User talk:Thw1309/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

German history categories[edit]

Hi, there are some spelling errors in 2 categories you created: Category:History of terretories in Germany ruled by an secular sovereign and Category:History of terretories in Germany ruled by an ecclesiastic sovereign. "terretories" should be "territories", and "an secular" should be "a secular". Could you request a speedy rename for them? BTW given the nature of the articles you added to these categories, maybe "Secular states of the Holy Roman Empire" and "Ecclesiastic states of the Holy Roman Empire" would be better names. Best regards, Markussep 14:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might help here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_concentration_and_internment_camps#US_internment_camps_in_the_defeated_German_Reich - thanx in advance. Byzanz

Do you know anything about french internment camps?[edit]

Having seen you live in the Saarland, you might know a little more bout French internment camps where German prisoners where detained.

Achwas, reden wir Deutsch: über die Briten und das Bad-Nenndorfer Internierungslager weiß man mittlerweile gut Bescheid, auch die sowjetischen und US-Amerikanischen Lager werden zumindest da und dort benannt. Über die französischen konnte ich aber weder auf der deutschen noch auf der englischsprachigen Informationen finden. Als Saarländer dürftest du am ehesten Bescheid darüber wissen, wie sich die Franzosen verhielten. Byzanz

By the way: I would like you to have a look on IDGR, a newbie with the handle user:Jesusfreund tries to introduce unprooven POV to the article and deletes well sourced information. Byzanz

Copyright concernes[edit]

Hello, I've noticed you are a jurist and I would like to ask your help in a matter of copyright: Can Wikipedia link to copyright infridgement movies on Youtube?

I know Wikipedia policy, but Youtube is not an ilegal site, and has it's own policy:

"Anytime we become aware that a video or any part of a video on our site infringes the copyrights of a third party, we will take it down from the site. We are required to do so by law. If you believe that a video on the site infringes your copyright, send us a copyright notice and we will take it down. [...]"[1]

In my oppinion, if a company doesn't like it's material freely distributed on Youtube, they would complain to them, not to the sites that link there.Dl.goe 07:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I´m sorry. You can not expect everyone to control websites as Youtube for copyright violations. Therefore not to take down a movie from this site does not mean a consent of the bearer of the rights. Every use without the explicit permission of the bearer means a violation of the rights and may be sanctioned, depending on the legal system. So please be careful.Thw1309 17:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time!Dl.goe 19:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WikiProject Germany[edit]

Welcome, Thw1309, to the WikiProject Germany! Please direct any questions about the project to its talk page. If you create new articles on Germany-related topics, please list them at our announcement page and tag their talk page with our project template {{WikiProject Germany}}. A few features that you might find helpful:

  • The project's Navigation box points to most of the pages in the project that might be of use to you.
  • Most of the important discussions related to the project take place on the project's main talk page; you may find it useful to watchlist it.
  • We've developed a number of guidelines for names, titles, and other things to standardize our articles and make interlinking easier that you may find useful.

Here are some tasks you can do. Please remove completed tasks from the list.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or any of the more experienced members of the project, and we'll be very happy to help you. Again, welcome, and thank you for joining this project! -- Kusma (talk) 06:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 2007 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter[edit]

The Germany WikiProject Newsletter
Issue I - May 2007
From the editor

This is the first issue of WikiProject Germany's newsletter. The newsletter is intended to help all members of the project to keep up with new developments and coordinate new collaborative efforts.

Other areas where you can help
  • Assessment requests: Some open Requests for assessment need to be answered. To see new assessment requests as they come in, you can watchlist the assessment page.
  • More task forces and subprojects: As this WikiProject covers a very large topic area, it is helpful to add more task forces that focus on specific aspects of Germany. Currently, we have a Mainz task force, a Munich subproject and some joint task forces with other WikiProjects. Any project member is invited to start a new task force. Suggestions for possible topics:
    • Transportation in Germany
    • German politics (the political system of Germany and the biographies of its politicians)
    • German Democratic Republic

Be creative! If you have an idea, just suggest it on the project talk page (don't forget to watchlist it).

  • Categorization: Uncategorized Germany stubs need to be categorized
Project news
  • Criteria for B-Class status: The assessment criteria for B-Class have been changed. {{WikiProject Germany}} template now has 5 switches, B-Class-1 through B-Class-5 that correspond to 5 easily checked criteria that an article should meet to be assessed as B-Class. The advantage of this system is that now there is a clear boundary between Start-Class and B-Class articles. Authors of articles that were assessed as Start-Class now get more direct feedback what they should improve to attain a B-Class rating.

