This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
TonyBallioni has decided to block me because I was trying to preserve an article Wee Curry Monster is disrupting. Instead of asking for explanation TonyBallioni has decided to block me. This is the definitive prove that that Wikipedia is not a place where people can collaborate. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 17:10, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Please stop twisting people's words. Wee Curry Monster did not ask me to unblock you. They said they wouldn't mind if I did so long as you engaged and were willing to work with them (which given your last reply, the answer is pretty clearly "no" on that.) Additionally, you were not blocked because of the warning, you were blocked because of edit warring, which you still don't seem to think is an issue. I also never said it was in the "last months", I was discussing your pattern of behavior here over your entire tenure, which dating back to your first indefinite block (which was lifted after a day), basically can be summed up as you not thinking the rules apply to you and complaining that you are the victim anytime someone points out that you are making mistakes.
Also, this is your fourth indefinite block. By this point, we assume that you know how Wikipedia works. You've been given many more chances than most other editors would have ever had. You still have the chance to appeal this block and explain how you are going to change how you interact with the community and do it in a way that is convincing.
Finally, your last comment makes it clear that this block is justified: two editors object to your edits, and rather than engage with them in good faith, you assume that they are working together to undermine you and continue to revert them, and blame them for your disruptive behavior. This is not something that a time-limited block is going to fix. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:07, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
And with the above mass ping to canvass editors and continue the content dispute you were blocked for, I've revoked your talk page access. You are free to appeal through WP:UTRS. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:23, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Elisa.rolle ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #22338 was submitted on Aug 11, 2018 23:10:16. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 23:10, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Elisa, I'm posting this here for the purpose of transparency, since you, Ritchie333, and me are discussing this via email. As I said via email, while my inclination is for this to be a standard offer situation, I would be willing to change this to a one month block under the following conditions:
I'm sorry that we are in this situation, but hopefully this will provide a way forward. TonyBallioni ( talk) 11:55, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Tony, I have a concern about this. Both parties were engaged in complex reverts. It would be too time-consuming to trace it all, but here are the reverts that led to the block, focusing on one sentence for clarity (the number of reverts refers to this sequence only).
I believe you said that you blocked in part because of Elisa's block log, but that really isn't so extensive. She began editing in March 2017. She was blocked (indefinitely) once that month for disruption (I believe this had to do with poor image placement, then undoing it unnecessarily after others had fixed it); once in July 2017 for copyvio; and again for copyvio in January 2018. To remove talk-page access because she pinged people who might speak up for her is harsh, and it means she was forced to get involved in an email discussion about being unblocked. SarahSV (talk) 16:18, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Tony, the agreement about 1RR and the talk-page arrangements can't be regarded as valid. She had no choice but to agree, because the alternative was an indefinite block. Because talk-page access had been removed, she was forced to engage in an email discussion that she almost certainly would have preferred to avoid or at least to hold on-wiki.
I know of several long-term editors who remove (without archiving) every talk-page post as soon as it appears. It's very annoying, but they're entitled to do it.
Elisa, Tony posted a block template here. If you want to appeal the block, you can re-post that template to your talk page and someone will look at it. If you do appeal, you should explain what you plan to do in future to avoid edit warring. If you focus on your view that the block was unfair because other editors weren't blocked too, it will look as though you're saying you did nothing wrong. It's better to acknowledge that you edit-warred and explain what steps you'll take in future to avoid it. SarahSV (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia is made of words. Words to teach, words to record, words to help. Words are important. Maybe since I'm not an English speaking native, I take more care in the words I use. Words have weight, and this weight makes them important. But also dangerous. I have a thirst of knowledge, yes, I was that crazy child that read an encyclopedia starting from the letter A (yes I did, 33 volumes of it). And more I age, not having my own family, I'm probably scared part of my knowledge will die with me. That is the reason why I try to share it as much as possible. But words hurt. And sometime they hurt too much. I think today I was hurt one time too much. In the past I said I was leaving out of rage. Today I say it out of pain. The sad thing is that now this message will vanish in one week, therefore only who is watching this page will read it. Hope they are more friends. I'm not pinging people. I know who is really intersted is reading. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 21:43, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
You posted this, which is a word-for-word copy of this, clearly labeled at the bottom "Copyright 2010 The Louisa Swain Foundation. All rights reserved.". After two previous indefs for copyright violations, and while being blocked for other violations, you really should have known better. Fram ( talk) 06:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Fram I REALLY do not care at this point. TonyBallioni please let me know why the archive is not working. It's longer than one week. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 06:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
SusunW, there is a museum in Wyoming honouring 13 women, I was expecting all of them had an article. I think it would be good idea to list the missing name for future articles... copyvio removed Elisa.rolle ( talk) 21:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
September is an exciting new month for
Women in Red's worldwide online editathons!
| ||
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
BeenAroundAWhile, I cannot answer on the talk page, but of the red name in the Gallery the following are featured in the Notable Women book of 1914 by Anne André Johnson: Elise J. Blattner Mary C. Dillon Mary Dodds Edna Fern Althea Somerville Grossman Martha H. Hoke Emily Grant Hutchings Alice Gould Pattison May Simonds I was planning to write an article about them, but for obvious reason, I was prevented in doing so. I would save at least the above names other than the blu links to. For your information, the other women missing an article included in Notable Women are: Amelia C. Fruchte Anna C. Hedges Anna Ellis Reifsnider Anna Sneed Cairns Annie Laurie Y. Orff Annie Rooney Knight Eliza Buckely Ingalls Ellen Osborn Maria I. Johnston Mary C. McCulloch Mary Fisher Miriam Coste Senseney Elisa.rolle ( talk) 07:45, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
“The sad thing is that now this message will vanish in one week, therefore only who is watching this page will read it.” You are wrong. I just spent an hour going back in your history for almost a year. It is Kafka-esque. You are right to take some time off. BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 08:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree, proud of having been a co-author of Kafka, mmissing the main author who is also blocked for something kafkaesque. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
The article Isophene Goodin Bailhache has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
I have added a book source with a short mention. But even the most open searches including searches on her husband John Mason Bailhache do not bring about significant coverage. Fails BASIC/GNG.
