Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:49, 20 February 2015

I am no longer a very active editor, although I occasionally drop in for a few days. There is a great deal about Misplaced Pages I miss (and I've recently received a few new Texas history books which have started me thinking about potential articles again), but there's a great deal that I don't like, too. Perhaps the love of history will win out for good. Or not. Anyway, I get an email if you leave a message, so ... leave a message after the box.

	Fragmented conversations hurt my brain.
	In an effort to keep conversations together, I will likely respond on this page if you begin a conversation here. If I've begun a conversation on your talk page, I'll watchlist that page until you respond.

24 December 2024
News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform" Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting? Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Misplaced Pages article intensifies Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols Traffic report: Was a long and dark December
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Todo list

Note to self:images

Note to me. Per User:TenPoundHammer/Country, country music artist articles need pictures. I need to go through my photo albums and see if I can find any useful ones. Karanacs (talk) 16:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Your extra credit bit on Catholic Church...

I suggest reading the following works to help with what you're trying .. (Le Goff's a bit outdated and the work you're citing is somewhat of a cross between a popular history and a low level textbook.) You have Eileen Power's Medieval Women which is a good start. Medieval women by Derek Baker World Cat; Queens, concubines, and dowagers : the king's wife in the early Middle Ages by P. Stafford World Cat; Women in medieval life : a small sound of the trumpet by Margaret Labarge World Cat; Women in medieval history & historiography by Susan Stuard World Cat. That should get you started, although I'll admit I don't pay much attention to "women's history" so I have little on my shelves about it. I do have Malcolm Barber's The Two Cities World Catwhich is a good recent comprehensive history of the High Middle Ages, which does have mentions of women's status and the church. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Jean Lafitte

Well done on adding references, I've expanded intro to cover whole article but what i've added needs to be tightened a little. Looks close to GA, were you going to nominate soon or planning to take to FAC? Tom B (talk) 12:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Tom, thanks for your help on the article. (Especially thanks with the alt text stuff - I hate writing those.) I'm actually hoping to bring this article to FA at some point, but not quite yet. I still have notes from the Davis biography to incorporate, and then the article will probably need a really good copyedit. I tend to be pretty verbose in my first pass at an article and have to trim a lot of unnecessary detail and convoluted wording. This is one of four articles that I'm currently prepping for FA; One of them only needs a good copyedit, so it will probably be next. Maybe I'll finish working on Lafitte after that. If you're interested in trying for GA before that, feel free to nominate the article as-is. Karanacs (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

righto, i think Lafitte's at GA level and that it's worth bringing articles as fast up the quality rating as possible, i'm an immediatist in that sense . some fa editors don't value GA as much, maybe because they think it's a better use of everyone's time/resource to go straight to fa. what do you think? the convention article is short, but i'm assuming there's not much more one can reasonably say, will have a look. i noticed the coincidence of Reform Act of 1832. Tom B (talk) 00:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't go for GA reviews much because there's often a backlog and I'm usually pretty aware of what else needs to be done to get the rest of the way to FA. I respect the process, and I've gotten great feedback from GA reviews in the past, but it's usually easier for me to focus on the FA criteria. If you nominate Lafitte for GA I'll help with any of the feedback if I can. I need to go find all my notes; I think they are buried somewhere on my desk. Karanacs (talk) 13:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Please take a look at User:Richardshusr/Catholic Church and women

I have started putting together an article on Catholic Church and women in my userspace. Since you expressed an interest in this topic at Talk:Catholic Church, I thought you might be kind enough to look at it and give me your thoughts. I know that this needs an overview to introduce the topic and provide the reader with a summary of the article. If you would care to write one, I would be very grateful.--Richard (talk) 07:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Richard, I'll be happy to look at that when I have a few free momets - may be several days. Thank you for taking the initiative to start that! Karanacs (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Murder of Imette St. Guillen

Hey, see that you're working on it. I'm tied up doing some milhist work in a sandbox at the moment, but let me know if I can help with prose or whatever. Skinny87 (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Right now I'm reading through more recent sources to try to see what should stay and what should be yanked. There's a lot of info out there... Karanacs (talk) 21:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Message

