Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Jim1138 (talk) 09:58, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Santa Maria al Paradiso (Milan), Valerio Corte Basilica of San Savino, Piacenza Discalced Carmelitan Order, Vitale Sala and Ernesto Rigamonti

Santa Maria al Paradiso (Milan) I just tagged Basilica of San Savino, Piacenza for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

A tag has been placed on Discalced Carmelitan Order, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia.

A tag has been placed on Sigismondo di Giovanni requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion,

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|Speedy deletion]] nomination of Gennaro Serra, Duke of Cassano A tag has been placed on Gennaro Serra, Duke of Cassano requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook 06:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gennaro Serra, Duke of Cassano is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gennaro Serra, Duke of Cassano until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook 06:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		impressive work, well done! Cavarrone (talk) 20:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I fixed your page move of Antonio Beccadelli. When moving a page, it's best to include the complete page history rather than just copying the latest version. If you have questions, please ask. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 13:27, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Italian Vedutisti, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:12, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao! Just a formatting note: please don't put centered captions in images. As you can see, they're always put normally. Ciao e buon lavoro! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 08:26, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also reading "Francisco da Volterra" was really frightening... ;) --'''Attilios''' (talk) 18:30, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other notes: please add the country of the entry (es. "in Pisa, Italy"), and do not use boldface in the book titles in the cite book template. Ciao!! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 19:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see you're not checking advices at all, as your new articles are as poor as the previous ones. In general, I see they lack a bit of self-review, like when you left Ca'Rezzonico red link in Giorgio Massari (also, for complete birth and death dates, give a quick check to the Italian articles). Ciao e buon lavoro! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 06:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Panels

Ciao! Please stop adding such panels are they are highly intrusive and not standard. Add instead a footer, like for example that you can find in Titian, Raphael etc. works (i.e., you could add a footer "Venuses in western art" with just links to the separate articles. Putting image galleries with items not described by the articles itself is a bit out of place. Buon lavoro. --'''Attilios''' (talk) 06:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've just seen your very useful addition of Faenza Cathedral. Maybe my additions there should be useful for you to make new articles in Wikipedia format, categories etc. Ciao! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 07:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for translating Jacopo Guarana from the Italian Wikipedia. However, for future articles, please use ((translated page)) on the article talk page to indicate the source article you used for translating. With the appropriate input, this template provides a permanent to the source article which is important to keep the free license of the content. The template documentation is also very helpful. Regards, De728631 (talk) 22:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the new article! Let me know —Theopolisme 02:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Nixie9. Rococo1700, thanks for creating Carlo Murena!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Important architect, you could turn this into a great article, judging by the refs I found in 5 minutes on google.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

to the Franklin Simmons article. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You said "St Mary Major is not common use in English, by my examination of academic and non-academic sources in English, nor by the own church's english website." The first line of the churches own english website reads "Situated on the summit of the Esquiline Hill, St. Mary Major is the only patriarchal basilica of the four in Rome to have retained its paleo-Christian structures." My point is, what you said is the opposite of what is true. The church DOES officially refer to it as "St. Mary Major" in English. Start reading the paragraph here http://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/sm_maggiore/en/storia/interno.htm Xkcdreader (talk) 06:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will post this in the above talk site also.

• First, my comment on the examination of academic and non-academic sources in English stands.
• Second, the title of the page above is The Papal Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore
• Third if you take the Italian version of the paragraph you cite (from the same website):

(La Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, situata sulla sommità del colle Esquilino, è una delle quattro Basiliche patriarcali di Roma ed è la sola che abbia conservato le strutture paleocristiane. Una nota tradizione vuole che sia stata la Vergine ad indicare ed ispirare la costruzione della sua dimora sull'Esquilino. Apparendo in sogno al patrizio Giovanni ed al papa Liberio, chiese la costruzione di una chiesa in suo onore, in un luogo che Essa avrebbe miracolosamente indicato. La mattina del 5 agosto, il colle Esquilino apparve ammantato di neve.)

and compare it to the same paragraph translated using google translate; you get:

The following is the translated version: The Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore, situated on the summit of the Esquiline Hill is one of the four patriarchal basilicas of Rome and is the only one which has preserved early Christian structures. A note tradition has it that the Virgin Mary herself and govern the construction of the Esquiline Hill. Appearing in a dream to the patrician John and Pope Liberius, she asked to build a church in his honor, in a place that she would miraculously indicated. On the morning of August 5, the Esquiline Hill was covered with snow.

The following is the English version as found on the page you cite: Situated on the summit of the Esquiline Hill, St. Mary Major is the only patriarchal basilica of the four in Rome to have retained its paleo-Christian structures.