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.
Sam
Sailor 18:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Isophene Goodin Bailhache 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/Isophene Goodin Bailhache 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. ∯WBG converse 15:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
SusunW, Rosiestep, Thsmi002, Megalibrarygirl, this is apparently a subtle way to have a backslap to another editor after an apparently civil discussion went wrong (note, in the Article for deletion reason the sentence "despite the quasi-good efforts of SusunW"). Isophene Goodin Bailhache is now up for deletion. I'm too fed up by the current state of Wikipedia to even have the slightly will to do something to save this article. I just want to record my disgust for this approach, that unfortunately I found in too many editors/administrators. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 15:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Elisa, I don't think it's a big secret that I'm pissed off that you're blocked, not least because I spent time with the original blocking administrator to get the block reduced, then somebody else came in and blocked you for something I thought was pretty innocuous. I personally want to unblock you but I would be wheel-warring with Fram and almost certainly lose my administrator tools if I did it. I can review the block on WP:AN and see what consensus comes back with, but I would have to come up with good arguments (and be backed up by Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Rosie etc) for it to succeed.
Godric, I think Elisa knows what the canvassing guidelines are; given her situation, linking to them here is not very subtle or particularly nice. It feels like rubbing salt in their wounds.
Everyone else, I know some of you are fed up with Elisa's attitude and continually tripping up on copyright violations - but I just see somebody who wants to help the project and has got increasingly frustrated at not being able to contribute in a manner that can satisfy everyone. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
sentences like: - this woman born in 18** is not notable since modern reliable source does not cite them. - this woman is not notable (despite various source in newspaper of the time) and is married or is the daughter to some "important" man (cause he was a politician, a businessman, something else) therefore merge her with his page. - this woman (who got a degree when the number of women vs men getting higher degrees was probably 3 to 100, who had a business when women did not have the right to private property if they were married, who was involved in social life when women did not have the right to vote) is not notable since she was "just" a woman prominent in social circles. - this woman or man is not notable cause if you google them there are few results... - even if this article is well researched and well written, the subject is not notable according to this or that or that other checklist that someone has written in some thousands policies on wikipedia. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 18:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
The article John Frey and Peter Morris has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No indication of fulfillment of WP:GNG.
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.
Mutt Lunker (
talk) 22:52, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Frey and Peter Morris 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/John Frey and Peter Morris 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. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 09:17, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Please join us... We have four new topics for
Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October!
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Ymblanter, you removed the propose deletion tag from the article, so maybe you can do something on the AfD? I'm indef-blocked so I cannot do much. I'm pretty sure that researching John Frey, more it will be available about his academic relevance. As for Morris he was a minor author, so not sure he is meeting notability as his own, that is the reason why, given the common tombstone, I included him in Frey's article, and I'm not opposed to the idea of renaming the page just for Frey. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 09:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Note: I'm pretty tired to be "accused" of canvassing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Frey and Peter Morris. a) if you post an AfD on an article of mine while I'm indef-blocked, I cannot do much to save the article if not posting on my own talk page, considering I'm not even able to comment on that AfD. b) the canvassing page states "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it be done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus. Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, and is considered inappropriate. This is because it compromises the normal consensus decision-making process, and therefore is generally considered disruptive behavior." Above I pinged ONE editor who had removed the propose deletion tag from the article; to this user I told that probably the article can be improved (considering I cannot do that) and BTW I also admitted that a renaming of the article would be useful. Therefore sorry, this is not canvassing, and I'm TIRED of pointing finger people. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 10:27, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
John Andrew Frey (August 29, 1929 – August 22, 1997) was a specialist in 19th century French literature, an author of books on French symbolism, Emile Zola, and Victor Hugo.