Hi Karanacs, I was thrilled to see your name pop up on my watchlist recently. Not so thrilled to see the "I'm mostly gone" message, but I understand completely. Just wanted to leave you a message to say that you're missed - along with the long list of other editors who have vanished in the past year. Very much missed. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Truthkeeper. You are one of the pieces of Misplaced Pages I have missed :) I need to figure out a way to write articles without stepping back into some of the drama that demoralized me in the first place. Karanacs (talk) 22:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

It's very hard to do. I went through my mess of archives this afternoon - I spent much of the last year quite upset and angry - and not until I read some of it, did I realize that the demoralization was endless and very embarrassingly public. I like it here as a hobby and that's what keeps bringing me back, but I take day by day. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I've spent most of my life angry, which I think every right-thinking person should be. Karanacs, I look back fondly on the work we did with Moni3 on the Donner Party, and I very much hope you can find a way back that fits in with what you want to do here. Malleus Fatuorum 23:37, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Mal, Donner Party and Ima Hogg are two of my favorite WP times - I loved the collegial collaboration. Too bad Truth and I couldn't find that on Catholic Church - I should never have stepped into that article. I have a drama/stress limit, and if I reach it my brain collapses in on itself (very messy, too much cleanup) and I have giant tantrums (which just gives my kids ideas). So much IRL drama over the past two years, and WP ended up being the easiest stressor to cut. Life is back on a mostly even keel, and I'm starting to work on another article again. Hopefully I will be around a little more often :) Karanacs (talk) 15:54, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Michael Pollack

Even though the discussion closed as a "delete" I talked with the closing administrator, and he said that it would be fine to write a new version of the article and propose it to Articles for Creation or for DRV. In any case I started Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Michael_Pollack#Michael_Pollack_.28new_version.29 and attached a note. I found additional sources that state that he was active in three states. And as for your latest reply at Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Pollack I would like to answer your inquiries. (I am answering them here because the discussion at AFD was closed - if you want to move this to another venue, it's fine)

• 1. "We have different definitions of extensive and trivial." - I was referring to Misplaced Pages's definition of "trivial" and unless one explicitly states "I am using a different definition" it becomes confusing if you use your own definition. Misplaced Pages's definition of a "trivial" mention is a source which says very little to nothing about a subject. If an article or book discusses a subject in a significant manner (maybe at least paragraph or two) then it becomes "non-trivial" no matter what the article actually says about the subject. WP:N says '"Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.' (underline added by me) Think about how the examples at Misplaced Pages:N#cite_note-1 are different - the book says a lot about the subject, while an article that mentions the subject in passing says little and is therefore trivial.
  • WP:N does state that "directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories" do not prove notability - But as for the last one I don't think an article in a major metropolitan newspaper would be a "minor" news story. In Pollack's case he has articles from the Houston Chronicle, the Phoenix Business Journal, and The Arizona Republic discussing him.
• 2. "flowing hair?" - Not trivial - it's part of his flamboyant persona that has been mentioned in newspapers both in Houston and Phoenix. In particular in Houston he had an image which he used to sell apartment complexes, and the "flowing hair" was a part of that image. That image was a part of his celebrity.
• 3. "drummer in a local rock band?" - Various biography articles have "personal life" sections that document family, hobbies, etc. His primary job is selling real estate and an article about him would focus on that, but articles on his personal hobbies do add to the article.
• 4. "He owns apartments and had one tv commercial that people thought was funny." - That understates his image and his persona in Houston. This Houston Chronicle states explicitly "He became a local celebrity, hosting a television talk show, emceeing beauty pageants and making the rounds of Houston's night clubs." - That's not merely "people thought was funny" and looking through these sources, it turns out he starred in multiple commercials in the Houston area, not just one. Today in Greater Phoenix his company owns multiple real estate developments throughout the Phoenix region. And also the sources revealed he was active in California. That's activity in three states with extensive reliable sources about his activities in two of them.

