User talk:Cavila

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Dear semi-retired; I have raised you revert of Irish manuscript 23 N 10 (with comment "Nah, we have articles for being 'informative', not article titles") at the Irl Project page. Please go there to discuss why we should not revert your reversion. The link is HERE

Regards Sarah777 (talk) 10:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there Cavila (talk) 10:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite TBDD II has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 05:47, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite Compert Con Culainn II has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 05:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hello cavila, i have invited anybody to post comments about the st cummin artical on my talk page,but you did not bother. why did you not post comments about what you were going to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.140 (talk) 13:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. For clarity's sake, please sign your comments using four tildes (like this: ~~~~) and preferably, use a subheading for your posts as well. That way people will be able to follow the discussion.
2. I'm not an administrator
3. Like I told you before, I responded to your question in the appropriate venue, which is the talk page for the article in question.
4. The big sign above that says "semi-retired" implies that I won't be able to respond as quickly as I would like to. Regards, Cavila (talk) 14:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

st cummin artical. changes. hello cavila, you have put a completely different format in place of the original artical. why did you not just stick your stuff on to the end of the original artical instead of destroying it.i did post this comment in the appropriate venue [as you put it ]but you did not reply.[ user name pcummin.]80.254.146.140 (talk) 14:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, Mr Cummin. See my reply here. Cavila (talk) 12:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

st cummin article, changes, i go to the church of st cummin next week and i willbe taking new photos[improved]is it ok if i put them on the article and take my original ones off.i will go to the open air mass for st cummin,if you go let yourself be known to father hegarty and he will introduce you to me.father hegarty knows me because i go to the mass every year.[user name p cummin]80.189.40.146 (talk) 21:39, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you feel your new photos are an improvement, by all means go ahead. If you need any advice on uploading photos, Help:Files would be your first stop I think, or else post a question on the associated talk page. Cavila (talk) 13:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

st cummin. artical removed. hello cavila,the photos did not come out, the camara did not work properly. soon i go to the royal society of antiquaries of ireland in dublin, to get the number of the page which named st cummin the first, whitch you said i did not get. when i get it i will put it on the said artical, then you can check that it is fact. [user name pcummin] 80.254.146.140 (talk) 14:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC) Hello cavila,article cuimin of kilcummin,changes. in your article,cuimin of kilcummin,you state domhnach chrom dubh[in irish]or garland sunday[in english]then you state crom dubh was the cow,so was the cow named[in english]garland or sunday.can you tell me before i go back to dublin to get it verified. [user name pcummin]80.189.57.251 (talk) 22:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it does not say anywhere that Domhnach Chrom Dubh is a literal translation of Garland Sunday, which of course it is not. It is more complicated because the Crom Dub from which the festival supposedly takes its name is more commonly known, in traditions elsewhere at least, as someone who initially opposed St Patrick but was later converted by him. Just how the two relate to one another I don't know, but there's more to find in MacNéill's Festival of Lughnasa I believe. Cavila (talk) 14:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

==New Page Patrol survey== hello cavila, the artical [cuimin of kilcummin.]what book is the genealogical text writin by ;dubhaltach mac fhir bhisigh ; about cuimin, actually in. i will be going to ireland, so i can check it out.

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Cavila! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Hi, Cavila. Can you say to me why did you reverted this, as that sentence in not in the source presented? Thanks. -WhiteWriter ^speaks 12:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. There was indeed a glaring error in the chronological order of things, which I've just amended, with some expansion from the same source. Thanks for pointing that out. Cavila (talk) 12:07, 4 Novemb

hello cavila, you must have missed my last posting, so i will ask you again. what book did dub haltach mac fhir bhisigh write about st cummin. [user name pcummin] 80.254.146.140 (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware, Dubhaltach Mac Fhir Bhisigh did not write any text that specifically deals with the saint, but he mentions him in a long genealogical tract. This tract has been edited and translated by John O'Donovan a good while ago (1844). See the article for the reference. Cavila (talk) 14:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Primary sources by era, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 19:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC) hello cavila,you say st cummin [fada] is associated with the parish of kilcummin,then you say cuimin mac dioma [of ui suanaig] his desendants rest there. so who do you say is actualy buried in the old grave yard. st cuimin fada, or mac dioma.80.254.146.140 (talk) 13:53, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[ user name, pcummin] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.140 (talk) 14:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Naming conventions (clergy). Since you had some involvement with the Naming conventions (clergy) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). John Vandenberg ^(chat) 03:12, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite CIH has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:13, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Isidoro di siviglia, etimologie, fine VIII secolo MSII 4856 Bruxelles, Bibliotheque Royale Albert I, 20x31,50, pagina in scrittura onciale carolina.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medieval sources, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:08, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Middle Ages in popular culture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Middle Ages in popular culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Ætheric has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 15 § Ætheric until a consensus is reached. A7V2 (talk) 23:44, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Manuscripts by area has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:41, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Greek manuscripts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:03, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:German manuscripts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Swiss manuscripts has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:07, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English manuscripts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:14, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scottish manuscripts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Texts of medieval Ireland has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Texts of medieval France has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medieval Latin texts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 18:14, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Egyptian papyri has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 18:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]