This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

 Skip to the bottom   ⇩  ·

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page.

There is an entry currently called " Frederic Wakeman." This is an error of sorts, as there are father and son, while the currrent article refers only to the son. How do we:

1. Create a new title for the current ""Frederic Wakeman" -- more properly "Frederic E. Wakeman, Jr."?
2. Create a disambiguation page for "Frederic Wakeman" and "Frederic E. Wakeman"?

Once done, I will create an entry for Wakeman father. Aboudaqn ( talk) 15 :35, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

The name should be decided based on which name is the most common for the subject (see Wikipedia:Article titles). As for what to move where, that really depends on who is more notable. If the son is more notable, then he should stay at the current name and the father should be created at a name disambiguating it (e.g. "Frederic Wakeman (author)"). If the father is more notable, the son should be moved to a new title (e.g. "Frederic Wakeman (scholar)"). If both are equally notable, both should be moved (e.g. "Frederic Wakeman (author)" and Frederic Wakeman (scholar)") and Frederic Wakeman should become the disambiguation page (<= see this link for an extensive overview). Regards So Why 21:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Bachrach44 19:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Please see notes regarding your new article at Talk:Eulalia Perez de Guillén Mariné. Engineer Bob 08:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC) reply

I noticed that you used {{ helpme}} above, what can I help you with? By the way, I have just written a response to your queries at Talk:Eulalia Perez de Guillén Mariné.-- Commander Keane 03:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating the aticle, but it was misnamed. I've moved "Wilder Hobson" to Wilder Hobson (no quotation marks). You made an addition to the old one that you'll need to redo in the version under the new name. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the kind note. In future, if you notice someone editing a newly created possible, would it be possible for you to wait on a change until the article seems a bit more "quiet"? Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Apologies for the inconvenience. As one of the Wikipedia "janitors" I usually try to fix major problems right away. I believe that most new editors use a different technique of editing that doesn't result in these conflicts. Not to worry, it's all easy to fix. Thanks again for writing about this interesting and noteworthy person. Feel free to drop me a line if you need help or have questions. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 12:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Will_Beback, can you please check my citations in Willy Pogany and Whittaker Chambers to check whether you find strange ${\displaystyle \wedge }$ markings show up in text? They did not show up in recent Wilder Hobson article. Also, I seem to have hit some button in edit function that has turned much text in blue and red and other sections into grey background, very strange...

Aboudaqn ( talk) 21:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC) reply

there seems to be a problem with the gadget wikEd that caused the insertion of "Ctrl-click" in your recent edit to Eugene Dennis, please could you help me locate this problem by reporting your browser name and version and possible other gadgets that you might have checked (under My Preferences - Gadgets) on User talk:Cacycle/wikEd#Very odd Ctrl-click issue.

Thanks in advance, Cacycle ( talk) 19:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Cacycle, I was using the browser Safari with Mac OS 10.5.7 Aboudaqn

Thanks for the link! I haven't seen many of those drawings before. -- Nessie ( talk) 17:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC) reply

• I am indeed related to both Jan Matulka and Albertus Van Loon. I don't really review cookbooks. Do you need a recommendation? -- Nessie ( talk) 19:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC) reply
  • BTW, if you have links or scans of any of Jan Matulka's work from The New Masses I'd love to see it.-- Nessie ( talk) 19:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC) reply

I just found your article on Alexander Trachtenberg and the plea for help on the talk page there. Comments are there Talk:Alexander_Trachtenberg. I worked over things pretty hard, hopefully you'll be okay with the changes. Drop me a line directly if you've got suggestions, concerns, questions, etc. Best, — Tim MutantPop@aol.com or Carrite ( talk) 20:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. I've nominated Ignace Poretsky, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. —  Malik Shabazz  ^Talk/ _Stalk 18:58, 4 September 2010 (UTC) (on behalf of User:Piotrus) reply

By the way, in the future you can nominate articles you have written at T:TDYK. —  Malik Shabazz  ^Talk/ _Stalk 19:07, 4 September 2010 (UTC) reply

On 9 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ignace Poretsky, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt ( talk) 06:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for letting me know: I'm honored. -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC) reply

User:Aboudaqn, I am back from my "WikiBreak". Would like to know your thoughts and ideas about improving Wikipedia:WikiProject Espionage. It would be appreciated, you can reply on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Espionage Discussion page. Adamdaley ( talk) 14:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC) reply

of 
The Analytic Sciences Corporation

A tag has been placed on The Analytic Sciences Corporation, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Night of the Big Wind _talk 14:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC) reply

It would help greatly if, on Wikipedia:Help_desk#how does one report a wikipedia editor for poor performance?, you could tell us which article it is about. Thanks,  Chzz   ►  18:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template.     File:Ico specie.png

 Chzz   ►  06:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello. Thanks for your inquiry about the Soviet Spies template. I like how you added a lot of names to the template and how you alphabetized them as well. I did reassign several of the names to a different order position, because several were not in the correct area alphabetically. Overall, I'd say you did a good job on adding to the template. Thanks for the message; I'll add the template to my watchlist. Backtable ^{Speak to me} _{concerning my deeds.} 21:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Regarding how we can host this image on Wikipedia: see WP:CONSENT. That will explain how to email us the proof of permission. If that is too complicated for you as a new user (understandable), feel free to ask at WP:MCQ. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 04:32, 3 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Michael Scammell has emailed Wikipedia as per WP:CONSENT, and he and I look forward to Wikipedia's resolution shortly. Specifically, can you please restore the B&W image I had posted originally, two days ago?

YDone Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 02:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Magog: you are no ogre  :) -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 21:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi - I noticed that a while back you made a useful update to this page, but your work was later undone. The same recently happened to me. There seem to be users intent on keeping to a minimum the biographical info on Wertenbaker. This does not feel helpful. I saw her recently described in the Guardian newspaper as in her early fifties, but her father died in 1955, and in reality she seems to have been born in '47. I'm interested to know how you feel about your edits being wiped out, as if by censorship! Agarpp ( talk) 11:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC) reply

I would like to know the source of the statement that Maxim Lieber's American citizenship was revoked. It is more likely, I think, that his passport was revoked and later restored. Denaturalization is a very serious business which I do not think can be accomplished by administrative fiat alone. 66.189.222.117 (talk) 00:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)I'd be grateful if you'd contact me directly at rcj@charter.net as the Wikipedia mechanism is still a mystery to me. Thanks!

Robert Jacobs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.222.117( talk) 05:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Apologies -- I should have explained more clearly. I have nothing against Agnes Smedley, whose works I have read with pleasure and profit. But:

A) They were not as influential either among the American public or with later scholars as were those of Snow and Buck.