All of our B-Class, Start-Class and Stub-Class articles now need to be checked whether they meet any of the B-Class criteria. This is a major effort, and we need your help! If you want to help, but don't know how, please post at the project talkpage.

  • Cities and municipalities task force

A task force dedicated to creating and improving articles on all German cities and municipalities has been started and is looking for help.

This newsletter was delivered by Kusma using AWB to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, Kusma 12:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cut/paste moves[edit]

DO NOT do cut and paste moves as you did with Principality of Bayreuth. Charles 05:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those types of moves are against Wikipedia policy. Unless you have viable English sources for the name of Bayreuth, leave it as is or use the appropriate method of posting at WP:RM. Continue to make cut and paste moves in light of this and I can guarantee someone will come along and ban you if go on. Charles 07:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cvlogo.jpg[edit]

Hello, Thw1309. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Cvlogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Thw1309. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 23:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

National Committee for a Free Germany[edit]

Why did you put an NPOV tag in this article?Ingsoc 22:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Re: History of the principle of inquisition in German criminal law[edit]

Hello

Regarding this article, I gave it stub status because while the content is fair, the article fails to meet the manual of style in certain places. Once this is resolved, I see no reason why the article shouldn't be given start class in my opinion.

Regards, WilliamH 17:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Award[edit]

The Saint's Star Award
I give you this award for creating Portal:Catholicism. May God bless you.Bewareofdog 03:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Meltzer page[edit]

Thank you for your help! ArtLit 16:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you very much for helping. I was just trying being helpful. The bot picked up the article as a possible COI. I made a quick look at the article, which indicated fannish "peacock" language, so I tagged it. I made a "kneejerk tagging" or "rabid response" like Pavlov's dog.  :-) Oh well. I made some suggestions. I still think a better explanation of his theories are in order, as well as links to where he lived and worked. However, I am not getting into an edit war. Bearian 15:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, really, thank you for your long response. I was NOT being ironic, but merely being tired. I'll take your advice, too. Bearian 18:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of member fraternities of the Cartellverband[edit]

Thanks for your message. I have replied at my Talk page.--Boson 21:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! --Boson 11:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 2007[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from an article. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Hmrox 16:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Your message[edit]

Okay I hadn't known that it was a mistake. I'm sorry about that though but I'm glad it helped you. Hmrox 17:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My "Vandalism"[edit]

The change I made to the Big Brother 2007 (UK) article was not vandalism, this was the removal of a paragraph which had no business in the introduction, for the reasons that it was not the right sort of content for an introduction, and was also mentioned, twice, later in the article, as I mentioned in my edit summary. Your revert was then reverted again, by another editor. If you had read the talk page, read my contributions, you might have realised that I was acting in good faith. I am, of course, very much for stopping vandalism, and would not want to discourage you, but please take more care about what is actually vandalism; a less regular editor might be discouraged from making any more contributions. Also, for the same reason, I would recommend using a different template for the first offence, such as uw-d2, you can find them all at WP:WARN. Thanks John Hayestalk 22:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, in fact looking back I didn't mention in the summary the it was mentioned twice elsewhere, only that it shouldn't be in the into. Ist ja nix passiert. Und danke dafür dass du die Warnung durchgestrichen hast. John Hayestalk 07:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{European Union-stub}}[edit]

Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 01:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About the WP sandbox[edit]

Would you mind replacing the GIF image with an SVG if I made one? - EstoyAquí(t • c • e) 11:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't made it yet. I'll do it now and upload it to commons under the same name when I'm done (i.e. Flags_of_European_Union.svg) - EstoyAquí(t • c • e) 11:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Project European Union[edit]

Hello. I like the new page, good work! :-) Good you brought a fresh look to the project, it puts me in the mood for helping with European related articles. Regards, Húsönd 17:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re European Union[edit]

I agree, they should be like the templates. I started adding them to ensure refs were up there to begin with, and was then told to follow the format of the first reference on that page. As you're working on changing them all, I'll be helping to change them as well. - J Logan t/c: 11:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV tag on Islam in Germany[edit]

When you put tags in like this, you should raise this on the talk page. You cant put in these tags without raising a discussion on Talk. Seeing that you have the NPOV userbox on your user page, I thought you would know the rules of using these tags. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 21:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok great, thanks, I guess thats alright then. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 00:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look[edit]

