Welcome!
|
Hello Aearthrise,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Victor E. Rillieux for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Onel5969 TT me 15:17, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi @ Aearthrise:, thanks so much for all your contributions!
I have created a personal user award to recognize contributions related to ancient Roman history, which I have dubbed "The Barnstar of Tacitus". Could you check my translation: "stella horreorum Taciti"? Thanks. Informata ob Iniquitatum ( talk) 19:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I can certainly help you; the phrase you wrote means the "Star of the granaries of Tacitus".
Aearthrise (
talk) 20:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- So how would I say it correctly?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 20:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I assume you want Classic Latin Pronunciation:
Aearthrise (
talk) 21:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, how do I write it correctly? The meaning I'm looking for is the "barnstar of Tacitus". Thanks
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 21:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- As a translation, there are different ways to say it: 1.stella granarii, stella horrei meaning "Barn star, Granary star, Storehouse star"; 2.stella horreorum, stella granariorum- "star of barns, star of granaries, star of store houses" work too- 1. singular and 2. is plural.
Aearthrise (
talk) 22:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. And how do I say "of Tacitus", "Barnstar of Tacitus"?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 22:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Taciti, like how you wrote it, is the correct way of writing "of Tacitus". Aearthrise ( talk) 22:43, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. And how do I say "of Tacitus", "Barnstar of Tacitus"?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 22:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- As a translation, there are different ways to say it: 1.stella granarii, stella horrei meaning "Barn star, Granary star, Storehouse star"; 2.stella horreorum, stella granariorum- "star of barns, star of granaries, star of store houses" work too- 1. singular and 2. is plural.
Aearthrise (
talk) 22:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, how do I write it correctly? The meaning I'm looking for is the "barnstar of Tacitus". Thanks
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 21:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I assume you want Classic Latin Pronunciation:
Aearthrise (
talk) 21:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- So how would I say it correctly?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 20:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Salve,
Aiutum! I am struggling with the difference between evocare and devocare, evoco and devoco. I understand evoco to mean to summon, or lure. An evocatio was a ritual designed to "distract" a city's gods by a besieging army. But I find in Pliny's Natural Histories XXVIII ch.4, devocare is used for summoning Jupiter. Are the two interchangeable?
Evocatus is a veteran heeding the call to return to duty. So what would a devocatus be?
If you can help, awesome, don't feel obliged to respond if you can't :-) Informata ob Iniquitatum ( talk) 04:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- @ InformationvsInjustice: taking a quick glance at the prefixes of the words- evocare means calling out ex+ vocare, while devocare is calling down de+ vocare. Beyond that difference I would assume they have a similar or same meaning. As an evocatus is someone called out (i.e. called to return to duty), a devocatus would be someone called down to someone/something, and an advocatus(advocate) is called to someone/something. Aearthrise ( talk) 22:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
- @ Aearthrise: Could the de in devocare be a negative prefix, like dethrone or denounce? Informata ob Iniquitatum ( talk) 05:26, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Aearthrise ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I as Aearthrise on wiktionary was blocked by the admin SemperBlotto for "vandalism;" He rolled back two definitions I added for Sabir, sabir & respondir, Mediterranean Lingua Franca, and banned me for 3 days & also removing the ability to edit my talk page; He did not communicate with me at all, nor did he add verify senses on the definitions I added. I am proud to be a prolific contributor on wiktionary, and I don't vandalize.