Tradition has it that the Virgin Mary herself inspired the choice of the Esquiline Hill for the church's construction. Appearing in a dream to both the Patrician John and Pope Liberius, she asked that a church be built in her honor on a site she would miraculously indicate.

The morning of August 5th, the Esquiline Hill was covered with a blanket of snow.

Ultimately I get the sense, that the sentence order of the English and Italian versions are identical; one is a translation of the other. Ultimately, I think the Italian preceded the English. I get a sense that the English is a translated version, bcause the sentence starting with Appearing has an akward structure; it is somewhat run on and ends in a somewhat dangling phrase. My question, to which I do not have the answer is whether the translator in this exercise tried to translate Santa Maria Maggiore to make an effort to have all the words in English for the paragraph. He obviously did not translate the title. However, how did he come up then with Mary Major, since most of the translation engines I tried (Babelfish, Google, Bing) did not make that leap. I don't know. As I said before looking at literature sources, there are a few sources that use St Mary Major, but they are clearly a minority, and some of them have an anglophile disdain of Italian use, calling Livorno, Leghorn, etc. I still don't think it translates to common use. Again, I stand by the title of the website you cite: The Papal Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore.Rococo1700 (talk) 02:12, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Napoleone Boni, Rococo1700! Wikipedia editor Uncletomwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

its a good article.keep up the good work!

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

• an important note

Although you are certainly allowed to base an article on content taken from the Italian Wikipedia, you must not use Wikipedia articles themselves as references. Instead of citing (article X), cite the references listed within (article X).

I've removed that error from two articles which you recently created, but you've created many articles and I don't have time to verify all of them today. DS (talk) 14:16, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your note on Dragonfly's talk page. Let me try to explain further. Wikipedia is not a primary or secondary source, and it shouldn't be used as an authority for information like someone's date of birth. If you are uncomfortable citing books that you haven't currently seen, that's ok, and you can use the Citation Needed template or leave them unsourced for someone to fix later. But please don't cite Wikipedia itself as a source. There is a policy that addresses this point at Wikipedia:Source#Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it. --Pine^✉ 20:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I came here after noticing you often edit some pages I've also recently been editing. And I see that you are quite a prolific contributor. Could I perhaps just suggest that to avoid anachronisms when introducing earlier Italian artists in the lead it may be preferable to link to Italians rather than the current geopolitical entity of Italy? (For example, "Pinco Pallino was an Italian artist of the High Renaissance...") Saluti, 86.151.103.208 (talk) 17:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adding: I realize you may not agree with this... I gather there was a big discussion on Wikipedia about quite what the page for Italy should refer to. It just seems to me that we're often talking about Italian people rather than citizens of Italy in the modern sense. I'm not sure if there's anything about this in Wikipedia's voluminous virtual style manuals. Cheers, 86.151.103.208 (talk) 18:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No objection.Rococo1700 (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Emanuele Caggiano (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Pliny, Capodimonte

Giuseppe Bortignoni the Younger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vatican

Hi Rococo, a doubt, it's Emanuele Mollica (like the title of your article) or "Emmanuele Mollica" (as written in the article)? One of the two things should be fixed... --Cavarrone 07:45, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for getting involved in Tommaso Conca. It's nice to know someone who cares about this field laid eyes on it. For one thing, I didn't know how to unorphan the article. trespassers william (talk) 19:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I liked your article about Pietro Antonio Avanzini. Do you have photos of his paintings to add to the article. That would make the article even better.(talk) 05:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Roccoco, I saw your note at the category page. My original reasoning for creating this category is not to separate these painters from any other category, but to use this category as a basis for (eventually) geolocating frescoes. Most frescoes are in churches and public buildings, and knowing which artists worked where is a great way to discover artworks that are not on Wikimedia Commons yet. So my reasoning has less to do with the use of plaster in the genre per sé, but more to do with the integration of the projects with local progenitors, Breugel, Piet and Boccio - bothe close to the Italian Renaissance. Gallery Uffizi in Florence would be the place. The date is 1750 (considered at this point in time, as later Romantic.

Thank you for your recent articles, including Luigi Rubio (1795 - 1882), which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent articles, including Luigi Rubio (1795 - 1882), which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like ((WikiProject Keyword)) to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. You have new messages at Whiteguru's talk page.
Message added 20:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

Whiteguru (talk) 20:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. You have new messages at Missionedit's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

~ Anastasia (talk) 00:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC) :)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. You have new messages at Missionedit's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

~ Anastasia (talk) 17:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. You have new messages at Talk:Cosroe Dusi.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hello, Rococo1700. You have new messages at Talk:Cosroe Dusi.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Thanks for your note on my page. I had assumed that this category was leftover from the original stub article which got him confused with a painter born with the same name. When it was updated by Voiceditenore, I just assumed that the category had remained.