At [2] and send it to others if you agree. all the best Lear 21 00:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've already re-edited the article[edit]

I've re-edited the article before I got any help. I read your message now. The article is live, now what should be done. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Potuluri_Veera_Brahmendra_SwamiBalanceRestored 06:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Question to One Who May Know[edit]

Gruesse, I'm new to the idea of supercessionism. I was wondering if this is now, or was in the past, an official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. Do you know who first used the term supercession? If it is or was official Catholic doctrine, I presume it would have a Latin form. Perhaps the idea is clearly stated somewhere, though the term refering to it is new. Sources would be ideal, but your general knowledge would be helpful as well. Tchuess, alastair. Alastair Haines 11:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the one who knows, but I know where to look. Please read http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html and http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/relations-jews-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20051027_rabbi-rosen_en.html On the webpage of the Holy See, you can find everything, you want to know about official Catholic doctrine.--Thw1309 18:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen dank! :) Alastair Haines 19:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help[edit]

Hi thanks for answering my query. However I have some more question on that on my talk page. Can you help. Thanks. Shabda 19:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick help[edit]

Sorry that the answer to my question was already in a list of how-to-do things. I'm embarrassed. I checked, but didn't see it. Anyhow, thanks for your patient help. Marcus 22:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Template: History of Germany[edit]

Historically, the changes you made, are absolutely correct, but do you think it to be convenient to make a period of history as the Third Reich, which contains about seventy percent of the articles about German History as a subsection?--Thw1309 09:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While there are a huge number of articles about the Nazi period in comparison to the rest of German history, the period of Nazi rule was still only 12 years long. So placing Nazi Germany as a subsection of the German Reich seems perfectly reasonable. I think it's best to go with what is historically correct instead of the article count - that helps in setting a clear framework and can prevent future disputes. - 52 Pickup 10:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking[edit]

Hiya. I just reverted this [3] as you didn't leave an edit summary and at first glance it looked like vandalism. I see this is not the case. If you want to blank it off again feel free (but could you summarise why you did it!) Ta! Pedro |  Chat  11:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SaarLorLux[edit]

Hi,

You requested an assessment of SaarLorLux at the Albums WikiProject. The article is not about a musical album, so it isn't within the scope of the albums project. You may want to try taking the request to another project such as Wikiproject Germany which does cover the article. Thanks - Papa November 1 15:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catholicism[edit]

I think a Catholicism template was way overdue, and I thank you for taking the effort to do that (you may want to collaborate with the Catholicism wikiproject at some point). That said, I'm here to tell you that I removed the template from some of the more generic articles you added it to. I think it's great to have it on Catholic specific articles, but for something like trinity that applies to all trinitarian Christian denominations is overkill. We don't add the Eastern Christianity template to these articles. Or something like 12 apostles doesn't have the Mormonism template. In almost all of these cases, the more generic Christianity template was used instead (which has a link to the RCC in addition other denominations). So I hope this explains the rationale why I reverted some of your edits. Thanks again for your work on the actual template. -Andrew c [talk] 20:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cathedral of chihuahua[edit]

Oops, sorry, Es tut mir leit, diese ist sehr neue. Thanks for moving the templates-I'm just getting my feet on the ground. Would you tell me how the importance of an article is determined? Only one of the questions I have? I can use all of the help I can get. Danke.Lyricmac 10:22 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem, feel free to ask whatever you want. There are certain rules at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Assessment but there still is an element of luck. If you rate 20 articles, the first 19 are B class and the last one is a border case between stub and start, then this article will be rated stub, if the first 19 have been stubs of the lowest kind, it will be rated start. If you do not like the rating, ask the guy, who made it.--Thw1309 09:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds very arbitrary-are there no concrete criteria in determining class and importance? Or is the importance of an article consistent with its world-wide importance, or local importance? Lyricmac 11:10 2 August 2007 (UTC)

My system works that way:
St. Peter's Basilica is known by almost everyone worldwide and the most important church of catholicism - top (although someone else rated it high)
Basilica of St. John Lateran many people around the world know it and as the church of the bishop of Rome it is important - high
The Chapel of the Miraculous Image Altötting The place of pilgrimage in Germany. Not like Lourdes but not much less. In Germany alsmost everyone knows about Altötting, even people, who are not religious or catholic. Outside of Germany, nobody knows
The dome of Trier (see:Seamless robe of Jesus) Naturally every catholic knows, the diocese of Trier has to have a dome, but there is only local knowledge about this church, which is a cathedreal as there are hundreds around the world (ok, perhaps a bit uglier). - low If I´m not sure, I leave it for someone else.