WhisperToMe (talk) 08:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

There are lots of articles in the Houston Chronicle and other papers that are considered minor stories. By the WP definition, the articles are trivial coverage - a few sentences, at most, about the man - most of the text is about the commercial. Most of what was in the original article was done not in a newsy way, but in superficial coverage - minor, trivial, whatever. Karanacs (talk) 14:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

What I should have done was try to re-write the article as soon as possible; based on a re-write one would be able to tell how much of each article discussed the subject. Anyway, in two of the articles (Sheridan article, which was about Pollack's proposed plans in Houston in the late 1980s, and the Kaplan article, which discussed his subsequent career in Arizona and recapped how he became well known in Houston) Pollack the person was clearly the primary subject, and so those two articles discuss him in depth. One could argue that, say, the Barlow article would be "trivial" is the primary subject of the article (it might help to have multiple persons check it and see what they think). WhisperToMe (talk) 18:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Since there is a noticeboard I started Misplaced Pages:Notability/Noticeboard#Notability_of_Michael_Pollack to get more feedback WhisperToMe (talk) 03:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I started Misplaced Pages:Deletion_review/Log/2012_December_9 WhisperToMe (talk) 04:12, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Pisco Sour

Karanacs, I answered your FAC comment for Pisco Sour. Thank you very much for taking the time to evaluate the article.--MarshalN20 | 21:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, great to see you back, however briefly! Would you be able to update the status of your oppose here? Given the relatively few reviews this has had, it will make it easier to decide whether we keep it open or not. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)‎

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel_66, AustralianRupert, and Nick-D look at ships, soldiers, and railways Op-ed: Nick-D on navigating the FA and A-Class review processes

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Loves Libraries Seattle

Decemmber 8 - Misplaced Pages Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Misplaced Pages articles with Misplaced Pages tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Thoughts on Sowell

You wrote, "I fundamentally disagree that anyone who fought in the Texas Revolution is notable in terms of getting a Misplaced Pages article." You are correct. I am proud of my ancestors, but they are mostly notable to my family and have no Wiki articles (and should not). Some of those persons are in the Handbook, but that site is sluggish. I submit corrections and source documentation to the Handbook to support necessary changes (not about my ancestors-- I do not specialize in genealogy) and doubt any were acted upon.

However, and just as one example: Because of my being a direct descendent of two Rangers involved, I researched many items most find unimportant. I probably have more detail and insight as to the movements of General Gaona's battalion than anyone-- because three of my family road as rear guard with Gaona pursuing. Few history books mention the movements of that northern prong, but if one was looking for camp sites for archeological purposes, or trying to understand why Gaona was "Lost in the desert" I would be the guy. I have not published (print) anything on this topic (and I may not) but I can reconstruct, with sources, much that has not been in print.

My point is, because the war archives burned, we are reconstructing the history, and it may take time to recognize what, that IS important, has been regained. Specifically regarding Andrew Jackson Sowell, I am most impressed by the fact that he is one of the relatively rare native-English-speaking persons who settled beyond the Colorado. From that, I am intrigued.

No need to respond. I just wanted to share a point of view that had me, ever-so-slightly, seeking to spare the article. --cregil (talk) 00:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you that there is much scholars still have to discover about what was truly important in the Texas Revolution. Until they have written more on these "new" discoveries, though, I think that information doesn't belong on Misplaced Pages. Our job is to summarize what the scholarly sources say, not what the primary sources say. I do look forward to reading the newer scholarly books, though - I've been fascinated with how much has come out in the last few years on the Alamo that has changed how people have viewed parts of the battle. Karanacs (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Simon Harley on British battleships and Nick-D on the French Resistance Interview: Five editors discuss some less-represented areas of military history Op-ed: Ian Rose looks back on 2012

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Seasons greetings...

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

		Best wishes for the New Year!
		Wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013! Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate this year, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year. Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; we miss you a lot in here, but trust that you are happy and settled! Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the FA process, with the help of many dedicated Wikipedians! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:28, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

What a nice illustration of why I am so frustrated with Misplaced Pages....yet another sock of yet another proven disruptive user ... and yet again those who are trying to defend content get blocked or at least lack the support to get rid of the problem so that we can just get on with the damn job of writing and maintaining good content. Karanacs (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

St. Andrew's Church, Lahore

Hello and thanks for tagging this for notability back in Jan 2008. The tag's still there. You may want to consider taking it to the Notability Noticeboard or AfD to get it resolved. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 22:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

>

Seeking input

Your input would be greatly appreciated here. GabeMc 02:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Irish Thoroughbred