John "Jack" Andrew Frey was born on August 29, 1929, the son of George Henry Frey and Marie Berter. He attended Catholic University and was a Fulbright Scholar. [1] In 1955 he collaborated to The Stylistic Relationship Between Poetry and Prose in the Cántico Espiritual of San Juan de la Cruz, Volumes 52-55. [2] He graduated in 1957 and his thesis was Motif symbolism in the disciples of Mallarmé, which he published in 1969. [3]
John Frey became a professor of Romance Languages at George Washington University. He was a specialist in 19th century French literature, and was an author of books on French symbolism (The aesthetics of the Rougon-Macquart, 1976), [4] Emile Zola, and Victor Hugo (Les Contemplations of Victor Hugo: The Ash Wednesday Liturgy, 1988, [5] and A Victor Hugo Encyclopedia, 1999 [6]). He also wrote magazine articles on François-René de Chateaubriand, Honoré de Balzac, Washington Irving, and Andre Gide. [1] [3] Frey criticized the use of medieval imagery in symbolist writing: "The whole representation of the Middle Ages, the captive princess, the enchanted castles, fairies, ghosts, and knights-errants... is oriented towards a sensualism. One is reminded of Swinburne making use of the Pre-Raphaelities in England... It is the cloaking of earthly desires in a mantle of aristocracy, of manor houses, gilded ladies, estates swarming with peacocks and swans, of boat and garden parties, and the perpetual games of love." [7]
Frey met his longtime partner, Peter Morris (December 29, 1929 - August 29, 2010), while they were both students at Catholic University. Even if fellow students, they did not met at college, but at what was at the time Washington, D.C., most popular gay venues, the Chicken Hut, a piano bar/restaurant on H Street near Lafayette Park. The Mattachine Society sponsored biweekly Sunday afternoon gay dances. [1] Morris was born on December 29, 1929, in Peekskill, New York, the son of Louis Morris and Dorothea Chaplin. [8] He was an expert in French cuisine. He was on the Board of Directors of Dignity, a gay Catholic Organization, and co-authored their community cookbook. [1]
John Frey and Peter Morris were together 43 years. Frey died on August 22, 1997, Morris died on August 29, 2010. They are buried together in the gay corner of the Congressional Cemetery, in Washington, D.C. [1] Their tomb are two benches and a table, inviting people to sit and read their inscription: "Us While wandering down the back roads Of my mind I came upon a memory of us Faces garden-fresh blooming and Full of promise. My inner-eye welled up Furrows have etched their way Into our fields of being. What had youth's straightness Now bends and curves into Accommodation. We have become ourselves Not alone, but with each other's Help. On the face of it, youth's bloom Has gone Replaced by hardier stuff Whose roots are deep and all Encompassing. How fortunate we were to Have loved each other then And even more so, to still Love each other Now. Forty-three years together Is not enough But we will be together again. John Andrew Frey August 29, 1929 August 22, 1997 Peter Louis Morris December 29, 1929 August 29, 2010 In Memory of our Parents George Henry Frey Marie Berter Frey Louis Morris Sr. Dorothea Chaplin Morris And our pets, Bucky, Pudgy, Major, Jelp I II, Rosh I II III, Franah I II, Mime I II, Madame" [1]
References
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
cite web}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); External link in |publisher=
(
help); Missing or empty |url=
(
help)
Even if Morris is not an important author, consider that Dignity [16] is still a strong organization in the US. Thank you, Elisa.rolle ( talk) 22:26, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
If you are reasearching women in historical newspapers, for example "Isophene Goodin Bailhache", and you search for "Isophene Goodin Bailhache", or "Isophene G. Bailhache" or "Isophene Bailhache" and you find zero result and then said, oh well, this woman is not notable, you have just failed your entry exam in Women History. Women, in the 19th and 20th century, if married, lost their identity and they became, in this case "Mrs John Mason Bailhache" or "Mrs John M. Bailhache" or "Mrs John Bailhache" or "Mrs Bailhache": all of these searches have results, Mrs Bailhace has even more than 600 hits. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 15:37, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
everyone is discussing about the fact that Wikipedia did not have an article about Donna Strickland before she won the Nobel. Worst, everyone is discussing how actually that article existed in May 2018 (so not so long ago), but it was deleted cause Donna Strickland was judged not notable enough. I read the article that got deleted and it was short, a stub, but it was not against any policy of copyvio or else. It was deleted cause someone said it did not have enough reliable sources, and the fact that no one wrote about Donna Strickland before the Nobel was a proof she was not notable. And in this case they were completely wrong. And so I wondered, why Wikipedia deletes articles if they are not a copyvio and someone took the care to write it? is there a some sort of space issues? if the article is stating the truth, and it's giving even one interesting info, why it should be deleted for the person not being notable enough? notability is a thin concept, to me, Donna Strickland is probably not notable, it's not my field, but to whom work in her field she is problably one of the most notable person alive. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 20:46, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
May someone please correct the birth and death dates of Charles Aufderheide both in the lead and the biography? when I created the page there was an anonymous with similar biography, but this Aufderheide (author and early movie technician) was born Charles Edward Aufderheide on March 9, 1918, in Seymour, Indiana, and died on May 26, 1991, in Indianapolis, Indiana [17] Elisa.rolle ( talk) 08:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
The article Inez Mabel Crawford has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:N .
See this AfD for a near-approximate valid reasoning except that the claim to fame as a registrar of a city chapter of DAR is even more thin.
Neither being the head librarian of a city library nor being the first president of a city-club-federation does contribute to encyclopedic notability.
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.
