Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

Hi Lithuanian crusades man

You seem to have restored a publication all of whose allegations have been thoroughly disproves by subsequent more Authoritative sources and publications such as Chronicle of Higher Education. Are you of the opinion that every rumour circulated on social media that is reprinted in a magazine should be on Wikipedia even after it is disproves by professional and independent journalists? Let me know. Otherwise I will be justifies in reversing your edit. Please edit it yourself in accordance with Wikipedia rules. We all abide by the same ones. Thestudentspirit (talk)thestudentspirit

@Thestudentspirit: I will be responding on the article talk page so more editors can contribute. I encourage you not to speculate about other editors' motivations or beliefs, and you should probably read WP:Edit warring—your repeated, undiscussed reversions to remove this information are not constructive. —Wingedserif (talk) 20:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At most the HAU article can include the discussion between Chronicle of Higher Education and Quillette. The Graeber apology is self-published source. In contrast one can cite original emails as reliable source and I could link you to a memorandum if you are interested in knowing what happened.

"The reporting of rumors has a limited encyclopedic value, although in some instances verifiable information about rumors may be appropriate (i.e. if the rumors themselves are noteworthy, regardless of whether or not they are true). Wikipedia is not the place for passing along gossip and rumors."

"Questionable sources Shortcuts WP:QUESTIONABLE WP:QUESTIONED Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions.[9] Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited." From wiki sources page, Thestudentspirit (talk) 08:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)Thestudentspirit[reply]

Write this on the article talk page so other editors can respond there. —Wingedserif (talk) 13:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. wrote it at talk page. Follow the guideline: ""Take special care with contentious material about living and recently deceased people. Unsourced or poorly sourced material that is contentious, especially text that is negative, derogatory, or potentially damaging, should be removed immediately rather than tagged or moved to the talk page." If you want to source factual data, feel free to data in the memo: https://medium.com/@enrique.martino/david-graeber-and-the-hau-coup-b368f8f20f39 that doesnt go against wikipedia guidelines not being able to use 1) anonymous sources; 2) twitter sources, cited as evidence; 3) self-publication of allegations (Graeber's apology). Thestudentspirit (talk) 14:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)thestudentspirit[reply]

Noticed your interest in the Italian antifascism template, you might be interested in the above template I created, feel free to add, comment, revise. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 09:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating that template; I'll take a look! I had translated the Italian antifascism template because I was surprised to see that en-wiki didn't have much in the way of organizing info about the Italian partisans. —Wingedserif (talk) 13:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Fourth Estate (painting) 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 Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 14:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article American Pre-Raphaelites, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the American Pre-Raphaelite painters had an obsession with depicting birds' nest still lifes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/American Pre-Raphaelites. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, American Pre-Raphaelites), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 12:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Fourth Estate (painting) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Fourth Estate (painting) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 11:01, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Wingedserif! The article you nominated, Edward Mitchell Bannister, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on the Triple Crown(s)! You might be interested in a userbox I made, ((User crown)):

This user has been awarded a Standard Triple Crown.

— Bilorv (talk) 21:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Napoleonic looting of art 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 FredModulars -- FredModulars (talk) 03:21, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FredModulars, thanks for taking an interest in this article. I saw your edit summary on the GAN page and I want to confirm that I am still logging in and able to try to address any comments. I've just been swept up by the school year, so my WP time has declined. —Wingedserif (talk) 03:58, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'll proceed with the review later today and probably stop somewhere for you to address comments. Thanks for informing me. FredModulars (talk) 11:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I don't... think we've met, but I've been here 15 years, so...

Anyway! I've swapped out the image in Edward Mitchell Bannister for an improved scan which I spent a couple days restoring. Hope it's helpful! We could probably use a cropped version, but I think with cabinet cards - the National Portrait Gallery gives the dimensions, and while they're still called cartes-de-visites in common use (think that's the right plural), we have a whole article on cabinet cards, and a section of the carte-de-visite explaining the difference, so... better to use the more accurate term.

Going to throw it up onto WP:FPC once it's had a little time to settle in. By the way, I'm always happy to help with images, at least, insofar as I can. Just ask! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 04:49, 14 February 2022 (UTC) Oh, fun fact about the photographer: His will makes part of the caselaw of Rhode Island. [1] Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 10:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, looks like it'll be a featured picture come Saturday. Forgive my meddling! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 09:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! It's nice to see the article with the historically appropriate picture (and description, oops!). —Wingedserif (talk) 22:49, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help! If you ever need help finding or improving images - at least from before the 50s or so , I'd be happy to give a search. I know my image archives, or at least enough of them to have a decent chance for America and Europe. I struggle a lot more once we leave the Latin script. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.6% of all FPs} 14:05, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Napoleonic looting of art you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Napoleonic looting of art for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FredModulars -- FredModulars (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Though I only observed your work for the past few months, I can safely say you are 100% a resilient editor, never letting a misstep or criticism get in the way of your work. You truly deserve this. FredModulars (talk) 13:57, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, this is very sweet!! —Wingedserif (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Napoleonic looting of art, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Napoleonic looting of art, French soldiers destroyed the Venetian state ship, the Bucentaur, and melted down its gold decorations? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Napoleonic looting of art 2. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Napoleonic looting of art), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 29 June 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2022, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 11:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

👏👏👏 --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you today for the article, "about Edward Mitchell Bannister, an African-American abolitionist and painter. He first received national recognition for his art in 1876 at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, and he was a founder member of the Rhode Island School of Design and Providence Art Club. I have particularly attempted to expand our coverage of Bannister's earlier abolitionist years in Boston and the specifics of his artistic style and subjects."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

art and artists

Thank you for quality articles such as Edward Mitchell Bannister, Napoleonic looting of art and American Pre-Raphaelites, for translating from Italian such as Oratory of San Pellegrino, for exquisite edit summaries, for " I've done all I can for them", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2747 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Gerda Arendt! I've been busy/burned out w/ a degree program so I haven't been able to contribute much recently, but I'm so glad what I've been able to complete so far is appreciated :D —Wingedserif (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Persephone Books books 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!} 01:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, as I can no longer see the Talk page for the Category because you deleted it—what was your reasoning for speedy deletion, given I had started a discussion on the Talk page to contest the mass-removal of that Category from every title it was applied to? —Wingedserif (talk) 17:07, 31 August 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) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- I'm seeking peer review for the page Welfare Colonialism and based on your interest in anthropology and the peer review instructions so am reaching out to see if you'd be able to take a look and share your thoughts. My notes on the review page are: "Hello, I am requesting peer review of this page. I am somewhat new to the peer review process; my aim is simply to further develop this page. To that end I appeal to those more experienced than I to advise me." Cheers and much thanks. Iguana0000 (talk) 14:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Kamal Al-Mansour, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) 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.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:12, 29 March 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) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]