Given you comments, I've no great objection to the category being re-added, especially as you have that reference - which maybe you can link into the text somewhere? All the best, Viva-Verdi (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Since you started the article today, I've been digging into more of my sources and have raised the question on the Talk:Francesco Tortoli page as to whether we are really writing about the same person. William Ashbrook, the more-or-less definitive Donizetti source (and whose book I have), only mentions him by surname as having authority to sign contracts with composers, especially after Barbaja gave up as Intendant in April 1824 (Donizetti and His Operas, page 606). Looking further, I find that he is referred to in Herbert Winestock's bio as the "Intendant" who could sign contracts(p. 40), so it is not the same "young man" who died in prison.......

Your Grossi source supports the idea of someone named Francesco Tortoli as a Florentine painter born in 1760..... Any help you can provide would be useful. Please leave any response on my talk page: Talk:Viva-Verdi. Thanks. Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Andrea de Litio, Rococo1700!

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

I reviewed your page and connected it to its Italian and French counterpart via wikidata. There is a lot more information in both French and Italian which could be translated and added here.

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

Hi, I'm Polyglot. Rococo1700, thanks for creating Andrea de Litio!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thanks for creating Andrea de Litio, you could improve the page with the wealth of information found on the French and Italian articles.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Polyglot (talk) 19:22, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the article Polyglot (talk) 19:26, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Your complaint about edit warring at Oscar López Rivera

Most likely your complaint at WP:AN3 will close with no action unless you have more data to provide. See the comments there. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 22:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the article's talk page you proposed deleting the "nationality" field from this article's infobox, "either the nationality entry is deleted or made into..." and I went ahead and did it. However, I don't think that either of you is likely to find a consensus on the issue since this is sort of a circular argument. Perhaps keeping the field blank would solve the matter? - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, we have similar problems at Filiberto Ojeda Ríos. Glancing at the talk discussion some clear similarities jump out at me. Factual inaccuracy: Lopez was convicted under the federal armed robbery statute (18 U.S.C. § 1951)[1]. It is called "Interference with Commerce by Extortion Consisting of Threats, Violence or Fear" because interstate commerce is what makes it federal. Use of a firearm added 10 years to his sentence. This is a violent crime. [2] Poor Sourcing: Reference to "political prisoner" in the lead is not a WP:RS but a press release for the book by Luis Nieves Falcón. Falcón wasn't a journalist; he was a socialist, nationalist professor who "has been at the intellectual and activist forefront of every major modern campaign for Puerto Rican sovereignty."[3] Most of the sourcing is poor or absent entirely. I think given the extent of the issues in the articles use of a third opinion WP:3O might help. Strictly speaking there are more than 2 editors involved but an independent seasoned outsider, very familiar with wiki policy, could resolve the POV issues in short order if Mercy11 and company will consent to it. I floated the idea on the Ríos talk page and he changed the subject without shooting it down completely. Eudemis (talk) 14:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Oscar Lopez Rivera". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 28 May 2014.

• Oscar Lopez Rivera, FALN, and Terrorist label

Hello Rococo1700. I am going to suggest that instead of including the statement as such "a Stalinist terrorist group which fought to transform Puerto Rico into a communist state during the 1970s", which as I stated would be POV, is that instead it be written as " considered a Stalinist terrorist group by the United States which fought to transform Puerto Rico into a communist state during the 1970s" with a source and that way it will not seem as a POV statement. Tony the Marine (talk) 21:01, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from Oscar López Rivera, I would appreciate some help in making references to the FALN stick in the ledes of Filiberto Ojeda Ríos and Alejandrina Torres (among others on the Clinton pardon list). Per Wikipedia notability requirements, these people have no demonstrable notability outside of their roles in the FALN.--Froglich (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The request for formal mediation concerning Oscar Lopez Rivera, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of House of Caracciolo, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://dictionary.sensagent.com/caracciolo/en-en/.

Two points here: 1) It is rather bad manners of you to move without consulting the talk page an article of some size which has at least one main author who is still very active, and 2) Vendramin family is much more idiomatic and less pompous. I think "House of.." should be reserved for the princely families of Germany and Central Europe. I will move it there if I can. Johnbod (talk) 13:48, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please read WP:AFD and how to vote, Simply sticking a gallery in to an AFD page with no explanation isn't very helful!,
Thank you. –Davey2010 • (talk) 01:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the "ridiculous" comment - Inserting galleries into afds is generally unhelpful but I guess you wasn't to know that so I perhaps should've AGF better!
I've removed yours and my comments on the afd as I would rather discuss it then argue, Anyway yeah I apologize for the comment,
Have a nice day, Regards, –Davey2010 • (talk) 13:52, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was looking at a couple of the articles that you have been creating on Italian painters, and I noticed a couple of things.