∯WBG
converse 19:05, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
David Eppstein may you please look if it is possible to improve this article? "She was the first city librarian and head librarian of the San Mateo City Library in San Mateo, California for 27 years from 1911 to 1937. Beyond her duties as librarian, she also worked towards the passage of a local bond issue that increased the size of the library by a factor of three." Im sure there is more about her out there. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 19:36, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Independently of the ultimately end of this article, I would like to remark the fact that an editor that is allowed to leave and edit summary as the following: "Sheerly and horribly incompetent write-up......How the fuck does she have the auto-patrolled bit?" should be at least warned that there are various policies in Wikipedia against such attitude, it's against personal attacks, against fair play, against all that is civil and collaborative approach. Said that I know my words and opinions are written in the wind and no one will take action. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 22:14, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Someone, according to their words, completely rewrote this article to make it better. What they did is to copy and paste the backcover bio of a book published in 1979 (which I had instead linked)... Im pretty sure this is copyvio the book is a reprint of a 1922 edition but the bio is in the 1979 edition so I think under copyright. Can someone take care of it? -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 17:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Three new topics for
WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives
Continuing: | ||
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
May someone delete this revision? this is clearly spam: [19]. Thank you, -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 16:38, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello Elisa, per Special:PermaLink/916829764#Community-ban_appeal your community ban has been lifted, and a suggested set of unblock conditions (editing restrictions) has been presented at Special:PermaLink/916829764#Discuss_(Elisa.rolle). The next step would be for you to actually ask for your block to be lifted (here on your talk page) - with the suggestion that you agree to those unblock conditions. — xaosflux Talk 21:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Elisa.rolle ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I post an unblock request and hereby I confirm that I agree to the unblock conditions: not to create new articles for at least six months, and only if someone from the monitoring team agrees; focus on fixing close paraphrasing in my existing articles or adding sources to existing articles created by me; discuss any substantial addition of new material on User talk:Valereee/ER first; abide by 1RR for 12 months, including my talk page. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 06:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Accept reason:
I unblocked your account, since the community agreed on an unblock, as in the topic above, and you accepted the unblock conditions. Welcome back, but please be very careful — in the past, you have been blocked multiple times, and one more block will probably make an unblock impossible for years to come. Ymblanter ( talk) 06:42, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
George Bellows, North River (1908), Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts. |
Best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2020. | |
Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place. BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 13:20, 30 December 2019 (UTC) |
Two years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Walter Elmer Schofield, Across the River (1904), Carnegie Museum of Art. |
Best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous 2021. | |
Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place. BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 15:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC) Oneupsmanship: This painting turned the friendly rivalry between Edward Redfield and Elmer Schofield into a feud. Schofield was a frequent houseguest at Redfield's farm, upstream from New Hope, Pennsylvania, and the two would go out painting together, competing to capture the better view. Redfield served on the jury for the 1904 Annual Exhibition of the Carnegie Institute; at which, despite Redfield's opposition, Across the River was awarded the Gold Medal and $1,500 prize. It was not until a 1963 interview that the 93-year-old Redfield revealed the painting as the cause of the 40-year feud between them. Schofield may have painted it in England, but a blindsided Redfield knew that it was a view of the Delaware River, from his own front yard! |
I'd like to try and create a page for a living person (usually I do not like to do that). I'd like to create a page for Tommaso Zorzi; he is an LGBTQ Italian influencer, currently he is a participant in the Italian Big Brother, the VIP version (Grande Fratello), and in the past he participated in the italian version of the Amazing Race (Pechino Express) and a program about young and wealthy people (Riccanza). Moreover, he wrote a book, "Siamo tutti bravi con i fidanzati degli altri", with a main Italian publisher, Mondadori (so not self-published). I'd like to be as much impartial as possible. People watching this profile can you please tell me if he passes the notoriety criteria? -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 11:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Back in August 2017, it appears that you added a short reference to "National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution 1901" to a number of articles, but there is no matching full citation for the short reference. There are about ten articles displaying errors as a result.
If possible, can you please add the full citation to each of these articles? Thanks. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 17:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Hey Elisa. Hope all is well. GMG talk 17:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Three years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Elisa.rolle. There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI where you have been mentioned: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Mike Peel. — Diannaa ( talk) 22:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I noticed you created Geraldine Morgan Thompson and uploaded File:Geraldine Thompson, before 1967.jpg. However, I have subsequently determined the picture is a photograph of Thompson's socialite daughter, also named Geraldine Thompson, from circa 1920. The misidentified photograph was also added by you to the elder Geraldine's Find a Grave page, where it may be continuing to cause confusion (I recently again reverted its addition to Geraldine Morgan Thompson). I am not active on Find a Grave, but if you are, please consider moving the image from the mother's profile to the daughter's, and linking the younger Geraldine and second brother Lewis Steenrod Thompson Jr. to their parents. The Thompson family is described in good detail in A Triangle of Land: A History of the Site, Founding, and Progress of Brookdale Community College. Cheers, --Animalparty! ( talk) 17:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Could you give a source for why the photo is used on Myrtle Beach Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Station?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Sorry I was there years ago and just for a few minutes I can't really remember. I think the station was behind me and there was a crossover in front of me and nothing much else around aside for those buildings. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 21:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
The article Letitia H. Erb has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
I really do not think the sourcing here is enough to justify an article. Only one of the sources is really even a secondary source.
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 09:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Five years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:32, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
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) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you added the December 1939 cover of Relief Society Magazine to Elizabeth Anne Wells Cannon. Do you have any sources that state that the woman on the cover is Elizabeth Cannon? The original is on archive.org and I don't see any indication that the woman on the cover is a specific person. Rachel Helps (BYU) ( talk) 21:26, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Six years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
thank you. Elisa
Tonight I had some issues sleeping, and I decided to go through my talk page messages. I realized there were many users who were kind to me, probably more than those I remembered. So I wanted to let them know I'm fine, but a lot has changed: I lost the most important person in my life in 2019, leaving me completely alone during COVID-19. I had double pneumonia in 2020, and just when I though everything was fine, I was hospitalized twice due to some high risk test results in my blood check. At the moment I'm still under therapy, out of the risk level but still beneath the right values. So yes, I'm fine, but not in any mindset of being back. But I appreciated all the friendly comments, and I read all of them. So thank you. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 23:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
The article Florence Hayward (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title and no other topics can be found within a reasonable time.
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
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) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Was Joy McSweeney the person Evelyn Irons saved from the beach? The text of The Times article reads: "Miss Irons rescued a woman from drowning under very courageous circumstances at Tresaith Beach, Cardiganshire. She is the first woman to receive the Stanhope Gold Medal and the first woman since Grace Darling to receive the gold medal of the society. Admiral Sir Michael Hodges, Brigadier General C. S. H. D. Willoughby, and Mr. Dunbar Kilburn represented the society. Miss Irons was accompanied by Mrs. Irons, her mother, Mrs. MacSweeney, the person saved, and Mr. and Mrs. Ewbank." The text appears to suggest that MacSweeney was the person saved! No Swan So Fine ( talk) 13:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
TonyBallioni has decided to block me because I was trying to preserve an article Wee Curry Monster is disrupting. Instead of asking for explanation TonyBallioni has decided to block me. This is the definitive prove that that Wikipedia is not a place where people can collaborate. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 17:10, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Please stop twisting people's words. Wee Curry Monster did not ask me to unblock you. They said they wouldn't mind if I did so long as you engaged and were willing to work with them (which given your last reply, the answer is pretty clearly "no" on that.) Additionally, you were not blocked because of the warning, you were blocked because of edit warring, which you still don't seem to think is an issue. I also never said it was in the "last months", I was discussing your pattern of behavior here over your entire tenure, which dating back to your first indefinite block (which was lifted after a day), basically can be summed up as you not thinking the rules apply to you and complaining that you are the victim anytime someone points out that you are making mistakes.