This is a note to let the main editors of Irish Thoroughbred know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 17, 2013. You can view the TFA blurb at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/March 17, 2013. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Irish Thoroughbred, the debut novel by Nora Roberts (pictured), was first published in January 1981 as a category romance. Like other category romances, it was less than 200 pages and was intended to be on sale for only one month. It proved so popular that it was repackaged as a stand-alone romance and reprinted multiple times. Roberts drew on her Irish heritage to create an Irish heroine, Adelia "Dee" Cunnane. In the novel, Dee moves to the United States, where her sick uncle arranges for her to marry his employer, wealthy American horsebreeder Travis Grant. Although the early part of their relationship is marked by frequent arguments, by the end of the story Travis and Dee reconcile. According to one critic, the couple's transformation from adversaries to a loving married couple is one of many formulaic elements in the book. Although the protagonists adhered to many stereotypes common to 1980s romance novels, Roberts's heroine is more independent and feisty than most others of the time. Roberts wrote two sequels, Irish Rebel and Irish Rose. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Precious

historical romance
Thank you for quality articles on literature, such as Irish Thoroughbred, for your "obsession with the history of Texas before it reached statehood", for your collaboration, for example on a Lady of Quality, and for showing Late Afternoon Sun on Research Park, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (5 November 2008)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:57, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 427th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:51, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Catherine Parr

I see that you don't specialize in Catherine Parr, but took out a huge chunk of her page. I understand that it was perhaps too much to put in the history of her family however this has been an ongoing issue with the English queens of King Henry VIII. If you would like Parr or any of the others to not be compared to Boleyn, perhaps all of that should be taken out of her page as well, especially the fact that she was of better birth. That is one authors opinion (Ives who incorrectly states that she was the granddaughter of a Duke; he didn't become Duke until 1514, after her birth) and there are several that dispute Boleyn's better birth claim saying Parr's family had the better lineage and presence at court, etc. (Starkey and Strickland). It would be nice to not see any comparison on any page actually (of the English queens). -- Lady Meg (talk) 19:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Georgette Heyer

This is a note to let the main editors of Georgette Heyer know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 29, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/October 29, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Georgette Heyer (1902–74) was a British historical romance and detective fiction novelist. Her writing career began in 1921, when she turned a story for her younger brother into the novel The Black Moth. After These Old Shades became popular despite its release during the General Strike, Heyer determined that publicity was not necessary for good sales and refused to give interviews thereafter. She essentially established the historical romance genre and its subgenre Regency romance. To ensure accuracy, Heyer kept detailed notes on all aspects of Regency life. While some critics thought the novels were too detailed, others considered the detail to be her greatest asset. Beginning in 1932, Heyer released one romance novel and one thriller each year. Her husband often provided basic plot outlines, leaving Heyer to develop character relationships and dialogue. Although many critics describe Heyer's detective novels as unoriginal, others praise them for their wit and plots. Her success was sometimes clouded by problems with tax inspectors and alleged plagiarists. Heyer continued writing until her death; her last book, My Lord John, was published posthumously. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Greetings

Nice to see you out and about! --Laser brain (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Maile66 lured me back with talk of a collaboration on one of my pet pages. Karanacs (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

And Ole! to you for responding. Looks like seeing your post on that project page brought out the "big dogs" to help. — Maile (talk) 15:54, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Great to see you back. I'm doing background research on Monroe Edwards ... one wild character with some ties to Texas... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ealdgyth! Congratulations to you on getting Middle Ages to FA - I just saw that you finished that project. I don't know much about Monroe Edwards. That sounds like an interesting article to write. Karanacs (talk) 15:42, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I think between Middle Ages, Norman Conquest of England and Battle of Hastings last year, I burned myself out and it's taken most of this year to get some energy for research back. And RL hasn't helped much ... crazy busy in RL. We were down in your neck of the woods for Texas Ren Faire on opening weekend ... just didn't get into Houston at all. Hoping to go next year with a bit more time - we might be able to meet! If you run across anything on Monroe Edwards, let me know. I ran across him because of my work on George Wilkes, who wrote a "sensationalized" biography of Edwards right after the forgery trial. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:46, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

We went to the Renaissance festival the weekend after that (we go one or two weekends every year)! Definitely let me know if you come back to the area - I'll happily drive a few hours to get to finally meet you in person. Karanacs (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