Decline reason:
Wikitionary is a different project. If you are blocked there, you need to contest your block there. Yamla ( talk) 15:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hi there Aearthrise, I saw that you're proficient in Latin, and wonder if you might be willing to translate a few sentences? They're "Leontius hic jacit fidelis puer dulcisimus patri, pietissimus matri. Qui vixit annis septem et mensis tres et dies sex. Innocens funere raptus, beatus mente, felix et in pace recessit." It comes from a letter written by Robert Howard Hodgkin, and while Google Translate gives the gist of it, it would be nice to have a more accurate translation before incorporating it into the article. The full letter (i.e., the full excerpt of the letter that was published) is: "This morning I set my face against the lovely Cologne Primitives and kept rigidly to Roman and Frankish antiquities. Among other things I copied out some of the Frankish inscriptions on tombstones. One of the fifth century: [above inscription]. I suppose sorrow has been almost the same through all the ages." The letter was written some eight months after Hodgkin's twelve-year-old daughter died. Thanks, -- Usernameunique ( talk) 01:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- @
Usernameunique: Hello Usernameunique! Yes, I can translate this: "Leontius lies here, a faithful boy, the sweetest to his father, the most pious to his mother. He lived seven years, three months, and six days. An innocent taken by death, blessed in mind, he departed happily in peace."
Aearthrise (
talk) 20:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- That's great, thanks very much! I've added the translation to the article. -- Usernameunique ( talk) 20:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Louisiana Creole people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page African. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Léger-Félicité Sonthonax into
Saint Dominicans. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you.
DanCherek (
talk) 04:51, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Aearthrise: Are you in, perchance? scope_creep Talk 16:13, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ping please, when your in.
scope_creep
Talk 16:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- I am in! Aearthrise ( talk) 21:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ping please, when your in.
scope_creep
Talk 16:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Germans in the American Revolution into
Pennsylvania Dutch. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Also, when copying between articles, please be sure to copy over any relevant sources. Thanks, —
Diannaa (
talk) 15:12, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Why are you sending me this? I clearly attributed it earlier.
- 15:30, 11 November 2022 Aearthrise talk contribs 52,414 bytes +1,466 →Hessians in the Pennsylvania Dutch Country: Copied text from Germans in the American Revolution 11/11/2022
- 15:03, 12 November 2022 Diannaa talk contribs m 52,838 bytes −1 Attribution: text was copied from Germans in the American Revolution on November 11, 2022. Please see the history of that page for full attribution. (See WP:RIA for more information.)
- I want you to apologize to me now for first not checking that earlier post and two posting this inflammatory message to my talk page. Aearthrise ( talk) 19:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Eh, cher — fellow Cajun Wikipedian here, nice to meet you. Thanks for all your good work on the Alabama Creole people page — but I do want to raise one important issue. The "Alabama Cajans/Cajuns" are no relation to either the Louisiana Cajuns or the French colonial settlers of Mobile. They are the descendants of a group of Choctaw Indians that evaded resettlement to Indian Territory in the 19th century. They were mislabeled as "Cajuns" (or "Cajans," a not-uncommon spelling for the Louisiana Cajuns at the time too) in the 1880s and the name stuck. They have long considered it a pejorative and have for decades called themselves the MOWA Band of Choctaw Indians. You can see background in the links below or in the ones linked at the MOWA Band article; the WPA Guide was just repeating some common misconceptions of the era. Given the lack of an actual connection, I think the Alabama Cajans section should be removed, but since it's almost entirely your work, I thought I'd give you a heads up. Flaggingwill ( talk) 22:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
https://www.proquest.com/docview/211812798?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ncvRcSlKmkYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA19&dq=%22mowa+band%22+%22cajan%22&ots=xCFV1HNHu5&sig=mWgv0OWETb3SiH2pzMxpOEtwOzc#v=onepage&q=%22mowa%20band%22%20%22cajan%22&f=false https://muse.jhu.edu/article/783008/summary https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yUFuAAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=%22mowa+band%22+%22cajans%22&ots=8q2T0x6QSb&sig=bcq4NjkPrxO8MBUUfzMLR_clisI#v=onepage&q=%22mowa%20band%22%20%22cajans%22&f=false Flaggingwill ( talk) 22:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is
legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Nardog ( talk) 14:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Aearthrise. Thank you for your work on French Louisianians. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article!