Also, this is your fourth indefinite block. By this point, we assume that you know how Wikipedia works. You've been given many more chances than most other editors would have ever had. You still have the chance to appeal this block and explain how you are going to change how you interact with the community and do it in a way that is convincing.
Finally, your last comment makes it clear that this block is justified: two editors object to your edits, and rather than engage with them in good faith, you assume that they are working together to undermine you and continue to revert them, and blame them for your disruptive behavior. This is not something that a time-limited block is going to fix. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:07, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
And with the above mass ping to canvass editors and continue the content dispute you were blocked for, I've revoked your talk page access. You are free to appeal through WP:UTRS. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:23, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Elisa.rolle ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #22338 was submitted on Aug 11, 2018 23:10:16. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 23:10, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Elisa, I'm posting this here for the purpose of transparency, since you, Ritchie333, and me are discussing this via email. As I said via email, while my inclination is for this to be a standard offer situation, I would be willing to change this to a one month block under the following conditions:
I'm sorry that we are in this situation, but hopefully this will provide a way forward. TonyBallioni ( talk) 11:55, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Tony, I have a concern about this. Both parties were engaged in complex reverts. It would be too time-consuming to trace it all, but here are the reverts that led to the block, focusing on one sentence for clarity (the number of reverts refers to this sequence only).
I believe you said that you blocked in part because of Elisa's block log, but that really isn't so extensive. She began editing in March 2017. She was blocked (indefinitely) once that month for disruption (I believe this had to do with poor image placement, then undoing it unnecessarily after others had fixed it); once in July 2017 for copyvio; and again for copyvio in January 2018. To remove talk-page access because she pinged people who might speak up for her is harsh, and it means she was forced to get involved in an email discussion about being unblocked. SarahSV (talk) 16:18, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Tony, the agreement about 1RR and the talk-page arrangements can't be regarded as valid. She had no choice but to agree, because the alternative was an indefinite block. Because talk-page access had been removed, she was forced to engage in an email discussion that she almost certainly would have preferred to avoid or at least to hold on-wiki.
I know of several long-term editors who remove (without archiving) every talk-page post as soon as it appears. It's very annoying, but they're entitled to do it.
Elisa, Tony posted a block template here. If you want to appeal the block, you can re-post that template to your talk page and someone will look at it. If you do appeal, you should explain what you plan to do in future to avoid edit warring. If you focus on your view that the block was unfair because other editors weren't blocked too, it will look as though you're saying you did nothing wrong. It's better to acknowledge that you edit-warred and explain what steps you'll take in future to avoid it. SarahSV (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia is made of words. Words to teach, words to record, words to help. Words are important. Maybe since I'm not an English speaking native, I take more care in the words I use. Words have weight, and this weight makes them important. But also dangerous. I have a thirst of knowledge, yes, I was that crazy child that read an encyclopedia starting from the letter A (yes I did, 33 volumes of it). And more I age, not having my own family, I'm probably scared part of my knowledge will die with me. That is the reason why I try to share it as much as possible. But words hurt. And sometime they hurt too much. I think today I was hurt one time too much. In the past I said I was leaving out of rage. Today I say it out of pain. The sad thing is that now this message will vanish in one week, therefore only who is watching this page will read it. Hope they are more friends. I'm not pinging people. I know who is really intersted is reading. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 21:43, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
You posted this, which is a word-for-word copy of this, clearly labeled at the bottom "Copyright 2010 The Louisa Swain Foundation. All rights reserved.". After two previous indefs for copyright violations, and while being blocked for other violations, you really should have known better. Fram ( talk) 06:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Fram I REALLY do not care at this point. TonyBallioni please let me know why the archive is not working. It's longer than one week. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 06:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
SusunW, there is a museum in Wyoming honouring 13 women, I was expecting all of them had an article. I think it would be good idea to list the missing name for future articles... copyvio removed Elisa.rolle ( talk) 21:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
September is an exciting new month for
Women in Red's worldwide online editathons!
| ||
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
BeenAroundAWhile, I cannot answer on the talk page, but of the red name in the Gallery the following are featured in the Notable Women book of 1914 by Anne André Johnson: Elise J. Blattner Mary C. Dillon Mary Dodds Edna Fern Althea Somerville Grossman Martha H. Hoke Emily Grant Hutchings Alice Gould Pattison May Simonds I was planning to write an article about them, but for obvious reason, I was prevented in doing so. I would save at least the above names other than the blu links to. For your information, the other women missing an article included in Notable Women are: Amelia C. Fruchte Anna C. Hedges Anna Ellis Reifsnider Anna Sneed Cairns Annie Laurie Y. Orff Annie Rooney Knight Eliza Buckely Ingalls Ellen Osborn Maria I. Johnston Mary C. McCulloch Mary Fisher Miriam Coste Senseney Elisa.rolle ( talk) 07:45, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
“The sad thing is that now this message will vanish in one week, therefore only who is watching this page will read it.” You are wrong. I just spent an hour going back in your history for almost a year. It is Kafka-esque. You are right to take some time off. BeenAroundAWhile ( talk) 08:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree, proud of having been a co-author of Kafka, mmissing the main author who is also blocked for something kafkaesque. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
The article Isophene Goodin Bailhache has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
I have added a book source with a short mention. But even the most open searches including searches on her husband John Mason Bailhache do not bring about significant coverage. Fails BASIC/GNG.
