User talk:Krakkos

Welcome!

Hello, Krakkos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Go Phightins! (talk) 19:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Vangio and Sido, Krakkos!

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

I have reviewed and passed your new article. Great Work!

To reply, leave a comment on Falkirks's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Maybe useful for perspective and sourcing concerning Vienna, Toronto etc

• Ian Wood (comparing critique of Halsall to other perspectives): https://books.google.be/books?id=4X1pAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA311
• Halsall, containing criticism of Heather: https://600transformer.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-do-we-need-barbarians.html

--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks for these links. Was Halsall's article ever published, or was it merely a blogpost? Krakkos (talk) 12:42, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Not actually sure, although in a sense a speech that was recorded is published, and for opinions of individual notable people we can use blogs if it is clear it is theirs.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Positive remarks are always more fun to make: So far this seems to be evolving in a good way. I am sure some of the editors who know more might spot things, and the balance might be something people will want to discuss, but clearly this work needed to be done, and it is an interesting subject.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes it is an interesting subject. If you have more content available on the perspectives of Halsall and others, feel free to share them with me. Krakkos (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

In terms of collecting back and forth accusations I noticed this one which could not be more direct: "there can be no doubt that these works have—in the most generous interpretation—been written sufficiently carelessly as to provide succour to far-right extremists". Halsall article p.518. Halsall really means that, and I know he mentioned it very often on his blog etc whenever Heather et al were willing to appear in public to compare the Roman "immigration crisis" to modern ones.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 16:25, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Chunks of Halsall's argument go back it seems to Goffarts Ch 5 Romes Fall and After and I suspect you have not read through this original version of them. https://books.google.be/books?id=55pDIwvWnpoC&pg=PA111 This could be helpful for more articles? --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

p.113 note 7 of Goffart: he seems time people called Goths Germani was in Spain, when Franks noticed the similarity of languages? Also notes that Paul the Deacon called Franks Gothic? These ideas don't seem to have spread very far yet, but show the difficulty of saying there are only two ways to define Germanic and non Germanic.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 16:45, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

That article by Halsall was very interesting. I added some of his more significant perspectives at relevant articles. Will check the theories of Goffart at a later time. Krakkos (talk) 17:59, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I think your final sentence has made Halsall's strong but careful accusation a little bit more strong. Have a look again? What did you think about User:Srnec's idea to combine coverage of the Toronto school? Not sure what the title would be. Is there a name for the debate overall? Traditionskern would maybe distort the perspective.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

The Toronto School emerged as an outgrowth and response to the Vienna School. One alternative would be to merge all of it into the ethnogenesis article, but the debates between the two schools aren't just about ethnogenesis. If there had been a specific name for the debate that would be ideal title for such a combo-article, but i don't think such a name exists. Krakkos (talk) 18:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

You could add the word "debate" but not sure that is enough. One thing Halsall mentions several times, I notice, is that he thinks Heather et al have to assume that the barbarians had a grand strategy. That is a criticism he feels to be important.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

The most interesting thing I just learned is that Goffart believes the Gothic language was in use in Hispania/Gallia in the 8th century. I wish he had provided a citation for "when the eighth-century Franks ... discovered the similarity of their respective languages". I am unaware of any positive evidence of the Gothic language in the Iberian peninsula (beyond personal names), although it is probably safe to assume that the Gothic liturgy was in use while Arianism was still the official religion. Not sure in any case why it took until the 8th century when they'd been living side by side since the 5th. Intriguing. Srnec (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@Srnec and Krakkos: Halsall seems to read the claim as relating to similarities in names. We should be cautious of this, but as people reading the sources, it may be a lead to more remarks. I am not sure these specific comments of Goffart have been questioned. For his argument the important point is that the idea of anything unifying the Gothic peoples (as lumped together by Procopius) with other Germanic peoples was unknown until Carolingian times. But he often mentions Jordanes as a source used for the idea of a link to the tribes described by Tacitus, and he is seeing him as a source which was used by later scholars to justify various such proposals.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:03, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Tabiti a sock?

Your tagging of User:Tabiti here as a suspected sock of User:Tirgil34 is not supported by any SPI findings. I'd suggest you undo the tag unless you can get confirmation. I am following up on a question from User:Orientls. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 19:15, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Tabiti is certainly a sock of Tirgil34. The only edit of Tabiti was the creation of the article Tabiti on May 16, 2015.[1] This edit is virtually identical to one made by Tirgil34 sock Dashte Qom at Scythian religion on September 8, 2014.[2] It is similar to the creation of the article Tabitu by Tirgil34 sock Greczia on July 12, 2012.[3] It would be helpful if an administrator could place a proper tag on Tabiti per WP:DUCK. Krakkos (talk) 19:21, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Peter Heather

On the Vienna School of History article I see reference to Heather supposedly criticizing Halsall for being biased because of money he got from the European Science Foundation? It comes across as quite a strong accusation. First small concern: the wording needs tweaking to avoid implying that Liebeschuetz also mentioned this organization? Secondly though I do not have access to the 2018 article being cited, but when I went searching I find Peter Heather thanking this same European Science Foundation for his own participation, and numerous references to such a friendly connection. So I am wondering if his remark was really as strong as we are reporting it?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:33, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

@Andrew Lancaster: In his 2018 essay Race, migration and national origins, Heather does write that the European Science Foundation has given a huge amount of support to the Transformation of the Roman World project. Heather was himself at one point part of this project. He writes that this project is suited to the political aims of the European Union. Wolf Liebeschuetz and Bryan Ward-Perkins writes the same thing. Jeanine Rutenburg and Arthur M. Eckstein, in their review of Heather's book, also points out the role of the European Science Foundation in boosting the theories of the Vienna School and the Toronto School. They don't mention Guy Halsall however, but Walter Goffart. Krakkos (talk) 10:22, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge

Excellent work, feel free to put up your articles here!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:58, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romance peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Goths

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Goths you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2020 (UTC)