Welcome!

Hello, Daniel the Monk, andwelcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page andHow to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using theArticle Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian! Pleasesign your messages ondiscussion pages using fourtildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check outWikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place{{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Ronz (talk)20:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are not leaving edit summaries with most of your edits. Also you aren't providing any references for you edits. Your ones for Cowl seem to suggest you beleive it is only a religious item. It is not it is basically a hood without a jacket in medieval times is had should covering as well. The term is still in use today see[1] --Kitchen Knife (talk)21:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you pedantically insist on US spellings - especially in an article likeWhite Ladies Priory that refers to a place in the UK. British users know the US spellings, but don't use them, and are apt to find them irritating in this sort of context - especially when they have been deliberately altered.Sjwells53 (talk)15:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but it's the auto-correct on my computer, for when I do editing.Daniel the Monk (talk)02:34, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions toWikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide anedit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit toCongregation of the Dominican Sisters of St. Catherine of Siena‎. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.ArcAngel(talk) (review)03:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The articleSeven Nations (Celtic) has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

neologism

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing{{dated prod}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. Thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion. —RHaworth (talk ·contribs)08:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Sisters are not Trappistine's.[2]. Please go revert yourself. Thanks.Malke201004:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware that the Trappistines are Cistercians, but not all Cistercian nuns are Trappistines?

I sympathize with your desire to be exact, but in this case, this is how the Sisters at St. Mary's Abbey identify themselves. The Trappistine's (sorry for my spelling) are more closely identified with the male members of the order. The Cistercian's are derivative, and you could certainly say that in the line, but there must be no mistake that the Sisters identify themselves as Cistercian. You must also understand that replacing Cistercian with Trappistine is confusing when someone accesses the citation.Malke201020:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it's not good to go back and revert again. You could end up running up againstWP:REVERT 3 RR and you don't want that. What is better is to open a section on the article talk page, or go to the editor's talk page and ask them about it directly there.Malke201020:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you mean by saying the Cistercians are derivate of the Trappists (which, by the way, is how themonks are called). If you mean historically, that is incorrect, and is the other way around. The term "Trappistine" refers only to the nuns of the Order. They have been known as Trappistine since their foundation, and still use the term themselves. See the link to their candy provided in the article.

Don't forget to sign your posts. The Sisters' website makes it clear what they identify as, and that is what we must go by. However, I did open a section on the talk page. The other editors will leave comments and the matter will be settled by consensus. Thanks.Malke201021:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. How does one sign one's posts here? The problem comes from the Sisters' dual identity. I would think that the hot link to the main article on Trappists (which does explain the connection to the Trappistines) does clarify the matter. Further, the abbey is listed internationally in the Trappist Order's own directory of their establishments:http://www.ocso.org/HTM/net/monwb-en.htm

About how to sign your post: Just take a look at the end of your welcome message above ;) . Best,The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk)21:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your other comments, please take a look at the talk page of the article in question.The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk)21:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you get to the end of your sentence, after the period, place four tildes (four of these ~) at the end. Do you see that?Malke201022:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your edit on St. John Neumann. He's a favorite of mine.Malke201005:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for the notice.Daniel the Monk (talk)05:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel,About this article,[3], I've always been told the IHM was first established in Ireland. I know there are schools there run by IHM, because I went to one. Maybe they're the ones from Spain, originally. But it was Irish IHM who staffed schools in Philadelphia, too, as far as I was told. Is that correct?Malke2010 22:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)Sorry, Malke, these Sisters were founded in Michigan. Many of the their latter members may have been from Ireland, but the congregation was founded here.Daniel the Monk (talk)01:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have just added:- "Except for a brief period of suppression during theGlorious Revolution underOliver Cromwell, this temporal power of the office lasted until all such authorities were abolished in 1836". The Glorious Revolution was not under Oliver Cromwell, but later when William and Mary took over as monarch. Which do you mean? Could you also find a source for this? --Bduke(Discussion)22:38, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. The result of hurried writing while suffering physical pain.Daniel the Monk (talk)13:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for raising the point about "skilled" nursing home - wasn't familiar that this was an industry term until now. However, this leads to another issue - the term seems to be strongly associated with United States usage based on thenursing home article. Therefore, since many in Wikipedia's international audience may not be familiar with the term, it may again be better to simply indicate "nursing home" in this case (with perhaps a link to the article).Dl2000 (talk)03:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My deepest apologies for posting to the wrong page, I was wearing the wrong glasses! Reposting/ —DocOfSoc •Talk •00:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See [[4]] OOPS! —DocOfSoc •Talk •00:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personal research is a violation ofOriginal research. Please read. Pre Vatican II children were routinely confirmed in junior high in the U.S. My own OR, I was confirmed on November 22, 1960, in 8th grade. I can't use that either because a recognized citation needs to be found to confirm (pun intended) this. PTL —DocOfSoc •Talk •21:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I very politely said "("Personal Recollection" is a violation of "personal research" Besides that you are incorrect)"

I purposefully never said you were "wrong," a much harsher word. TheOriginal research link is above and here again, so that you may read it; It is the documentation you asked for which I did indeed supply. "40 years ago" is Pre-Vatican II which opened in October 1962. I also recommend you readGood Faith.

Comments on articles belong on the article's discussion page, not on my personal talk page. You said "(Change age of reception prior to Vatican II from my own personal rellocation of the era) which has you re-locating rather than recollecting.Civility is part of Wikipedia'scode of conduct, and is one of Wikipedia'sfive pillars. The civility policy is a standard of conduct that sets out how Wikipedia editors should interact. Stated simply, editors should always treat each other with "consideration and respect". I suggest you read those also. Jesus said the same thing 2000 years ago. As a fellow Catholic, I am dismayed at the tone of your missive. Peace be with you... —DocOfSoc •Talk •23:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just wanted you to know that I reversed your cut and paste move ofStanislaus of Kazimierz because that type of move loses the article's history and therefore doesn't meetGFDL requirements. There is more info atWP:COPYPASTE andWP:CWW. In order to suggest a name change that might possibly be controversial, there are instructions atWP:Requested moves. I noticed your request on the article's talk page and have taken the liberty of formatting it as a move request that will automatically show up as a listing atWP:Requested moves. If that is not what you intended, please feel free to just undo my edit. Best wishes -Station1 (talk)17:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Much appreciated.Daniel the Monk (talk)00:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your edits in the Franciscan topics and I would like to get your feedback on a topic I brought up on theTalk:Franciscan page. Part of it revolves around the fact that I know many Catholic Franciscans don't consider any non-Catholic group really Franciscan due to the obedience to the Pope issue, but even in trying to keep things NPOV for WP I am not sure how we should be handling people adding new "non-denominational" Franciscan groups. It seems most of these groups except for the "official" Anglican ones are real small. We relegate all the official Catholic Third Order groups to the Third Order pages for notability reasons. What do you think we should be doing with these groups? The reason this came up is the recent addition of the "Companions of Jesus" to that section. Other then the fact I have never even heard of them (but I don't usually hear about UK groups) the added sections definitely seems improperly weighted but the big question is, should they be there at all? Thanks for any comments.Marauder40 (talk)13:59, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking, Marauder. In the interest of full disclosure, I should say that I have good friends who are Brothers, in both in the Anglican Society of St. Francis and the Order of Ecumenical Franciscans.

Regarding the issue of inclusion of non-Roman Catholic groups, as far as I am concerned, they ARE Franciscans. They follow a way of life inspired by St. Francis, and thus merit the name and inclusion on that page. I have been a part of the Franciscan movement for over forty years, and I have never heard anyone challenge their inclusion in the wider Franciscan world.

The issue really revolves around the title of the page. It is simply "Franciscan." Were one to include them in the pages of any of the three Orders of Friars Minor, e.g., there would be grounds for disputing such an inclusion, but not for the most general form of description.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:20, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I was only mentioning the fact that many Catholic religious order members do not consider non-Catholic Franciscans as true religious Order as a side-line. Like I said, it is their view that in order to truly follow St. Francis you have to follow everything St. Francis did and part of that is being obedient to the Pope, Bishops, Church, etc. They do respect non-Catholic religious, but have "issues" with it. I realize WP isn't the place for taking up that "argument" so have no problem with Anglican groups and larger groups being mentioned on the Franciscan page. My problem is where do we draw the line? Both within the Catholic Franciscan world and the non-Catholic Franciscan world there are hundreds (if not thousands) of groups that claim to follow the teachings of St. Francis. It is easier to deal with the Catholic groups because either they are official and have an official status within the church or they don't. If they are Catholic and to small to have an official status they aren't notable enough to be on WP. If they do have a status, they can be relegated to their appropriate page. We don't have that luxury with the "non-denominational" groups. Any group can claim to be following some of the ideals of St. Francis and want their group included on the main Franciscan page. How should we determine which of the hundreds of groups that may want this are notable enough to be included there? My personal take after viewing the "Companions of Jesus" web page was that they are to small for notability reasons and definitely to small for the amount of weight given in the current article. Maybe having some requirement that the group be notable enough to have a WP article in the first place before they can be added to the Franciscan page or something like that will help, but it isn't that hard to just create a page and whether someone notices its creation to challenge notability or not is questionable. But figure since I am a Franciscan myself wanted other views.Marauder40 (talk)14:55, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pax et bonum then. After all the negligible groups and pages I have seen on this site, I really don't see any way to set limits on what constitutes significant here. Solitary individuals as well as gropus get pages. This also allows pages on obscure saints, on the other hand. It's part of being an all-inclusive repository of data, I suppose. Sorry I'm not more helpful.Daniel the Monk (talk)15:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pax et bonum, thanks again for the comments. Based on that maybe I will trim down the "Companions of Jesus" section based on weight reasons and not worry about whether they are notable enough, until others do. Based on my interactions in the controversial pages, like abortion, politics, etc. I know that the secular side of WP will have issues with groups that have no mention outside of their own personal web-pages, I will leave it up to them to deal with it. Thanks again.Marauder40 (talk)15:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When you edited theMinim (religious order) article, you added a link to Congo, which is a disambiguation page rather than an article. If you know from the source material whether it's referring to theRepublic of the Congo or theDemocratic Republic of the Congo, could you please edit your link to point to the appropriate page? Most common usage referring to the country simply as "Congo" is about Republic of the Congo, not the DRC, but I didn't want to assume that in this case since you're probably more familiar with the topic. Thanks!LarryJeff (talk)21:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, Larry! I appreciate the help.Daniel the Monk (talk)01:48, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TheBold page rename atRoyal Mint is problematic.