There are small differences but the systems of the others seem to work quite the same way.--Thw1309 10:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ-I found Trier much more beautiful(my own opinion) than others I have seen, especially Mainz(over-rated). And I am very fond of Romanesque. I was disappointed with the Limburger Dom(7 towers?) and Sankt Bartholomaeus in Frankurt, very generic, and only Gothic-Revival, not Gothic. Lyricmac 0513, 8 August, 2007 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

That kinda did it. Thank you. :) TobiasK 21:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trier[edit]

There is a well-known saying in english which applies to architecture, "form follows function". This is the essence of what Catholic architecture should be: That the design of a church should be determined by the necessities of worship. Statues, icons, chapels, altars are there for the reason of God's worship and to help bring the people closer to Him. In the case of Trier, the mix of Romanesque, Gothic and Baroque is something I find very charming and harmonious, not dissonent or clanging. Many cathedrals took a hundred years to conplete, with different styles, and they don't mesh together(Have you seen Aachen?). Many churches built in the last hundred years look as if they were designed by 'retarded monkeys', in the words of an American writer. Ugly? Ugly is the Kaiser Wilhelm Kirche in Berlin. Ugly is the Cathedral of Our Lady of Angels in Los Angeles, or the Liverpool Cathedral in England. I saw many churches in Germany and Europe in my years there, and nothing can compare to Trier or Speyer. Great Architecture, my friend, great tools for helping us to reach for God. Lyricmac 1604, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Popes[edit]

It looks like you were the principal author/compiler of Portal:Catholicism/Popes. It strikes me as odd that the captions underneath 56 of the images on that page do not link to the existing article about the Pope in question, but instead link to disambiguation pages. --Russ (talk) 18:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me. It should be ok now.--Thw1309 20:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cathedral Church of Saint Patrick in El Paso[edit]

When you have a moment, please look at the above article: It was in very bad condition before I started to re-work it. There is not much information available, and I will be in El Paso later this month and check with the diocesan office for more material. I would appreciate your opinion and input. Vielen Danke. --Lyricmac 21:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I thought the evaluations were too subjective, but I have seen the same thing in other articles on Wiki. I will delete them when I finish here.--Lyricmac 02:20, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Besser? And what about the 'Notability Guidline' box at the top? Who decides?--Lyricmac 02:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. I think this box is nonsense. A cathedral is notable. Generally you decide. You can remove this box, but as the polite editor, you are, and to prevent an edit war, you should inform the editor, that you expanded the article and because the box is unreasonable now, you will remove it, if he does not complain. --Thw1309 06:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

Already done. Thanks for keeping an eye out though. --Kukini hablame aqui 06:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Brian_De_Palma[edit]

Hey we are reverting the same article. Im going all the way back before Jenesus and I have warned him. Just giving you FYI if I should back off from your corrections. --Tm1000 07:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hymn to Liberty[edit]

It seems that we were both reverting to essentially the same version (the only difference I have noticed was "recognise/recognize"). Correct me if I am wrong. - Mike Rosoft 09:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attack accounts[edit]

There is no point in adding {{db-attack}} to a user page of an attack account (unless the page actually exists and contains attacks or other vandalism). We don't delete accounts; while you could have reported the account at admins' noticeboard, he was already blocked when you added the deletion notice. Regards, Mike Rosoft 13:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks[edit]

for removing the vandalism from my talk page.Sennen goroshi 14:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dermot Boyd[edit]

Thanks for your advice and support regarding this page. Michael Oliver B 18:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cathedral Church of Saint Patrick in El Paso II[edit]

Please be so kind as to check the photo galleries when you have a spare moment- I'm not sure if it's okay or maybe too much, and the rest of the article too, please. I wrote to the diocesan office in El Paso, as I mentioned to you earlier, but received no reply from them. So I took the photos when I was there and selected these 20 of the hundred I took. Danke, mein Freund.--Lyricmac 21:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding photos, good idea-I had completely forgotten Commons-will upload there from now on(providing that I remember-memory gets a little fuzzy sometimes...).--Lyricmac 11:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Papal emblem[edit]

