User talk:Adam Bishop

Melisende peer review

You are one of the earliest contributors to the Outremer biographies and probably the earliest still active. Back when you worked on the article about Queen Melisende, I did not yet speak English :D If you have any comments on the state of the article now, I would love to read them at Wikipedia:Peer review/Melisende, Queen of Jerusalem/archive1. Surtsicna (talk) 18:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was an undergraduate student back then! Just a baby. I will be happy to take a look at it, and I'll add my comments to the peer review page. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, Adam Bishop. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 03:30, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem

I would highly appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem/archive2. I have tried to avoid to present the kingdom's history as a collection of political events and battles, and I understand you are interested in social history. Thank you for your time in advance. Borsoka (talk) 03:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Review notice

I have nominated Treaty of Devol for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for your adminisrative eyes

I am making this request of you as a Wikipedia administrator in order to get some objective views about the article on Landmark Worldwide. More to the point, on the extensive arguments on the talk page. As someone who worked for the company I have never edited the article, but have participated in those discussions and been open about my history. That may bias my opinions so I am out to invite the views of others.

A number of users feel the current article as posted doesn't fit with Wikipedia's standards about organizations, and object to edits made that over-emphasize complaints dating back before Landmark Worldwide was incorporated. Reading through the cited articles, many do not pass the test of WP:NPOV. None object to items critical of the company but all (myself included) suggest they need verification and a different location in the article.

I am making this request of you as a Wikipedia administrator in order to get some objective views about the article on Landmark Worldwide. More to the point, on the extensive arguments on the talk page. As someone who worked for the company I have never edited the article, but have participated in those discussions and been open about my history. That may bias my opinions so I am out to invite the views of others.

I am reaching out to you in your capacity as a Wikipedia administrator and asking that you expend a little time and help us all sort this out. Thank you in advance Ndeavour (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was posted on the talkpages of 7 different administrators, of which 3 have already responded. Polygnotus (talk) 21:02, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 23:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sympathy

Nothing worse than seeing a "reliable" source communicating information you know to be laughably incorrect. Alas that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes on WP. Anyway you've got my sympathy. Hope you can sort your situation out. Simonm223 (talk) 12:49, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! Adam Bishop (talk) 13:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If he was only born in Kansas

Concerning the continued brouhaha(stolen from Yesterday, all my dreams...) about Hugues place of birth, don't you think this illustrates a failure to get the point? Scopes? What? To me this is someone that doesn't like the fact their sources are out-dated and unreliable. I believe this has become disruptive.

To quote user:Chaste Krassley, "Evaluating the historicity of the claims in centuries old texts is a task that should be left to the published work of recent academic historians. There is no reason to include them for claims which are assessed by or better cited from recent scholarship."

And quoting Red Rock Canyon, "I'm pretty sure with sources that old, WP:RSAGE would recommend against using them at all. Sources from centuries ago shouldn't be considered reliable secondary sources. It takes real historical expertise to understand how and when to rely on documents that old. Ideally we should base articles on modern scholarship where professionals interpret, analyze, and summarize those older sources."

Thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:11, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability

Dear Adam, If you know of sources that support what was in the section that I deleted, please include them in the article. As you must well know, they cannot stand if they are not supported. Best Michel Nakashchit (talk) 03:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nakashchit: Do you object to any of the information in that section? Or is it simply because it lacks a specific source? Adam Bishop (talk) 18:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at a dead end

Dear Adam, sorry to bother you, but I need a little guidance. I've been editing House of Bourbon-Anjou, but a user -who also appears to be an administrator- has reverted half of my information twice. The arguments that were used are "unsourced" and "failed verification", reasons I didn't understand because I added references. The fact is, I restored the information by adding more references and, while I was gathering other sources to reference in more detail, that person reversed everything back again.

After this, and to avoid an edit war, I tried to talk to the user on their talk page to make them understand that they shouldn't ruin other people's work and that if they had any specific questions about where the information came from (maybe they can't find it because it's in another language), they should ask me before reverting it. This was of no use because it merely referred me to a past discussion that adds nothing to this specific case.

So I find myself in a situation where I can't improve the information because it's constantly being reversed, and I also can't talk to that person because they don't seem to want to solve the problem, just impose their point.

How should I proceed in such a case?