We will definitely be back next year - we camped and totally enjoyed the experience. Be warned - we dress for Faires. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:54, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

So do we :) Hubby and I are Irish peasants, one child was Robin Hood, one was a witch, and one was a pirate. I realllly want the full regalia of a lady, but I've had a hard time parting with the money. Karanacs (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Sew it. Cheaper. And ... well, I wouldn't camp with children... but it was very fun and ... "adult" (grins). I go pirate wench because it's no fun if I don't get to wear a sword... hubby usually wears one of his kilts. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 15 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Texian Army page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Texian Army, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Home guard. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Juan Martín de Veramendi

added a link pointing to Francisco Ruiz

Manuel Fernández Castrillón

added a link pointing to Veracruz, Mexico

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Can you help?

I did something I don't know how to correct. I moved Texas Santa Fe Expedition to Texan Santa Fe Expedition. Only afterwards did I realize I had actually moved it over an existing same-name redirect page. I don't know how to fix this one. — Maile (talk) 15:55, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm on it. Karanacs (talk) 15:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, I can't figure out how to see what was there before you moved it. It's not in the normal Deleted revisions (I either don't have access or don't remember how to look). If you want to restore it the way it was, it'll take someone else. If it was just a redirect, though, is it a big deal? Karanacs (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

It's not a big deal to me, if it's not hurting anything. I think it was just a redirect before I made the move, based on what I see linked to it. — Maile (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Texas Revolution, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Camino Real. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Luciano Pacheco at the Alamo edit

To your question if Jose "Luciano" Pacheco was ever mentioned by researchers, the answer is yes. He was mentioned on page 90 in the book "Alamo Traces and new evidence" by Thomas Ricks Lindley. I am an author researching the Tejano families, their relationships prior to the Texas revolution. The Pacheco family which also went by the name Pacheco, Granado y Pacheco and Granado. They were the descendants of one of the original Canary Islander families of San Antonio by way of Maria Robaina de Bethencourt and were thus Granados. Luciano's father was a former council member of the Cabildo of San Antonio in the 1810s. He and Erasmo Seguin were well acquainted with each other as were their families.

Yes, the information is based upon independent research, however all references have been included. 1) The birth certificate of Jose Sebastian de Jesus Pacheco along with the record number of the certificate in the baptismal registry which lists his parents, the records are held in the Nettie Benson center at the University of Texas (which was cited) as well as the Catholic Archives of Texas. 2) Two census records, the first taken a few months after his birth with his family where he is recorded with the name "Luciano" which was a nick name, he continued to use this name the remainder of his life in all public records. The book was, published by the Institute of Texan Cultures is cited. 3) Republic Pension records which are available online from the Texas Archives and Library commission website, which included an affidavit from Juan Seguin stating Luciano's participation and resulting role as a messenger and also include an order from the Wilson county judge acknowledging and granting the granting of the pension as a veteran of the revolution.

I also have a photographic copy of the letter written in 1890 by Juan Seguin, which states the sons of the Pacheco widow (of which his mother was) who was well known to Juan Seguin. In the letter he states that she sent her sons to the Alamo to bring his dinner during the early part of the siege of the Alamo (being family friends) and their actions as messengers during the siege. Luciano is mentioned as his christian name "Sebastian" although it was transcribed as "Estaban" by the stenographer. This letter was written 3 months before the death of Seguin, who was 90yrs old. It is know that in his final days that Seguin did make errors with names, and there is more than one example of this with some of the American defenders as well. The family of Luciano were the only Pachecos at the time in San Antonio. Additionally, Jim Bowie, with whom Seguin and Luciano entered the Alamo, was married to a cousin of the Pachecos, Ursula Veramendi through Ursula's grandmother who was also a Granado.

Luciano's brother Jose Wenseslado's widow likewise received an republic pension posthumously, which can also be found in the Texas Archives. His affidavit is signed by capt. Antonio Menchaca, the original request for the pension for Wenseslado does mention the Alamo as well, showing as well as Wenseslado likewise was probably one of the "Pacheco sons" that were mentioned in the 1890 letter of Seguin.

This evidence has been shown to the groups Daughters of the Republic of Texas as well as the Sons of the Republic of Texas and both groups for the first time this year acknowledged the participation of the both brothers in the battle for independence in light of this evidence.