B) The source in the footnote says the opposite: Smedley had "a certain vogue among the party faithful but not very far beyond" p. 162. Isaacs mentions only one other author, Lin Yutang.

So unless you can find a source to back up the addition of Smedley, I hope you will agree that your well-intentioned sentence should be removed from the lede. But I do think it would be a good idea to add a later paragraph mentioning some of the other 1930s writers on the CCP.

Cheers ch ( talk)

If it helps, I found another source that Red Star and Good Earth are the two most influential books is Mao's Journeys to the West: Meanings Made of Mao. in T. Cheek, (ed.), A Critical Introduction to Mao (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), p 316. Unfortunately, the online Google Book doesn't include this page, but there is some discussion at [3].

I added a little more at George Hatem. ch ( talk) 23:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your quick and helpful reply on my Talk Page. I very much agree that it’s much more helpful to open a conversation than to go ballistic.

The problem is Wikipedia’s confusing use of the term “source.” When you say

So, good CWH, I challenge you: show us credible sources that pre-date, say, 1945 (before American concerns turned from Hitler to Stalin -- and Mao), that show that Snow's book was more important than Smedley's two pre-1937 China books.

you are using the word “source” in a common sense way. But Wikipedia uses the word “source” in its own peculiar but ultimately logical way, that is, Reliable Source.

Here you can imagine me taking a deep breath, but bear with me, because what this means is that your challenge is asking me to do what Wikipedia specifically tells us not to!

Wikipedia: No original research is a policy article which requires that articles "rely mainly on published reliable secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources."

Again, "reliable" means one thing in everyday talk and another in Wikipedia. Wikipedia policy requires us to avoid WP:Tertiary sources, which means general textbooks, encyclopedias, and books which do not use primary sources but which themselves rely on secondary sources.

Secondary source are ones which are based on an expert's evaluation and synthesis of primary sources. The policy article continues,

All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.

Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources explains the differences between these types of sources.

In this case, we can’t do research in The Dragon Wakes for evidence because that would be original research in a primary source. We could, I think, use a quote to illustrate a generalization in a reliable secondary source. But we can’t draw our own conclusion, as you are honest in showing that you do by using the word “thus”:

Thus, when Snow's book came out, Smedley's was the name associated.

We editors are not allowed to use "thus" or the process of drawing conclusions. Wikipedia says, in effect: “verifiability is more important than truth.” (See WP:Verifiability).

I agree that it’s great to correct historiographical inaccuracies, but we have to do it using those famous “reliable sources.”

Hope this helps. Cheers again! ch ( talk) 05:58, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

• dates
• years
• commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
• common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

Thanks and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 08:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC) reply

I've become more selective in pasting in this message, and include diffs. Thanks for your post on my talk page. Tony (talk) 07:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC) reply

Aboudaqn,

I was wondering if you are still acting on Wikipedia and if so are you still interested in being part of WikiProject Espionage? Adamdaley ( talk) 00:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating Elinor Ferry, Aboudaqn!

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

Interesting! I hope you expand the article!

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

Learn more about page curation.

You are invited...
	Women in Espionage worldwide online edit-a-thon Host: Women in Red Supporting: University of Edinburgh - Women in Espionage and Spy Fiction 13-20 April 2016

Stinglehammer ( talk) 17:38, 12 April 2016 (UTC) reply

I thought you might be interested to know that Emile Despres was first a cousin of Leon Despres. They grew up together in Chicago and remained close until Emile's death in 1973. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naomides ( talk • contribs) 17:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC) reply

• Naomides: Many thanks. I updated Emile Desires's entry -- but could not find a source for citation: do you know of something? Also, did you realize your Wikipedia alias is now defunct (which makes it hard to contact you)?  :( -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 20:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating Robert Bendiner, Aboudaqn!

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

I would suggest that this article be expanded more. It's nothing but short sentences.

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

Learn more about page curation.

You may find WP:ORCID/About you of interest. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:33, 16 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for letting me know. I've made some cosmetic updates and a few category tweaks <to Brock Brower>.

Keep up the good work, and happy editing! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao ^{Che dicono a Signa?} _{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your message. I don't regard it as "my" article and know nothing more than I have put there from the Jewish Encyclopaedia. Feel free to edit, but I don't think I can help further.

All the best. -- Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) ( talk) 16:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Pallache family at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{ db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot ( talk) 04:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of Pallache family at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 07:54, 16 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi, in addition to Pallache family you can also nominate Abraham Palacci and Charles Palache separately for DYK, (or you could make a hook that includes their names) although some referencing work still needs to be done. Haim Palachi would only be eligible for DYK if you wrote another 25%. So you might be able to get 4 articles up at DYK with a bit more work. Thankyou for contributing to Wikipedia. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:18, 16 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Aboudaqn, it's been three weeks, and you haven't yet responded on your nomination page. We really need to hear from you in the next few days if you wish to continue pursuing this nomination at DYK. I hope we hear from you soon. Thank you. BlueMoonset ( talk) 08:42, 8 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

Ornamental Peasant ( talk) 07:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/International Juridical Association at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{ db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot ( talk) 01:18, 4 December 2016 (UTC) reply

 Done I bolded the highlighted article. However, I think you're going to have to make the hook tighter, as it still looks too long. Daniel Case ( talk) 06:11, 4 December 2016 (UTC) reply

 Done Great, thank you! (That's all that was needed? Wikipedia supervisors sure could write more clearly and simply...!) I spiced up the description a bit and managed to lose a line – but, given the legalistic nature of the IJA and HUAC's criticisms, I find it hard to lose much more. That said, I welcome your recommendations. (Also, I added quite a few images already appearing in Wikipedia.) Regardless, I thank you again for jumping in and helping out. -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 17:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Just as an FYI, as a registered user, you can create redirects on your own. I went ahead and created the one you requested, but just wanted to let you know that you do not need to go through AFC. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:25, 18 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating Juda Lion Palache, Aboudaqn!

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

The dates of birth and death don't match in the infobox and in the article, please amend the incorrect version, otherwise it's a very nice read

Fixed: thank you!-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 21:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of International Juridical Association at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 11:40, 3 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Aboudaqn, if you are still interested in pursuing this nomination, please respond soon on the nomination page. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset ( talk) 03:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Final call for a response. You've been editing elsewhere on Wikipedia, so you need to give this a priority if you wish it to remain open. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC) reply

BlueMoonset ( BlueMoonset) ( talk), (I have not yet understood how "talk" works, so I hope this message shows up on your own Talk page), I have updated as you requested. -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 20:43, 20 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Esther Shemitz page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 6 February 2017 (UTC) reply

of 
Edward Cochrane McLean, Jr.