Is it worth while changing the symbol of the Catholicism portal from that of the Vatican City State (silver key in place of honour) to that of the papacy (gold key in "dexter" position)? (See Papal coat of arms.) Lima 17:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your kind welcome. I look forward to helping this project. I am new at this but I am enjoying learning, thanks again! NancyHeise 01:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Coffeebean66[edit]

I have moved your recent warning from the User Page to the User Talk Page. B1atv 12:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thw...[edit]

THW = Technisches Hilfswerk? Just wondering... — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 09:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No! Just an abridgment of my name. Thomas W.. --Thw1309 10:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Wollte mal nachfragen. — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 10:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User talk:Janbur[edit]

Sorry, it's generally standard to move discussions to the talk page so that the user is immediately notified of a response. As you can see, the response is below your comment, it just took some time to type. I had no intention of being impolite and was only trying to offer help. I have been on the site for over nine months and do know what I'm doing. Hersfold (t/a/c) 14:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need Your Help[edit]

Hello. Today I decided I would try to create a new article about bishop Nicholas Anthony DiMarzio. At first, I created the page under Nicholas DiMarzio, and then I realized that many pages referred to him with his middle name. So here is where I made a mistake... I did not notice the 'move' option, and I simply *coughs with embarassment* copied and pasted the information to the Nicholas Anthony DiMarzio. So now their is a useless page with nothing on it. Just ned some advice. Guldenat 21:35, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This empty page is no problem. As the creator, you can ask for the speedy deletion. Just add {{db-author}} and an administrator will delete it. --Thw1309 04:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot big guy. You're a gentleman and a scholar. Guldenat 09:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was a pleasure to help, but some people could think different about the gentleman and scholar.--Thw1309 15:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

move[edit]

I've moved Origin of the coats of arms of Germany and it́s federal states to Origin of the coats of arms of Germany and its federal states because of the spelling. I don't think you'll have any trouble finding it, but just in case, I thought I'd let you know. - Nunh-huh 17:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've changed "it's" to "its" where needed (only use "it's" where it could be replaced by "it is".) Also, you probably should use the word "beak" instead of "pecker" when describing the anatomy of birds, since "pecker" has an unfortunate (and unintended) vulgar meaning.... :) - Nunh-huh 17:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't the heraldic blazons in Latin? If so, "beak" is going to be a better translation of whatever word is being translated, anyway. ;) - Nunh-huh 18:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC) (In fact, I guess it's French, or what passed for it in the Middle Ages, and that this would be "Or, a double-headed eagle Sable, beaked Gules", so you don't need to worry about using the wrong word at all! - Nunh-huh 18:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof![edit]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Thw1309! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. βcommand 00:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catholicism[edit]

Hi Thw1309!
Thanks for the welcome message. I was wondering on how the DYK for the Portal:Catholicism updated. Especially because there are a couple of DYKs on the suggestion page and one of them posted sometime in June (other one was posted by me) is still there and possibly gone stale now. Can you do something to sort that out please. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 10:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, you are really efficient. Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 12:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 12:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Userbox[edit]

Thank you for the message, I wasn't aware of that situation in Germany. I was going by Liturgical colours and was trying to use a shade of rose as the background. The changes you made look good, however, I'd like to change the blue writing to another color.. would a deep red be suitable? (it is featured on the Emblem of the Papacy. Thanks again and look forward to hearing your thoughts. :) - The Immaculate 04:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Historical German Arms[edit]

Guten Tag! I noticed in your article Origin of the coats of arms of Germany and its federal states that you've inserted identical sections about arms of states of the Holy Roman Empire several times, most noticeably concerning the Electorate of the Palatinate. I think a better idea would be to put that information in Armorial of the Holy Roman Empire and just link to it. At first, I thought it would be a good idea to merge the two articles, but I believe they're two distinct topics, and the best solution would be linking. What do you think? -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 06:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About describing the arms, I think the common practice is to use blazon language for the most part. If there's a combination of arms, I've seen it where the division of the field is blazoned, and the locations are named instead of explaining the charges. For example, Coat of arms of Spain has:
Blazons are hard to understand for those who don't know the language. What I've done on the Armorial page is to use the blazon language and just link to articles when there's an uncommon word, because most of it is explained in different articles. Another article that does this is Coat of arms of Charles I of Spain. I think those styles both work equally well. Personally, I wouldn't like to see the French words abandoned entirely, because that's why I became interested in arms in the first place.
Thanks for checking my accuracy. I'll fix that right away. Are there any good sources online in English? I'd like to provide references for each one, and I'm not sure about some of them. The page originally came from the French Wiki, and they didn't provide any references. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 05:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. If I'm going to do it by state, that book won't help me very much, because it never really says what state is being represented by which quarter of the prince's arms. I don't think I want to organize it by cast. A noble family's arms change a lot more over time than a state's arms. A book made in 1605 won't represent the situation in 1806, but a state's arms stay pretty much the same. I'll have to think about it some more. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 10:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Okay. I'll work on the changes you suggested. Please be patient. It may take a while. All the images I've uploaded are already on Commons, but there may be some that I didn't make that are not. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 06:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

