User talk:Jnestorius/2015

Greetings! There seems to be a new discussion, this time an RfC, about the linking of pre- and post-nominals. Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 21:37, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Just an idea, but perhaps e.g. KG would serve the purpose? :P Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion moved to Talk:Carrickfergus (barony)#Bold names jnestorius^(talk) 11:58, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the source that seems to support most of the Brussels massacre article and that you've just added to Eucharistic miracle has a dead link, and Google isn't helping me find a live version. Do you have anything firmer? --Andreas Philopater (talk) 00:01, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LINKROT. jnestorius^(talk) 10:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found User:Jnestorius/Church of Scotland family tree while making an RFD nomination for United Original Secession Church; if you'd comment there, I'd appreciate it. One note on your family tree — your Cameronians links, or at least the latter one, should go to Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland, which is yet extant. Nyttend (talk) 21:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Regarding your SOFIXIT comment, I didn't know where to look — I had no real idea of where to find anything off-wiki about the United Original Secession Church, Original Secession Church, or Synod of United Original Seceders (Scotland), aside from their years of existence. I assumed that they were descendants of the Associate Church, judging by the name alone, and from synodical minutes of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland, I knew that there were relations of a sort between them (e.g. UOSC minister William McKane was appointed as a fraternal delegate to the RPCS Synod of 1955), but that was all I knew. A bigger problem is that I really don't have much knowledge of sources on the Associate Church in general: I would have written an article years ago on the Associate Synod of North America if I had anything solid beyond Scouller's Manual; minor mentions in Glasgow's History and appearances in less general sources such as Buckeye Presbyterianism and the testimony of the Reformed Dissenting Presbytery (I have access to a print copy) really aren't enough to sustain an article. Nyttend (talk) 01:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would say never be afraid of writing a stub. Even one sentence, if that's all your references can support. Adding it to the right categories increases the likelihood of someoone with more sources finding and expanding it. jnestorius^(talk) 04:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for dabbing that, looks cleaner now! Funny we took such a grilling in putting it through FAC and nobody thought to create a dab! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mhairi Black, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Mhairi Black is the youngest elected British Member of Parliament since at least 1832? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mhairi Black. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:50, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You made an incorrect assessment of the situation of Seles' ranking. While she was out injured no one wanted her to have her ranking preserved during her 28 month recovery. But when she announced a comeback in August of '95 only a very few players were against her being given a co-number-one ranking. Graf specifically was for it. The comeback section could contain that fact. It was only her maintaining a number 1 ranking while recovering first physically and then mentally that players were against. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you for your correction; let me point out that the version to which you reverted did not contain any of the information you offer, only a cryptic allusion to Sabatini. It would have been as easy for you to fix the article rather than leave this Talk page message. jnestorius^(talk) 10:46, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You made a good job of the article. Do you know if the President has issued the pardon yet for Harry Gleason?

Thanks. I don't think it has happened yet, but it's hard to prove a negative. jnestorius^(talk) 18:35, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Talk:Military commission jnestorius^(talk) 20:05, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Other townlands exist with the same name yes, but do they have articles? No. Thus we are adding in disambiguation that is unrequired. I highly doubt any other Castlereagh townland articles will be created making all those redlinks you've added to a disambiguation page redundant, which also goes against this principle unless properly qualified. Though Castlereagh, Knockbreda would be a better name than Castlereagh (County Down townland), which would match the disambiguation you used for the RoI Castlereagh redlinks. Mabuska ^(talk) 12:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In fact Castlereagh (County Down townland) could be merged into Castlereagh (barony) or both together to form an article similarly titled to Lecale or Ards (territory). Mabuska ^(talk) 12:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There needs to be a central discussion about handling townlands, including: whether all are notable or only some; naming conventions for disambiguation of articles; what to redirect to in the absence of a specific article. The current assumption seems to be that all townlands, being officially defined units, are sufficiently notable. I guess Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland is the place, not my user page. jnestorius^(talk) 12:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to notify you in case you object to it, I have submitted a merge proposal for Castlereagh in County Down: Talk:Castlereagh_(County_Down_townland)#Merger_proposal Mabuska ^(talk) 14:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just another notification: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Ireland-related_articles#Article_namespace_double-disambiguation. Mabuska ^(talk) 17:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jnestorius. You have new messages at Talk:Calvinistic_Methodists.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Congratulations on creating the Sinn Féin Funds case article. The case has fascinated me for years, but I knew very little about it, so I was delighted to find it so clearly explained. I have nominated it for DYK at Template:Did you know nominations/Sinn Féin Funds case. Feel free to suggest an alternative hook if you wish. Scolaire (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all compliments gratefully received. jnestorius^(talk) 17:08, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it states "but was hopeful that the coat of arms of Ireland would be adopted afterwards", but its the standard of the President of Ireland being shown, minor difference I know but still not the same. Murry1975 (talk) 19:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to copy File:Flag President of Ireland.svg to an identical file named File:J. J. Kelly's proposed Olympic flag of Ireland.svg? Be my guest. 19:32, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Can you show an example of what Kelly had in mind, I dont think I have seen one, and I assuming what was being put forward by Kelly and changing a file or copying it with out proof is original research. Murry1975 (talk) 19:35, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The arms of Ireland are a gold harp with silver strings on a blue field. I did not intend to imply that Kelly specifically favoured File:Flag President of Ireland.svg over, say, File:Arms of Ireland banner (Historical).svg or File:Bratach na hÉireann.svg. Any of those would do for illustration. If you are worried that picking any one in particular overstates the case, maybe the resolution is to change the caption to something like "A flag based on the arms of Ireland, such as this, was proposed in the 1920s for the Olympic team." jnestorius^(talk) 23:07, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 November 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sinn Féin Funds case, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1948 ruling in the Sinn Féin Funds case was that the Sinn Féin party was not legally a continuation of the Sinn Féin party that governed the Irish Republic during the Anglo-Irish War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sinn Féin Funds case. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks for this article Victuallers (talk) 12:01, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TWL users! We hope JSTOR has been a useful resource for your work. We're organizing a cleanup drive to correct dead links to JSTOR articles – these require JSTOR access and cannot easily be corrected by bot. We'd love for you to jump in and help out!

Sent of behalf of Nikkimaria for The Wikipedia Library's JSTOR using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]