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.
Sam
Sailor 18:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Isophene Goodin Bailhache 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/Isophene Goodin Bailhache 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. ∯WBG converse 15:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
SusunW, Rosiestep, Thsmi002, Megalibrarygirl, this is apparently a subtle way to have a backslap to another editor after an apparently civil discussion went wrong (note, in the Article for deletion reason the sentence "despite the quasi-good efforts of SusunW"). Isophene Goodin Bailhache is now up for deletion. I'm too fed up by the current state of Wikipedia to even have the slightly will to do something to save this article. I just want to record my disgust for this approach, that unfortunately I found in too many editors/administrators. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 15:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Elisa, I don't think it's a big secret that I'm pissed off that you're blocked, not least because I spent time with the original blocking administrator to get the block reduced, then somebody else came in and blocked you for something I thought was pretty innocuous. I personally want to unblock you but I would be wheel-warring with Fram and almost certainly lose my administrator tools if I did it. I can review the block on WP:AN and see what consensus comes back with, but I would have to come up with good arguments (and be backed up by Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Rosie etc) for it to succeed.
Godric, I think Elisa knows what the canvassing guidelines are; given her situation, linking to them here is not very subtle or particularly nice. It feels like rubbing salt in their wounds.
Everyone else, I know some of you are fed up with Elisa's attitude and continually tripping up on copyright violations - but I just see somebody who wants to help the project and has got increasingly frustrated at not being able to contribute in a manner that can satisfy everyone. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
sentences like: - this woman born in 18** is not notable since modern reliable source does not cite them. - this woman is not notable (despite various source in newspaper of the time) and is married or is the daughter to some "important" man (cause he was a politician, a businessman, something else) therefore merge her with his page. - this woman (who got a degree when the number of women vs men getting higher degrees was probably 3 to 100, who had a business when women did not have the right to private property if they were married, who was involved in social life when women did not have the right to vote) is not notable since she was "just" a woman prominent in social circles. - this woman or man is not notable cause if you google them there are few results... - even if this article is well researched and well written, the subject is not notable according to this or that or that other checklist that someone has written in some thousands policies on wikipedia. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 18:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
The article John Frey and Peter Morris has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No indication of fulfillment of WP:GNG.
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.
Mutt Lunker (
talk) 22:52, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Frey and Peter Morris 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/John Frey and Peter Morris 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. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 09:17, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Please join us... We have four new topics for
Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October!
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Ymblanter, you removed the propose deletion tag from the article, so maybe you can do something on the AfD? I'm indef-blocked so I cannot do much. I'm pretty sure that researching John Frey, more it will be available about his academic relevance. As for Morris he was a minor author, so not sure he is meeting notability as his own, that is the reason why, given the common tombstone, I included him in Frey's article, and I'm not opposed to the idea of renaming the page just for Frey. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 09:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Note: I'm pretty tired to be "accused" of canvassing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Frey and Peter Morris. a) if you post an AfD on an article of mine while I'm indef-blocked, I cannot do much to save the article if not posting on my own talk page, considering I'm not even able to comment on that AfD. b) the canvassing page states "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it be done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus. Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, and is considered inappropriate. This is because it compromises the normal consensus decision-making process, and therefore is generally considered disruptive behavior." Above I pinged ONE editor who had removed the propose deletion tag from the article; to this user I told that probably the article can be improved (considering I cannot do that) and BTW I also admitted that a renaming of the article would be useful. Therefore sorry, this is not canvassing, and I'm TIRED of pointing finger people. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 10:27, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
John Andrew Frey (August 29, 1929 – August 22, 1997) was a specialist in 19th century French literature, an author of books on French symbolism, Emile Zola, and Victor Hugo.