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Domdeparis ( talk) 17:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC) reply

(NOTE: Moved content to Edward Cochrane McLean and created redirect for Edward Cochrane McLean, Jr. Aboudaqn ( talk) 18:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)) reply

Thanks for creating Joseph Forer, Aboudaqn!

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

You mention feminists in the lead, but no mention of any is made in the body. Similar for "racial groups".

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

Learn more about page curation.

Mduvekot ( talk) 01:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking says, "Consider including links where readers might want to use them; for example, in article leads, at the openings of new sections, in the cells of tables, and in image captions. But note below that as a rule of thumb editors should only link the term's first occurrence in the text of the article." If there were no other links to Madden, Fahy, or Witt in the article, the caption link would be appropriate. But there are links in the text, which come first. - Tim1965 ( talk) 16:59, 26 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Tim1965: Respectfully citing back the quote – "Consider including links where readers might want to use them; for example, in article leads, at the openings of new sections, in the cells of tables, and in image captions" – reject your change again, out of consideration for readers (again). Was just editing Rebecca West and saw examples there – very common on Wikipedia – and very convenient for readers, encouraging them to visit other articles (which is very good for Wikipedia). NOTE: If you plan to change again, I ask instead that you escalate for arbitration. -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 17:05, 26 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Unspecified source/license

for 
File:AlanMWald UM.png

Thanks for uploading File:AlanMWald UM.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{ PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{ self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ^{( Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 23:46, 27 April 2017 (UTC) reply

with File:AlanMWald UM.png

Thanks for uploading File:AlanMWald UM.png, which you've attributed to Alan M. Wald. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{ OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. AntiCompositeNumber ( Leave a message) 02:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC) reply

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. reddogsix ( talk) 01:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Judith Palache Gregory 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/Judith Palache Gregory until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. reddogsix ( talk) 03:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:AlanMWald GregoryFox 2400pxl.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 11:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Raymond L. Wise should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond L. Wise .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:46, 22 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Sorry I missed the pages. I'll take a look.-- John Foxe ( talk) 19:52, 6 August 2017 (UTC) reply

I checked Weinstein, but Kronenberger isn't mentioned on those pages. He's not in the index either. Maybe you got the wrong book?-- John Foxe ( talk) 20:50, 7 August 2017 (UTC) reply

I've moved the comments you put on my talk page to the article talk page.-- John Foxe ( talk) 22:56, 7 August 2017 (UTC) reply

Unspecified source/license

for File:1937.10.20 Lowenthal with Truman.png

Thanks for uploading File:1937.10.20 Lowenthal with Truman.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{ PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{ self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Wikipedia:Image use policy

Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ^{( Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 21:45, 26 August 2017 (UTC) reply

As an expert, please fix

Owner: Wikipedians need to start instructing people to specific actions, not "Here: go read this, figure out what applies, and fix it." I don't know the ins-and-outs of images – but you seem to, since you're claiming this particular image needs refiling. In its accompanying text, I went out of my way to providee ample details about why this image can be used: all you needed to do was correct it.

So, in fact, I ask you: please make corrections for this LOC-sourced, open-to-public-use image File:1937.10.20 Lowenthal with Truman.png (and do, please, read the image's text details first-thing in future). -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 21:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi Aboudaqn;

Thanks for your good work on Tom Grunfeld. I just filled in a few things, but I don't have easy access to journals online, unfortunately. won't be able to give it the attention it deserves.

I hope you will keep up the good work. Grunfeld is especially interesting in the Tibet debates, so linking to other articles and having links in them to Grunfeld would be very useful. It would also be very useful to look up reviews of his works, especially those in refereed journals.

Cheers in any case, ch ( talk) 19:43, 2 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating Mary Spargo, Aboudaqn!

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

I linked to your article from one another where Mary Spargo was mentioned. I'd link from Willo the Wisp as well but I'm not sure if the article refers to the same Mary Spargo.

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

Learn more about page curation.

Robert G. ( talk) 18:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC) reply

of 
Walter Beer

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. reddogsix ( talk) 21:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC) reply

The article Walter Beer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable individual lacking in-depth, non-trivial support. References are single-line mentions and a "paid notice" obit. Fails to provide support for WP:N.

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. reddogsix ( talk) 18:15, 18 September 2017 (UTC) reply

(REMINDER: Have asked Jo-Jo for contents (since RedDogSix left Wikipedia) and need to add to Helen Lehman Buttenwieser and Harold Rosenwald entries... Aboudaqn ( talk) 18:27, 20 November 2018 (UTC)) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Walter Beer 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/Walter Beer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. reddogsix ( talk) 01:41, 23 September 2017 (UTC) reply

@aboudaqn - I am going to politely ask that you stop canvassing on behalf of the article Walter Beer. While I cannot and will not comment on the potential bias of those editors you have chosen, your acknowledged preference in the message is far from unbiased. reddogsix ( talk) 16:56, 23 September 2017 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Kovner 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/Joseph Kovner until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. agtx 15:27, 24 September 2017 (UTC) reply

[deleted]

...I can put the material on the talk page, however I'm assuming that you'd like the text for a second crack an article, and if that is the case in the interest of preserving the history for any attempted rebuild would you prefer to have the material userfied instead? I can move it to a subpage where you can work on it if you like. TomStar81 ( Talk) 20:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC) reply

I userfied it; you can find the whole thing at User:Aboudaqn/Edward Cochrane McLean, Jr.. TomStar81 ( Talk) 20:45, 13 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Thank you for seeking assistance with the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Unfortunately, the case you filed had to be closed as it did not meet the minimum DRN criteria. There was not an extensive enough talkpage discussion. Please use a talkpage to discuss ways to improve the article. If, after a good collaborative effort is made, a dispute still exists, you should feel welcome to refile. Nihlus 14:53, 13 November 2017 (UTC) reply

[deleted]

Hello, Aboudaqn. You have new messages at Randykitty's talk page.
Message added 17:02, 4 March 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. reply

Randykitty ( talk) 17:02, 4 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Aboudaqn_reported_by_User:Eric_(Result:_). Thank you. Eric ^talk 23:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Eric: I welcome intervention from colleagues. Had I known how to ask, I would have done so myself. I am glad you have done so and look forward to resolving this matter. -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 23:30, 16 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Quick link to outcome (still pending)