• Any page move should be uncontroversial. Clearly, this is not the case, as the page name has been discussed on the article's talk page.

• Theedit summary states “there were other royal mints besides the British one”. Please name them. Were they called “The Royal Mint”, as the British mint is known?

• How would a reader find the Royal Mint following this move?

• Also, the editor moving a page is responsible for repairing the redirects (found at'What links here').

Please revert your moves and initiate a discussion atWikipedia:Requested moves. Thanks,Daicaregos (talk)07:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had looked at the article "Mint" before I did the change. I have also looked at the discussion page on the article, and it seems that there is no discussion on there about this point, other than a complaint about a bias in emphasis on the American mint. So I don't see the controversy. Prior to my move, the article was the only one which would come up in a search for "Royal Mint." You will notice that there arethree other "Royal Mints" listed in the article on "Mint", apart from the British one. Since it clearly is not the only one in the world, as can be seen from the article itself, I don't see the issue or any controversy. I did change the Redirect for "Royal Mint" to "Mint (coin)" and my move clarified that the article in question was the mint of only one nation.Daniel the Monk (talk)21:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please desist from adding unnecessary links about Ambrose Barlow to an article about another person.--J3Mrs (talk)16:12, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Desist?? I had never heard of him before today. The article I edited already had a link to him, which you would have seen in the history. And since when is there a limit on links?Daniel the Monk (talk)17:46, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to enjoy providing multiple links to the same thing,WP:Overlinking. Ambrose Barlow has his own article, that's where all the links about him belong. If I look up one person I don't expect a link farm on somebody else. --J3Mrs (talk)17:56, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I won't argue some of the changes you made to my text, we have a disagreement about a number of things. Firstly, your change of the term "Mass" to be uncapitalized is offensive to members of my faith. Secondly, there are also a number of changes you have made which removed standard references made within religious communities, and thus are proper to the article. The different references to St. Ambrose give a context to someone who, like myself, had no idea who he was, and without that, might not be motivated to look further. As with Mother Clare Mary Ann, indication of one's religious Order is considered a standard part of one's name, like "Jr." Particularly as a fellow Benedictine, I question why you consider the standard use of the Order's initials for him as overkill.Daniel the Monk (talk)18:11, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since I now see that you created the article, I have to point out that you made a number of factual errors in it, which might have been avoided by actually checking the links in it.Daniel the Monk (talk)18:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I usually decapitalise nouns that aren't proper nouns but if it is offensive, replace it. I might add you don't know my faith and I edit in as neutral a way as I can. I probably wouldn't have removed the abbreviations if had there not been serial overlinking throughout your edit. I reiterate strings of overlinking as you did for Ambrose Barlow belong in his article not this. The factual errors being?--J3Mrs (talk)18:25, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I edit from a neutral point of view, you obviously have an axe to grind. --J3Mrs (talk)18:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I regret that you are taking it that way, but I am trying to make the article as clear as possible, especially for those who, like myself, are not as conversant with terms common in the U.K, and respecting the ettiquete in use among us in Religious Orders. Since you ask, here are two of the factual errors in your original text. The article originally stated that Mary Ward entered the monastery with Elizabeth. Inaccurate by three years. It also stated that the women were received into Holy Orders. This was not possible then in the Roman Catholic Church, as remains true today. Links can help.Daniel the Monk (talk)19:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're in religious orders then I'm a Chinese whore from Mars.MalleusFatuorum03:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What a typically sad comment. On the bright side, you show an excellent grasp of the English language for someone in your profession and locale.Daniel the Monk (talk)00:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm not a Chinese whore from Mars. ;-)MalleusFatuorum00:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? On this site, documentation is required.Daniel the Monk (talk)00:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite certain, as human life is not possible on Mars. And even if it were the speed of light would make it impossible for me to respond to your posting so quickly. But you claim to be a monk, or at least in religious orders. Are you really?MalleusFatuorum00:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.Daniel the Monk (talk)00:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, right.MalleusFatuorum00:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel the Monk, I thought I'd drop a few notes on your talk page with some help on writing articles :o)

First of all, it may be best for you to do a bit of reading, starting with theWikipedia manual of style, which will give you a lot of information about how Wikipedia prefers its articles to be written. It's not as hard to follow as it might look; quite a bit of the information there probably won't be vital for you at first.

Second, I recommend you make a user sandbox - which is just an area you can use to practise in, and to make notes in, and to get things ready in. If you click this red link:user:Daniel the Monk/Sandbox, that will let you create that page (it gives you an edit window to start work in). Anything, anywhere, on the help and information pages which gives you an example, try it out in your sandbox until you're familiar with it.

For your article, the next thing you want to do is start collecting as much information as you can about it. Google searches (particularly in Books and Scholar) will be your best friend for this! Once you've found the information, the next most important thing is to start writing up each factin your own words (very important, this), and make a note at the same time ofexactly where that information came from. Build in the references as you go along; I'm going to copy in, down below this, a whole heap of help on doing references, which was produced by one of our best teachers (Chzz).

Here's another place that you'll find incredibly useful -citation templates which you can copy and paste into your sandbox, between <ref></ref> tags; you just fill in the blanks from your sources into the template, and you'll end up with nicely formattedinline citations :o) It all helps. Remember to add a references section to your sandbox (make a new line, and put ==References== on it, and type {{reflist}} on the next line, so that you can see how your citations look as you do them. Remember to save your page often! You don't want to lose your work.

Hopefully this will give you a good start and make life easier for you.

One last thing to keep as a motto: "It's better to write one good, well-referenced, nicely-presented article than it is to create fifty unreferenced one-line stubs!"Pesky (talk …stalk!)13:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These require two parts;

a)

Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref>He likes tea. <ref> [http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com Tea website] </ref>

b) A section called "References" with the special code "{{reflist}}";

== References =={{reflist}}

(an existing article is likely to already have one of these sections)

To see the result of that, please look atuser:chzz/demo/simpleref. Edit it, and check the code; perhaps make a test page of your own, such asuser:Daniel the Monk/reftest and try it out.

Chzz was born in 1837. <ref name=MyBook>"The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref> Chzz lives in Footown.<ref name=MyBook/>

Note that the second usage has a / (and no closing ref tag). This needs a reference section as above; please seeuser:chzz/demo/namedref to see the result.

You can put anything you like between <ref> and </ref>, but using citation templates makes for a neat, consistent look;

Chzz has 37 Olympic medals. <ref> {{Citation | last = Smith | first = John | title = Olympic medal winners of the 20th century | publication-date = 2001 | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]] | page = 125 | isbn = 0-521-37169-4}}</ref>

Please seeuser:chzz/demo/citeref to see the result.

For more help and tips on that subject, seeuser:chzz/help/refs.

Hi there Daniel the Monk! I've just come across one of your articles, and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.

You might want to consider usingthis tool - it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in completecitation templates for your links. All you do is install the script onSpecial:MyPage/common.js, or orSpecial:MyPage/vector.js, then paste the bare url (without [...] brackets) between your <ref></ref> tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for pdf documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. Happy editing!Pesky (talk …stalk!)13:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Pesky, thanks for the tip! Much appreciated. I don't quite follow all of it, as Wiki still leaves me feeling like I'm walking through a forest, but I just saw your examples, and they are a big help. From your profile, though, sounds like just your kind of habitat, lol. Great photo, btw, of you and the wolf. Cheers!Daniel the Monk (talk)23:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English Roman Catholic Religious Sisters, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Occuli (talk)18:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rethis edit summary: yes—Eastern or Roman Catholic. Which is why I didthis: not all will be Eastern Catholics.Good Ol’factory^(talk)01:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True, but Roman rite Ukrainian Sisters can be covered with other Roman Catholic Sisters, no?Daniel the Monk (talk)21:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they could. I was referring to removing the parent category, which wasCategory:Eastern Catholics. If they are not all Eastern Catholics, thenCategory:Eastern Catholics should not be the parent category. I was just explaining why I changed the parent category.Good Ol’factory^(talk)03:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So a nun is not a cleric? Please explain. (Also please note that it is important to look atall of what you revert.)LadyofShalott14:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, she would not be, at least not a Catholic one. A cleric receivesHoly Orders and in the Roman Catholic Church, that is taught to be possible only for males. In fact, as of last year, public support of women priests in the Catholic Church is grounds forexcommunication. Thus nuns are automatically lay women, but ones who led aconsecrated life. She would be termed amonastic, or, more generally, areligious, which applies to any member of a religious institute, male, female, lay or cleric.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK.LadyofShalott14:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, OnKeynsham you changed "Victorine order ofAugustinian monks" to "Victorinecongregation ofcanon regulars" while onKeynsham Abbey it says "Augustinian Canons Regular", based onthis source. I'm not expert on Augustinian vs Victorine so could you check both articles are OK & say the same thing?—Rod^talk20:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rod. I had already looked, only because Augustinian and monk were not synonomous in that period. All canons regular are automatically Augustinians, as explained in the entry on them and in the more general one ofAugustinians. The Victorines were an autonomous grouping within that Order.Daniel the Monk (talk)21:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks.—Rod^talk21:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was interested in your edits at the articleDominic of Evesham. I note that you gave edit summaries ofThis is not a document of the time, he was a Benedictine and the postnominal initials of the Order to which he belonged are appropriate as such andthis is a Benedictine article, use Benedictine practice. User:Ealdgyth has raised the question with me of whether this contradicts the precedent of not using the post-nominalpbuh on ourMuhammad article. At this stage, without taking sides in your dispute, I want to ask you this. Was your opinion one that was formed by consensus, or were you merely exercising individual editorial discretion? If the former, can you point me to where the consensus was formed? If the latter, would you mind if I raised the issue centrally so that such a consensus can be fairly formed? Thanks in advance, --John (talk)20:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, John. This was my on own discretion, based on centuries-old practice. The example Ealdgyth brings up might be apples and oranges. Post-nominal initials for a member of a religious institute are not an honorific. Its use is considered equivalent to "Jr." or "IV", while that term seems to be a religious blessing. In the West, we have an equivalent term used for venerated deceased people, "of blessed memory". So personally I don't see the connection. Hope this helps.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I intend to help resolve this disagreement by posting centrally. I will let you know when I do so. --John (talk)20:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It'shere. --John (talk)21:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for joining the discussion. --John (talk)09:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for expanding the article about Archbishop Robert Sanchez. I prefer to start with stubs in writing articles and let others expand the articles. Also I have no problems about the change in the style of dating. Thank you again=RFD (talk)21:47, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel. This article doesn't needCategory:Beatified people because it already hasCategory:Franciscan beatified people, which is a subcategory of Beatified people.Pburka (talk)04:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there. I understand your point, but the issue to me is whether someone looking at the wider category would necessarily look in the subcategories unless they already had specific information on a person, knowing, e.g., that he or she was a Franciscan or Dominican or Benedictine. That's why I feel the duplication is better.Daniel the Monk (talk)04:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel. That's contrary to the guidelines atWP:Categorization. (Each article should be placed in all of themost specific categories to which it logically belongs. This means that if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it isnot normally placed directly into C.) Additionally, I'm concerned that your recent expansion of the article isn't supported by reliable sources. An archbishop's blog isn't a reliable source. For such a large addition, I would also strongly advise the addition of footnotes supporting each individual claim.Pburka (talk)12:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, Pburka. To my mind, this falls into the area of a non-diffusing category, which the guideline points out can be an exception to the general rule. This categorization allows for a quick reference to someone looking for people in that specific category, rather than having to go through a whole list of, in this case, beatified people, trying to find thebeati of a particular movement.

I am not clear why you say that the archbishop's blog is not a reliable source. In what way? In this case it is another secondary source, which is also being requested of the article, so excluding it is a kind of Catch 22. It certainly adds to the notability of the subject of the article.

It also has the advantage of giving an image of the subject of the entry. I just wish I could figure out how to add it to the article, if that were allowed.Daniel the Monk (talk)17:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you foryour contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits toMichael Rua, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance withHelp:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, thereversion of clear-cutvandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you.Nat Gertler (talk)17:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You created categories for religious sisters of various nationalities, but left the original categories (nuns) as well. They should have been merged, unless they are not the same thing, which I suspect they are. If you are going to create all sorts of new categories you should dispose of the existing ones which they are replacing. Now there are essentially duplicate categories and a mess to be sorted out.Quis separabit?03:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Daniel. Please disregard the above. I discussed the matter withGood Olfactory and I was operating under a misconception. Again, please disregard. Yours,Quis separabit?23:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding your edit to this article, the source cited does indeed say that "Both German churches had lay trustees that were so overbearing that they drove out several pastors," but it says nothing whatsoever aboutwhy they did it. To describe what they did as being the result of their "rebellious spirit" is aconclusion, and like any pit of analysis or interpretation of facts, it needs to be specifically sourced to be included in the article - which is why I have removed it. If you have a source which says this, specifically, please use it, but without such a source, the statement cannot be included in the article, so please do not restore it. Best,Beyond My Ken (talk)17:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleBaroness of Douglas is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baroness of Douglas 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 template from the top of the article.BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs)18:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

from LUCIOBLUES to Daniel the Monk. May, 30 2012

Thanks for your 'correct the English and grammar' to my Traversari's page.Sorry for my english.Can you do something about french Traversari's page ?Thanks in advance.— Precedingunsigned comment added byLUCIOBLUES (talk •contribs)21:53, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - this categoryCategory:Priories is sparsely populated, even though there are at least 700 articles with the word 'priory' in the title - almost all of them that are monasteries are classified as such in the monasteries categorization hierarchy.

I'm thus thinking that we should probably just delete this category, and it's underused and monastery is probably sufficient. What do you think? --KarlB (talk)14:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Karl.

I just looked at the category. Yes, using the category for monastery makes more sense to me, since that is what it is. A rose by any other name, haha.Daniel the Monk (talk)15:50, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. I've nominated it here:Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_June_27#Category:Priories; feel free to weigh in with your thoughts. best, Karl

The info you requested a citation for is here:[5]. I'm inexperienced with doing citations, so would you mind doing it?PsychoInfiltrator (talk)00:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not answering before. You should write me at giunti.matteo (at) gmail.com for more info on William Seton.Madmats (talk)14:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent articles, includingIgnatius Lissner. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in theDid You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list atT:TDYK. Let me know if you need help,Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here21:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You moved my concerns regarding the German parish tothe article's talk page. I would not "sigh" on an article talk. I answered there what belongs there. "Bare url" doesn't. The bare urlhttp://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20031005_freinademetz_en.html should be formatted to show a title, if possible a date, an author, a publisher. Theonly position where bare urls are wanted is in infoboxes. With a welcome notice of 2009, I thought you knew that ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk)15:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you really want to put a user page template onNirmala Joshi? Seems rather odd... CheersJim1138 (talk)02:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't, but the person vandalizing the entry is not signed in so I had nowhere else to post it. Any suggestions? I really can't figure out how to refer this for consideration by other editors in dealing with the matter. Any help would be appreciated. I had wanted to request your help, but your talk page seems to be protected from editing.Daniel the Monk (talk)18:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, youraddition toDependency provided some good information for the encyclopedia. A disambiguation page is not the place for it though. I think it would make a good short article. If you would like to prepare it, that would be great, or I would be happy to. I'd make sure to give you credit as the original author. Right now, I've stored a draft in my user space atUser:SchreiberBike/Workspace/Scratchpad and I've changed it slightly to better fit the style of an article. I also added a reference I found on-line (if you have better references, that would be great). If you would like to take a fresh look at it and make any changes you think are appropriate, you could do that in my workspace. After the new article has been added to the encyclopedia, we can add a link to it atDependency. Thank you.SchreiberBike (talk)02:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Schreiber. I've edited it. See what you think of it. My only concern is that, as a free standing entry, somebody is going to threaten to delete it for lack of additional references. I've put plenty of links, but I'm not sure if that would be enough for everybody.Daniel the Monk (talk)04:57, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I put it up atDependency (religion). Time will tell if it stays. I did un-capitalize a couple of words to match withWikipedia's manual of style, otherwise I didn't see any need for change. Thanks again.SchreiberBike (talk)05:33, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

His original name is:María de León Bello y Delgado. I think the name should prevail in Spanish.--88.12.65.62 (talk)18:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the correct form. Look at how her sibling's names are given in the entry. Plus your English needs much correction, which I am now doing.Daniel the Monk (talk)18:15, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

María de León y Delgado andJohn of Jesus Hernández y Delgado, can correct their names in the other articles in other languages​​.--79.155.93.29 (talk)08:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

John of Jesus Hernández y Delgado (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toCooper andEcstasy

Adèle de Batz de Trenquelléon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toCarmel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel, I've reverted you again atAlexis Bachelot. Per the guideline atWP:OAS, you should not make major changes to a featured article without making an attempt to discuss the issue and gain consensus. This article has been reviewed by a number of users and the current version reflects that consensus. I'm willing to discuss possible changes, but please do not make major revisions to the article without proposing them on the talk page.Mark Arsten (talk)20:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some of your changes may have been beneficial (particularly, I appreciate the titles and abbreviations), but your version introduced a number of problems. Please familiarize yourself with the guidelines atWP:LEAD--your version is much too short of a lead for an article of this size. Also seeWP:RS, wordpress blogs are not reliable sources. (I added an inline citation to the claim you questioned.)Mark Arsten (talk)20:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofArsenius Walsh at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneathyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!— Maile (talk)21:33, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, there are more issues with this nomination. Could you please review these on the page and respond there? Many thanks.BlueMoonset (talk)19:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Three categories you created (Category:Deaths from neurodegenerative disease by state and subcats) have been nominated to be merged and deleted. Please see the discussionhere.Tassedethe (talk)20:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please note that the MOS talks about post-nominals in general; this includes post-nominals related to bodies of priests (seePost-nominal letters#Examples). --Omnipaedista (talk)17:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am not denying that they are, but by the standard protocol of religious institutes, as per theMOS, they are not considered honorifics, but are the equivalent of "Jr" or "Sr", which are considered part of a man's name in theMOS.

The explanation "religious Order initials are not honorifics, but denote heritage" seems to be irrelevant. Sr./Jr. are not the same as OFM or SJ. The latter are post-nominaltitles, while the former aren't. I think that this is quite clear. The only way to be sure though, would be to ask the guideline's talk page for further clarification. --Omnipaedista (talk)02:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call them what you will, my point is that they serve a similar function, as opposed to the purpose of honorifics, in that any member of a religious institute is entitled to their use to indicate their belonging to it, regardless of his or her occupation in life otherwise. Thus it is a matter of belonging to a group, not "achievements". I am in agreement that it would be helpful to have this clarified.Daniel the Monk (talk)15:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a threadhere. --Omnipaedista (talk)17:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The frequent editors of the guideline pageindicated that there is no special exception for religious vs. non-religious postnomials. --Omnipaedista (talk)13:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that the inclusion of post-nominals in "Hugh of Saint Victor"has been deemed anachronistic and a violation ofWP:NOR. --Omnipaedista (talk)14:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hardly consider two editors who openly state a lack of knowledge in this field as an authoritative consensus. I shall await other comments before I consider the matter closed.Daniel the Monk (talk)17:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. Why are you reverting my pipelinks? The pipelinks are done for all the other Pope bio articles.GoodDay (talk)04:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. Is there a MOS to govern this? Listing them without a title seems odd.Daniel the Monk (talk)05:13, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why showPope, when we know they are, since they're his predecessor & successor. Anyways, it's more important to have the 265 articles as consistent as possible.GoodDay (talk)

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

Birmingham Oratory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toEton

Daughters of Providence (Paris) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSedan

Fahr Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toTorricelli

Frederic Baraga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toMarquette

Frederick William Faber (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toJoseph Brown

Ignatius Mrak (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toMarquette

Jean-Jacques Olier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toPresbytery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:33, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Abbé de Coulmier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toEstates General andFirst Estate

Andrew Bobola (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toKingdom of Poland

Anna Borkowska (Sister Bertranda) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toDispensation

Basilica of Regina Pacis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toVatican

Hôtel-Dieu de Québec (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toDieppe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There have been reservations expressed about the sources used in the article as part of the DYK review. Are you planning to address these? Please respond there. Many thanks.BlueMoonset (talk)19:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I thought the process was over. I would be happy to do so, but the main problem the last editor had, if I understood him correctly, was that he did not acccept the main source as reliable. What can one do with that?Daniel the Monk (talk)20:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know whether there might be other, clearly reliable sources out there that could be used. If there aren't, then we are indeed at a stand, and there doesn't seem to be anything more that can be done. The problem is that, absent a response, none of us could know there weren't other alternative sources. Thanks, and sorry it didn't work out.BlueMoonset (talk)00:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep my eye out when I have time, if only for the research. Thanks for your attention.Daniel the Monk (talk)17:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited toWikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (atLincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki andat meetup.com!--Pharos (talk)07:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Catherine of St. Augustine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toPlague andHôtel-Dieu

Sisters of Providence of the Institute of Charity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toSisters of Providence andMary Arundell

Felix-Joseph Barbelin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSaint Joseph's Hospital

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:02, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for I am a little confused over whether she is "officially" a saint in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church. On theList of Saints article, she is listed as being venerated by Catholics, and I found a few sources that state she has a feast-day and was a saint, but I was doubtful of their completeness/reliability (She does not appear on sites such as www.catholic.org for instance). I could do with some further enlightenment.--Kawaii-Soft (talk)23:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, one of the reasons Wikipedia has a certain reputation, but if you look at the last paragraph of her life it states there that the Catholic Church has never declared her to be a saint.Daniel the Monk (talk)01:29, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooh! I completely missed that! >_< I guess she's an "unofficial" saint then, to some people. Thanks! --Kawaii-Soft (talk)21:26, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Áurea of San Millán (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toCell,Moor,Vita andLa Rioja

Jean-Charles Cornay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toRed River

Jean-Martin Moye (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toMother Superior

Pierre Toussaint (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toFrench Empire

St. John O'Sullivan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toEast Los Angeles

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:39, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I noticed you made a bunch of page moves putting people at their full name. While I'm sure you meant well, we don't title articles by the full name by default, but instead follow the guidelines outlined atWP:Commonname. Thanks!--Yaksar(let's chat)04:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, however, several of those figures are listed with their full names in some of the sources. What to do then?Daniel the Monk (talk)17:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, usually a good way to see what would be best is to look at search results. While there are certain sites that always list the full name of political figures, looking at google news archives from their era will often show what most coverage actually referred to them as.--Yaksar(let's chat)18:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creatingAlix Le Clerc, Daniel the Monk!

Wikipedia editorFreeRangeFrog just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Beautiful article! Merry xmas!

To reply, leave a comment on FreeRangeFrog'stalk page.

Learn more aboutpage curation.

Hi, if you have an issue with a redirect that doesn't qualify forspeedy deletion, please take it toWikipedia:Redirects for discussion rather than blank the page as you did withMing Mang (disambiguation). Thanks! --KTC (talk)23:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I've already resolved an issue with the redirect which existed.Daniel the Monk (talk)02:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Francis Spellman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toSanta Maria,Sila,Nina andPinta

Giovanni Battista Tolomei (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toChaldean language andFolio

Hugo Reid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toCathedral High School

John Joseph O'Connor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSt. Clare's Hospital

Laurent-Joseph-Marius Imbert (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toAix

San Salvador Monastery, Oña (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toZamora

St Mary's Seminary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toRev.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site atWikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 atNew York University;sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or atbit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!

We especially encourage folks to add your5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!--Pharos (talk)01:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., alumni, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}12:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., faculty, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}12:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		In recognition of your excellent work over the last few days; making improvements and moving some not-often-viewed articles for the sake ofWP:MOS. Thought you should know your efforts have been appreciated. Keep up the good work!Stalwart11108:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Much appreciated.Daniel the Monk (talk)19:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your for fixing my grammar onMargaret McKenna. I have always found it hard to remember the post nominal letters for the different orders. --Guerillero |My Talk18:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to draw your attention to thereliable sources guideline; particularly the part that says, "Reliable sources must be strong enough to support the claim." The Ursulines of the Roman Union website will never be reliable source for a claim tosupernatural powers.Marcus Qwertyus (talk)20:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? This has been recorded as part of her life story since the 16th century. The Ursulines have 500 years of history as an organization, and operate worldwide. I suggest that you consider this context, as pointed out the WP.Daniel the Monk (talk)20:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You think a website that believesComic Sans is a good font is a serious source? With a reliable source you can say it is claimed she had divine powers but you can't say shehad divine powers. This is not the Catholic Encyclopedia.Marcus Qwertyus (talk)20:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So you are judging the site by its font??!! That is certainly a frivolous criterion. Plus nowhere does the article state that she had "powers". It relates her experiences, as she clearly must have shared with her followers. It is the same as when people judge recent military figures as being "charismatic" leaders. What proof would there be for that?Daniel the Monk (talk)20:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read what you wrote? You said she experienced a revelation from God and had "deep mystical gifts."Marcus Qwertyus (talk)20:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and gifts does not equate with "powers" in the realm of spirituality.Daniel the Monk (talk)20:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Powers, abilities. You're arguing semantics. The reality is that your revision says that God exists and mine doesn't necessarily say he doesn't and contains a minor grammar error. You tell me which revision better meets the burden of proof.Marcus Qwertyus (talk)21:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proof of what? Her experiences? She reported it to her followers per the historical sources. The very fact that shehad followers demonstrate her notability. The neutrality you seem to seek is not required in Wikipedia. I suggest that you look at the MOS on the topics of spirituality.Daniel the Monk (talk)21:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, if you have a strong disagreement, I suggest that you put the matter up for discussion and consensus, rather than just continually reverting my text.Daniel the Monk (talk)

Hello, Daniel the Monk. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion atWikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

A small thing, but please see note onTalk page.Jsmith1000 (talk)16:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused by your edit summary where you reverted my move ofFrancis of Assisi's infobox. You said my edit was inaccurate, but I was only moving the location of the saint infobox and using a more generic box for the lead. --JFH (talk)19:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When I looked at your edit, "Christian leader" is not the format given by your WP reference, and it removes most of the information given under "type=saint". So I'm confused about what you are trying to accomplish.Daniel the Monk (talk)19:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to the documentation I linked,template:infobox saint is intended for use in a veneration section. I copied and pasted the infobox to the section on his feast day, so no information is lost, it's just in a relevant section of the article. I replaced the lead infobox withtemplate:infobox Christian leader. --JFH (talk)19:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the history and see how much of the data was no longer visible under the other template. I grant that the wording of the guideline given there seems confusing, and universally is not what is done in the articles. As an example, using Christian leader for a female Catholic saint would be totally inappropriate, as it presumes some form of clerical status.Daniel the Monk (talk)19:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just think leading with the saint box gives a lot of information that I wouldn't expect to find in an infobox or quick summary for someone like Francis, and I assume that's why the documentation is like that, though it does appear that many articles are not following it. There'stemplate:infobox religious biography for women and others who are not leaders. Just to reiterate, no information was removed from the article, just moved down out of the lead. --JFH (talk)20:33, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not finding that template, but would presume that it works for religious figures who are not clergy or venerated as saints. I find the infobox is good for summarizing details that can be lost, or are often not included, in the text.Daniel the Monk (talk)20:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, just like I thought. Best for non-clergy and non-venerated Christians. The Dalai Lama gets to have the date of his re-incarnation noted.Daniel the Monk (talk)20:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Krakow, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}19:18, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials at the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Fatima, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}01:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Santarem District, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Armbrust^{TheHomunculus}01:51, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Daniel...,Thanks for translating the article of Rudolf Moroder, you dit a terrific job. May I ask you to translate the article ofde:Ludwig Moroder my grandfather and brother in law of Rudolf? He married Adele the sister of RUdolf they had the same family name but were not related (both my granfather Ludwig and my grandmother Adele were Moroders).Best regards and thanks so much Wolfgang --Moroderen (talk)23:26, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Holy Cross Abbey (Cañon City) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toChapter andLatrobe

Sebastian de Aparicio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toGalicia andTlalnepantla

St. Vincent's Seminary (Germantown) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toEastern seaboard andBishop of Philadelphia

Claire Ferchaud (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toThird Republic

Cornelius a Lapide (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toBocholt

Donald J. Harrington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toRegis High School

Hartwerd (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSaint Hugh

Joseph Carrière (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toLyons

Miguel Zugastegui (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toCriollos

Parish Church of St Mary and St Petroc (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toPetroc

Petrus Codde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toArchbishop of Utrecht

St Augustine's Priory, Ealing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toWest London

Évariste Régis Huc (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toHeishui

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

John of God (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toToledo andGalicia

Gabriel Moran (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toEpiscopal Church

Ignatius Maloyan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toTransfiguration

Robert Graham (colonel) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toLa Trappe

William Meninger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toEnneagram

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for category edits on a bunch of Catholic pages.

>>M.P.Schneider,LC(parlemus •feci)17:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi :). Just curious, are you a real life monk?— Precedingunsigned comment added byBlelbach (talk •contribs)05:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Blelbach. Yes.

Category:Jesuit popes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you. —teb728tc07:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jonathan Morris (priest) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSan José

Ramón José Castellano (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toCórdoba

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Daniel, good to see you again. I saw youredit to the articleAmbrose Maréchal where in the edit summary you mention that the titles are "proper titles". I'm not sure what proper titles are. In my understanding, the words are not proper nouns which would be capitalized. My reading of the Wikipedia Manual of Style atWP:JOBTITLES is pretty clear that these would not be capitalized. What do you think. Thanks,SchreiberBike (talk)23:02, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your greetings, Schreiber. In the MOS it says that when it is a case of a specific office, such as Mayor of Paris or Queen of Sheeba, the office is capitalized. This then applies to bishops, when one says, e.g., Bishop of Timbuktu. Also, in the the case of Maréchal, one is speaking of a specific group, the Society of Jesus. Hope this helps.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see the section you quoted gives King of France as an example. There is another section of the MOS which uses Mayor of London as opposed to he is the mayor as an example.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked more closely into the MOS and I see that you are right. In themain MOS it says "Standard or commonly used names of an office are treated as proper nouns." I had missed that before and will change my practice.

I differ with you though on some other capitalization points. Society of Jesus would be capitalized, but I wouldn't capitalizesociety used in a sentence withoutof Jesus. I base that on the MOSInstitutions section where it says "Names of particular institutions are proper nouns and require capitals, but generic words for institutions (university, college, hospital, high school) do not." Also, I would not capitalizebull meaning a specific kind of communication. Are you comfortable with those changes? Thank you.SchreiberBike (talk)18:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree in that one is still referring to a specific institution when speaking of the Society, so it's not general. Not capitalizing bull, well, I'm fine with that, because it's just a lot of bull.Daniel the Monk (talk)19:42, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that theSociety of Jesus article sometimes capitalizes and sometimes doesn't. The examples given atWikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Institutions use lower case for university or city even where it is clear that they are speaking of a specific institution. Another place to go for clarification is to featured articles to see how it was done there. I looked atGeorgetown University and see that they don't capitalize university except in the full name (but it's not fully consistent). Does that persuade you? The Society of Jesus article should be made consistent too.SchreiberBike (talk)20:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, to be honest, it doesn't convince me. I'm so used to the practice in Catholic literature of the Society always being capitalized. Perhaps it depends on context. I'll have to think on that. Consistency is a good goal, but remembering the old adage of lots of cooks and pots, I'm not going to lose sleep over it.Daniel the Monk (talk)02:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the result ofWP:AN3#User:Srnec reported by User:Daniel the Monk (Result: Warnings, protection), which contains a warning for you. The steps ofWP:Dispute resolution are open to you when you have a two-person disagreement and it appears that consensus can't be reached. Continued warring is harmful to the encyclopedia. Thank you,EdJohnston (talk)13:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Aldegonde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toNord

Eugene V. Clark (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toParish Council

Orderic Vitalis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toVitalis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)19:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedBenedict the Moor, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesMoor andCongregation of the Holy Ghost (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 theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)14:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel the Monk! You're invited to our next meeting forWikipedia Meetup NYC on Sunday April 14 -this weekend- at Symposium Greek Restaurant @ 544 W 113th St (in the back room), on the Upper West Side in the Columbia University area.

Pleasesign up, and addyour ideas to the agenda for Sunday. Thanks!

Delivered on behalf ofUser:Pharos,17:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At[6]. Please tell me which source is the citation for the part of the text preceding the now-removed citation tag. PS. Also, why did you remove the diacritics fromCzesław Miłosz's name? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}14:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the tag because the sentence already cites a specific document, which, in fact, has its own entry. As to the diacritics, if you look at the images of his English-language books, he did not use them in his works in this language.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An existence of a Wikipedia article does not satisfyWP:V. Hence, the section is uncited. The fact that a a book may used simplify spelling does not change the fact that on Wikipedia we use the correct spelling variants, i.e. the one where an article is at. You are welcome to start a move request atCzesław Miłosz, but until such a time that it succeeds the correct name for him as used on this project is the one with diacritics. Similarly, if you were to cite a Korean source about American history, you would write about George Washington, not 조지 워싱턴, despite the fact that the Korean language source would use the latter version. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}02:12, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are ignoring the fact that, in this case, as a resident and citizen of the United States, this is howhe rendered his name in English. I have looked at the various English-language sources quoted here about him, and none of the journals and books in English use the Polish form, which he must have dropped upon gaining citizenship. So it not a matter of my changing it, it is how he used it, which is different than the example you give.

In this matter, I was simply rendering the name as given in the source. You have have raised an interesting point about the spelling in the entire article, since the MOS is that a name be rendered as most commonly used in English-language sources. I wonder what result that would have.Daniel the Monk (talk)02:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a dead horse issue, and you are welcome to start aWP:RM at CM page to prove me wrong. He never officially changed his name, and unless you can prove otherwise, diacritics are the correct use. PS. While there is inconsistency (no diacritics on the cover of[7]), note that they are used on page 2 in the copyright and LoC catalog sections. Throughout the book CM himself prefers just the not helpful C.M. initials. Authority control:Worldcat - uses diacritics,VIAF - ditto,LOC - ditto,DNB - I'll let you guess. So, dead horse, please stop staring at the carcass and move on :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}07:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ that it's a dead issue, though I see you have a history of insisting of Polish accentuation. I shall grant that the case is muddy because he probably used both forms, but the issue is his use in the English language, and for that I do not have to prove that he changed his name, because as an American citizen his legal name would be the name on his citizenship papers, or do you dispute that he did become one? The American government, certainly in that period, did not use foreign accent marks for names, especially non-Western ones. Given how the English-language sources do not generally use them, the proof would be on you to prove that somehow he was able to keep the accent marks as part of his legal name. Evidence that he did not use Polish accentuation in his English writings can be seen here from his lifetime from the school where he lived and taught for many years.^[1]

Given the ambiguity of the matter, I am not inclined to insist that the entry be changed, but I do feel that his own practice when writing in English, as an American citizen, should be respected and the MOS followed.Daniel the Monk (talk)21:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Few points to consider: 1) did he ever renounce Polish citizenship? 2) in 1993 he returned to Poland 3) did he stop publishing books in Polish, or not? 4) were his works in Polish with English translations, vice versa, or both? 4) It is obvious his original name used diacritics, I think the burden is on you to prove his American ID did not have them 5) a major issue is as follows: did he stop using diacritic of his own will, or was he forced to not use them on occasion due to their technical unavailability in some locations, and due to foreigners slighting him and not using them when writing about him? Just a few points, but as you say, perhaps we should just stop discussing this, if it would be just for the sake of discussion. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}03:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel,

I have been starting a series of articles on White Fathers missionaries in East Africa lately. I am not sure the best way to fill in the "Infobox Christian leader".Jan Cornelius van Sambeek is an example. I am inclined to give his main title as "Titular Bishop of Tracula", since he held that title until he died, then to list his more tangible positions under "Other posts". But I would also like to show his predecessors and successors in these posts in the infobox. Do you have any views on what is most appropriate? Maybe an example?

Thanks,Aymatth2 (talk)02:42, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aymatth. Thanks for asking. Most infoboxes use a bishop's actual working post as his major title. Actually, in this case, Van Sambeek ceased to be a titular bishop once he became the Ordinary of Kigoma. Other posts are given going back in time, so the most recent is listed first. Had he still been a Vicar Apostolic, that would be the title to list. Hope this helps.Daniel the Monk (talk)13:55, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that does help. I would prefer the approach used bytemplate:infobox officeholder where a series of posts can be listed, each with title / start / end / predecessor / successor. But changingtemplate:Infobox Christian leader seems impossible. I will follow the convention you describe.Aymatth2 (talk)14:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I would just point out that Mgr. is not the formal title for a bishop in the English-speaking world. His title would bethe Right Rev., and adding the intials of his society, W.F., after his name is proper.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have tweaked theJan Cornelius van Sambeek infobox to make his last active post the main one, and list the other posts in reverse sequence. I added the suffixM. Afr., which is the formal name of the society and what seems to usually be used. I am not comfortable with theRight Reverend. That seems to be used in Britain but "Most Reverend" is used elsewhere by English speakers. The sources do not use either, but sometimes use "Mgr. van Sambeek". When in doubt, leave it out. (I also have difficulty calling a politicianThe Right Honourable!) I will work through and standardize the other articles in this set. Thanks,Aymatth2 (talk)14:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I try to keep styles as used during the lifetime of the subject of the entry. W.F. is what the Missionaries of Africa used in English during that period. As regards, Most vs. Right, since Van Sambeek worked in a British territory, the usage there would be the appropriate one. It helps to know that it was used universally in the Catholic Church, except for Ireland, until the United States adopted it in the 1970's. From my reading of the MOS, the infobox can show a formal title for informative purposes, so it can only help.Daniel the Monk (talk)14:14, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly do not feel strongly. The title and text of the articles should use the common forms, but I assume an infobox can use more formal forms, even if they were not often used in practice. Given the backgrounds of the early White Fathers Vicars Apostolic, I imagine they thought of themselves as "Monsignor Abc, M. Afr." (I never see P.B. forPères Blancs). They would probably have introduced themselves as "Monsignor Abc", and probably were called by others either "Bishop Abc" or "Monsignor Abc". The sources mostly use one of those forms. I think I will just leave it - but would have no problem if you want to add a prefix or change a suffix.Aymatth2 (talk)15:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedFrançois de Laval, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesMontigny andAlaincourt (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 theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)15:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pirmasens was under the control of Bavaria in 1855 when the Poor Franciscan Sisters were organized there. The fact that it is not presently in Bavaria is not relevant to its categorization for 1855.John Pack Lambert (talk)17:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source?Daniel the Monk (talk)17:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look at the Times Atlas of World History, p. 216, clearly shows that Bavaria held a large section of area along the French border from 1815 on. The various maps atKingdom of Bavaria also make this clear.John Pack Lambert (talk)18:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your many edits, I'm just wondering why you movedMinh Mạng toMinh Mang (emperor)? (see Choi Byung WookSouthern Vietnam Under the Reign ofMinh Mạng (1820-1841) 2004 etc.) Is there another Minh Mang with the ạ removed?In ictu oculi (talk)06:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a game with that same name.Daniel the Monk (talk)19:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toMaria Innocentia Hummel may have broken thesyntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

Thanks,BracketBot (talk)14:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Maria Innocentia Hummel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toCell

Order of Saint Paul the First Hermit (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toProcurator

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toJean-Gabriel Perboyre may have broken thesyntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

Thanks,BracketBot (talk)03:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Luigi Orione (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toOratory

Marko Krizin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toKingdom of Croatia

Péter Pázmány (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toPrincipality of Transylvania

Sisters of the Infant Jesus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSisters of Providence

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Vincente de Valverde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toToledo andNative Americans

Discalced Mercerdarians (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toChapter

Jerónimo de Loayza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toNative Americans

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus, both within and outside Wikipedia. WP Manual of Style,WP:HYPHEN, sub-subsection 3, point says "A hyphen is not used after a standard -ly adverb (a newly available home, a wholly owned subsidiary) unless part of a larger compound (a slowly-but-surely strategy)." Happy editing!Chris the speller ^yack11:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! As I've said elsewhere, the MOS does not make for light summer reading.Daniel the Monk (talk)15:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On14 August 2013,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleHermann Cohen (Carmelite), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... thatFranz Liszt'sfavorite protégé became aDiscalced Carmelite friar who opened monasteries of his order in both France and England, and is being considered forcanonization by the Catholic Church? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Hermann Cohen (Carmelite). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

monasteries
Thank you for quality articles on monasteries and the people who dedicate their life to them, such asHermann Cohen, forimprovements, page moves to more precise names and for categories, - you are anawesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)05:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 578th recipient of myPumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk)08:05, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thank the giver of this prize for bestowing it and my Superiors for allowing me to be able to earn it. AMDG!Daniel the Monk (talk)17:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Six years ago, you were recipient no.578 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk)07:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Didacus of Alcalá (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toJubilee Year,Córdoba andAlbaida

Montmajour Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toHermitage andHoly Cross

10th arrondissement of Paris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSaint-Vincent-de-Paul

Cathedral of St. John the Baptist (Paterson, New Jersey) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toDiocese of Newark

Dan Duva (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to1984 Olympics

Francesco Piranesi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toEtruscan

Martin Adolf Bormann (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toTyrol

Shrine of St. Anthony (Boston) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toBrookline

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:48, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Congregation of St. Vanne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toLeopold,Nancy andMaurus

Jérôme le Royer de la Dauversière (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toCathedral of Notre-Dame,Hôtel-Dieu andNative Americans

Francis Schüssler Fiorenza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toLyons andFellowship

Yves Congar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toLaypeople andVatican

Aloys Grillmeier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toLimburg

Hautvillers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toDom Perignon

Pierre-Paul Durieu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toYakima Valley

Saint-Pal-de-Mons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toBishop of New Westminster

Sisters of the Child Jesus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toBishop of New Westminster

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello
You moved this page recently, without much of an explanation. I've reverted the move (perWP:BRD) and opened a discussionhere, if you wish to comment.
Regards,Moonraker12 (talk)15:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please join theWikimedia NYC Meetup on October 5, 2013! Everyone gather atJefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia'slocal outreach foreducation,museums,libraries and planningWikiConference USA. --Pharos (talk)21:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mariam Baouardy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toDamascene,Epiphany andPalestinian

Catharine Burton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toBoyton

Nicolò Albertini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toO.P.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)13:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toPatrick Keely may have broken thesyntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ], [[County Tipperary]], then a part of the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland]](alternatively another source states it was [[County Kilkenny]], <ref name=keely/> on August 9, 1816,

Thanks,BracketBot (talk)20:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Einsiedeln Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toHermitage andEvangelist

Patrick Keely (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toAlbany

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Charles Auguste Marie Joseph, Count of Forbin-Janson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toDubuque,Lorraine andBishop of Montreal

Ferdinand von Hompesch zu Bolheim (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toGrand Master,Rothenburg andSulz

Seraphin of Montegranaro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toMason andQuestor

Mary O'Hara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toKnobber

Methodios I of Constantinople (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSyracuse

The Interior Castle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toMystic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a terrible nuisance this Wikipedia user is. Please STOP removing the category, 'Members of the Dominican Order' from pages concerning figures who are obviously and patently members of the Dominican Order. Furthermore, you do not have any authority whatsoever to suggest that my edits to these articles constitute vandalism.— Precedingunsigned comment added by92.239.58.13 (talk)21:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually look at the category, it lists onlyfriars of the Order. The parties in those articles are listed in their appropriate categories for their branch of the Dominican Order. Given this, your continued nonconstructive editing can be considered vandalism.

I would comment on your page if you had a profile, but since you hide behind your IP, it is not possible to know if you would even get the message.Daniel the Monk (talk)22:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Members of the Dominican Order' category clearly contains a number of particular subcategories, each of which obviously has a more limited range of content. However, my edits pertained to the GENERAL list of Dominican figures which proceeds the more specific subcategories. The fact that this more general list appears to contain mostly friars is no good reason to necessarily conclude that Dominicans other than friars should be omitted. As for your accusation of 'nonconstructive editing', what reason would any individual have to necessarily assent to your subjective judgement upon what what constitutes 'nonconstructive editing'. Considering my assessment of the 'Members of the Dominican Order' category, I do not see any good reason to think that this constitutes 'nonconstructive editing'. Moreover, I am finding your interference to be singularly nonconstructive. The reason why I limit my involvement in Wikipedia, and therefore do not have a profile, is exactly because of this sort of silliness, ie, that I cannot operate without pointless impediment.

You clearly miss the point and rules of editing in this site. This is what makes your editing non-constructive. Perhaps it is best, then, that you limit your editing. The subcategories automatically are part of the greater category. All editors bring their viewpoint to the site, subject to the established guidelines for editing. If you wish to create a new category, to clarify that it is one for the friars, be my guest.Daniel the Monk (talk)22:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am sorry; you are not grasping my point. As for the 'rules of editing', you are not qualifying or clarifying which rules I am violating, and how. I am simply honouring the democratic nature of the site. I can only repeat that there is NO good reason that one should accept your judgement on my editing - you merely maintain that it is non-constructive because you happen to think it is non-constructive, and that in some vague way (according to your subjective prejudice and interpretation), I am missing the point of the rules. Moreover, there is no good reason (and you have certainly not provided one) to conclude that my edits are non-constructive. Your suggestion that I should limit my editing is as fatuous and unauthoritative as if I were to tell you to limit your editing. The point about the subcategories, which I CLEARLY made above, is that they distinguish between the particular and the general; they are limited in content according to type (sisters, scholars, etc). The fact that the figures in these particular categories might also appear in the general list of members is irrelevant. Your point that 'The subcategories automatically are part of the greater category' is also irrelevant: the greater category is divided into two distinct parts, a group of particular subcategories, and a general list of members. In addition to the reasons I have just stated, I maintain that my inclusion of Dominican women in the general category (the list beneath the subcategories) is perfectly legitimate and correct. Firstly, because there is no indication (a title, subtitle, etc) that this list (the general list, distinct from the subcategories) is exclusively for friars. Secondly, the title for the general list is clearly 'Members'. Do you agree that, in the context of the Order, the term 'member' is more inclusive than the term 'friar'? If so, do you also agree that this inclusive term might also pertain to Dominican women, such as Blessed Columba and Mother Ekaterina Abrikosova? Finally, I do not wish to create a new subcategory. Here, you appear to be contradicting yourself: if it is necessary to create a further subcategory to qualify 'friars and only friars' - for the very reason that one would make the distinction clear - your earlier remark that, 'If you actually look at the category, it lists onlyfriars of the Order' is incorrect. Your contention was that my edits were nonconstructive because I was adding Dominican women to a part of the general category reserved for friars. Of course, if this were true, there would be no point in creating a qualified subcategory.

I can only repeat that the edits that I made to the 'Members' category should remain, and that you should stop interfering where you have no good reason to interfere.— Precedingunsigned comment added by92.239.58.13 (talk)13:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pointing out the specific editing guidelines is pointless, unless you agree to respect them, which I suspect you won't.Daniel the Monk (talk)02:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What an utterly pathetic, obnoxious reply! Considering that you have not (due to unwillingness or, as I strongly suspect, inability) explained how and why my edits are non-constructive, and that I have repeatedly explained why there is NO good reason to think that these edits are non-constructive, the reasonable and appropriate think for me to do at this point would be to reverse your interferences in the edits. Besides, why don't you actually engage honourably with the issue at hand, rather than resorting to argumentum ad hominem silliness, such as claiming that discussion is invalid because I am not or will not be respectful.— Precedingunsigned comment added by92.239.58.13 (talk)10:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. Belated apologies for becoming irate over such a trivial matter.92.239.58.13 (talk)21:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please joinWikipedia "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon on November 2, 2013! Everyone gather atJefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia'slocal outreach forGreenwich Village articles onthe history and the community. --Pharos (talk)21:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Isidore De Loor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toBlessed andBevern

St. Joachim's Church (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toCherry Street andPark Row

Catherine Slip (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSouth Street

Catherine of Ricci (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toPatrician

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)20:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Solanus Casey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toFaculty andPenitentiary

Chelles Abbey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toLowlands

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

St. Vincent de Paul Church (Manhattan) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toMetropolitan Opera House andFrench Hospital

James Joseph Daly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toDean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:01, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Henri Depelchin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toNamur

John Morris (Jesuit) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toChurch History

Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mercy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toScudo

Pope Urban VIII (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toFrancesco Barberini

Rose Philippine Duchesne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toConvent of the Sacred Heart

Teodolfo Mertel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing toSt. Ives

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:01, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mother Ignatius Hayes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toO.P.,Convert andSecond Order

Mary Magdalen Bentivoglio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing toWest Coast andSteamer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)08:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please joinQueens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013! Everyone gather atQueens Library to further Wikipedia'slocal outreach forborough articles onthe history and the communities. Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

Please joinWikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014, an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles coveringArt and Feminism, and thebiographies of women artists! There are also regional events that day inBrooklyn,Westchester County, and theHudson Valley. --Pharos (talk)

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1:Harlem History Editathon and March 8:NYU Law Editathon

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March: Saturday March 1:Harlem History Editathon (RSVP), focusing on Harlem history, landmarks and biographies Saturday March 8:NYU Law Editathon (RSVP), focusing on innovation law and intellectual property (with social dinner afterward) I hope to see you there!Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name fromthis list.)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedPayo Enríquez de Rivera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageCastile (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 theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daniel! I wonder if you are watching the article onCistercians. A few days ago, another editor and I were discussing something on the Talk page of the article under the heading "Constitution and Rule". Neither of us is an expert, and we were hoping someone would be able to address the issue we were discussing, but a few days have passed and no one has commented. Perhaps you might be able to help. Besides a question of capitalization in a section heading, there seems to be a disconnect between the section heading and the content of the section.CorinneSD (talk)01:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel,
I saw your reversion back to the longer category name using a paraphrase instead of the term nunneries and wondered, why the shorter version is inaccurate?
Best wishes
Ulf Heinsohn (talk)05:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello, Ulf. While the term nunnery might have been the common term in the 15th century, in modern English, especially in the U.S.A., it is considered somewhat pejorative, reminiscent of the anti-Catholic terminology of that era. I have been meaning to have the category deleted, but there are only so many hours in the day to get around to making all the changes. So thanks for giving me the incentive.Daniel the Monk (talk)11:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel,
thanks for the answer. I cannot judge whether nunnery is a negative term or not, but a short search in the Catalog of the Library of Congress delivers not a single title containing monastery of nuns, some having monasteries of nuns (the latest published in 1963, others having it as a keyword from the early 1980s, and older), but in the same time many titles using the term nunnery, the latest from the late 1980s, one on a nunnery in Montreal, Canada. Saying nunnery was accurate in the 15th century, but not later, does not make sense, since there are many titles from 19th and 20th century using it, for sure not all, and I guess not even mostly, in an anti-Catholic attitude. I think judging nunnery as pejorative needs more evidence, before using the paraphrase.
One title, also for sure no base for a generalisation but showing the width of usage, uses even monasteries and nunneries as a juxtaposition, as if monastery were rather one of monks, as opposed to nunneries. Is there any conclusion among wikipedians banning nunnery is discriminatory? Otherwise I do not see a basis for replacing the plain term nunnery, but suggest a parallel usage.
Best wishes
Ulf Heinsohn (talk)11:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've hardly ever heard the word "nunnery" used, and I've always taken "monastery" to mean a place where monks live and work. The word for the place where nuns live and work is aconvent, and I don't understand why you are not using it. I don't know what the connotation for "nunnery" has been in the 19th and 20th centuries, but thesound of the word is not pleasing. It parallels the sound of words such as "creamery", "brewery", and "tannery", all places where things are produced.CorinneSD (talk)17:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ulf, I have no idea what the contexts are of the listings you are looking at. Are you saying that there is an community of nuns in Canada which uses this term in their formal name? I think it is worth noting what outsiders who are not familiar with monastic terminology use should not be given the same weight as what the nuns themselves use. As an example, there is a Poor Clare monastery listed here which the locals would call an abbey, even though the nuns of that Order have NEVER used that term for their houses. Likewise, there is no community of nuns which officially calls its house a nunnery.

So perhaps monastery of nuns as a title will not show up, as such, since the operative word is simply monastery. Did you check the listings to confirm that they all referred only to monks? Corinne hits the nail on the head with its resonance. In this case, I would add "popery", which is definitely considered an anti-Catholic term.

My main point, however, is that nunnery is not, and actually has never been, so far as I can tell, a formal title. Given that, it seems preferable, following Wiki's guidelines, to use the formal term actually in use. By the way, if you look at the category of nunneries, it gives monastery as its main article.

Corinne, it's a bit complicated. Houses of nuns and what are now called Religious Sisters were always called monasteries or abbeys until the 16th century, when it became common in France to use the term convent for non-Benedictine nuns, especially the Carmelites. It gets very cloudy in German and Scandinavian languages, which usually simply use the term "Kloster", irrespective of the distinctions which are made in the Latin languages. In modern usage, when working in English and the Romance languages, all communities of nuns, i.e., those who follow the contemplative life, call their houses monasteries, while convent is used for houses of Religious Sisters, who follow active lives of service.Daniel the Monk (talk)23:48, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daniel -- I wonder if you could take a look at a section of an article. The article isGoliard, and the section isGoliard#Debate over authorship and recent scholarship. I've made a few edits (see also my exchanges withUser talk:Rothorpe#Goliard), but there is one sentence that we feel is confusing. It appears to be unsourced, and Rothorpe suggested removing it, but I can see that the entire section is paraphrased from a book listed at the bottom of the article by Gillingham. There are no in-line citations giving title and/or page numbers, however, and perhaps there should be. The sentence is the second-to-last sentence in the second paragraph of the section:

"Certain monastic orders were also less strict than others because of the forced monastic way of living, such as the Benedictine monks at Cluny."

If we remove this sentence, then the next sentence would make no sense. Whoever added this sentence was trying to make a point, but the point is not clear.

If you think the sentence is important, could you try to make it clearer? If you think it is not important, it can be deleted, but then you have to decide what to do with the next sentence.

I don't know if you can add in-line citations, or not. The entire section seems a bit long relative to the rest of the article, doesn't it?CorinneSD (talk)16:17, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Corinne, thanks for your confidence in my editing skills. I've rearranged the sentence slightly and dropped that last phrase, which, as you note, is very unclear. I've also requested a citation for the reference to the Cluniacs for other reasons. See if you feel that it helps the article. Peace.Daniel the Monk (talk)15:07, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday August 17:NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

You are invited to join the theWikimedia NYC community for our upcomingwiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop on theUpper West Side of Manhattan. Sunday August 17NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share (RSVP). 2pm–5pm atYeoryia Studios at Epic Security Building, 2067 Broadway (5th floor). Afterwards at 5pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided). We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk)15:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name fromthis list.)

Hello, I'mBracketBot. I have automatically detected thatyour edit toMiguel d'Escoto Brockmann may have broken thesyntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "<>"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: justedit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message onmy operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• } Today, he continues as President of FUNDECI, which operates in several departments in Nicaragua.<ref name = ONU /<ref>[http://www.cinu.org.mx/onu/estructura/GA_BIO_Spanish_sm.pdf "Excmo. Sr. Padre
• ]</ref> In 1985 the pope denounced him and two other priests, brothers [Ernesto Cardenal|Ernesto]] and [[Fernando Cardenal]], who all served in the Nicaraguan government, because they did not

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, followthese opt-out instructions. Thanks,BracketBot (talk)03:56, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedMichael O'Connor (bishop), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesS.J. andBishop of Philadelphia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)08:55, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't added any comments to your talk page in three weeks. I hope all is well and that you're enjoying the summer. I wanted to ask you something about a recent edit toCistercians, but since you don't seem to be around, I'll ask someone else, or maybe the edit will just be undone by someone watching the article.CorinneSD (talk)00:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Corinne. Thanks for thinking of me. I hope your summer is going well. As my period of convalescence winds up, my duties in the Order seem to multiply. So I don't have too much time for editing. Do you still need help with that article?Daniel the Monk (talk)11:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daniel! I'm sorry to learn that you have been under the weather. I hope you're feeling better now. Another editor took care of the problem in the article. Thanks. I hope you keep editing on Wikipedia whenever you have time. --CorinneSD (talk)22:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are enjoying what is left of the summer. If you have time, would you review today's edit toCistercians? An IP editor removed a line from the article, with an edit summary, but no source other than another Wikipedia article was provided to back up the statement in the edit summary. What do you think?CorinneSD (talk)23:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your good wishes,Corinne. I hope you had a great summer. I looked at the article. If I understand the edit correctly, the editor removed reference to the Certosa di Pavia as a major Cistercian house. Even though they currently occupy that monastery, given their very limited historical connection to the site, I wouldn't object to that edit.Daniel the Monk (talk)04:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. Thank you for looking at it. I completely trust your judgment.CorinneSD (talk)12:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you were one of the major contributors to this article. I am currently finishing a rewrite, and I hope to nominate this forWP:GAN. One of my major weaknesses is that I am not an English speaker, so the article could use some copy editing. I am also not an expert on Christian topics, so I'd appreciate if a person more familiar with this area could ensure any terminology and such is correct. Would you be able to help? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}06:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for considering me for reviewing your edit. Looking at the text briefly, I haven't seen a huge difference so far. There are a number of violations of the English MOS and I shall edit those when I can. Some have already been corrected by other editors.Daniel the Monk (talk)02:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Roman Catholic Religious Brothers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.Elizium23 (talk)21:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please stop capitalising words when they are not part of a proper noun or a proper name. Only words which are part of a proper noun or name should be capitalised in contemporary English. It is, therefore, incorrect to write "his Order" instead of "his order". It is also incorrect to write "Master's degree" instead of "master's degree". And there is no "American" capitalisation style in such matters ~ the contemporary style principles for capitalisation are universal in English language countries. The fact that some organisations, such as universities, might write "the University" instead of "the university" when writing about their institution in their own publications is an idiosyncratic style which has no relevance to the standard style as used in Wikipedia articles. SeeMOS:INSTITUTIONS for guidance on these principles. Thank you.Afterwriting (talk)03:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no parameter calledtype = priest in Infobox religious biography. Pleaseread the documentation before reverting. --Jayarathina (talk)05:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedVincenzo Santucci, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageConsistory. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedMissionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageCanton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)08:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedRoman Catholic Diocese of Sora-Cassino-Aquino-Pontecorvo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageVincentians. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:57, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please seeWikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_November_27#Category:Vincentian_martyrs. –FayenaticLondon12:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onParklawn Memorial Park requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under thecriteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more aboutwhat is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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 withWikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator.The Dissident Aggressor01:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleParklawn Memorial Park is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parklawn Memorial Park 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.The Dissident Aggressor18:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have written this information can correct?. Thanks:Mary of Jesus de León y Delgado.--79.146.227.31 (talk)22:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		The Christianity Barnstar
		Daniel the Monk, I award youThe Christianity Barnstar for all your hard work inWikiProject Christianity related articles, especially your recent creation of theFranciscan Sisters of Baltimore. Keep up the good work! Your efforts are making a difference here! With regards,AnupamTalk22:24, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wednesday October 28, 7pm:WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join theWikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday"salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street /Union Square in Manhattan. This month, we will also host aNewcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project! We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, to see if the chapter is able to fiscally sponsor more ongoing projects tied to our core mission of expanding and diversifying free knowledge. We welcome the participation of our friends from theFree Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday OctoberWikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki orat meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm atBabycastles, 137 West 14th Street We especially encourage folks to add your5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk)17:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply] Bonus events, RSVP now for our latest upcoming editathons: October 25 -AfroCROWD + DAWN @ Brooklyn Public Library November 4 -Aphra Behn Society @ Grand Summit Hotel (Summit, NJ) November 10 -Basquiat: Still Fly 55 @ MoMA

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)

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

John Plessington

added links pointing toThe Telegraph andMark Davies

Roman Catholic Suburbicarian Diocese of Velletri-Segni

added a link pointing toMichael Ellis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel,
why are the Benedictine nunneries not suited to be listed in the nunneries category, like nunneries of other orders?
Best wishesUlf Heinsohn (talk)17:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They do not use that term. They are called monasteries, just like those of monks.Daniel the Monk (talk)18:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bartholomew the Younger

added a link pointing toBasilian

Mkhitar Sebastatsi

added a link pointing toDivine Office

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wednesday December 9, 7pm:WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join theWikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday"salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street /Union Square in Manhattan. This month, we will also host aNewcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project! We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, and welcome input from community members on the sorts of projects the chapter should support through both volunteer and budgetary efforts. We welcome the participation of our friends from theFree Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday December 9WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki orat meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm atBabycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street We especially encourage folks to add your5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One talk this month will be on use of Wikipedia press passes for photographers.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk)13:38, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] Bonus events, RSVP now for our upcoming editathons: Saturday December 12 -Art & Law @ School of Visual Arts editathon Sunday December 13 -Black Film: AfroCROWD editathon

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)

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

Antônio Ferreira Viçoso

added links pointing toSantarém,Vincentian andMariana

Chrétien Le Clercq

added links pointing toBishop of Quebec andFleming

Ursulines of Quebec

added links pointing toUrsuline andMarie of the Incarnation

Francisco de Paula Victor

added a link pointing toVincentians

Geneviève Boucher

added a link pointing toBishop of Quebec

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedJohn D. Faris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageBaccalaureate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:02, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy the new (?) talk page heart icon (which I had never noticed until now, let alone used), I would like to gift you this picture of a cookie in thankful recognition for the helpful clarifications you added toCasa Santa Maria. The article has benefited from them and as it prepares to be added to the DYK queue I am even more grateful. Cheers. —AJDStalk10:18, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday January 16:Wikipedia Day NYC 2016

You are invited to join us atNew York University forWikipedia Day NYC 2016, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference as part ofWikipedia 15, the project's global 15th birthday festivities. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatoryunconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions. We also hope for the participation of our friends from theFree Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. Saturday January 16Wikipedia Day NYC 2016 (RSVP on-wiki or atbit.ly/wikiday15). 10:00am - 7:00 pm at NYU ITPTisch School of the Arts, 721 Broadway (between Waverly and Washington Place) We especially encourage folks to add your5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk)17:56, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It appears I got the Minim Daughters, who work in schools and medical centers, mix up with the Minim Nuns in Santillo who clearly do not. I went back and made the distinction. Thank you for pointing that out. Mea culpa.Mannanan51 (talk)03:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedGaspar de Bono, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesSt. Raphael,Archbishop of Valencia andArchdiocese of Valencia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Samuel Charles Mazzuchelli
• Samuel Mazzuchelli

32.218.47.159 (talk)05:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• 32.218.47.159, It was an editing error. I changed the article name while still working on a major edit. I didn't realize that it would create two separate articles. You should have noticed on the talk page that I immediately requested that an authorized editor merge the two articles.Daniel the Monk (talk)16:17, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Church of Our Lady of Guadalupe (Manhattan)

added links pointing toRev. andSt. Bernard Church

Samuel Charles Mazzuchelli

added links pointing toDispensation andRev.

Church of St. Clement Mary Hofbauer

added a link pointing toRev.

Clement Mary Hofbauer

added a link pointing toFeast

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:34, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Benedictine mathematicians, which you created, has been nominated fordeletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.RevelationDirect (talk)04:38, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedSaint Vincent Seminary, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesRep. andDiocese of Pittsburgh. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedLeo Haid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageBelmont Abbey. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday February 6 in NYC:Black Life Matters Editathon

You are invited to join us and theAfroCROWD initiative at New York Public Library'sSchomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of theBlack WikiHistory Month campaign. Saturday February 6Black Life Matters Editathon (RSVP). 12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk)19:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply] (Bonus upcoming event:WikiWednesday Salon @ Babycastles - Wednesday, February 17)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)

Hello. I noticed that you have edited a number of articles on Catholicism. A discussion is taking place as to whether the websiteCatholic-Hierarchy.org is a reliable source that can be utilized on Wikipedia or whether all references and information derived from it should be deleted. This topic is currently being discussed at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard[8]. As the website's removal as a reference will affect several thousand Wikipedia articles, I believe that the broadest range of opinions should be obtained before action is taken. Please contribute if interested.Patapsco913 (talk)22:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedGonsalo Garcia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageThe Examiner. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)12:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wednesday March 16, 7pm:WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join theWikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" eveningsalon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop atBabycastles gallery by 14th Street /Union Square in Manhattan. We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants. We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities. We welcome the participation of our friends from theFree Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also vote on nominations for theglobal Wikimedia Foundation board. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday March 16WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki orat meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm atBabycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street We especially encourage folks to add your5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One likely talk this month will be on theWikidata project.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk)18:07, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)

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

Nivelles Abbey

added links pointing toVita andTympanum

Gertrude of Nivelles

added a link pointing toVita

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:32, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Let me try to explain a couple edits re: Franciscan categories. At first, please notice for instance thatCongregations of Franciscan sisters iscurrently both a child ofRoman Catholic female orders and societies andRoman Catholic religious sisters and nuns by order, which makes no sense as it contains congregations, not individual nuns and sisters. Therefore, it should be a subcategory of the former, not the latter. This is the way WikipediaWP:categorization works. The equivalent category for individual nuns isNuns of the Franciscan Third Order Regular, which you also created.

Also, to the average reader like me, the difference betweenThird Order Regular Franciscans andThird Order of Saint Francis is not clear, and if it is not clear to me it is probably not clear for other people as well. May I suggest to add a line of introduction explaining the difference betweenThird Order Regular andSecular Franciscan Order ? Or maybe renameThird Order Regular Franciscans to something likeRegular Third Order,Regular Third Order of Saint Francis (parallel toSecular Franciscan Order),Third Order Regular orThird Order Regular of Saint Francis ?

Re:your diff comment that "Since I created both categories, I think I know what they are for", may I kindly suggest that although you created these pages, you do notOWN them or any page on Wikipedia, neither do I. Also, you may know something that the average reader does not. Please kindly accept these comments as friendly suggestions to improve the encyclopaedia as a whole and an invitation to discussion.Place Clichy (talk)15:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday April 30, 1-6pm:Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim

File:Monir Portrait-exh ph021.jpg OnSaturday April 30, 2016, in conjunction with a global campaign, theGuggenheim will host its fourth Wikipedia edit-a-thon — or,#guggathon — to enhance Wikipedia's coverage of modern and contemporary artists from theMiddle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and tocounter geocultural systemic bias on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of theGuggenheim UBS MAP Global Art Initiative, and build on the model of campaigns like theWikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Guggenheim: Women in Architecture,Wikipedia Asian Month, andArt+Feminism. New and experienced editors are welcome. The event will include a training session for participants who are new to Wikipedia and Wikipedia specialists will be on hand to provide basic instruction and editing support. Can’t join us in New York? Visitour global MENA Artists Month partnership page to coordinate international and online events as well. Saturday. April 30Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim (Participants have to bring their own laptops and power cords). Time:Presentation: 1:00 pm - 2:30 pm, Edit-a-thon: 2:30pm - 6:00pm Location:Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue (88th Street), New York City, New York 10128 Guests should enter using the 88th Street entrance via the ramp at 88th Street and Fifth Avenue Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)

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

Florencio del Castillo

added links pointing toBaccalaureate andMexican Empire

National Autonomous University of León

added a link pointing toCivil law

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Frei Tito

added a link pointing toPerdizes

Maria Restituta Kafka

added a link pointing toSan Bartolomeo

Thomas F. Anderson

added a link pointing toOak Grove Cemetery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:54, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please note that the manual still says that postnominals should not be boldfaced.[9] –Omnipaedista (talk)23:44, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you foryour contributions. It seems that you may have addedpublic domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such asApril 1943. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipediaguideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described atWikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of anattribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. —Diannaa (talk)18:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wednesday May 25, 6pm:WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference

You are invited to join theWikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" eveningsalon. This month's WikiWednesday Salon, we'll meet and share with theMediaWiki software development community, through a community learning night at NYU on May 25. Wednesday May 25 at NYU Tisch School of Arts, 721 Broadway, 4th floor (same location as Wikipedia Day in January) -WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference (RSVP on-wiki orat meetup.com). 6:00 pm: Introduction, pizza 7:00 pm: MediaWiki tutorial, community involvement and extension ideas, novel uses of wiki technology 8:00 pm: State of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia / Wikimedia community 9:00 pm: Monthly WikiSalon in San Francisco video-link, casual bicoastal chat Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk)13:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)

Sunday June 5, 12-5pm:Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon

Join us for a full Sunday of social Wikipedia editing at theCenter for Jewish History (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to Women in Jewish History. All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required. Expanding coverage of Jewish women on Wikipedia makes these women and their creations discoverable, addresses the gender bias on Wikipedia in a positive way, and works to correct imbalances archival collecting practice and institutional projects that have historically silenced women's narratives. A training session on editing Wikipedia will be held at 12:30 pm. Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand. Light refreshments will be provided. Make edits! Ask questions! Be bold! Sunday June 5Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon (Participants have to bring their own laptops and power cords). Time:12:00 pm – 5:00 pm Location:Center for Jewish History, 15 West 16th Street (between 5th and 6th Avenues), New York City, New York 10011 Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk)15:01, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply] P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for ourJune 15 WikiWednesday and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name fromthis list.)