Hello Thw1309. I got your message. Your changes to Template:Catholicism are good.

I have no problem with the removals of Anglican Use and Sarum Rite, as I am not aware of any authority that allows for other rites in the Latin Church besides the Roman Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, and the Mozarabic Rite. I will go ahead and remove them and ask someone to put supporting information on the talk page or something.

Later. Pmadrid (talk) 03:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot. I do have one change. I'm not sure if it's correct to say that the Ambrosian Rite and the Mozarabic Rite are decendents/variants of the Roman Rite, despite the fact that all are liturgical traditions that are currently practiced in the Latin Church. I'm going to list them separately for now while I do some more research on the matter.

Alternately, either for style reasons or if you're sure that they are descended, maybe you could use Latin liturgical rites as an alternate header for that section. Pmadrid (talk) 03:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!![edit]

Fattyjwoods (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for helping me with the colour thing!!! Fattyjwoods (talk) 07:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

For reverting vandalism on my talk page. Meisterkoch (talk) 22:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again[edit]

for your quick and sterling work on the Art Portal, and to find what was lost. Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 21:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thanks for solving my problem on the Alia al Hussein page! It looks the way it is supposed to in my browser now. Ozzieboy (talk) 08:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the assistance on the inserting the photo to the infobox i had been doing it all wrong and would have done so again without your help. Thanks Phil--Phil2511 (talk) 11:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

I have finished the article movement. Do i leave the discussion article so people can see it was discussed?or should i delete that? I was unsure I had originally wanted to include links to many photos for people to get a good view of what the dogs are like and such as there are so many different types. And i have found that when people enquire to me about pups that they are uncertain as to what a Neapolitan mastiff is supposed to actually be.

But the other guy who answered my talk page said i should remove it. Some are photos that i have donated as I am a member of the site and travel to Italy (6 times in the past year)and like to share with others what i have seen.

The only other sites i can see with such photos is an Italian one

DirkBeetstra had said to include it on the talk page and see if anyone else objected to the link being added. But i saw that he is on vacation now for Christmas. I was wanting to guage your opinion.

Thanks--Phil2511 (talk) 12:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took a short look at the link. On their main page, they say that it's a page dedicated to give breeders an opportunity to promote their dogs. I wouldn't add such a link. For you, please look at Wikipedia:External links and decide by yourself. You are as much an editor of Wikipedia, as I am and you know so much better than me about these dogs. So you should be able to decide about the quality of this link much better than me.
You should remove the article from the talkpage. There is no need to have the article twice. Perhaps you could tell in the edit summary, that you moved the content to the article itself.--Thw1309 (talk) 15:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean . Though i like it as do others i know for the photos and videos that it has. I am in Northern Ireland myself and there are very very few of these dogs here and of those the quality is very low so i find it good to get to see other peoples dogs in USA, South America, as well as many other places. I have been to Naples and seen many there but not to the other Italian areas and its nice to see those as well.

So i have posted again on the discussion page as i believe in getting good opinions from others.

Thanks again for all your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil2511 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Catholicism[edit]

I read the Portal:Catholicism featured portal nomination and want to tell you if you need help just call.Bewareofdog (talk) 03:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I forgot probably shorten the Patron of the month day section .Bewareofdog (talk) 21:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thw1309, can you please have a look on comments added by me on Catholicism portal nomination. Thanks, Shyam (T/C) 09:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the branstar. Btw, there is nothing to be considered yourself as a limited mind. Happy New Year to you!! Shyam (T/C) 10:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the barnstar! Great work on the portal. Cheers, [sd] 01:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

Bewareofdog (talk) 01:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thw1309/Archive_1&oldid=1142533179"