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=McGregor,_Iowa&diff=next&oldid=835992773 Hi Friend, New to editing and trying to learn. Frank Lloyd Wright lived in McGregor, IA as a child and I provided 2 references when adding this to the McGregor, IA notable natives section. What is the rationale for removing this information? Thanks in advance, eager to learn. Gretchen622 ( talk) 03:57, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Gretchen622 - talk: From what I could find, I edited something else... https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=McGregor,_Iowa&diff=835992773&oldid=833075102 Regardless, I took your point and reversed the deletion. I work mostly on biographies and have a very high acceptance rate from Wikipedia editors, so feel free to look at my own page (where I list work) for examples... Welcome to writing and editing at Wikipedia! I still haven't figured out which to use for Talk pages, so I used both forms for you from above.) Aboudaqn ( talk) 20:26, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks so much! Best to you. Gsigbat ( talk) 02:03, 18 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Gsigbat ( talk -- you might want to create a stable Wikipedia ID for yourself...-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 03:01, 18 April 2018 (UTC) reply

peter@bakke.com : Thank you for your work on the Jerome Davis page. He was my wife's grandfather on her father's side of the family. Dr. Davis's son, Wilfred G. Davis (b. 1928) is still alive at 90 years old of sound mind and living with us in Tucson, AZ. We all thank you. As an aside, if you have the time... what do you think of Christopher Hedges? I really appreciate what he writes and lectures. Peter Bakke, Tucson AZ360BLUE ( talk) 06:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC) reply

AZ360BLUE ( talk) -- If you post an email address or phone number, I'll happily (cor)respond. Also, FYI, I contacted someone with your name and city via LinkedIn... Aboudaqn ( talk) 16:49, 27 April 2018 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dana Converse Backus 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/Dana Converse Backus until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dom from Paris ( talk) 11:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC) reply

(NOTE: moved Backus content to Mundt–Nixon Bill Aboudaqn ( talk) 18:14, 20 November 2018 (UTC)) reply

Thank you for your additions to the important article on Joel Kovel (which I also edited), in which you contributed hitherto unknown details about his death, derived from the NY Times obit. Your work is appreciated. Dylanexpert ( talk) 16:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC) reply

info box deletion

Was deleting his info box intentional? It looked like vandalism so reverted it but now I'll assume it was accidental. 47.40.52.156 ( talk) 01:20, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

<deleted>

Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 ( talk) 19:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC) reply

The article Henry Zolinsky has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable individual lacking in-depth, non-trivial support.

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. reddogsix ( talk) 01:10, 23 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi. You might be interested in archiving your talk page to keep it neat, current, and navigable. That's all. Cheers. --Animalparty! ( talk) 19:35, 26 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Aboudaqn, you were unfortunately improperly advised at ANI. The correct and only way to request the rename of an article is via the detailed process at WP:RM, not via an RFC. I suggest you cancel and withdraw the RFC and create a WP:RM instead, following the process detailed in that link. That is the ONLY way you will be able to establish an official consensus to change the title of the article. Also, please learn to sign your posts correctly by typing five (not four or three) tildes (like this: ~~~~). Softlavender ( talk) 04:15, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

• Softlavender ( talk): The request makes no request at all for _renaming_ the article. It asks simply whether fellow Wikipedians agree on proper expression of the name. The resulting vote/agreement would of course change the name throughout the entire article. (Whether the article's name needs to change involves many other articles about place names, as Wikipedia English is currently inconsistent, e.g., The Hague in title and throughout article, whereas Netherlands in title but "the Netherlands" throughout the article.) Therefore, would you and other colleagues now please reread the article and determine whether all references within it should be "the Perche" or simply "Perche"? (Meantime, thank you for the correction on signature: would you mind also investigating why the "xl" signature icon appears inconsistently while other editing icons like "B" and "I" appear consistently?...?) 13:30, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

• Hi Aboudaqn:

(1) Why do you post your comments twice? You've done that here and at the article talkpage. Softlavender ( talk) 13:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Reply: Softlavender Had a hard time reading the various levels of comments (hence my effort here at carefully replying item by item).-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

(2) Please learn to sign your posts using four tildes (nor three or five). Use "Show preview" before clicking "Publish changes" to make sure your full signature and date stamp shows up. Softlavender ( talk) 13:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Reply: Softlavender Thank you again for your consistent, patient instruction.-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

(3) If you are trying to notify someone via WP:PING, you must type those four tildes or the ping does not work. Consequently, I did not receive notification of your comments to me here. Softlavender ( talk) 13:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Reply: Softlavender Thank you again.-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

(4) I can see now that your RfC is not about the wiki article title, but about using the article "the" within the wiki article. That's fine. However, your RfC is incorrectly formatted. Please read WP:RFC: The opener needs to be a brief and simple question, such as "Should Perche be referred to as 'the Perche' within this article?" That is all it should be. Save your own opinions, rationale, comments, sources, and such for your own ("Support" or "Oppose") !vote. Please reformat your RfC to that effect. Do not mention any other editors in the RfC. Softlavender ( talk) 13:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Reply: Done.-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

• Softlavender With regard to my previous request, would you mind also investigating why the "xl" signature icon appears inconsistently while other editing icons like "B" and "I" appear consistently?-- Aboudaqn ( talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

I actually do not know what you are talking about. This is something you could probably ask on WP:VPT. In any case, always type out the four tildes yourself, instead of clicking a link, especially if it is not working for you. -- Softlavender ( talk) 14:24, 2 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --Animalparty! ( talk) 00:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Great article creation in Morris U. Cohen! Keep it up! Regards, SshibumXZ ( talk · contribs). 03:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:1948.08.30J Peters Ravenna-standing.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones   ^(Talk) 02:34, 30 November 2018 (UTC) reply

 (Talk) – I do not (as usual) understand the Wikipedia instructions: could you not make the change, please, that you recommended to me yourself? Aboudaqn ( talk) 19:04, 30 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi, Aboudaqn. You reinstated your link to the surname in the article title of Albert Hourani with the edit description sorry: there is no relevant mention of "surname" there; please use Talk page and provide sources; otherwise, please refrain from making this entry less user-friendly. This is in relation to my reference to MOS:LINKSTYLE: "Links should not be placed in the boldface reiteration of the title in the opening sentence of a lead... Linking part of the bolded text is also discouraged". I don't know what you mean by "sources". The MOS has a general guideline about article titles; it doesn't need to mention a specific type of article titles to apply to it. What makes you think that surnames are an exception to this general rule? If you need another opinion, I see that Onel5969 has delinked similar wikilinks you added elsewhere.

