contribs) 16:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey HisExcellencyAadi You can find out everything you need about barnstars here: WP:BARN. As for you additions to CoC, they look to be a bit overly detailed, but I'll take a better look as soon as I get chance and let you know. Bertaut (talk) 21:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I just added a spells column since there was already a troops column. It is mentioned in the supreme gaming rulebook of my own that all offense things get equal attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HisExcellencyAadi (talk • contribs) 14:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
• Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
• Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
• American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Early Performances of 1 Henry IV

Hallo Bertaut!

I am just working on Heinrich IV., Teil 1. And as you know i am always looking what you did find out. Now you say here: The first definite performance was on 31 December 1624 at Whitehall. But David Scott Kastan says: "on New-years Night 1624-5". This is not 31. December. In England and Wales (not in Scotland) New Years Day was Lady Day until 1752. So this performance took place on 25. March. But in wich year? 1624 or 1625? It depends on whether Lady Day is it the first day of the new year or the last day of the old year. I am confused, i do not know. What is your opinion?

Greetings -- Andreas Werle (talk) 11:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Andreas. I've looked into this, and as far as I can tell the information in the Chronology of Shakespeare's plays article is correct. Lady Day (25 March) was considered the first day of the "legal year" up to 1752, but it was not the first day of the calendrical year, which was January 1. If you check out this link and go to page 70 (that's page 70 using the search function, the actual page number in the book is 52), you'll see the play is listed as being performed on January 1, which is referred to as "New-years night." I'm going to add this reference to the article though as it should avoid as further confusion. Another good spot on your behalf. Bertaut (talk) 00:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bertaut! Convinced, great link! Thank you for that. -- Andreas Werle (talk) 08:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Ouch

I'm sorry to hear you're not in fighting shape. Here's to hoping for a speedy recovery!

I suspected you already had good access to scholarly resources, but figured I'd ping you all the same just to be sure. You may of course still (when you're up to it) want to have a look at the various resources that the Wikipedia Library offers access to, as at least some of them are not universally included in what individual universities choose to subscribe to; and a Visiting Scholar type setup might facilitate access to very specific collections that might not otherwise be available (Beinecke, Ashmolean, Bodleian, or the Folger).

Incidentally, since you mention Ireland, I have a long-term wish list under that general heading related to Edmond Malone:

• Information, both historical and current, on the properties/houses Baronston and Shinglas in County Westmeath
  • Including pictures, both historical and current, and precise map references / GPS position; and any local-historical sources that may exist
• Information and pictures relating to graves or mausoleums of Malone; his brother, Baron Sunderlin; Malone's father, Edmond Sr., and uncle, Anthony
  • Lord Sunderlin and Anthony Malone (MP in the Irish House of Commons) I would like to eventually have articles about
• Any info relating to "Dr. Ford's preparatory school in Molesworth Street, Dublin"; where Malone went to school, and which I think is on the same street as Trinity, but I've found no hints as to its precise location (I've sent out my crack team of sleuths to search previously, and the shop owners in the area had no idea).
  • I'm hoping to eventually have at least a picture of the building today, for pure decoration on the Malone article
• Sources relevant to writing an article on the Court of Common Pleas (England) in Ireland: i.e. Court of Common Pleas (Ireland)
  • Way outside my area of expertise or interest, but hopefully a stub article may attract someone competent and interested. Case in point, since last I looked, someone has made a stub of this.
• And the current picture I use for Trinity (of Parliament Square, File:Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland (Front Arch Panorama).jpg) is nice, but not quite featured quality, so if you happen to know any photography enthusiasts I wouldn't mind nicer versions to pick from (I know, I'm greedy, I can't help myself ;D)

You should obviously not feel obligated to exert yourself in the slightest regarding these, and especially not when you're feeling under the weather, but I wanted to just sort of casually drop my wish list here such that if any of the entries happen to strike your interest I might benefit from your curiosity. None of these are very critical or very high priority; it's literally just a bunch of little niggling points I'd like to eventually do something about (the Malone article is beginning to look like a decades-long project). I've considered taking a trip to Dublin, and maybe even up to Westmeath, myself eventually, and if so I might, if you'd permit, ask for more direct assistance (locating things ahead of time, or sanity checking what I think I've found ahead of time, say) to maximise the efficacy of the trip.

Anyways, thanks for taking the time to respond over on the Wikiproject page, and hope you get well soon! Regards, --Xover (talk) 06:01, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping B. I join Xover in sending my best wishes and hopes that you get to feeling better soon!! MarnetteD|Talk 14:03, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the sentiments Xover and MarnetteD. Much appreciated. I'm just waiting for an MRI appointment to see how bad the pinch is. If's it not too severe, I can get an injection of some kind that kills the nerve (I'd imagine that'd be painful - an injection directly into a nerve!). If it's more serious, it's surgery, possibly keyhole, but worst case scenario, it's full on spinal surgery, with the possibility of fusing two of my vertebrae. At the moment, I'm more worried about the MRI, because I'm extremely claustrophobic!!!!! And to make matters worse, my mum is having chemo for lung cancer. The prognosis is good. It's a fairly small tumour and not especially aggressive, but they want to get rid of it early. Aaaaaaanyhow, enough of my woes. Again, I do sincerely appreciate the sentiments. And Xover, I'll get back to you on the above as soon as I get the chance to think on it. May be a short while, but I will get back to you. Cheers guys. Bertaut (talk) 02:22, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Hallo Bertaut! I wish you and your Mother all the best and hope that you will be back on duty soon. But take your time to recover! Sincerely yours -- Andreas Werle (talk) 08:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Andreas. Much appreciated. Bertaut (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
• Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
• Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
• Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Don't insert duplicate categories

Parent is enough, shouldn't be repeated. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization it goes: "Normally articles should not appear both in a category and a "parent" of that category; however an exception should be made for the "main article" of a category." Not normal articles. I had to explain this because you didn't understand when I told you it's all "Fatal Frame games" duplicates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fatal_Frame_games Or maybe I just wasn't clear enough because I thought this should be obvious. Anyway, always check parent before inserting any cats. --AggressiveNavel (talk) 09:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough. If you learned to use edit summaries properly though this problem would never have arisen. Manners go a long way sir. Bertaut (talk) 13:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
• Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Read the full newsletter

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

MarnetteD|Talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.

Make sure to click on both pictures to see them full size Bertaut as they will give you a chuckle. May your 2016 be full of joy and special times. MarnetteD|Talk 03:03, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot good sir. The same to you and yours. Love the picture on the right. I'm a big Dore fan in general, so I certainly got a kick out that it. Cheers. Bertaut (talk) 23:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Archive 2010

←

Archive 2013

Archive 2014

Archive 2015