I take requests for image and source reviews on historical topics at A-Class and Featured level. Please post all requests on this page.
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as
contentious topics:
|
Thanks for your suggestions in
/info/en/?search=Draft:Quantum_metrological_gain
Now I refer also to Trenyi et al. 2024 in that line. I changed the wording. The notion has already been defined in Toth el al. 2020, because of that I would like to cite it as well.
Is the present form OK with you, or you would suggest a change. Please let me know. Thank you!
Quantum1956
Thanks for accepting my Deception Island Incident draft. Cheers! Bob meade ( talk) 21:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I have just listed a ton of new studies that come to other conclusions: why do you keep on hindering work, which is evidence and empirically based ? Please be more constructive… LevanteCra ( talk) 17:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
-
WP:NOR is not optional. A good source for "It used to be believed that X, but more recent studies have found Y" would say something like "In this field, X used to be the predominant belief. However, in 1999 Scholar Z published research showing Y. Over time Y has become increasingly accepted and there are now few scholars arguing X". It's not acceptable to just cite studies saying "Y is true". (
t ·
c)
buidhe 17:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- I have linked many actual dissertations, among them scholars from London School of Economics, University of Basel, Lund, UCLA and so on. The claim that Bruinessens studies are old is valid. Ages ago the guy said some stuff in order not to enragen the merits of the countries he so beautifully travelled trough. His ,,Research“ is old, the guy is now 77. Many Young, gifted scholars looked at the matter at hand and came to other conclusions. Original research. New. This is unrefutable. Just change it to ,,other authors“ conclude it was genocide. But stop deleting, hindering, undoing, as if that is your only Dogma. Wikipedia is meant to inform people more or less scientifically. Not hinder the truth with small grammatical plays and so on. LevanteCra ( talk) 17:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Please continue this discussion on article talk. ( t · c) buidhe 17:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I am here to ask for help. Since this is a "flagship" article, I think it should be among our best. I would like to see it go FA, but I have never had one, and I need expert advice. I am hoping (begging) for you to please take a look over the article and make any recommendations you can think of. Thank you. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 18:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ask me again at the beginning of June. I'm pretty busy rn unfortunately (
t ·
c)
buidhe 18:30, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Okay! If things aren't in shape by then I will. Yours is one of the WP opinions I value most. Good luck with whatever you are doing! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Buidhe, thank you for leaving a comment on the FA review for Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I was wondering if you would be interested in supporting the nomination? Llewee ( talk) 13:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
On 16 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Soviet prisoners of war were the second-largest group of victims of Nazi mass killing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
|
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 14,911 views (621.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2024 – nice work! |
GalliumBot ( talk • contribs) (he/ it) 03:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
On 18 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Data breach, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that data breaches are rarely detected by the compromised organization? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Data breach. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Data breach), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you're doing well. If you have a couple of minutes, would you mind looking at Talk:Never again#Nazism vs. fascism? I took a stab, but I am not sure it's the best way to go. Thanks so much!– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Blessed-name
Template:Blessed-name has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Gonnym (
talk) 08:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Buidhe, regarding your Core contest question, this may not be helpful regarding last year, but I received a prize in 2022. Best, CMD ( talk) 15:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello Buidhe,
I see that you removed this large section about the Foibe massacres on the Ethnic Cleansing article as being undue but the user placed it back. It seems undue as no other event has a large section going into detail of such events and also it isn’t neutrally written as Foibe was mainly a reprisal targeting Italians and Slavs associated with collaboration. It doesn’t appear consensus that it was ethnic cleansing of Italians. Neither the 300,000 figure for the exodus from Istria and Dalmatia. What’s also misleading is no mention of the ethnic cleansing of slavs in Istria and Dalmatia by Italian Fascist forces during WWII. Could you take a look? Cheers. OyMosby ( talk) 17:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree this content is UNDUE, but the entire section needs an overhaul, not just this part. (
t ·
c)
buidhe 17:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yea the article itself seemed to fixate at certain points. I made some edits like in the etymology section to give brief one sentence summaries on various events there. Appeared to be factoid listed that don’t offer anything profound or worse could mislead. OyMosby ( talk) 17:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should the content be removed again? OyMosby ( talk) 18:05, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:German-name
Template:German-name has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Gonnym (
talk) 09:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
I see that you have removed the table that was in the Marino dialect "lexicon" section due to WP:NOTDICT. However, articles such as Malagasy language and Arbëresh language have identical tables, so I'd like to know if I can add it back. Thanks Manoru007 ( talk) 12:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
I take requests for image and source reviews on historical topics at A-Class and Featured level. Please post all requests on this page.
|
| This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as
contentious topics:
|
Index
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thanks for your suggestions in
/info/en/?search=Draft:Quantum_metrological_gain
Now I refer also to Trenyi et al. 2024 in that line. I changed the wording. The notion has already been defined in Toth el al. 2020, because of that I would like to cite it as well.