Whether or not it is appropriate to link articles about surnames to people's names in the body of the article is another question. I'm not aware of a guideline on that, but as a matter of community practice, we have articles about almost any common surname, and I can't recall seeing a wikilink to one of them from a mention of a specific person. If an article has a statement that refers to the surname as such, that would be a different story. Eperoton ( talk) 04:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Just my .02 - I understand your impetus to give more info on the background of the individual, but that's what the "See also" section is for. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC) reply

talk, TT me -- And I like your impetus, too, for See Also, which until recently I normally follow -- yet there a number of other people who clearly hate the concept of See Also and try to limit it and delete it. Worse, people constantly make changes and insist on them without using Talk first. Frankly, I see no reason not to load any entry with wiki-links at all times, since one of Wikipedia's greatest attractions is immediate click-through if curiosity arises! Whatever the case, the lack of uniformity at Wikipedia is often quite frustrating!  :( -- Aboudaqn ( talk) 15:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC) reply

I see you're an extremely experienced editor but I noticed that you tried to add an image to Anatoly Yakobson a couple times. This image does not seem to be uploaded to Wikipedia or Commons. Would you please see Wikipedia:Uploading images and then upload the image using WP:UPLOAD before adding it to that page again? If you have any questions, please {{ ping}} me in your reply here. Cheers! - tucoxn\ ^talk 21:07, 13 December 2018 (UTC) reply

@ Tucoxn:: As usual, I find Wikipedia's instructions unclear (e.g., how to {{ ping}}--I don't know whether this will work): would you mind submitting the image yourself? In fact, for future, why not just do you automatically? I find that many Wikipedians (who "know better") undo my work and ask me to do it another way, rather than taking the same amount of time to do it themselves. What a waste of time!) Aboudaqn ( talk) 19:57, 15 December 2018 (UTC) reply

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC) reply

Dear Sir,

By great good fortune, I learned that a member of my Rockville, Maryland French book/conversation club - Dr. Jane Forer Gentleman - is the daughter of Joe and Florrie Forer and is mentioned briefly in your article.

A prospective biographer who abandoned his project on Joe Forer after collecting FOIA and other documents turned all of his materials over to Dr. Gentleman. Dr. Gentleman has personal recollections which may be important to you as well.

Would you be willing to consider an edited version of your Forer article which adds information you may wish to include? I am a DC lawyer and would be happy for the edited version to remain under your name once we agree on proposed changes.

Could you please share with me your sources for your Forer article in addition to those listed under references? I am happy to communicate by phone and/or email if this would be easier for you. Perhaps trading markups would be easier through Word editing software.

If it matters, I am a licensed District of Columbia Bar member with special interests in human rights and East-West relations. Should you need more information on myself, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Mary Dominick Mfdominick 08:06, 15 June 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfdominick ( talk • contribs)

Hello! I'm in the process of introducing a new membership system to WikiProject Socialism (designed as part of WikiProject X and adopted by a few other projects). The new system works by filling a form which creates a WikiProject Card. I'm manually creating WikiProject cards for current members. You can find and edit yours here. Any change to your WikiProject card will be automaticalle updated at Wikipedia:WikiProject Socialism/Members. If you have any doubt, please, feel free to contact me by replying here using the {{ re}} template. Best, -- MarioGom ( talk) 00:39, 20 July 2019 (UTC) reply

First, I wish to thank you for posting your article on John F. O'Donnell, Labor Lawyer. You did remarkable research. I am his grandson, John F. O'Donnell Sheehan. I was wondering if I could add some details to the page based on my mother's research and publication in her book on him, A Man from Bruckless. I believe it would add some valuable information. Giantman56 ( talk) 14:22, 14 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Giantman56: Why don't you set up a Wikipedia account with private email, so we can correspond offline? Aboudaqn ( talk) 00:20, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

User:Smallbones is being generous, as am I: since you have violated WP:3RR today, you could already be blocked from editing for 24 hours. However, if you persist in reverting our edits to Whittaker Chambers Farm, one or the other of us is likely to eventually report you for such violations. Consider this a friendly warning. Magic ♪piano 03:25, 16 October 2019 (UTC) reply

How R U? 😀 From your contributions, I notice you are interested in Russian/USSR spy articles. I created /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2019_October_22 for John Mark Dougan He is a Florida Sheriff who fled America for Russia three years ago. I am new to this process but from what I have seen it seems difficult to undelete an article. Any help that you can provide would be most helpful! The deleted article is here: User:Moscowdreams ☯️☯️☯️ Moscowdreams ( talk) 14:41, 1 November 2019 (UTC) reply

talk, I read the link but did not stand where the issues lies or what you want at this point. Also, I work almost exclusively on dead, 20th-Century people, so I don't have much experience in dealing with fellow Wikipedians who oppose actions based on political beliefs; usually, I face technoid or nitpick Nazis (who fight nearly as hard, all the same). In short, I don't see how I can help you. Aboudaqn ( talk) 21:45, 2 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn

Thank you for creating Lawrence Milner.

User:Insertcleverphrasehere, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice new article. I'd consider taking it over to WP:DYK to get it put up on the front page of wikipedia!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Insertcleverphrasehere}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

— Insertcleverphrasehere ^{( or here)}_{( click me!)} 20:45, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

@ Insertcleverphrasehere:: I'm honored; please DYK away. – Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:44, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Well, I was suggesting that you take it over there (though my wording was ambiguous sorry). I think you'd know better than I what bit of obscure trivia to use as a hook. You get 5 free DYK nominations without needing to Quid Pro Quo, so it should be relatively simple. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{( or here)}_{( click me!)} 22:52, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

@ Insertcleverphrasehere:: Frankly, I find most of the background stuff related to Wikipedia unclear and instructions poorly worded: would you mind starting me off or something? Gratefully - Aboudaqn ( talk) 23:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Sure. Just fill out a hook at Template:Did you know nominations/Lawrence Milner. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{( or here)}_{( click me!)} 00:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Note, the 'ALT' is meant to be an alternative hook in the same style as the first one, in case the nominator doesn't want to accept the first one for some reason they can choose the ALT instead (note that you don't NEED an ALT either). I like your first hook a lot. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{( or here)}_{( click me!)} 20:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC) reply

On 1 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lawrence Milner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1939, Lawrence Milner testified against Australian-born longshoremen union leader Harry Bridges in what Time magazine called "the most important deportation hearings of the decade"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lawrence Milner. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Lawrence Milner), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

— Wug· a·po·des​ 06:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC) 12:03, 1 February 2020 (UTC) reply

a·po·des​: Thank you! Aboudaqn ( talk) 16:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC) reply

Re: my edit:

I changed "url" to "lay-url" to fix the duplicate-parm error (visible when you press "Show preview"), since there were 2 "url" parms in the {{cite book}}. Notice that when there are multiples of a given parm, the WP software ignores all but the last one; so the books.google.com "url" wasn't used in the displayed ref. The "lay-url" was a way of keeping both "url"s. See Template:Cite book#Laysummary.