1. According to the Manual of Style (WP:OPENPARAGRAPH) the place of birth should be mentioned, but not together with (date of birth – date of death). See where it says: "Birth and death places should be mentioned in the body if known, and in the lead if they are relevant to the person's notability; they should not be mentioned within the opening brackets."
2. Also, some of the pipe links had the order backwards. If you want to link to the page on "Italian people" but display "Italian", the order should be like this: [[Italian people|Italian]]. This is easy to get backwards, so when I finish an article I always click each link to make sure it displays the page I wanted.
   

Anyway, those articles were great. Thanks for creating them. --Margin1522 (talk) 18:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Lakun.patra. Rococo1700, thanks for creating Santa Maria Infraportas, Foligno!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Great Work !!!!

my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Lakun.patra (talk) 08:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Sant'Alessandro, Brescia, Rococo1700!

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

keep up the great work!

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

Learn more about page curation.

Hi Rococo1700, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 18:21, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Faraggiana Ferrandi Natural History Museum, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.illagomaggiore.com/4297,Poi.html.

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Farmacia del Moro, Florence, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://brunelleschi.imss.fi.it/itineraries/place/FarmaciaMoro.html.

"Duomo" is not the same as "cathedral", as for example at Lendinara. Please leave me a message if you would like more explanation. Eustachiusz (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of agree that they are not identical: to me Duomo always has the overtones of a dome.

However the first-line of the Wikipedia entry for Duomo states:

Duomo is a term for an Italian cathedral church. then it goes on to say it could be former or present, etc. I am not certain if the Lendinara church is the present cathedral.Rococo1700 (talk) 23:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article does indeed say that - but it doesn't say that all duomi are cathedrals. Compare it to the Italian article, which starts: "Il duomo è la chiesa principale di un centro urbano. È spesso anche la cattedrale della diocesi", which makes it much clearer. A cathedral is (nearly) always also a duomo, but a duomo isn't necessarily a cathedral. In English, a church is either the seat (or former seat) of a bishop, in which case it's a cathedral; or it isn't, in which case it's a church. Lendinara, for example, has never had a bishop, so its church - whether or not it's a duomo in Italian - cannot be a cathedral, and never has been, so the English article can't refer to it as one. Does that help? Eustachiusz (talk) 01:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't expect such a quick response! The Russian Tonci did spend some time at a place in Rome called the "Accademia di Fonti", but it's not clear if he was a student or a teacher...and the academy itself doesn't come up on Google, so I think your solution is a good one. (PS: There was a "Sigismondo Tonci" from Siena who was about the right age to be Salvatore's father, but he was a doctor.) WQUlrich (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abbey of San Caprasio in Aulla, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luni. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI... you created a redirect to itself. Bgwhite (talk) 08:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC) FixedRococo1700 (talk) 05:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you create so many new sections on the talkpage, all about one and the same issue. Also, you should not open an Rfc till the issue has been discussed fully on the talkpage. It would even have made sense to post a link on WT:JUDAISM before opening an Rfc. I would recommend to take it easy, because it seems you are a little too agitated about such a minor issue. Debresser (talk) 11:06, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. You have new messages at Debresser's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

If you want, I can help you in your Rococo project. :D

Codice1000.en (talk) 16:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rococo1700, I have removed your comment from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 January 12 because it is off-topic. That page is only for discussions of categories that were nominated via the CfD process on 12 January. I would suggest you pursue the subject via either of the following:

• Post a new section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts with your suggestions, including links to the categories in question, and make another new section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Museums with a link to that discussion and an invitation to participate.
• Open a CfD for the categories you feel should be removed or altered. You should open one CfD that includes all categories together, not several CfDs covering one category each. Then post new sections at the WikiProject pages I have linked above, inviting people to the discussion.

If you need any assistance in taking these actions, let me know and I will be happy to help. Ibadibam (talk) 18:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that ".. in Georgia" and "... in New Jersey" are empty and have been nominated for speedy deletion. I had a brief hunt for NJ paintings with articles but with no success. I think the Georgia category should be disambiguated with (US state), so probably wise to let that one go anyway.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:09, 20 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]

I created a stub... All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:32, 20 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]

What's going on here? We need Category:Borghese Collection, which has now been deleted. Were you responsible for emptying it? Johnbod (talk) 13:18, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure of what you mean. I recall altering the categorizations, but do not recall if I changed the categories from Borghese Collection to Collections of the Galleria Borghese. I tend to agree with the recategorization however. I suspect your concern is that some of the works collected by the Borghese have ended up in other museums, such as the Louvre. Many of these works are antiquities, now categorized as Borghese antiquities, under the category of "Collections of the Gall....", which in effect they are not. However others would argue that those works are not part of a "Borghese Collection" any longer and would be best categorized as "Formerly part of the Borghese Collection". I think it is too complicated to categorize objects according to provenance, since such inventories can be quite complicated.