Is the present form OK with you, or you would suggest a change. Please let me know. Thank you!
Quantum1956
Thanks for accepting my Deception Island Incident draft. Cheers! Bob meade ( talk) 21:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I have just listed a ton of new studies that come to other conclusions: why do you keep on hindering work, which is evidence and empirically based ? Please be more constructive… LevanteCra ( talk) 17:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
-
WP:NOR is not optional. A good source for "It used to be believed that X, but more recent studies have found Y" would say something like "In this field, X used to be the predominant belief. However, in 1999 Scholar Z published research showing Y. Over time Y has become increasingly accepted and there are now few scholars arguing X". It's not acceptable to just cite studies saying "Y is true". (
t ·
c)
buidhe 17:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- I have linked many actual dissertations, among them scholars from London School of Economics, University of Basel, Lund, UCLA and so on. The claim that Bruinessens studies are old is valid. Ages ago the guy said some stuff in order not to enragen the merits of the countries he so beautifully travelled trough. His ,,Research“ is old, the guy is now 77. Many Young, gifted scholars looked at the matter at hand and came to other conclusions. Original research. New. This is unrefutable. Just change it to ,,other authors“ conclude it was genocide. But stop deleting, hindering, undoing, as if that is your only Dogma. Wikipedia is meant to inform people more or less scientifically. Not hinder the truth with small grammatical plays and so on. LevanteCra ( talk) 17:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Please continue this discussion on article talk. ( t · c) buidhe 17:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I am here to ask for help. Since this is a "flagship" article, I think it should be among our best. I would like to see it go FA, but I have never had one, and I need expert advice. I am hoping (begging) for you to please take a look over the article and make any recommendations you can think of. Thank you. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 18:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ask me again at the beginning of June. I'm pretty busy rn unfortunately (
t ·
c)
buidhe 18:30, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Okay! If things aren't in shape by then I will. Yours is one of the WP opinions I value most. Good luck with whatever you are doing! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Buidhe, thank you for leaving a comment on the FA review for Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I was wondering if you would be interested in supporting the nomination? Llewee ( talk) 13:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
On 16 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Soviet prisoners of war were the second-largest group of victims of Nazi mass killing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
|
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 14,911 views (621.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2024 – nice work! |
GalliumBot ( talk • contribs) (he/ it) 03:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
On 18 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Data breach, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that data breaches are rarely detected by the compromised organization? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Data breach. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Data breach), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you're doing well. If you have a couple of minutes, would you mind looking at Talk:Never again#Nazism vs. fascism? I took a stab, but I am not sure it's the best way to go. Thanks so much!– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Blessed-name
Template:Blessed-name has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Gonnym (
talk) 08:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Buidhe, regarding your Core contest question, this may not be helpful regarding last year, but I received a prize in 2022. Best, CMD ( talk) 15:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello Buidhe,
I see that you removed this large section about the Foibe massacres on the Ethnic Cleansing article as being undue but the user placed it back. It seems undue as no other event has a large section going into detail of such events and also it isn’t neutrally written as Foibe was mainly a reprisal targeting Italians and Slavs associated with collaboration. It doesn’t appear consensus that it was ethnic cleansing of Italians. Neither the 300,000 figure for the exodus from Istria and Dalmatia. What’s also misleading is no mention of the ethnic cleansing of slavs in Istria and Dalmatia by Italian Fascist forces during WWII. Could you take a look? Cheers. OyMosby ( talk) 17:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree this content is UNDUE, but the entire section needs an overhaul, not just this part. (
t ·
c)
buidhe 17:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yea the article itself seemed to fixate at certain points. I made some edits like in the etymology section to give brief one sentence summaries on various events there. Appeared to be factoid listed that don’t offer anything profound or worse could mislead. OyMosby ( talk) 17:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should the content be removed again? OyMosby ( talk) 18:05, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:German-name
Template:German-name has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Gonnym (
talk) 09:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
I see that you have removed the table that was in the Marino dialect "lexicon" section due to WP:NOTDICT. However, articles such as Malagasy language and Arbëresh language have identical tables, so I'd like to know if I can add it back. Thanks Manoru007 ( talk) 12:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)