Of course, you could also fix the error by just eliminating one of the "url"s, or maybe other methods, but the error should be fixed so the next editor won't see it and think he made the error. Davemck ( talk) 19:36, 30 March 2020 (UTC) reply

The article Thomas L. Sakmyster has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Delete WP:BEFORE reveals nothing that rises to the level of WP:NACADEMIC

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. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 20:42, 19 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello, I wrote a comment at the talk page of Marian Marzynski article (revised by you some years ago). Would you please check it and help if you can? Thank you! Szkari ( talk) 03:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC) reply

I mean, I couldn't make a correction in the title: Marzyński would be the correct form. Please make it if you can. Thank you! Szkari ( talk) 02:29, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Szkari ( talk) -- done -- please see Marian Marzynski, which now redirects to Marian Marzyński - Aboudaqn ( talk) 16:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Thank you! MFG Szkari ( talk) 04:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the thank you!

(Oinkers42) ( talk) 23:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

She left Budapest when she was 11. Categories are supposed to be defining. I cant see how coming from a place as a child makes it defining. She was a Hungarian Jew, not an American person of Hungarian-Jewish descent. It is her children who are of Hungarian-Jewish descent. Rathfelder ( talk) 19:47, 30 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi! I noticed several articles where you've added links to publications by a Public Affairs Press (whose name PublicAffairs acquired the rights to use in 1997). Do you have any connection, financial or otherwise, with PublicAffairs (or any firm related to its parent)? I realize you've been around here for a long time, but I gotta ask. Thanks! —  UncleBubba ^{(  T  @  C )} 20:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• User talk:UncleBubba: Other than historical interest? Nope. (I hope you're just noting my efforts to start thorough Wikipedia entries.  ;) ) - Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on John F. Kennedy; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet ( talk) 22:14, 17 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• talk: First, why does this warning not appear on your own Talk page, too, since you are a party? Second, since I offered information to the JFK entry and you're trying to take it away, IMO, the burden is on you to ask people whether the addition is "valid" to add or not. Please advise - Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:26, 17 October 2020 (UTC) reply

I reverted your edit adding references to his authored books as listing of books within article does not require reference citations. I also made additional revisions to books listed. Please let us discuss if you are in disagreement. Old Beeg .. warble·· 11:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi,

I am an undergraduate student in an art history course focussing on art activism. I noticed that you are an active contributor to WP:Women in Red (WiR). I am interested in learning more about WiR users like yourself for use in a class project. I would sincerely appreciate if you would agree to answering a few short questions for me.

• How did you hear about WiR? Saw it posted somewhere on Wikipedia
• What made you decide to get involved? Fits my areas of interest
• How many pages have you contributed to as a part of WiR? Did not count
• How do you decide what pages to work on? Worked on those that fit my areas of interest
• What's the page you're most proud of and why? Cannot recall; it was some time ago
• How much time per month do you devote to WiR? None devoted; if I work on it, that is because it continues to fit my own areas of interest
• Do you view content creation as a form of art? "Art"? No.
• Do you view your work as activism? "Activism"? No.
• How do you research a topic that you wish to edit or create a new page on? Generally, I create biographical entries, so I read about the person, follow a standard outline of sections for biographies (Background, Career, Personal life and death, Awards, Works, Reference, External links), add as many pre-published images as possible to encourage readership, tailor image captions to specific entry, and add as many wiki-links as possible to maximize the incredible, endless linkages enable by Wikipedia.

If you agree, please feel free to leave your answers as a reply to this post. Done – now, would you please fill out your User page at least a bit?

Thank you for your time in considering my interview request. HonestButterfly ( talk) 20:44, 29 November 2020 (UTC) - Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the response! I'll look into doing that. HonestButterfly ( talk) 23:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi! I would be happy if you could help me solve a mystery about Moshe Pelesh about whom you wrote in Wikipedia, is there a connection between this personality and Rabbi Moshe Alfels who authored the books: "הואיל משה", "ויקהל משה", Venice (1597). Thanks. עמנואל בן חיים ( talk) 16:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply

I see that there will be anachronism in identifying the two as one personality. עמנואל בן חיים ( talk) 19:11, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply

I appreciated your thanking me for my addition of Reuben Markham to the contributors of The New Leader. Markham wrote often on Southeastern Europe for The New Leader in the 1940s. There were several articles about him in The New Leader as well, including one on April 17, 1945 by William Henry Chamberlin, entitled "A Story of Journalistic Courage." Markham joined the CIA in May, 1949, and died Dec. 29, 1949. He corresponded and met with Sol Levitas. I wonder if you have any information about the connection between The New Leader and the CIA and whether Markham might have been involved. Thanks again. Ankara59 ( talk) 19:27, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Ankara59: So sorry, not my area - Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:18, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I meant November 17, 1945. Ankara59 ( talk) 19:28, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply

I initially searched the three terms raid, raids, union raids with the categories Category:American Federation of Labor, Category:Congress of Industrial Organizations in order to attach Union raid and or Police raid. There are many false positives also with US Civil war era raids. Shushugah ( talk) 19:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Shushugah: Sorry, for which article/entry? ` Aboudaqn ( talk) 20:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC) reply

All/any articles mentioning union raids. It's a highly technical term, and not immediately obvious what it means. I added it to two articles you created, which is why I am asking you. I imagine the scope would be all US/Canadian trade union articles that mention raid. Shushugah ( talk) 20:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Shushugah: I am not expert on union raids; for me, for now, your wiki-links on United Public Workers of America and Railway Labor Executives' Association seem very satisfactory and I thank you again - Aboudaqn ( talk) 20:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC) reply

In November 2019 you added material to the article " Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences and Professions". The added material included this passage: "On September 24, 1946, the ICCASP issued a joint declaration with CIO-PAC that opposed the . This joint declaration came in response to the Baruch Plan." Note that the conclusion of the first sentence is missing. This garble is still present in the article. Please fix it. Rich Rostrom ( Talk) 08:17, 17 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Done - Aboudaqn ( talk) 19:22, 17 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi, thanks for the Vito Marcantonio section on his writings. Per your request for edit rationales affecting your contributions, I changed the "Labor's Martyrs" parameter "contribution" in the article to "others" (and wikilinked William Z. Foster who wrote the Introduction). "Contribution" seems to be intended for something different, whereas the argument to "Others" is shown verbatim. Per Template:cite book, it looks like an appropriate use of "Contribution" would be, e.g.,

|contribution=Foreword|contributor=Larry|, appearing as:

Larry. Foreword. Sample Book Title. By Sample Author.

or alternatively

|contribution=What'd you say!?|contributor=Larry|, appearing as:

Larry. "What'd you say!?". Sample Book Title. By Sample Author.