One branch of the family, in interviews, has family lore of another brother Jose Leonicio Pacheco as an Alamo rider, but no documented evidence has yet to be found. The family were not literate and unfamiliar with the English language as stated by Seguin so no written record from the family is likely ever to be found, thus without concrete proof, Jose Leonicio is likely to never be included.

In the end, the record of Luciano's participation at the Alamo is irrefutable and solid citation was provided. Perhaps Wenseslado will at some point be added, but Luciano's evidence was much more solid with good citation available.

Other Tejanos and their relationships

The relationships I have thus far established are the Pacheco family and the Seguin family. The Curviers (changed from Curbelo after the failed Gutierrez-McGee rebellion) and the Villanueva family. In the case of Villanueva and the Pachecos, the youngest of the Pachecos, Luciano was dispatched with Villanueva at the order of col. Travis and Seguin in the early part of the siege (as per Seguin's affidavit and republic pension records). Other Pacheco brothers are known to have joined Seguin at Molino Blanco with the other Tejano participants and participated at the battle of Concepcion and the siege of Bexar (as per republic pension records). Luciano's brother Wenseslado, married the step daughter of Candelario Villanueva, Francisca Flores. The Curiers were most likely playmates of the Pachecos as children and Mathias Curvier was a lifelong friend of Luciano and the Mexican census records indicate that they were all but neighbors and had children of similar ages.

Luciano is also a witness to others' republic pension claims, again documentation is in the state archives. Luciano is a very interesting historical character as he was not only an Alamo veteran (at 17yrs old), but was also a Civil War veteran and an early Texas ranger, under the command of capt. Antonio Menchaca. Luciano's older brother Francisco was killed in 1837 during the conflict (roster of the Mounted Men of the municipality of Bexar, record is in the state archives only, not online). The only one not found in the record is of the brother Antonio Pacheco, although he is very likely to have participated along with the other four brothers. I am doing further research on him and Jose Leonicio Pacheco to prove their cases. It is very probable the Pacheco brothers were at least a few of the members of Seguin's company that entered the Alamo with him. The evidence suggests that they all seem to have been used as couriers during the battle, which is backed up by family lore. Luciano was present when hostilities began, as per Seguin's affidavit.

Much of the relationships between these families I am finding via the sacramental registries of San Fernando church. Often times they appear as godparents in one another's sacraments throughout the 1800s.

Finally, the book by Lindsy is available online via google books https://books.google.com/books?id=WA93DU1z4eMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=alamo+traces+new+evidence+and+new+conclusions&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NnzNVPvpMLb_sASfhYHQDA&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=pacheco&f=false

Your point is taken about publishing the information with a historical journal, and I will make efforts to do that shortly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polarbase (talk • contribs)

Howdy!

I decided to lurk on your page. I haven't been that active, but it is good that you are still doing some editing. I hope you are doing well. Gosh it is 2015, and I was first an editor in 2007. Man does time fly. . . Oldag07 (talk) 20:12, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Howdy! Yes, we are both old Ags and old Wikipedians now ;) I just unretired before Christmas to work on Texas Revolution. Come join us for the FA push! Karanacs (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Holy crap!

I'm only part shithead ;) thank you so much I was started to go through to research but I saw you did it and did a splendidly neutral job as well. You have my thanks. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:22, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

No thanks necessary; I thought it best to have someone relatively neutral do the research, and I was curious myself at the backstory. I've only been un-retired for a bit and I'm out of the loop. Karanacs (talk) 00:57, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

also

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

• initiated 24 January 2015 by Lightbreather, resulting in a 48 hour block of Eric Corbett
• Eric Corbett (2), initiated by Rationalobserver, long comment by LB on 28 January 2015. Case closed and deleted shortly after. EChastain (talk) 18:24, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

EChastain since I managed to miss those, would you add them to your section, since you found them? Thanks Karanacs (talk) 19:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Did so. I hope they pay attention, since these focus on Eric Corbett, as do Lightbreather's comments at Clarification request: Arbitration Enforcement sanction handling. EChastain (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

also, Lightbreather commented on an SPI of Darknipples. Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Darknipples/Archive, but I don't want to add more. EChastain (talk) 20:33, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)

I saw you commented on the City of Angels FAC, and I wondered if I could get you to expand on one of your comments. I opposed on the first FAC, and haven't commented yet on this one. I'm considering commenting but wanted to understand your oppose first. The comment I'm interested in is the one about having too many quotes from Leto. Earthh's reply was that the quotes are appropriate given Leto's role, and aren't presented as neutral sources, only as his opinions. Is it that you think there are just too many of them for balance in the article?