If your complaint is only that we changed from Borghese Collection to Collections of the Galleria Borghese, then I disagree with your concern. I would urge you to look at the category of Category:Collections of museums in Italy (or any other country) and see that the grammatical construction of the entries fits the latter. Within the Collection of the Galleria Borghese are three subcategories of painting, sculptures, and antiquities. The latter still contains the works from the Louvre. I think that is a minor inconsistency, and which I would overlook because they were once in the Borghese. Bottom line, as you can see , I do not see why we need the Borghese Collection, unless you are embarking on a project of categorizing former accumulated collections. Rococo1700 (talk) 18:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh??!!! You say "I think it is too complicated to categorize objects according to provenance" but this is exactly what you are doing! You did indeed do these edits, only a few days ago, on the 15th. [4] [5]. and added "collections of the Louvre" to "Galleria Borghese"! Crazy. Please stop doing these manic, ill-thought out category changes. Johnbod (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the category as I think it was. Can I remind you that deliberately emptying a category will normally lead to its deletion, as here, and so needs to be raised in a deletion discussion at CFD. Johnbod (talk) 19:33, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've been going though your disambiguation links notices and fixing the issues, but you really must be more careful in checking links when you put them in articles. Then you'll stop receiving those warnings. Ibadibam (talk) 21:13, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm WannaBeEditor. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Bruno Cassinari, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. WannaBeEditor (talk) 04:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see thay you're active User. Do you can look at it and latter although little help me? I would be grateful. Regards. Dawid2009 (talk) 17:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rococo! I would kindly ask you if you can give your opinion here [[6]]. It is a talk about Canova ethnicity/nationality. The talk got a bit tumultuous, so a user asked for a third opinion. It would be a pleasure if you join the talk :) I saw that this is not the first time it happens so your opinion is really welcomed--Walter J. Rotelmayer (talk) 11:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits to Gaspare Carpegna. "The mother was a sword." had me puzzled. :) 32.218.33.92 (talk) 18:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I note by doing some comparison work on various versions of "Bentavenga de Bentivengis" and "Nonantola abbey" that you have been tagging numbers of proper names, creating red empty links thereby. Please, either look up the correct links, or do nothing. Just bracketing every proper name is no help to anybody. --Vicedomino (talk) 08:11, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Vicedomino is referring to WP:REDNO. Drive-by tagging is something else. Ibadibam (talk) 20:43, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I agree all the time. I created hundreds of redlinks for articles on painters, that were subsequently filled with article. I am also working through hundreds of links to places, mainly churches. We have to keep in mind that redlinks can be a way of tagging articles for completion. Also I did link an Orsini name to a pope. It might help someone someday searching through names to reach the pope. Many of the concerns of REDNO do not apply in that case. Rococo1700 (talk) 05:09, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to your stubborn comment, I can only hope that this exchanges prods YOU to greater efforts, not just with the bracket keys, but also with looking afterwards, and making some effort to fix the problems you create. You could easily have used the search function to figure out Nonantola. --Vicedomino (talk) 05:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Always try, but again, I am not sure it is always a problem. So I am not likely to change. My view of Wikipedia has been that the entries are still heuristic, rather than only settled review. For certain areas, for certain entries, the latter should predominate now. For others, it remains a work in progress. Sorry if it bothers you.Rococo1700 (talk) 16:18, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "heuristic, rather than only settled review" doesn't make total sense to me. Do you mean that article names are decided by trial and error, rather than review by multiple editors? That's sort of true, but the consensus process overrules any individual contributions, where applicable. Creating redlinks isn't inherently disruptive, and I myself don't have a problem with it, but Rococo1700, I think we'd all appreciate it if you checked your links a little more thoroughly before creating them. If you'd be a little more careful, then other editors wouldn't have to take as much time to fix your links. For example, you link to disambiguation pages when there is a more precise link that should be used (you may find it easier to check links if you use a tool like linkclassifier). And the case of linking to Monastery of Nonantola when there is already Nonantola Abbey is another good example where a little more care from you will make less work for everyone else. We're all trying to make Wikipedia better for readers; let's make it easier for each other to do so! Ibadibam (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if that is your concern, I still disagree. This argument is beginning to get weird. You should take more care to look at my contributions before making such an assessment. First of all, my previous understanding is that it is not wrong to create links for that redirect to the same topic. It will make it easier for people seeking Nonantola Abbey if there is a redirect from the Monastery of Nonatola. I have made that redirect clear. I think you are wrong to not do so. By doing so, you make Wikipedia better for readers. Finally, I do not apologize for populating Wikipedia with a few thousand entries regarding painters. I have to say that when I started, most of the entries had redlinks for masters and pupils of many painters. Part of my efforts have been to make those redlinks refer to an article, and now that process became easier. Sometimes it is hard because a painter can have names spelled differently, or nicknames. Part of the goal has been to make it easier for someone to link a name to an entry. You should spend time doing that rather than arguing against that. Again, a few years ago, I felt the Italian painter category was highly incomplete, and my entries were chockfull of redlinks. At present, there are likely some 5000 entries for Italian painters. The most comprehensive encyclopedia of Italian painters has over 100,000 names, but many of the entries are just or nearly only that, names with an era. I would imagine entries with more meat are likely 20,000. That would be an ambitious goal. One way of determining what is left to be completed is to keep a list of names without an entry. I prefer to redlink many of the names, and hope they are filled overtime. It has been quite successful, thank you. For example look at my goal of trying to create links for all the pupils of Pietro da Cortona or Federico Barocci. Again, if your concern is disambiguation pages, that is something I periodically try to dig through. I do not know why you claim that always has to involve time for others, since the messages on my discussion page are robot-generated. Different editors will have different styles. Also I have never claimed that I disagree with consensus process, that is a strange claim by you. I have written thousands of entries that have been further edited by thousands of other editors, and I welcome it.