I hope this is helpful! Larry Koenigsberg ( talk) 02:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Clearly and kindly explained; thank you! - Aboudaqn ( talk) 12:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC) Aboudaqn ( talk) 12:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh 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/Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh 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.

Daniel ( talk) 23:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Daniel ( talk): Thank you, and please see my response among others - Aboudaqn ( talk) 18:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload files. However, it appears that one or more of the files you have uploaded or added to a page, specifically Marzani & Munsell, may fail our non-free policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted file of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Not all images you see on Wikipedia are licensed the same way and how each image is licensed is going to largely determine how they can be used on Wikipedia. The files you keep trying to add to Marzani & Munsell are licensed as non-free content which means their use is subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. This policy is quite restrictive and their are ten specific non-free content use criteria that need to be met for each use of a non-free file; moreover, it's the responsibility of the person wanting to use a non-free file to make sure it does satisfy these criteria.

The reason JJMC89 bot keeps removing the files you're trying to add to "Marzani & Munsell" after you add them is because the files' uses in that article do not comply in that article do not comply with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. The reason the bot is not removing the other files in the same article is because they aren't licensed as non-free content and therefore they aren't subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. Not all image use is the same even if it looks the same, and it's OK if you just made a mistake and weren't aware of this. JJMC89 bot, however, has been set up to search Wikipedia articles for certain types of non-free content use policy violations, and then removes files violating such policy from articles when it finds them. The bot leaves and edit summary explaining why it removes a file like this containing links to relevant pages where you can find more information.

The bot isn't cherry picking images at all; it's doing exactly what it has been set up to do. Image use on Wikipedia (particularly non-free content use) can be tricky sometimes and it can be easily to make mistakes. Making a mistake once or twice is probably not going to lead to any sort of sanctioning from an administrator like a block; maybe a warning perhaps but probably not a block. Making the same mistake four times, however, is going to be much harder to write off as a good faith mistake and more than like is going to be seen as edit warring or some other type of disruption. So, before you try and re-add those particular files to that article again, I strongly suggest you take the time to better understand why they're being removed and then seek assistance if there are things you still do understand. I'm not an administrator, but JJMC89 is and he is almost certainly going to block your account if you continue to edit war over these files in that particular article. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Marchjuly ( talk): 1. Thank you for answering with explanation, rather than ignoring my repeated efforts to engage in dialog, eventually leading to a threat from the other party. 2. The subjects of those images are long dead (easily checked -- on Wikipedia!). 3. You've mischaracterized the situation completely, because the issue is re-use -- the images are not at all newly uploaded but already available on Wikipedia itself! -- are you policy enforcers and your bots not checking? - Aboudaqn ( talk) 12:32, 5 August 2021 (UTC) reply

There was no mischaracterization on my part. I did not say you uploaded the files; I said that your were trying to use them in a way that doesn't comply with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. That is why the template above states (I've bolded the relevant wording) However, it appears that one or more of the files you have uploaded or added to a page, specifically Marzani & Munsell, may fail our non-free policy." As I posted above, each use of a non-free file is required to satisfy all ten non-free content use criteria. It makes no difference whether you upload a non-free file yourself to use in an article or add a non-free file uploaded by someone else to an article; those uses which do not meet all of these criteria are going to be removed by either a bot or another editor. It also make no difference as to whether the subject of the photo is long dead; if the file is not being used in accordance with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, it's going to end up being removed. If you want some other opinions on this, you're welcome to ask at WP:MCQ and WT:NFCC. As for the bot, a bot isn't going to respond to request made in an edit summary and trying to dispute an edit made by another via edit summaries is almost never a good idea as explained in WP:REVTALK. Moreover, the response you got from JJMC89 was a bit curt but that was most likely was due to the tone of your original post; you were basically accusing the bot of doing something wrong when it clearly wasn't and it was actually you who wasn't following the relevant policy; in other words, it was you who didn't properly check what the relevant policy was even though it was your responsibility to do so. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 13:12, 5 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Marchjuly ( talk): ...may fail? So, in fact, no one knows for sure? This is so confusing. How is one actually to tell? "Go read" a Wikipedia guideline that may apply: has anyone actually determined which if any policies these images fail? - Aboudaqn ( talk) 14:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Template:uw-nonfree is just a user warning template meant to provide some general information. I'm not sure why it is exactly worded the way it is, but perhaps that's because it's only a single-level template (sort of "one size fits all" type of template) due to the fact that most non-free content use violations seem to be made in good faith and are just misunderstandings that usually are fairly easy to clear up in one try. There are lots of single-level warning templates that use the word "may" and perhaps those who created the templates felt the word could cover as many cases as possible without needing to use the extremely strong language that some higher-level warning templates use.

The best way to tell how a file is licensed is to look at its page and check the license. If you see anything that uses the word "non-free" or "fair use", then file is almost certainly non-free which means its uses are going to have to satisfy WP:NFCC. The reason the bot kept removing the image was because of WP:NFCC#10c and WP:NFCCE. This is why the bot was including a link to WP:NFC#Implementation in the edit summary it left each time it removed the file.

A non-free file is required to have two things: (1) a file copyright license and (2) a separate specific non-free use rationale for each use of the file. The files you were adding to the "Marzani & Munsell" article had (1), but they didn't have (2); so, they were removed. Most non-free files generally need only a single copyright license since that's pretty much never going to change regardless of how many times the file is used; however, a separate specific non-free use license needs to be provided for each use to clarify why the person using believes a particular non-free use satisfies relevant policy. The person who originally uploads the file mostly is the person who provided the rationale for its first use; however, the file may have been subsequently added to other articles or used in other ways by editors other than the original uploader and it is the person who adds the file for each of these additional uses who is responsible for providing a corresponding non-free use rationale. You kept adding the files to the article without providing the required rationales; so, they kept being removed by the bot. There was nothing really to discuss since there was no rationale to discuss and what you did was a clear violation of policy. This is quite a common mistake that is made by many; so, it's not typically the kind of thing that will lead to a harsh response from an administrator like the one you got from JJMC89. The problem was that you kept re-adding the file without the required rationale despite it being removed each time with an edit summary explaining why. If you didn't understand something the first time the file was removed, then that's when you should've asked for clarification. Continuing to re-add the file in violation of relevant policy (even if you didn't know any better) made it seem that you were ignoring relevant policy and using edit warring to try and force the images into the article.