I hope you can help me. Thank you. TheRichic (Messages here) 13:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I know enough about the subject to help out here, but have you tried any of the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution pages? Adam Bishop (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thank you for answering. Not yet, i'll give it a try. Thanks! TheRichic

(Messages here) 20:05, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Crusades


	Hello! I'm here to reach out to you about WikiProject Crusades, a proposed revival and expansion of the Crusades Task Force. I've noticed your contributions to articles about the crusades and wanted to ask for your input regarding such a project and potential membership. For more information about the idea (and to sign up), please visit the page for the project. Thank you!
	WikiProject Crusades

🌷Reverosie🌷^★talk★ 14:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Agni

You slipped Thomas Agni da Lentini right under me! :D I just did some more digging and I am wondering about the dates of birth and death. Where did you find them? Surtsicna (talk) 09:11, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah sorry! I've had him on my list for a long time, and I wanted to get rid of the red link in the list of patriarchs. Actually, I used the German Wiki article (which was apparently also the source of the French version). But nothing was cited, so I only included information that I was able to cite. Most of the German version seems to be from the Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani. That should be a reliable source, but the information isn't cited there either (at least, not in a way that is very helpful). The date of his death comes from the German article. I didn't find a reference to September 14 , but I guess I forgot to remove it. The specific date ultimately comes from the Histoire d'Eracles Empereur, which says he died on the Feast of the Cross. However, the Dizionario Biografico says some manuscripts mention different dates. So, it's probably best to simply say "September 1277" (as in Hamilton). I'll mention this on the talk page as well. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Nominations for the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Will power" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Will power has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 3 § Will power until a consensus is reached. Electricmemory (talk) 17:48, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Voting for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on 29 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Thomas Agni of Lentini

On 23 September 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Agni of Lentini, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that being outranked by Bishop Thomas Agni of Lentini so infuriated the future Pope Urban IV that he left Palestine and went to Rome? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Agni da Lentini. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Thomas Agni of Lentini), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Gilles of Saumur

On 19 October 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gilles of Saumur, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gilles of Saumur was given the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Tyre as compensation for the loss of the Archdiocese of Damietta during the Seventh Crusade? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gilles of Saumur. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gilles of Saumur), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, Adam Bishop. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

Editing from a temporary account

When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
- There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
- There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

How to enable IP Reveal

Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
- This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

How to use Special:IPContributions
How automatic IP reveal works
How to use IP Info
How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November article improvement drive

Starting on 1 November, the month-long 2025 Article Improvement Drive will target a number of content improvement areas and backlogs. Participating editors will be in line for barnstars and other awards; articles from all aspects of the project will be eligible so there will be something for everybody. Interested editors are encouraged to sign up now! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:17, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations are now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2025! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2025 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations are now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!

Correction: nominations are open until 23:59 (UTC) on 14 December 2025. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:20, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2025! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2025. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Io, Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:34, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The russian propaganda in Wikipedia

Hi, Adam. My name is Kroum from Bulgaria, I didn't know who I should speak to, so I have just picked up your name from a list. I don't know if you can do anything about that questions or at least you can give me an advise. It looks like Wikipedia in Bulgarian is occupied by some pro-Putin group, for which they can get even money from Russia, and it is used for russian propaganda. They have already many admins and if someone tries to say anything against them or against Russia, one gets a ban immediately. I can prove it in a longer message, even here you can see at the first page of the Bulgarian Wikipedia that today, in 2000 Putin singed a law for the new russian anthem and you can listen for 3:34 min to the anthem. And Bulgaria is a EU and NATO member, and the russian anthem is forbidden at the sport events. And that is a very small piece of the russian propaganda in Bulgarian Wikipedia. https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0

So my question is if you have any idea, that something could be done, so the Bulgarian Wikipedia to be stopped to be used in that way. They probably do it in other countries in other languages too. ~2025-42818-72 (talk) 19:54, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute over content and source with other user

Hello, I had added some useful information and proved it accordingly to an article here on Wikipedia but another user removed it for imo dubious reasons. When I said that the article already contained similar information and I just expanded on this he even went as far as to remove that from the original article as well. I think the information is not only very useful and wanted for the readers it was also proven by my references. I dont want to go into changing it back and forth with him so could you look at it and judge who is right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AWaxworker#Berwick_Saga_translations_removed

It's about this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tear_Ring_Saga#Legacy

Thank you in advance. ~2025-43935-29 (talk) 19:16, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]