User talk:Hrothgar cyning

Welcome!

Hello, Hrothgar cyning, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your 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
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

It's good to have someone who knows what they're talking about editing King Arthur. If there's anything you need, please don't hesitate to ask.--Cúchullain ^t/c 06:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

King Arthur

Don't worry about using your book. I looked into it, and it seems pretty well received and provides us with a lot of good information not found elsewhere. As long as you're not trying to promote yourself at the expense of the encyclopedia, there's no conflict of interest.

Keep up the excellent work. If you wish, you should join the Wikipedia:WikiProject King Arthur - it's not very active right now, but it's always good to have people who know what they're talking about on board.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Featured Articles

I'd say it's getting pretty close. There's a list of the criteria here. I'd say the main things to change will be introducing some images, including a bit more on post-medieval portrayals of him, and probably making some subsections within the longer sections. The intro will probably have to be tightened a bit as well. Articles are nominated at Featured Article Candidates, they are reviewed there. Generally other editors will offer suggestions for improvement, and the nominator and others working on the article will make the necessary changes. At this stage I'd imagine they'd bring up the things I just mentioned. You may want to talk to Wrad, he's currently working to get Sir Gawain and the Green Knight featured, so he'll know more about the process than I do.--Cúchullain ^t/c 22:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Concepts of Arthur

Just letting you know I recently got a copy of your book. Extremely fascinating stuff. I haven't seen any other work that attempts to do what you've done. When I get done with it I'll start using it at other articles. Wikipedia's lucky to have it as a source, and you as a contributer. Cheers,--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Recent Arthur Family Edits

I had found this other son of Arthur and had a perfectly legitimate reference, but it was recently deleted. Is there a reason for this? I noticed you also put the site I referenced on external links and said it had "varying reliability." Is this because there is something to show this part or parts of the site in general are wrong? If so, I would like to know as I am doing a lot of research in that area and if the site is bad I don't want to rely on it too much. ---G.T.N. (talk) 14:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

King Arthur Peer review

The second peer review is getting a lot of responses. We need your help to take care of the concerns there and get this article to FA! Wrad (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

King Arthur

It seems that the article is ready for FAC. Once you come back, drop a note on the talk page and then we can get things started.  Mm40 (talk | contribs)  14:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see the instructions at the top of WP:FAC regarding consulting the significant contributors prior to nominating to FAC; since this was already pointed out to you on Talk:King Arthur, I won't copy the text to here again. I've removed the listing from WP:FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Sandy doesn't know what's going on, Hroth. I've left a note with her and she will hopefully see the light. Wrad (talk) 02:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

lol! thanks :) Assuming I'm allowed, do I renominate or can the other one be returned? cheers, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 02:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:King Arthur; (thanks for the vote of confidence, Wrad :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hrothgar cyning, I'm sorry you were caught in the middle of this; I read the talk page and Awadewit had clearly said not to go forward only hours before, so combining that with all of the other info about the other contributors and previous FACs, I made the decision to remove. Qp will surely weigh in within a few hours, and I'll restart after the kerfuffle dies down, so everyone can calm down and you don't have a cloud over the FAC. I'm not sure what time zone you're in, but hopefully this will be sorted by the time you wake up. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm re-starting the FAC now, Hrothgar cyning, and I sincerely apologize for the interim events and hope they haven't dampened your enthusiasm; I was possibly overly gunshy on that article because of the previous premature nom last month, and I shouldn't have given Awadewit's talk page comment so much weight in the decision to remove. Thank you for being so gracious in spite of this unpleasantness. Good luck on the FAC, although from what I'm reading, it doesn't appear you'll need it; it appears from subsequent comments that you've made a fine addition to Wiki. Going to restart the FAC now ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it :) I went to sleep and when I awoke, all was fixed :) I should probably have checked more closely on preceding comments and events before nominating. Anyways, hopefully everyone will still be happy to contribute to the FAC and thank you for the confidence in the article's chances! If you get the chance to have a read, I'd appreciate an opinion but will understand if you can't :) Cheers, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 09:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

You did nothing wrong, don't even give it a second thought. I will read it as soon as I've had some sleep :-) On my way now, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot :) Sleep well, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for rewriting the King Arthur article and making it into such an impressive article. It is a model of concision and comprehensiveness. Covering "everything under the sun about King Arthur" is not easy, but the article provides the reader with an excellent outline of the various Arthurian legends. Awadewit (talk) 19:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Tom Thumb and Arthurian legend

Apart from the two references in the King Arthur article, I'm curious if you know of any other articles or books that mention the Thumb-Arthur connection. I am currently studying eighteenth-century children's literature and Tom Thumb appears in publications for children. I always like learning about these sorts of connections. Awadewit (talk) 19:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Your Book

I'm fairly new to Arthuriana, but I've been picking it up a lot lately, as well as watching the King Arthur article progress. By the way, good job on that! Anyways, I noticed it mentioned that you are something of an expert and have even written a book on the subject. What's the title and where can I get it? And out of curiosity- where do you think he came from (assuming you think he was real)? ---G.T.N. (talk) 01:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I'm trying to start a taskforce on Sub-Roman Britain. Would you care to join? ---G.T.N. (talk) 01:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

King Arthur FAC

Hi there, just wanted to clear up a "process" issue, since you're new to FAC and in case you were confused by the dialogue. Nishkid64 correctly pointed out that the objection raised was, in fact, a valid and actionable oppose (the previous statement that it was invalid was incorrect), meaning that the oppose relates to WP:WIAFA and is something that can be fixed. That doesn't mean you have to act on it, however; on an issue such as the one raised, dialogue can ensue and consensus can determine whether to act on the oppose. Just wanted to make sure you're clear on the process, not saying one way or the other whether I agree with the oppose, as that is for consensus to decide. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks — that does clear it up a bit :) Hmm, maybe I shouldn't have altered it then; on the other hand, Python's film is a notable piece of arthuriana so probably does deserve a name-check and now at least anyone looking can see where it fits into the great scheme of things.... Cheers and thanks again, Hrothgar cyning (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me just say I've never met anyone quite like Ottava on here before. Most people are respectful at FAC, but he is an exception. At one point he was nearly blocked from FAC, but he backed off and promised to stop. Apparently that promise wore off. I think he is only strengthening the case against himself now. You've made your case. Just sit back and let the guy rant and rave. Again, the guy is a bit of a rarity around here. We have rules, and if you don't respect them, life gets very hard for you. Wrad (talk) 01:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

This is evidence that the "th" sound was known to the Greek and Roman world (and known by the various monks) before it was ever used in Welsh. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)