I had issues with the prose, which may now have been improved, and also with the very fragmentary nature of the critical commentary -- I think this is common in popular music articles. I started a conversation about it at FAC, but got little response. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I think there are too many to strike the proper balance. We definitely need to hear Leto's point of view (and the quotes are satisfactorily marked as being Leto's opinion, etc), but it seems that is presented without enough third party, more neutral interpretations. I suspect there just aren't enough third party, neutral interpretations to put in the article, and because of that I wasn't sure how to fix the balance. Pop culture articles are challenging. Karanacs (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Three Weeks With Lady X for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Three Weeks With Lady X is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Three Weeks With Lady X until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Deunanknute (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

And this, ladies and gentlemen who still stalk my talk page, is an example of the gender gap at AFD. An article on a romance novel nominated for deletion - despite the book being nominated for 2 awards from the only magazine that focuses on romance novels, despite reviews by Romantic Times, Publishers Weekly, Kirkus, USAToday, and the most well-respected website focusing on romance novels. Karanacs (talk) 19:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

This book was nominated for deletion only because the sources appeared to be paid. The reason I looked at the article in the first place was because it was a new page, and many new articles on books are written for promotional reasons or otherwise fail notability guidelines. I have put more than a few book and book related articles up for AfD, and neither the author's nor the audience's gender is a criteria I use to decide how much to research the topic or whether or not to AfD it. Deunanknute (talk) 19:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Deunanknute, I'm so sorry if it read that I was accusing you of nominating it solely on the basis of gender the author or audience - that wasn't my intent (and I never thought it was yours!). The bigger problem is that the vast majority of men (95%+) don't have any knowledge whatsoever of typically female topics like romance novels, so it can be quite difficult to evaluate whether an article on that subject is notable or not. I was actually surprised that there wasn't already an article on this book, because it made a huge splash last year in the romance realm. But new page patrollers like yourself, who aren't familiar with this category of knowledge, are more quick to nominate something like this for deletion because it's so outside your realm. Karanacs (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't keep much of an eye of AfD, but there was this too. Surprised me! Welcome back btw! It's nice seeing your name on my watch again. (um … (Truthkeeper88)) Victoria (tk) 02:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

It's nice to be back :) Karanacs (talk) 15:03, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

FYI

Per your post here: You may wish to be aware of and . Montanabw 20:10, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Just to be clear...

I just want to be clear: You found nothing wrong w/ monatanbw calling me a "Slovenian nationalist," yet you warned me to "comment on content, not on contributors." Well, I guess it's nice to have friends in high places. --LJU2ORD (talk) 01:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

The Loop

I just used echo to thank you. You are definitely not "Out of the Loop". Talk about a Nutshell wrap up!!!! . Buster Seven Talk 15:28, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks ;) Those types of discussions make me sad, and, it appears they make all the editors involved angry. There has to be a better way, but I haven't figured one out. Karanacs (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

User:2601:C:6380:16F:D5BD:CA17:DD26:4135

Hello, Karanacs. I just wanted to let you know that I unblocked the above IP address after I blocked the /64 range it is part of. Comcast assigns a /64 IPv6 block to each subscriber, so blocking just one of them is usually ineffective. Cheers ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, DoRD for fixing my mistake!! Karanacs (talk) 22:21, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Getting Rid of Bradley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WOSU (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

So as not to post on her page I wanted to give you a suggestion ] is a pretty weak personal attack honestly. If you have other concerns you can always refer her back to User:Lightbreather/Kaffeeklatsch/Pledge, " I will abide by the WP:CIVILITY policy at the strictest level; I will not speak negatively about non-members (WP editors who are not members of the group) by name, initials, or other identifying characteristics." That's where the whole story breaks down as to the motives. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:49, 20 February 2015 (UTC)