Arrivederci.Rococo1700 (talk) 04:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely welcome your contributions, and I meant no offense! And as I said, I have no issue with your redlinks, for the most part (It was Vicedomino who raised that issue). Redlinks have an important purpose, per WP:REDYES, and the vast majority of your edits fall well within that purpose. Also, thank you for creating a redirect at Monastery of Nonatola. Had you created that redirect at the time you created the redlink, it would have been much better. Since you have some expertise in the subjects you edit, you are the best person to create suitable redirects, or link to the correct page instead of a disambiguation page. Leaving this work for other editors means that 1) they may be more likely to direct the link to the wrong page, and 2) until those other editors do that work, which may take weeks or months, our readers don't have a useful link to follow. The best time to address disambiguation links is not periodically digging through, as you say, but immediately after you create them. The bot-generated disambiguation link notifications are not informational; they are a request for your immediate action. As the one who has addressed most of the disambiguation link notifications that have been left above at this talk page, I would certainly appreciate your taking just a little extra time to improve the quality of your links. I'm not suggesting you change your approach, only be a bit more thorough.

Last, I want to request clarification again. I don't claim that you disagree with consensus; I don't understand what you meant by "heuristic, rather than only settled review", and was asking whether "settled review" was referring to consensus. Could you restate this phrase, so I may understand you better? Ibadibam (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So far, it has not decided to eliminate the category, so it is valid to use the more specific category--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 15:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

that's not the point, the point is if a person wants to search for "Cathedrals by country" the category "Cathedrals in Italy" is needed, and if you want to search "Roman Catholic cathedrals by country" category "Roman Catholic cathedrals in Italy" is needed. Not only is Italy, it is to maintain order in the categories. As I told you as a category is not eliminated, it is valid and correct use it.--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 21:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia in Italian https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattedrali_in_Italia#Chiesa_ortodossa and English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cathedrals_in_Italy most of the cathedrals in Italy are Roman Catholic, but there are also two Greek Orthodox (Greek Orthodox Church; San Giorgio dei Greci [Venezia] and tempio della Santissima Madre di Dio e San Nicola di Mira [Rimini]). and 2 cathedrals Italian Albanian Italo-Albanian Catholic Church (St. Nicholas Cathedral in Lungro and Cathedral of St Demetrius the Martyr in Piana degli Albanesi), if we follow your theory these are all Roman Catholic cathedrals and is not. So as I said, until it is deleted by voting this category, it is valid to use it ... not only because there are many similar categories in many other countries, but to separate them by religious denomination, So if I can answer your question perfectly and easily.--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 20:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No my theory is have one category: Cathedrals in Italy, and then two sub-categories with the churches above.