If you want to stop the bot from removing the files, you need to add a non-free use rationale for their use in that particular article to their respective file pages; however, just adding a non-free use rationale doesn't make a non-free use automatically compliant and the file's use can still be challenged by another editor. Just for general reference, relevant Wikipedia policy does typically allow non-free images of deceased persons to be used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the person in question; this this why File:Carl Aldo Marzani.jpg and File:Herbert Aptheker.png were uploaded for use respectively in Carl Marzani and Herbert Aptheker. Other types of uses and uses in other articles, however, tend to be much harder to justify and often there's a need to establish a consensus for such a use at WP:FFD. You're free if you want start a FFD discussion about this and explain why feel the files' uses in "Marzani & Munsell" do satisfy relevant policy; if others feel the same way, then the files will end up being re-added to the article. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 23:00, 5 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Marchjuly: Almost there! The rationale would be that both people in both images are long dead, yes? (Or other rationale?) If I could trouble you just a bit more to provide an example of how to do this (which Wikipedia does not), then I could make the change (best, if you could, in this case) – and I for one, who often re-use images (exactly because of the byzantine guidelines related to new images), would happily follow your example and end at least one case of bot-relentless, non-conversational image-adding! - Aboudaqn ( talk) 12:27, 6 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Very interesting! Did you ever get anywhere with this? I agree that it seems confusing, but I've been able to upload an image to Wikimedia, and use it on Wikipedia, after getting permission from a Wisconsin Historical Society archivist. I did explain to her that posting on Wikimedia would put the image into the public domain. I still have no idea what its provenance is, but I took her word for it that she has this right of dispensation. She only required that I credit her institution, which I did. The image is also to be found elsewhere on the Web, again with no provenance. I think your best bet is to use only those images that you find on Wikimedia. Larry Koenigsberg ( talk) 01:12, 14 August 2021 (UTC) reply

I neglected to mention: use images that are clearly marked public domain. That should avoid any unpleasantness. Larry Koenigsberg ( talk) 01:39, 14 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi Aboudaqn,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 00:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC) reply

czar: Duly noted – as well as duly noting your royal profile name vis-a-vis an Anarchy expert... - Aboudaqn ( talk) 15:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi @ Aboudaqn – I had recently expanded/re-written " Draft Eisenhower movement", which passed its GA and DYK nomination. You are a major contributor, as you had edited the page in the last days of 2018. I would appreciate if you could provide any comments/suggestions for improvement on its current A class nomination page. No issues if too busy. Regardless, thanks a lot for editing the page. – Kavyansh.Singh ( talk) 12:19, 25 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ivan Kalyayev, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Celia Homeford ( talk) 15:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC). reply

Celia Homeford ( talk: "Officer, you got the wrong guy!"  :) Someone else changed text to claim a different death without citing any source. I reverted and asked that person to provide a source. Eventually, someone – you (thank you) – did. Well done: I find too many people on Wikipedia assert authority in critical, negative manner rather than use the same energy positively and constructively. A case in just the past week was a disambiguation page for Ken Crawford. Someone swooped by and deleted information again and again and again, despite my requests for that person to at least create a bio stub – so, when I had time, I did for Kenneth G. Crawford. As it turned out, "Kenny G." turned out to be a far more notable person than originally hinted at on the disambiguation page. So, again, please accept my thanks for adding the sources on the death of Kalyaev. Sincerely - Aboudaqn ( talk) 15:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC) reply

		The Civility Barnstar
		Thanks for a civil exchange over a miscommunication! Carter (Tcr25) ( talk) 19:41, 22 October 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juliette Rossant 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/Juliette Rossant 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.

Coretheapple ( talk) 19:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Coretheapple ( talk): It's an old entry I created – could you withdraw the sudden deletion, give me some latest guidelines to follow, and let me take a stab at reshaping it first? - Aboudaqn ( talk) 02:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Sorry but I don't believe the article meets notability standards. Coretheapple ( talk) 16:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Coretheapple ( talk): "I don't believe" – please be a bit more collaborative, work with me here, and give me a chance, yes? - Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aboudaqn. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  -- RoySmith (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2022 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brookwood Labor College, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Labour Party.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC) reply

I found no perfect match to choose from, so I left it open by pointing to the Labour Party "general" page... Please feel free to choose a more specific entry, or to delete the wiki-link, as you see fit. Aboudaqn ( talk) 13:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn

Thank you for creating Kenneth Toombs.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

North8000 ( talk) 11:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you! - Aboudaqn ( talk) 13:11, 10 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello Aboudaqn! Your additions to National Negro Congress have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sennecaster ( Chat) 01:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC) reply

If you look at Wikipedia entries I have created or made major or minor contributions, I generally over-cite sources as well as avoid copyright issues. I find the digital trail of changes you made too complicated for me to track back through and understand, especially since the deletions seem to refer to sources... If you could present together a clearer, cleaner set of issues -- related to my contributions, not those by others -- I'd be happy to learn more. - Aboudaqn ( talk) 17:28, 23 July 2022 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, Patricia Abbott, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. ( ?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed ( verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:49, 24 September 2022 (UTC) reply

As File:Philip-abbott-undated-patti-abbott.jpg was deleted on commons you need to address there as it is a separate project. This is an interactive release generator at c:COM:VRT/CONSENT or if you think is was deleted incorrectly you can talk to the deleting commons admin c:User:Ruthven. Regards KylieTastic ( talk) 15:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn. Thank you for your work on D.M. Ladd. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article! Hopefully you will create more in the future! Have a good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC) reply

@ SunDawn:, I have started more than 300 entries, and you are the first person to leave such a kind note: thank you – Aboudaqn ( talk) 16:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you! It is my pleasure to encourage editors to edit more! ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC) reply

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 16:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Aboudaqn. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, " Patricia Abbott".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mitchell A. Dubow 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/Mitchell A. Dubow 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 until the discussion has finished.

Let'srun ( talk) 15:46, 14 August 2023 (UTC) reply

could you please send me the text of the final entry, before it was deleted? Aboudaqn ( talk) 19:50, 15 September 2023 (UTC) reply

The article Murray S. Monroe Sr. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication that subject is notable.

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. PepperBeast (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

The redirect James S. Chambers (editor has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 3 § James S. Chambers (editor until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 20:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply

looks like an error (a closing parenthesis is missing), so, sure, delete please (and thanks) Aboudaqn ( talk) 22:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The redirect James S. Chambers (publisher has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21 § James S. Chambers (publisher until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 21:09, 21 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Aboudaqn: In 2019, you [created]( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Independent_Citizens_Committee_of_the_Arts,_Sciences_and_Professions&oldid=922082410) the Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences and Professions article, where you included a membership figure of 100,000. Do you recall which book or article you got this figure from?

Thank you for your time and your work! SocDoneLeft ( talk) 05:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Not sure what's going on here. There is already an entry: Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences and Professions – what is this other URL? Aboudaqn ( talk) 18:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply