User talk:Grutter

Excellent work on Archaeology Grutter, keep it up! adamsan 11:31, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks very much! --GRutter 11:39, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I done bad with Chess, better with Hooker

Thanks for the good work on the A Game at Chess article that I put up too hastily. I had sought more and better information but had not found it in time. I'm glad that others fixed it up some. Just a note, though, that I've put in a longish paragraph in the Richard Hooker article on Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Politie, which is one of my favorite works. (Not that many folks have read it, unfortunately.) I look at it a bit differently from others, since my primary interest in it is as part of the long tradition of "what are the rights of the governed" and the passing view of the divinely appointed ruler. In particular, I'm a fan of the latitudinarian and semi-Pelagian theology that emerged from the 18th c. -- a theology that is inherently English (and American now) and which seems to have always already been there, except in times of foment. Geogre 04:29, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments- I'm glad you put the A Game at Chess article up; I wouldn't have got involved otherwise! Your new para on Hooker looks good. I want to put paragraphs on both articles about their use today, but I couldn't find out anything about modern staging of A Game at Chess. Rowan Williams has written what looks like an interesting article on Hooker, but I haven't had a chance to read it yet! --G Rutter 16:37, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

T.S. Eliot uses A Game at Chess in The Waste Land, but he used pretty much all Jacobean drama somewhere in there. I'm not sure if he used a quote as an epigram as well, but I don't think so. At any rate, I don't think that particular play does get staged very often. As with other topical plays, and in particular as with Middleton, I think it has faded somewhat. As for Hooker.... He's the man. He, and in a different way Laud, set up Anglicanism, so he is revered, but not so many people still read him. I remember being pretty unique for actually reading 3 of the books of Of the Laws. However, he is the cornerstone of the Thirty-nine articles, so he is invisibly behind all of modern Anglican practice. I studied him in the context of ideas of power and the private in the public in the turn of the Jacobean era. The seminar was looking at Sidney, Spenser, Shakespeare, and Hooker, with side readings from Machievelli's Discourses. We were out to examine the claims made by New Historicism about what "could be known." (Short version: they were wrong. A lot more was known than Greenblatt thinks could have been known.) At any rate, Hooker was assigned the job of writing the Laws, and so he was handed the hardest job in the kingdom: prove that we're right not to be Catholic and that we ought not listen to the further reformers. I.e. prove that there is authority, but that it isn't the Pope. Again, prove that Jesus established the bishops but that the present Bishop of Rome doesn't have power over us. Rhetorically, I think it's the finest work of that stretch of 500 years. The tightrope he has to walk is scary as can be, and yet he never falls off. At the same time, he ends up having to give some ground that Locke will soon occupy. Amazing work. It should be interesting to see what Williams has to say about Hooker. I don't have a lot of confidence in him, but it will be interesting to see if he can tightrope his reaction to Hooker half as well as Hooker did his to Calvin. Geogre 17:49, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Archaeological theory

Good work refactoring the Archaeology page. --Theo (Talk) 16:16, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad it was OK. --G Rutter 16:24, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Archaeology wikiproject

Hi GRutter, thanks for volunteering your skills to the Archaeology wikiproject. As you've probably noticed it's rather basic at the moment so any suggestions you want to add would be most welcome. Cheers adamsan 14:00, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Basalt fiber

Wonderful expansion of Basalt fiber, which had been assigned to cleanup by our Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce when you happened along! Fortuitous timing. Won't you consider joining? · Katefan0^(scribble) 19:06, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

advice? comment?

If you have time can you look at this: [1]? I am feeling frustrated trying to deal with Rev of Bru. If you have any constructive comments, feel free to make them at the Request for Mediation page or the talk page for the Jesus article. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:11, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

About RoB, I do not know what is happening. SInce I am so close to it I myself cannot block or ban RoB. Could you take it up with the ArbCom? Also, We do not disagree as much as you think. I too have no objection to including popular accounts as long as they are correctly identified and, as you say, critiques, but, most important, not put on the same level as real scholars. Slrubenstein | Talk 16:05, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

You might want to add a note in the clarifications section of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. One arbitrator has the power to do limited sockpuppet checks, and should that fail, the developers can have a look as well. Ambi 14:25, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks,Slrubenstein | Talk 15:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Re: Jesus cat

your right, I probably shouldn't have and I didn't check the user's userpage regarding the request, After an admin unprotected the article I just added it since it was a request leftover from when the page was protected and there didn't seem to be any objections on the talk page for the article. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 22:00, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Lists of primary route destinations

After reading your message about deletion of the lists of primary route destinations, I have decided to add the lists to Wikitravel instead, as this would be more appropriate for this particular topic. Ted Ted 10:11, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Images I don't know what I'm doing

I put up the following images for:

John Haught Denis Lamoureux Keith B. Miller George Coyne Darrel Falk

Make them look like this page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:KennethRMiller.jpg

And we should be fine, right? The image above was taken from Kenneth R. Miller's home page, and looks to be in no threat of deletion.

But I have learned some new tags below, thanks. :-)

{{fair use}} {{GPL}}

PhilVaz 20:04, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for contributing to Girl!

		An Award
		For your contributions to the CotW focusing on Girl in September, 2005, I, Mamawrites, award you, Grutter, this THANK YOU.

More Christian mythology

There is a new proposal at Category_talk:Christian_mythology/Proposed_compromises#JHCC's_new_proposal. Please read and comment. JHCC (talk) 14:50, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment on this proposal; I've added a public response there. Privately (at least, as privately as one can be on a publicly viewable talk page), however, I'd like to say that this proposal is an attempted circumvention of one major issue: FestivalOfSouls's incessent fillibustering of any attempt to delete the Category:Christian mythology. By leaving that category alone and creating a viable alternative, I expect that the Wikipedia community will abandon that category in favor of the more neutral alternative, especially if people continue to dispute the neutrality of categorizing beliefs as myths. JHCC (talk) 16:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your support in my RfA; I really appreciated it. -R. fiend 17:37, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

RfA

Just to say thanks for supporting my RfA. Please let me know if you see me screw up. --Doc (?) 19:05, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Mindmatrix scam adminship

I have recently been granted greater access to your systems, and can begin the process of salvaging the sensitive information from my politically unstable land, as I promised. Please accept this loonie as a token of faith that I will conduct myself as required to complete our transaction. Thank you for your support. Mindmatrix 20:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Awolf002 RfA

Thank you very much for your support for my RfA. I will do everything I can to justify your trust in me. Awolf002 03:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Oops, ignore that last edit

I thought you have removed Damascus steel from the experimental archeology article, I see that I was mistaken, and you had in fact put it back. But since I'm here, do you think more information from http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/9809/Verhoeven-9809.html might be appropriate in the Damascus steel article? I think the near-critical temp "cold forging" of the wootz--in essence work hardening the steel rather than heat treating it--is a very likely explanation for the unique characteristics of Damascus steel, and how easily the technique was lost. scot 15:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, take a look at Damascus steel and see what you think. I moved the etymology up to the front, the split the discussion of "true" wootz based Damascus from the pattern welded Damascus, and added a discussion of Verhoeven and Pendray's experimental process. scot 20:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I found an article on "eutectoid", and linked it to "hypereutectoid", which hopefully will be sufficient--I assume most people can handle "hyper" and "hypo", do you agree? As for images, there is an image in the pattern welding article that could go in (since it does apply to one definition of Damascus steel). I don't have any images that we could use, unfortunately. It would be great if we could get a public domain image of one of the close-ups of the swords Verhoeven et. al. used in their study. I suppose I could try to track down e-mail addresses and ask, if you think it would bear fruit. Also, bladesmith might be worth an article, as there are a few references to it in Wikipedia, and it's certainly a far more common profession these days than swordsmith. scot 20:36, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

It suddenly occurred to me that one of my friends was both a student and an employee at Iowa State for many years, where Dr. Verhoeven is on faculty. I AIMed her and she thinks one of her friends knows Dr. Verhoeven, so I'm going to try that route to get some PD images before I go for the direct approach. scot 17:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Pattern welding

Since I was already thinking about steel and knifemaking due to the Damascus steel article, I added some significant content to the pattern welding article, including links to some really amazing work being done combining EDM miling and pattern welding. Check it out when you get a chance--I spent about 6 hours adding bits and pieces to the article (I'm doing tests of my software right now, so I have bits of down time while I wait for results) and there's no telling how coherent it is. I'm useless to proofread my own work, as I tend to see what should be there, not what really is... scot 21:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I reworded the sentence you had trouble with (it was sort of ambiguous--the joys of a language where every word has at least two overlapping meanings) and added a couple of references on the Viking stuff. I remember reading some interesting stuff in a book about 10 years ago when I was dabbling in knife and sword making that had some good info on the Japanese blademaking techniques, I need to see if I can figure out where I got that--it may be that a friend of mine has books on the subject, as he actually went as far as putting together a simple propane fired forge so he could experiment with forge welding (me, I tended to stick to grinding 1095 bar stock). If you haven't popped out to Ed Caffery's site (linked at the bottom) and looked at some of the "mosaic Damascus" stuff he's done, you really should, it's rather spectacular stuff. Makes me want to track down a good anvil and set up my own forge in the back yard. Hammering pattern welded steel is probably good for working off a few extra pounds... scot 23:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'd say the technique of pattern welding was "lost" so much as it became unneccessary as better smelting techniques for iron were developed. With the ability to make cruicible or fluid steel of fairly consistent carbon content, the need for the carburization/folding/forge welding process went away. As I recall from James Burke's "Connections", navigation was actually the driving force at this point--warfare had moved away from swords and to firearms and bayonets, but navigation required accurate clocks, and clocks on ships required good, homogenous steel springs for accuracy. scot 14:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Dioceses

No worries. Hope you like my prose ;) "The bishop of the Bishop of X and the cathedral is X Cathedral". Morwen - Talk 22:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

)

Now, if you want a challenge, try to find out what the antecedents of the Diocese of Southwell were, also why it got put into Canterbury and then in York. Morwen - Talk 23:18, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for note. Outside of that, I just noticed the map of Dioceses has a spelling mistake - should be "Lichfield" not "Litchfield". Morwen - Talk 10:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Biography

Template:Infobox Biography has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Infobox Biography. Thank you. DreamGuy 07:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

An Invitation

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

A.J.A. 21:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Jesus template

No skin off my bad. I was originally going to propose the article for deletion but thought that it could be improved. Savidan 13:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Might I suggest {{prod}} instead of AfD. Savidan 19:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Comma Johanneum

First, thanks for your edit on Comma Johanneum. I've been trying to expand that article into a closer-to-comprehensive state, and I'm sure that I've written a least a few phrases which just don't make sense. If you'd like to read it through again, I'd be grateful for a clarity check. Of course, the article is still incomplete, though maybe not as woefully so as it had been; the "Modern views" section needs a few more paragraphs of good prose. I welcome any good references you might have on the topic, naturally.

Since this is the kind of topic where one naturally treads on many sensitive toes, I'd appreciate whatever input you may have on how to keep the article satisfactorily NPOV.

Best wishes, Anville 08:26, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you!

Thank you!

Hi Grutter. On behalf of my right eye, I'd like to thank you for giving me your support on my recent RfA. It ended with a final tally of (73/2/2) and therefore I have been installed as an administrator now, and I'm ready to serve Wikipedians all over the world with my newly acquired mop and bucket. If you have any questions, do not hestitate to forward them to my talkpage. Once again, thanks for your support. SoothingR 20:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

rƒa · ɐƒɹ

Thank you for supporting me in my request for adminship! It ended with a tally of 39/5/4, and I am now an admin. I'm glad to have earned the trust of the community, and I will make use of it responsibly. Of course, you can let me know of any comments or concerns you have.

With a million articles in front of me, I'd better get mopping.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 05:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

What was behind your reversion of Textus Receptus?

I notice that you reverted a couple of months of revisions on Textus Receptus, and called it a minor edit ('m'). I'm a newbie here and my change to Textus Receptus was to fix a broken dash, so I don't have an agenda or an editorial position on this.

But I'm curious to understand better why and how edits are made to articles. What makes that reversion a minor one, and why did you undo those eight or so edits to the article? Were they invalid somehow? How can one tell?

Thanks for your help with this. Best regards, --Dmacf 01:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion

Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Fishhead64 21:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Ancient Near East warfare taskforce

I see you’re a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near East. Might you be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Ancient Near East warfare task force? See its talk page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Ancient Near East taskforce? Neddyseagoon 15:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

List of Saskatchewan general elections

I've made many of changes you suggested. Could you have a look, and possibly comment further over at its featured list discussion page. Tompw 13:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

List of Saskatchewan general elections

List of Saskatchewan general elections is currently up for nomination for Featured List status. As you commented last time on its (unsuccessful) attempt, I was wondering if you would like to have another look, and see if it merits promotion. Tompw 11:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments - much apreciated. :-) Tompw 13:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You may be interested to know that the Alberta, Manitoba and British Columbia equivilants are currently Featured List Candidates, and I would welcome your input. Tompw 17:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Following your comments, I've done some work on the Nova Scotia list, and replied on its WP:FLC page. Tompw 14:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

List of film formats FLC

Thanks for your comments regarding the FLC! I have responded with a question of my own regarding your comments that hopefully you can clarify for me. I also have been musing more about the inline cites, but I'll get to that in a bit... Many thanks again! Girolamo Savonarola 03:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

CFD Category:Anti-creationism

You have either edited Category:Anti-creationism or contributed to the previous discussion[2] about its encyclopedic value.

This a courtesy notice that it has again be nominated for a deletion discussion[3].--ZayZayEM 02:42, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Request Your Intervention

Hello Grutter, Last year you made suggestions for editing the page titled 'Suzanne Olsson.' Her book and research deal with archaeology and Jesus in India. Her name and book appear on quite a few Wiki pages in relevent fields.

After your help, all went quiet for a year. Meanwhile Ms. Olsson released a new edition of her book with a change in the title. I have gradually been including the new title and information at various wiki pages where it is relevent and appropriate to do so.(pages such as Yuz Asaf, Jesus in India, crucifixion, grave of jesus, pictures of jesus, tomb of Jesus, Roza Bal, et cetera)

Last week a new Wiki (?) member suddenly began deleting mention of Olsson's name and research on other sites where her research and her new book were recently added. He considered them irrelevent and self=promotion..

Now after rasing so many fusses, the critic, 'high on a tree' has stopped responding altogether. I am at a loss how to procede.

Would you be so kind as to jump in and help ?

I would like to update relevent Wiki pages but I do not want this kind of constant re-editing from this person or anyone else. I thought with your help last year that we finally had it right...it might be to benefit of all if you could help again as this is an area in your expertise anyway...

Thanks, Kashmir 2

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Creationism2

Template:Creationism2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Neelix (talk) 20:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Culture

Hi, I am here to solicit your help. As of a week ago, the culture article was just a total trainwreck. There was a GA and it elicited many reasonable criticisms. I recently did a major revision of the article, although my approach was conservative: I deleted redundancies, deleted fringe and tangential material, and reorganized what was left in an attempt to highlight distinct approaches and points of view. I explain all this in more detail on the talk page starting here (note: the two people who did the GA think my revision is bad and the earlier version should be restored). I admit that my revision has big holes, and i am hoping other editors can help fill them in.

A major hole involves material culture:

• what do we know about the evolution of tool-use?
• what is the relationship between material culture and symbolic or mental culture?
• how do archeologists conceptualize culture? What are the main debates today among archeologists over how to define and study culture?

I do not want to duplicate the archeology article ... I think Culture should be about "culture" and the different views and approaches to conceptualizing and studying culture. But clearly, archeology should be represented in this.

I know everyone has other things to work on - any edits you can make would be valuable, I am sure. You may also have suggestions about the organization of the article (e.g. should we have separate sections on cultural anthropology and archeology? or should we have separate sections on Taylor's categories, non-material culture, behavioral culture, and material artefacts of the preceding two? Or something else?

Anyway, I appreciate any help you can give! Slrubenstein | Talk 16:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Contests

User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)