John "Jack" Andrew Frey was born on August 29, 1929, the son of George Henry Frey and Marie Berter. He attended Catholic University and was a Fulbright Scholar. [1] In 1955 he collaborated to The Stylistic Relationship Between Poetry and Prose in the Cántico Espiritual of San Juan de la Cruz, Volumes 52-55. [2] He graduated in 1957 and his thesis was Motif symbolism in the disciples of Mallarmé, which he published in 1969. [3]
John Frey became a professor of Romance Languages at George Washington University. He was a specialist in 19th century French literature, and was an author of books on French symbolism (The aesthetics of the Rougon-Macquart, 1976), [4] Emile Zola, and Victor Hugo (Les Contemplations of Victor Hugo: The Ash Wednesday Liturgy, 1988, [5] and A Victor Hugo Encyclopedia, 1999 [6]). He also wrote magazine articles on François-René de Chateaubriand, Honoré de Balzac, Washington Irving, and Andre Gide. [1] [3] Frey criticized the use of medieval imagery in symbolist writing: "The whole representation of the Middle Ages, the captive princess, the enchanted castles, fairies, ghosts, and knights-errants... is oriented towards a sensualism. One is reminded of Swinburne making use of the Pre-Raphaelities in England... It is the cloaking of earthly desires in a mantle of aristocracy, of manor houses, gilded ladies, estates swarming with peacocks and swans, of boat and garden parties, and the perpetual games of love." [7]
Frey met his longtime partner, Peter Morris (December 29, 1929 - August 29, 2010), while they were both students at Catholic University. Even if fellow students, they did not met at college, but at what was at the time Washington, D.C., most popular gay venues, the Chicken Hut, a piano bar/restaurant on H Street near Lafayette Park. The Mattachine Society sponsored biweekly Sunday afternoon gay dances. [1] Morris was born on December 29, 1929, in Peekskill, New York, the son of Louis Morris and Dorothea Chaplin. [8] He was an expert in French cuisine. He was on the Board of Directors of Dignity, a gay Catholic Organization, and co-authored their community cookbook. [1]
John Frey and Peter Morris were together 43 years. Frey died on August 22, 1997, Morris died on August 29, 2010. They are buried together in the gay corner of the Congressional Cemetery, in Washington, D.C. [1] Their tomb are two benches and a table, inviting people to sit and read their inscription: "Us While wandering down the back roads Of my mind I came upon a memory of us Faces garden-fresh blooming and Full of promise. My inner-eye welled up Furrows have etched their way Into our fields of being. What had youth's straightness Now bends and curves into Accommodation. We have become ourselves Not alone, but with each other's Help. On the face of it, youth's bloom Has gone Replaced by hardier stuff Whose roots are deep and all Encompassing. How fortunate we were to Have loved each other then And even more so, to still Love each other Now. Forty-three years together Is not enough But we will be together again. John Andrew Frey August 29, 1929 August 22, 1997 Peter Louis Morris December 29, 1929 August 29, 2010 In Memory of our Parents George Henry Frey Marie Berter Frey Louis Morris Sr. Dorothea Chaplin Morris And our pets, Bucky, Pudgy, Major, Jelp I II, Rosh I II III, Franah I II, Mime I II, Madame" [1]
References
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (
link){{
cite web}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); External link in |publisher=
(
help); Missing or empty |url=
(
help)
Even if Morris is not an important author, consider that Dignity [16] is still a strong organization in the US. Thank you, Elisa.rolle ( talk) 22:26, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
If you are reasearching women in historical newspapers, for example "Isophene Goodin Bailhache", and you search for "Isophene Goodin Bailhache", or "Isophene G. Bailhache" or "Isophene Bailhache" and you find zero result and then said, oh well, this woman is not notable, you have just failed your entry exam in Women History. Women, in the 19th and 20th century, if married, lost their identity and they became, in this case "Mrs John Mason Bailhache" or "Mrs John M. Bailhache" or "Mrs John Bailhache" or "Mrs Bailhache": all of these searches have results, Mrs Bailhace has even more than 600 hits. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 15:37, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
everyone is discussing about the fact that Wikipedia did not have an article about Donna Strickland before she won the Nobel. Worst, everyone is discussing how actually that article existed in May 2018 (so not so long ago), but it was deleted cause Donna Strickland was judged not notable enough. I read the article that got deleted and it was short, a stub, but it was not against any policy of copyvio or else. It was deleted cause someone said it did not have enough reliable sources, and the fact that no one wrote about Donna Strickland before the Nobel was a proof she was not notable. And in this case they were completely wrong. And so I wondered, why Wikipedia deletes articles if they are not a copyvio and someone took the care to write it? is there a some sort of space issues? if the article is stating the truth, and it's giving even one interesting info, why it should be deleted for the person not being notable enough? notability is a thin concept, to me, Donna Strickland is probably not notable, it's not my field, but to whom work in her field she is problably one of the most notable person alive. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 20:46, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
May someone please correct the birth and death dates of Charles Aufderheide both in the lead and the biography? when I created the page there was an anonymous with similar biography, but this Aufderheide (author and early movie technician) was born Charles Edward Aufderheide on March 9, 1918, in Seymour, Indiana, and died on May 26, 1991, in Indianapolis, Indiana [17] Elisa.rolle ( talk) 08:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
The article Inez Mabel Crawford has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:N .
See this AfD for a near-approximate valid reasoning except that the claim to fame as a registrar of a city chapter of DAR is even more thin.
Neither being the head librarian of a city library nor being the first president of a city-club-federation does contribute to encyclopedic notability.
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.
