User talk:Johnbod

IF YOU MENTION AN ARTICLE HERE - PLEASE LINK IT!!!

This user is one of the 200 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Dirty angel from the Monumental Cemetery of Staglieno in Genoa, c.1910

memo to self - arty student project pages to check through

• Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/California State University Sacramento/Art of the Ancient Mediterranean (Fall 2017)
• Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Amherst College/Women and Art in Early Modern Europe (Spring 2017)
• Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/College of DuPage/History of Art- Prehistory to 1300 (Fall 2017)
• Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Duke University/Art in Renaissance Italy (Fall 2017)
• Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Duke University/Art in Renaissance Italy (Spring 2017)

Johnbod (talk) 19:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Boston_University/Venetian_Renaissance_Art_and_Architecture_(Fall)

Johnbod (talk) 16:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Wilderness (garden history), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chatsworth.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the holiday wishes

		Bringing you warm wishes for the New Year!
		In the midst of the snowy season, sending you some cheer with the sounds of nature I enjoy in my garden when the Indigo bunting return with the warmer weather. May you and yours have a healthful, happy and productive 2022! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

tee-hee - yes, let's hope it's not a repetition again! Johnbod (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Johnbod,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! LearnIndology (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

---

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

in friendship

January songs

in friendship

Thank you for your beautiful traditional Christmas card! - Happy new year, in friendship! - One of my pics was on the Main page (DYK) and even made the stats. - In this young year, I enjoyed meetings with friends in real life, and wish you many of those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda! Same to you. Johnbod (talk) 15:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks you! 2022 began happily with vacation. I uploaded images but stopped at 22 January - click on songs. 30 January means 10 years of Precious. It's also the birthday of a friend, - I'm so happy I mentioned his DYK on his 90th birthday when he was still alive. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hedge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hawthorn.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

John Byrne article

Hi, @johnbot I've put some comments at the Talk page of the John Byrne article. If you have a moment, could you possibly take a quick look? All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 10:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Legal threat?

Does this edit summary by User:Minafu look like a legal threat to you? Should he be warned of WP:NLT? Sweetpool50 (talk) 08:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, not a serious one anyway. But I'm not the best person to ask. You could certainly warn him. Johnbod (talk) 15:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Wilderness (garden history)

On 19 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wilderness (garden history), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in garden history, a wilderness is a highly artificial and formalized type of woodland, forming a section of a large garden? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wilderness (garden history). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Wilderness (garden history)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words!

Hi John, I think we can do better than this: "Other features, such as a garden maze, were a feature of ...". Equally, starting two sentences in three with "Though". And that hideous ly-. But next time I won't bother, so we're all winners! Regards, Ericoides (talk) 21:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

"Signature Style" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Signature Style and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 24#Signature Style until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Take the Lead contest 2021

Thank you for participating in the Take the Lead contest. You are one of the winners. I have just sent you an email to coordinate the prize. Best, Karla Marte(WMUK) (talk) 12:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Garden room

On 27 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Garden room, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Vita Sackville-West described the garden rooms she created at Sissinghurst (pictured) as "a series of escapes from the world, giving the impression of cumulative escape"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Garden room. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Garden room), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

		The Writer's Barnstar
		Thank you for a quality article about, Garden rooms. Bruxton (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

• Many thanks! Johnbod (talk) 01:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

English gardens

Question: currently Category:English gardens only contains one article and one subcategory. I am inclined to think that the purpose of this category and its subcategory coincide. Do you agree? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Not really "English gardens" meaning English-style landscape gardens, wherever located, is a Continental-only term we should not be using. It should probably be renamed to "Gardens in the English landscape style", and the sub-cat split between ones in the British Isles & the imitations (never the same) elsewhere. But the whole area is a horrible mess, as I've said. Johnbod (talk) 14:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if you noticed...

Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Illinois State University/The Middle Ages (Spring) - looks to be hitting a few art articles.... just a heads up. Ealdgyth (talk) 18:27, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks - some anyway. But few edits seem to result.... usually. Johnbod (talk) 14:22, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Woodland garden

On 16 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Woodland garden, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the woodland garden (example pictured), "colourfully planted with exotic shrubs and herbaceous plants, dominated English horticulture from 1910 to 1960"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Woodland garden. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Woodland garden), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 7,338 views (611.5 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of February 2022—nice work!

Bruxton (talk) 20:49, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cult image, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spirit.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Not sure you saw this ...

... you probably did: India’s Art History United in a Single Source Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

No I hadn't -that's paywalled, but this is their site. Are they free? Not clear. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 04:31, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, not sure myself. I might have mistaken "open source" for "open access." :) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Parterre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Temple.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

AGF

this edit summay not only does not assume good faith, it flies in the face of our remit as editors to edit articles even while WP:AfD is going on. We are not required to keep shitty content in articles just because there is a deletion discussion. Your revert back to a version that included a WP:CREDENTIAL and at least five different unvetted claims is, I would argue, making Wikipedia worse. By all means, improve the article if you can. But that was not an improvement. jps (talk) 13:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

At least I spelled the main guy's name correctly! There was a discussion very recently at one of the admin boards on this very bad practice of gutting Afd's before or during the deletion debate. I was one of many strongly against it - it is very bad practice indeed. I don't agree the content was that bad - such differences of opinion are a main reason why. Johnbod (talk) 13:52, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

You could have corrected the spelling of the name without reintroducing a bunch of unverified bullshit. Yet, you chose to re-include the unverified bullshit. Why? jps (talk) 13:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Both the generally WP:RS sources made the status of the claims perfectly clear. Add Rollston if you want. Not all the story is "bullshit". Johnbod (talk) 13:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Do you think fluff pieces like that are "generally reliable" for making claims about the archaeological discoveries prior to any peer reviewed paper being published? Is that really your editorial philosophy? I note that you didn't feel it worth your while to add Rollston. I'm trying to figure out what your game is here. Are you just taken in by any WP:SENSATIONalist piece you read? Or is this particular story somehow after your own heart? It is still entirely puzzling to me how you came to the conclusion that this revert was somehow an improvement. jps (talk) 14:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Now I see why you chose "AGF" as your header - yes, you should. Johnbod (talk) 14:05, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

So is this an admission that you may have been hasty in that? Fine, if so. But you definitely doubled down on your actions in the AfD. Thus my arrival at your user talkpage. If you have a problem with the way I do things, it would be good to have out with it. But I take firm exception to the actions of those who deliberately reintroduce shoddy academic scholarship into the encyclopedia that are sourced entirely to newspaper articles. It makes me nervous about what other problematic content you may have been including here. My hope is this is just a one-off mistake on your part. jps (talk) 14:12, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

No, it certainly is not. Johnbod (talk) 16:59, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

MOS:ERA draft RfC question

Hi Johnbod,

I'm sure you have a lot on your plate, but if you're interested in taking a look, I’ve been working on drafting a MOS:ERA RfC question in my sandbox. Please feel free to edit and/or comment if you have the inclination. For any page watchers here, this with regard to a recent discussion over at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Much appreciated, Generalrelative (talk) 19:04, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, I haven't forgotten, but I am busy this week. But I'll get back to it soonish. Johnbod (talk) 04:14, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Cool, no hurry! Generalrelative (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)