Much simpler and easier. Does that counter your argument, perfectly and easily?Rococo1700 (talk) 23:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really I do not understand why this is a problem, so much anguish for a single category. The category does not affect you at all, just this allows organized Catholic cathedrals by countries, it is very simple to understand. It is not something I invented, is a common practice to organize buildings by religious denomination. When the category is removed, then I'll let of using it--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 16:30, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained why I object, when your create a category for 395 of the entries out of 400 (I am assuming that is the number of Cathedrals in Italy), it makes for more clutter. rather than when you make one a subcategory for the 5 that do not fitRococo1700 (talk) 02:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the categories if made with a logical and standardized order, do not have to create disorder, opposite, They can facilitate the search for something. Check other similar categories, and you can see that it is a common practice, There is no minimum or maximum number of pages that can be included in a category--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 19:05, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the red link for Gabburi, as I think he deserves an article. I requested one on WikiProject:Italy probably over a year ago. I'm an admirer of your contributions, and I'm wondering if when you have the time and interest, you could create an article on him sometime in the future? I can only read some Italian and need help with dictionaries, and my language skills just aren't good enough for me to be able to create an article on him, as all the sources are in Italian. Thank you.Curiocurio (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've transalted in italian your article about Raffaello Tancredi (here the upgraded italian article: it:Raffaello Tancredi). I found this book about "living neapolitan painters" published in 1916: so probably at that time Tancredi was still alive. I found also an historical image of Tancredi and some works: see c:Category:Raffaello Tancredi. --Holapaco77 (talk) 10:08, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Abbey of Sant'Antimo a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied on my talk page. Eustachiusz (talk) 21:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• AE

You have a complaint filed against you at AE here. User:Kamel Tebaast 05:40, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

• ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. <span style="font-size:smaller;:'arial bold',;border:1px solid Black User:Kamel Tebaast 06:24, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

• Use of AE

G'day, WP:AE is only used to:

• request administrative action against editors violating a remedy (not merely a principle) or an injunction in an Arbitration Committee decision, or a discretionary sanction imposed by an administrator,
• request discretionary sanctions against previously alerted editors who engage in misconduct in a topic area subject to discretionary sanctions,
• request other administrative measures, such as revert restrictions, with respect to pages that are being disrupted in topic areas subject to discretionary sanctions, or
• appeal discretionary sanctions to uninvolved administrators.

What this matter is about doesn't appear to fall within the purposes of AE, so I have closed the case. The most appropriate venue is probably WP:ANI. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:30, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I moved your comment at the Rfc to the "Threaded Discussion" subsection. The "Survey" subsection is for the short version of your opinion, one - two lines at most, and no discussion. It's like a vote. So please add some short version of your opinion to the "Survey" subsection as well. Debresser (talk) 09:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Debresser (talk) 15:51, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you for 48 hours for your persistent disruption at Menachem Mendel Schneerson against consensus. Your comments at the article Talk page are also not constructive and demonstrate that you are not thinking like an editor but like a crusader with an agenda. Those comments ("I am not deterred") also show that you will continue to edit-war regardless of the fact that other editors view the material as misplaced and inapproriate. See WP:GAB for your appeal rights.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:24, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I've discovered that in the article for Domenico Galeazzi, the categories for his birth and death dates are different than the one's stated at the top of the article. I don't know which ones are correct, could you have a look? Omegastar (talk) 17:07, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Rococo1700,

you moved Palazzo Chigi-Saracini [7] and added ", Siena" to it. Please note that if there is only one building with that name, city names are not added to it, or if the building is most well-known under that name. You can see White House as an example, and here is the policy WP:NAME. You have been doing that with articles in these categories Category:Palaces in Florence and Category:Palaces in Siena. Please be so kind and move them to the proper Wiki naming format. Thank you for your understanding. Gryffindor (talk) 08:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paintings depicting the Massacre of the Innocents, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rococo, I saw you're very active when it comes to creating pages for churches in Italy. Thank you very much for all your contributions to Wikipedia. I just wanted to let you know yesterday I created Template:Places of worship in Turin. It basically contains all places of worship listed this itwiki article and that also have their own page in the Italian wikipedia. I just wanted to let you know about it so that maybe we can, together, turn some of those red links into blue! :) Here's to a fruitful collaboration, ---roroke (talk) 03:54, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

San Michele Arcangelo, Antegnate, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your edits in my article, but the bit where I state that Portugal was the first world power is a consensus among scholars, and it supports how the Portuguese defeated the Ottomans. Also, you edit the quotations from the author Charles Boxer at the bottom of you edition. Could you undo those? SirPortuga (talk) 17:27, 13 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirPortuga (talk • contribs) 13:27, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rococo1700 reply posted in the article page SirPortuga (talk) 22:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Notifying you of relevant sanctions relating to the page Oscar López Rivera, which you have recently edited. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Please do not add any material to biographies of living persons that is not supported by a reliable source, as in this edit. Such additions are subject to immediate removal. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

* Talk page discussions should focus on applicable sources and policies. Wikpedia does not take a stand on whether something is "serious" or not; that's basic NPOV. Crucially, biographical articles are not venues to demonize subjects based on editors' personal feelings. Please take the time to read WP:BLP: "biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times". —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