∯WBG
converse 19:05, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
David Eppstein may you please look if it is possible to improve this article? "She was the first city librarian and head librarian of the San Mateo City Library in San Mateo, California for 27 years from 1911 to 1937. Beyond her duties as librarian, she also worked towards the passage of a local bond issue that increased the size of the library by a factor of three." Im sure there is more about her out there. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 19:36, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Independently of the ultimately end of this article, I would like to remark the fact that an editor that is allowed to leave and edit summary as the following: "Sheerly and horribly incompetent write-up......How the fuck does she have the auto-patrolled bit?" should be at least warned that there are various policies in Wikipedia against such attitude, it's against personal attacks, against fair play, against all that is civil and collaborative approach. Said that I know my words and opinions are written in the wind and no one will take action. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 22:14, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Someone, according to their words, completely rewrote this article to make it better. What they did is to copy and paste the backcover bio of a book published in 1979 (which I had instead linked)... Im pretty sure this is copyvio the book is a reprint of a 1922 edition but the bio is in the 1979 edition so I think under copyright. Can someone take care of it? -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 17:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Three new topics for
WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives
Continuing: | ||
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
May someone delete this revision? this is clearly spam: [19]. Thank you, -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 16:38, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello Elisa, per Special:PermaLink/916829764#Community-ban_appeal your community ban has been lifted, and a suggested set of unblock conditions (editing restrictions) has been presented at Special:PermaLink/916829764#Discuss_(Elisa.rolle). The next step would be for you to actually ask for your block to be lifted (here on your talk page) - with the suggestion that you agree to those unblock conditions. — xaosflux Talk 21:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Elisa.rolle ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I post an unblock request and hereby I confirm that I agree to the unblock conditions: not to create new articles for at least six months, and only if someone from the monitoring team agrees; focus on fixing close paraphrasing in my existing articles or adding sources to existing articles created by me; discuss any substantial addition of new material on User talk:Valereee/ER first; abide by 1RR for 12 months, including my talk page. -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 06:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Accept reason:
I unblocked your account, since the community agreed on an unblock, as in the topic above, and you accepted the unblock conditions. Welcome back, but please be very careful — in the past, you have been blocked multiple times, and one more block will probably make an unblock impossible for years to come. Ymblanter ( talk) 06:42, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
George Bellows, North River (1908), Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts. |
Best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2020. | |
Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place. BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 13:20, 30 December 2019 (UTC) |
Two years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Walter Elmer Schofield, Across the River (1904), Carnegie Museum of Art. |
Best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous 2021. | |
Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place. BoringHistoryGuy ( talk) 15:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC) Oneupsmanship: This painting turned the friendly rivalry between Edward Redfield and Elmer Schofield into a feud. Schofield was a frequent houseguest at Redfield's farm, upstream from New Hope, Pennsylvania, and the two would go out painting together, competing to capture the better view. Redfield served on the jury for the 1904 Annual Exhibition of the Carnegie Institute; at which, despite Redfield's opposition, Across the River was awarded the Gold Medal and $1,500 prize. It was not until a 1963 interview that the 93-year-old Redfield revealed the painting as the cause of the 40-year feud between them. Schofield may have painted it in England, but a blindsided Redfield knew that it was a view of the Delaware River, from his own front yard! |
I'd like to try and create a page for a living person (usually I do not like to do that). I'd like to create a page for Tommaso Zorzi; he is an LGBTQ Italian influencer, currently he is a participant in the Italian Big Brother, the VIP version (Grande Fratello), and in the past he participated in the italian version of the Amazing Race (Pechino Express) and a program about young and wealthy people (Riccanza). Moreover, he wrote a book, "Siamo tutti bravi con i fidanzati degli altri", with a main Italian publisher, Mondadori (so not self-published). I'd like to be as much impartial as possible. People watching this profile can you please tell me if he passes the notoriety criteria? -- Elisa.rolle ( talk) 11:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Back in August 2017, it appears that you added a short reference to "National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution 1901" to a number of articles, but there is no matching full citation for the short reference. There are about ten articles displaying errors as a result.
If possible, can you please add the full citation to each of these articles? Thanks. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 17:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Hey Elisa. Hope all is well. GMG talk 17:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Three years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Elisa.rolle. There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI where you have been mentioned: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Mike Peel. — Diannaa ( talk) 22:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I noticed you created Geraldine Morgan Thompson and uploaded File:Geraldine Thompson, before 1967.jpg. However, I have subsequently determined the picture is a photograph of Thompson's socialite daughter, also named Geraldine Thompson, from circa 1920. The misidentified photograph was also added by you to the elder Geraldine's Find a Grave page, where it may be continuing to cause confusion (I recently again reverted its addition to Geraldine Morgan Thompson). I am not active on Find a Grave, but if you are, please consider moving the image from the mother's profile to the daughter's, and linking the younger Geraldine and second brother Lewis Steenrod Thompson Jr. to their parents. The Thompson family is described in good detail in A Triangle of Land: A History of the Site, Founding, and Progress of Brookdale Community College. Cheers, --Animalparty! ( talk) 17:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Could you give a source for why the photo is used on Myrtle Beach Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Station?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Sorry I was there years ago and just for a few minutes I can't really remember. I think the station was behind me and there was a crossover in front of me and nothing much else around aside for those buildings. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 21:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
The article Letitia H. Erb has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
I really do not think the sourcing here is enough to justify an article. Only one of the sources is really even a secondary source.
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 09:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Five years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:32, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
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) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you added the December 1939 cover of Relief Society Magazine to Elizabeth Anne Wells Cannon. Do you have any sources that state that the woman on the cover is Elizabeth Cannon? The original is on archive.org and I don't see any indication that the woman on the cover is a specific person. Rachel Helps (BYU) ( talk) 21:26, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Six years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
thank you. Elisa
Tonight I had some issues sleeping, and I decided to go through my talk page messages. I realized there were many users who were kind to me, probably more than those I remembered. So I wanted to let them know I'm fine, but a lot has changed: I lost the most important person in my life in 2019, leaving me completely alone during COVID-19. I had double pneumonia in 2020, and just when I though everything was fine, I was hospitalized twice due to some high risk test results in my blood check. At the moment I'm still under therapy, out of the risk level but still beneath the right values. So yes, I'm fine, but not in any mindset of being back. But I appreciated all the friendly comments, and I read all of them. So thank you. Elisa.rolle ( talk) 23:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
The article Florence Hayward (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title and no other topics can be found within a reasonable time.
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
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) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Was Joy McSweeney the person Evelyn Irons saved from the beach? The text of The Times article reads: "Miss Irons rescued a woman from drowning under very courageous circumstances at Tresaith Beach, Cardiganshire. She is the first woman to receive the Stanhope Gold Medal and the first woman since Grace Darling to receive the gold medal of the society. Admiral Sir Michael Hodges, Brigadier General C. S. H. D. Willoughby, and Mr. Dunbar Kilburn represented the society. Miss Irons was accompanied by Mrs. Irons, her mother, Mrs. MacSweeney, the person saved, and Mr. and Mrs. Ewbank." The text appears to suggest that MacSweeney was the person saved! No Swan So Fine ( talk) 13:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)