* Your removal of the Finley ref from the "Trial" section is not justified by your edit summary. Finley says "accused", not "convicted". Please learn the difference. I have re-added the material. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 03:29, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, sorting out wikidata items about italian churches I noticed the existence of Oratory of San Leonardo, Borgomanero (but the text refers to Santa Caterina) and this San Leonardo, Borgomanero which is exactly the same church/title...I added an image on the second article. Bye --Civvì (talk) 18:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700,

Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for creating Santi Cosmo e Damiano, Isernia! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

This has been tagged for referencing issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with ((Re|Boleyn)). And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 08:09, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Giovanni Battista Crema is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giovanni Battista Crema until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  04:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article San Lorenzo, Carmignano has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article may not meet general notability guideline and building notability guidelines, main content was copied and pasted from an external website

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrSwagger21 (talk) 02:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:16th-century Roman Catholic church buildings by decade requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pesenti Family of Painters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pesenti Family of Painters until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you check recent edits to the Oratory of San Leonardo by User:Alienautic? I'm not sure if they are correct. Denisarona (talk) 17:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Sarcophagus of Stilicho—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Ewf9h-bg (talk) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For your work creating articles for churches. God bless. ♠Vami_IV†♠ 13:06, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Temple of Santo Stefano della Vittoria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Votive Church.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Giuseppe Sardi (1624–1699). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Giuseppe Sardi (1624–1699) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ist this the same person as Francesco Costanzo Cattaneo? If so, you might consider merging these articles. --Johannnes89 (talk) 13:06, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Manfredo I Pio, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 14:15, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Manfredo I Pio a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Manfredo I Pio. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 01:32, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see in a recent addition to Emilio Sommariva you included material from a webpage that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 23:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent addition to the categories in this article - thanks! Dmhball~enwiki (talk) 12:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited San Giuliano, Catania, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francesco Battaglia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rococo1700, I ran across Clementi Clinic building, Catania and wondered if it shouldn't be titled Clementi Clinic or Clementi Clinic building, since there's no need for disambiguation. Leschnei (talk) 14:52, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Ingratis. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Castello Scammacca, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Ingratis (talk) 13:59, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700,

Thank you for creating San Francesco di Paola, Caltagirone.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This article needs more references to meet notability for buildings. A diocesan entry about a church is insufficient.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|Whiteguru)). Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Giovanni Spoldi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Apparently of truly minimal significance, the cited sources have only the scantiest of coverage, does not meet WP:NBIO. Not in Treccani, GroveArt or the Benezit dictionary, no indication here that any work of his in held in a public collection.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Castello Scammacca, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. The Italian Wikipedia cannot be counted as a source. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ingratis (talk) 19:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Castello Scammacca. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been better for you to move the Draft back to main space that creating a new version of the article. Now, we have two copies of Castello Scammacca. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Manfredo I Pio, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Whiteguru. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, San Giovanni Battista, Monterosso Almo, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Whiteguru (talk) 05:56, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to determine if the article San Rocco, Marsico Nuovo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Rocco, Marsico Nuovo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

SL93 (talk) 21:24, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you were trying to do at CfD, but since it related to an empty category, I've nominated the category for speedy deletion instead. You're welcome to contest that and (properly) create a CfD instead if you have any concerns. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 22:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Santa Maria dell'Itria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albergaria.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Giardino Pacini has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet notability requirements for a place WP:GEOFEAT

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mr.weedle (talk) 16:40, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Palazzina Reale delle Cascine, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other test edits you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its page contains many informations. Xx236 (talk) 08:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Buildings and structures in Italy by style has been nominated for merging. Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_20#Buildings_and_structures_by_style. – Fayenatic London 15:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monument to Giordano Bruno, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Rome.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:19th-century Historians from the Republic of Venice indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rococo1700. I noticed that your recent edit to Gabriele Pepe added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 23:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Archaeological Museum of Orvieto, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Etruscan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Acquasparta

added a link pointing to Palazzo Cesi

San Fortunato, Todi

added a link pointing to Angelo Cesi

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on San Lorenzo, Civitella del Tronto requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

No indication of importance; the claim that it was used as a "bastion of the defence" is not a claim of significance, as this could apply to almost any building in a current or former area of urban armed conflict.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Actualcpscm (talk) 16:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There were two pages about the same painter. Xx236 (talk) 08:07, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:1695 paintings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:45, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Giovanni Colombini (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:2DABS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 21:17, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paintings in Haarlem has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:03, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Paintings in the Netherlands by province indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Palazzo Comunale, Piacenza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alessandro Farnese.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romano Vio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antonio Santarelli.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paintings in Denmark by region has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 14:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]