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) 19:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Alaskan Creole people moved to draftspace
An article you recently created,
Alaskan Creole people, is not suitable as written to remain published. While it appears to be notable, 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. I did this rather than removing the uncited material in the article, which I felt would be more disruptive. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask on my talk page. When you have the required sourcing (and every assertion needs a source), and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Or feel free to ping me to take another look.
Onel5969
TT me 12:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- All of the information in that article is from other articles in Wikipedia, so while you're putting that article into a draft, you should also move all the other articles that the information was copied from to draft space too as apparently they don't fit "veritability."
Aearthrise (
talk) 14:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please peruse
WP:OWN. Blanking the draft was not called for and looks like an act of lashing out at the perceived denigration of something you own. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 15:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- You accuse me of lashing out without any evidence; I won't tolerate your slander, and I want you to apologize to me now for your attack on my person.
Aearthrise (
talk) 15:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I merely pointed out how your actions look. You decided to take it as slander. I have not attacked you. I still suggest you read
WP:OWN. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 21:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- You, "UtherSRG", posted an inflammatory accusation on my talk page; you purported that the blanking of a page and adding a delete tag on the Alaskan Creole draft page was an action of "ownership." You then demanded that I read the page for ownership disputes, WP:OWN, yet you yourself, being an Admin, ignored the very lines within that read "Always avoid accusations, attacks, and speculations concerning the motivation of any editor."
- Your supposed basis for your accusation was that I blanked the page and put a deletion tag. This a Wikipedia sanctioned action under the deletion rule WP:G7.
- You escalated this encounter to a personal level attack by making baseless accusations based on your unwarranted speculation. This behavior is not becoming of someone who has been a Wikipedian for as long as you have, and especially not of an Administrator.
- I want you to apologize to me now for your personal attacks and baseless accusation and I implore you to read the very rules that you purport to be upholding rather than slandering Wikipedia members.
Aearthrise (
talk) 21:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I am sorry that you choose to take things so harshly. I merely looked to help you see how your actions were viewed. G7 is definitely a legitimate criteria for deletion. Without such state criteria, the request looked like lashing out in frustration. With the criteria, it appears less so. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- I merely pointed out how your actions look. You decided to take it as slander. I have not attacked you. I still suggest you read
WP:OWN. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 21:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- You accuse me of lashing out without any evidence; I won't tolerate your slander, and I want you to apologize to me now for your attack on my person.
Aearthrise (
talk) 15:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please peruse
WP:OWN. Blanking the draft was not called for and looks like an act of lashing out at the perceived denigration of something you own. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 15:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm not really sure what you were trying to accomplish by pasting a massive informational template at the top of Promyshlenniki and Russian America, nor by previously moving them to draftspace, but it is disruptive and I have reverted it. Please see WP:POINT and be more careful about invoking templates that you are not familiar with. signed, Rosguill talk 16:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you @ Rosguill:, i'm looking to post the template for a content dispute on ths page. Aearthrise ( talk) 16:27, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
| discussion copied from Onel's talk page |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Onel5969 reverted the page immediately thereafter with the line only with the word "nonsense".
Onel5969 then reverted the page a second time with the line "unwanted comments from someone who is not interested in conversation, only arguing. Now go away and don't post on my talk page again." These are not the actions or words dignified of a Wikipedia administrator; they should understand that the actions and words made in their position is held in a higher regard than standard editors, and should not make accusations unless they have ample evidence. |
I want Onel5969 to explain now what he meant in his closing words because he implied I broke WP:OWN rules, and my reputation is at stake. Aearthrise ( talk) 16:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- First of all, Onel5969 is not an admin. I'm not really sure why OWN would apply here, but WP:POINT does per your decision to take drastic action against other articles in response to their draftifying of Alaskan Creole people. Please refrain from invoking templates without reading their documentation (or at least just hitting preview before publishing the edit to make sure you're doing what you want to do! I've now had to revert you twice.); dispute resolution processes are not begun by placing requests for intervention on an article, they are begun with discussions on the article's talk page.
- My guess as to why Onel drafted the original article was not due to an issue with the underlying verifiability of the content at the articles you pulled it from, but its suitability in establishing notability of the new subject. To establish that the subject "Alaskan Creole people" is notable, you need to provide sources that describe the subject directly, by name, in detail; sources about Promyshlenikii or other Russian groups are not sufficient. Now, looking at Google Scholar, plenty of usable sources exist, so you should have no trouble creating a suitable draft. If you like, I can restore the draftspace revision Draft:Alaskan Creole people so that you can continue work if you like. signed, Rosguill talk 16:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dominican Creoles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bambara.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Aearthrise. Thank you for your work on Alaskan Creole people. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Hello! Thank you for creating this article. I have marked it as reviewed. I encourage you to write more articles! Have a blessed 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) 13:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I thank you for your kind words. Have a good weekend! Aearthrise ( talk) 21:56, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alaskan Creole people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Byzantine Church.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Saint-Domingue, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dominican Creole.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Mario & Luigi
Hello Aearthrise. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Mario & Luigi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Please provide a valid reason for speedy deletion based on the criteria for speedy deletion for take it to redirects for discussion.. Thank you. BangJan1999 00:34, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Hey there — I'm reverting your revert of my edit on Cajuns. Your version:
Although the terms Cajun and Creole today are often portrayed as separate identities, Louisianians of Cajun descent have historically been known as Creoles.
My version:
Although the terms Cajun and Creole today are often portrayed as separate identities, Louisianians of Acadian descent have sometimes been considered Creoles.
I understand and appreciate the broader point, but surely you'd acknowledge that Louisiana Acadians/Cajuns have only sometimes been considered Creole, historically speaking. Sometimes they have! But there are hundreds and hundreds of references through the 19th and 20th centuries that differentiate "Acadians"/"Cajuns" from "Creoles" of all types. To pick just a few:
George Washington Cable, 1881: "The Creoles proper will not share their distinction with the native descendants of those worthy Acadian exiles who, in 1756, and later, found refuge in Louisiana." [1]
Carl Brasseaux, 2005: "The heirs of these three colonial cultural traditions are, of course, white Creoles, Creoles of Color, and Cajuns." [2]
Ruth McEnery Stuart, 1896: "Among the interesting peoples who are ensconced in picturesque homes in remote localities over the Western continent there are probably none about whom hangs so charmed a glamour of romance as the three principal American communities of French speech: the Canadians of Quebec, the Lousiana Acadians, and the Creoles of New Orleans. Although the first two are essentially different from the last, there are certain inherent national qualities in them all that have, through successive generations, preserved them separate and distinct peoples." [3]
And "of Acadian descent" makes more sense than "of Cajun descent," given that Cajun identity is a 19th/20th-century creation, and the key referent is their earlier Acadian ancestry. Flaggingwill ( talk) 17:13, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- You'll find that the usage of the term "Cajun" came about only after the Civil War, evolved throughout the destruction of Louisiana Creole society; for all the time period before the Civil War, there was no discussion about whether Acadian descendants were Creoles or not. They were Acadian Creoles, and thusly so as Creole refers to Latin Louisianian culture. The phrase makes a contrast with the modern understanding of Cajun and Creole, and sheds light on the fact that historically they indeed were known as Creoles, specifically Acadian Creoles. If the reader wants to know how the word evolved from the historical meaning of Creole, they read the sections specifically dedicated to that information: "Etymology and historical usage of the term", and "Cajuns as Louisiana Creoles"
- So, I shall revert the phrase back. Aearthrise ( talk) 18:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=7egxAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA10&dq=cajuns+creoles&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwic4Ji64fL-AhUykIkEHenXB4kQ6AF6BAgMEAI#v=onepage&q=cajuns%20creoles&f=false
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=j2IAZ7563soC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=%22The+heirs+of+these+three+colonial+cultural+traditions+are,+of+course,+white+Creoles,+Creoles+of+Color,+and+Cajuns.+The+oldest+of+the+white%22&source=bl&ots=YXxj2goUk9&sig=ACfU3U0Kt3xgClguJ82Ye41hqGXORa49PQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiLqNPh4vL-AhW9jIkEHWoAAXIQ6AF6BAgGEAM#v=onepage&q=%22The%20heirs%20of%20these%20three%20colonial%20cultural%20traditions%20are%2C%20of%20course%2C%20white%20Creoles%2C%20Creoles%20of%20Color%2C%20and%20Cajuns.%20The%20oldest%20of%20the%20white%22&f=false
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=Oviw712mvHUC&pg=PA7&dq=cajuns+creoles&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiQ3sSL4_L-AhVDmIkEHSCZDBA4ChDoAXoECA8QAg#v=onepage&q=cajuns%20creoles&f=false
If you want to nominate Draft:Mario & Luigi for deletion, the correct place is at redirects for discussion. The G6 speedy deletion criterion and proposed deletion processes are for uncontroversial deletions, and you've been reverted by five different editors at this point. However, I would warn you that your concern (that there is a redirect in draftspace) is a very common occurrence, given that accepted draftspace submissions by the Articles for Creation project tend to have redirects from draftspace to the mainspace. You may also be interested to read WP:RDRAFT and Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 135#Draft Namespace Redirects. Sdrqaz ( talk) 18:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Each one of those reversions by the editors did nothing to further the cause of deleting that redirected draft. I thank you for your initiative to bring this information to at least my talk page. This is an uncontroversial deletion; can you delete this redirected draft, not only for me, but also all future draft reviewers, so that they may not be bothered by a misplaced draft?
- Thank you, and I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Aearthrise (
talk) 19:12, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think that the reason why
"[e]ach one of those reversions by the editors did nothing to further the cause of deleting that redirected draft"
is because they didn't agree with the deletion. As I've noted, this is not an uncontroversial deletion – apart from the people objecting in that page's history, I have highlighted pre-existing community consensus on the issue. Again, having a redirect from draftspace to the mainspace is a very common occurrence – being"bothered by a misplaced draft"
is very unlikely. My role as an administrator is not to circumvent community consensus. If you want the redirect to be deleted, you should use the redirects for discussion process. Sdrqaz ( talk) 20:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think that the reason why
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cajuns, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arcadians.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:04, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BlackcurrantTea. After editing Alaskan Creole people, I looked at your contributions out of curiosity. I noticed that many of them were marked as minor, although they weren't minor in Wikipedia terms, e.g. changing the wording and link in a hatnote, changing 'French Creole culture' to 'The Catholic Latin-Creole culture', adding an image, and changing 'German' to 'Palatine'. If other editors have 'hide minor edits' ticked in their watchlist and recent changes preferences, these changes would be hidden from them. Please take another look at WP:MINOR and be careful when deciding whether to mark an edit as such. Thank you, BlackcurrantTea ( talk) 01:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Swiss Amish. Your edits appear to be
disruptive and have been or will be
reverted.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Better to discuss on the talkpage rather than leaving a diatribe in the edit summary. Eric talk 22:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- This whole post is nonsense: you seem to lack the ability to communicate effectively, as your only communications with me on the article Swiss Amish were reversions with no context other than you claiming the information to be "contradictory" to the articles content:
- Here are your nonsense reversions with no context, and my reversion with context:
Reverting edit(s) by Aearthrise (talk) to rev. 1179717180 by Materialscientist: Reverting presumed good faith edit that both contradicts the article content and introduces an inappropriate graphic (RW 16.1)
Undid revision 1193449609 by Eric (talk) You claim that the statement "Amish come from Switzerland" is a contradiction, but this whole article has to do with Amish coming from Switzerland. Either you're blind or you don't comprehend the article
Reverting edit(s) by Aearthrise (talk) to rev. 1193449609 by Eric: 2nd rv of unhelpful edit (RW 16.1)
- I detailed a full response detailing logic for the edit, which you should have responded with a proper response or argument against the edit. You failed to communicate entirely, and rather decided to post this useless drivel on my page.
- Indeed, coming to my page to post this nonsense is just a bullying tactic from your part, to end the conversation through false authority which does not apply at all in this case. All of this instead of providing your detailed reasoning for reverting the edit.
- I will not play your ego game, and further, I shall revert your unhelpful, nondescript reversion on Swiss Amish, and I expect you to communicate your reasoning on either the Edit Summary or on the the Talk:Swiss Amish page as you should have done from the beginning. Aearthrise ( talk) 23:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- As is stated in the Swiss Amish article, the Amish came from what is now France and Germany as well as from Switzerland. Placing a Swiss flag in the article, with the caption "The Amish come from Switzerland", is incorrect and runs counter to Wikipedia's encyclopedic style. Eric talk 02:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
I noticed your recent edit to the ' Holy See' article, changing the term 'Holy See' to 'Holy See of Rome' in the first paragraph. While the latter term exists, in the present time it's not used by the Holy See itself nor by major organizations like the UN, US Department of State, UNESCOor CIA to refer to the See of Rome. For clarity and consistency with established usage, I have reverted the term 'Holy See of Rome' to 'Holy See' as it was before.
Cambridge dictionary definition for Holy See: "the government of the Roman Catholic Church, under the Pope"
Oxford dictionary definition for the Holy See: "the job or authority of the Pope" EXANXC ( talk) 13:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I was alerted to your piece on Axsum by a discussion on Twitter citing your erroneous information on Greek and the ptotemies in Ethiopia, which is false. Location is unknown and no ptolemies remains have been found in Eritrea or Ethiopia and is said to be Aqiq. No scholar agrees with such. You then make claims Greek was the official language without providing sufficient evidence to such, the script was not invented in the 4th Century, for example Wazeba uses it and neither did Ezana promote the script, I have no idea where you got that from. Definitely needs to be revised. Can you show me inscriptions in Greek prior to Ge'ez? Habesha212 ( talk) 16:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Don't bring this nonsense to my talk page. Make your argument under
Talk:Kingdom of Aksum#Greek.
Aearthrise (
talk) 17:23, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Your agenda drivel nonsense should be bought to the forefront and therefore you will be called out. I saw the discussion on twitter your claims are false and when challenged you can not seem to answer. Habesha212 ( talk) 17:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Are you aware that the user "Djflem" redirected the article "New York Dutch" over to "Dutch of New York City" essentially erasing it from the encyclopedia without consensus? Jonathan f1 ( talk) 01:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Aearthrise. Thank you for your work on German Pennsylvania. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
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) 10:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Welcome!
|
Hello Aearthrise,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Victor E. Rillieux for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Onel5969 TT me 15:17, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi @ Aearthrise:, thanks so much for all your contributions!
I have created a personal user award to recognize contributions related to ancient Roman history, which I have dubbed "The Barnstar of Tacitus". Could you check my translation: "stella horreorum Taciti"? Thanks. Informata ob Iniquitatum ( talk) 19:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I can certainly help you; the phrase you wrote means the "Star of the granaries of Tacitus".
Aearthrise (
talk) 20:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- So how would I say it correctly?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 20:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I assume you want Classic Latin Pronunciation:
Aearthrise (
talk) 21:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, how do I write it correctly? The meaning I'm looking for is the "barnstar of Tacitus". Thanks
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 21:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- As a translation, there are different ways to say it: 1.stella granarii, stella horrei meaning "Barn star, Granary star, Storehouse star"; 2.stella horreorum, stella granariorum- "star of barns, star of granaries, star of store houses" work too- 1. singular and 2. is plural.
Aearthrise (
talk) 22:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. And how do I say "of Tacitus", "Barnstar of Tacitus"?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 22:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Taciti, like how you wrote it, is the correct way of writing "of Tacitus". Aearthrise ( talk) 22:43, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. And how do I say "of Tacitus", "Barnstar of Tacitus"?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 22:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- As a translation, there are different ways to say it: 1.stella granarii, stella horrei meaning "Barn star, Granary star, Storehouse star"; 2.stella horreorum, stella granariorum- "star of barns, star of granaries, star of store houses" work too- 1. singular and 2. is plural.
Aearthrise (
talk) 22:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, how do I write it correctly? The meaning I'm looking for is the "barnstar of Tacitus". Thanks
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 21:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- I assume you want Classic Latin Pronunciation:
Aearthrise (
talk) 21:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
- So how would I say it correctly?
Informata ob Iniquitatum (
talk) 20:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Salve,
Aiutum! I am struggling with the difference between evocare and devocare, evoco and devoco. I understand evoco to mean to summon, or lure. An evocatio was a ritual designed to "distract" a city's gods by a besieging army. But I find in Pliny's Natural Histories XXVIII ch.4, devocare is used for summoning Jupiter. Are the two interchangeable?
Evocatus is a veteran heeding the call to return to duty. So what would a devocatus be?
If you can help, awesome, don't feel obliged to respond if you can't :-) Informata ob Iniquitatum ( talk) 04:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- @ InformationvsInjustice: taking a quick glance at the prefixes of the words- evocare means calling out ex+ vocare, while devocare is calling down de+ vocare. Beyond that difference I would assume they have a similar or same meaning. As an evocatus is someone called out (i.e. called to return to duty), a devocatus would be someone called down to someone/something, and an advocatus(advocate) is called to someone/something. Aearthrise ( talk) 22:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
- @ Aearthrise: Could the de in devocare be a negative prefix, like dethrone or denounce? Informata ob Iniquitatum ( talk) 05:26, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Aearthrise ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I as Aearthrise on wiktionary was blocked by the admin SemperBlotto for "vandalism;" He rolled back two definitions I added for Sabir, sabir & respondir, Mediterranean Lingua Franca, and banned me for 3 days & also removing the ability to edit my talk page; He did not communicate with me at all, nor did he add verify senses on the definitions I added. I am proud to be a prolific contributor on wiktionary, and I don't vandalize.
Decline reason:
Wikitionary is a different project. If you are blocked there, you need to contest your block there. Yamla ( talk) 15:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hi there Aearthrise, I saw that you're proficient in Latin, and wonder if you might be willing to translate a few sentences? They're "Leontius hic jacit fidelis puer dulcisimus patri, pietissimus matri. Qui vixit annis septem et mensis tres et dies sex. Innocens funere raptus, beatus mente, felix et in pace recessit." It comes from a letter written by Robert Howard Hodgkin, and while Google Translate gives the gist of it, it would be nice to have a more accurate translation before incorporating it into the article. The full letter (i.e., the full excerpt of the letter that was published) is: "This morning I set my face against the lovely Cologne Primitives and kept rigidly to Roman and Frankish antiquities. Among other things I copied out some of the Frankish inscriptions on tombstones. One of the fifth century: [above inscription]. I suppose sorrow has been almost the same through all the ages." The letter was written some eight months after Hodgkin's twelve-year-old daughter died. Thanks, -- Usernameunique ( talk) 01:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- @
Usernameunique: Hello Usernameunique! Yes, I can translate this: "Leontius lies here, a faithful boy, the sweetest to his father, the most pious to his mother. He lived seven years, three months, and six days. An innocent taken by death, blessed in mind, he departed happily in peace."
Aearthrise (
talk) 20:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- That's great, thanks very much! I've added the translation to the article. -- Usernameunique ( talk) 20:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Louisiana Creole people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page African. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Léger-Félicité Sonthonax into
Saint Dominicans. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you.
DanCherek (
talk) 04:51, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Aearthrise: Are you in, perchance? scope_creep Talk 16:13, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ping please, when your in.
scope_creep
Talk 16:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- I am in! Aearthrise ( talk) 21:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Ping please, when your in.
scope_creep
Talk 16:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Germans in the American Revolution into
Pennsylvania Dutch. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Also, when copying between articles, please be sure to copy over any relevant sources. Thanks, —
Diannaa (
talk) 15:12, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Why are you sending me this? I clearly attributed it earlier.
- 15:30, 11 November 2022 Aearthrise talk contribs 52,414 bytes +1,466 →Hessians in the Pennsylvania Dutch Country: Copied text from Germans in the American Revolution 11/11/2022
- 15:03, 12 November 2022 Diannaa talk contribs m 52,838 bytes −1 Attribution: text was copied from Germans in the American Revolution on November 11, 2022. Please see the history of that page for full attribution. (See WP:RIA for more information.)
- I want you to apologize to me now for first not checking that earlier post and two posting this inflammatory message to my talk page. Aearthrise ( talk) 19:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Eh, cher — fellow Cajun Wikipedian here, nice to meet you. Thanks for all your good work on the Alabama Creole people page — but I do want to raise one important issue. The "Alabama Cajans/Cajuns" are no relation to either the Louisiana Cajuns or the French colonial settlers of Mobile. They are the descendants of a group of Choctaw Indians that evaded resettlement to Indian Territory in the 19th century. They were mislabeled as "Cajuns" (or "Cajans," a not-uncommon spelling for the Louisiana Cajuns at the time too) in the 1880s and the name stuck. They have long considered it a pejorative and have for decades called themselves the MOWA Band of Choctaw Indians. You can see background in the links below or in the ones linked at the MOWA Band article; the WPA Guide was just repeating some common misconceptions of the era. Given the lack of an actual connection, I think the Alabama Cajans section should be removed, but since it's almost entirely your work, I thought I'd give you a heads up. Flaggingwill ( talk) 22:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
https://www.proquest.com/docview/211812798?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ncvRcSlKmkYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA19&dq=%22mowa+band%22+%22cajan%22&ots=xCFV1HNHu5&sig=mWgv0OWETb3SiH2pzMxpOEtwOzc#v=onepage&q=%22mowa%20band%22%20%22cajan%22&f=false https://muse.jhu.edu/article/783008/summary https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yUFuAAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=%22mowa+band%22+%22cajans%22&ots=8q2T0x6QSb&sig=bcq4NjkPrxO8MBUUfzMLR_clisI#v=onepage&q=%22mowa%20band%22%20%22cajans%22&f=false Flaggingwill ( talk) 22:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is
legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Nardog ( talk) 14:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Aearthrise. Thank you for your work on French Louisianians. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article!
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) 19:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Alaskan Creole people moved to draftspace
An article you recently created,
Alaskan Creole people, is not suitable as written to remain published. While it appears to be notable, 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. I did this rather than removing the uncited material in the article, which I felt would be more disruptive. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask on my talk page. When you have the required sourcing (and every assertion needs a source), and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Or feel free to ping me to take another look.
Onel5969
TT me 12:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- All of the information in that article is from other articles in Wikipedia, so while you're putting that article into a draft, you should also move all the other articles that the information was copied from to draft space too as apparently they don't fit "veritability."
Aearthrise (
talk) 14:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please peruse
WP:OWN. Blanking the draft was not called for and looks like an act of lashing out at the perceived denigration of something you own. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 15:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- You accuse me of lashing out without any evidence; I won't tolerate your slander, and I want you to apologize to me now for your attack on my person.
Aearthrise (
talk) 15:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I merely pointed out how your actions look. You decided to take it as slander. I have not attacked you. I still suggest you read
WP:OWN. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 21:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- You, "UtherSRG", posted an inflammatory accusation on my talk page; you purported that the blanking of a page and adding a delete tag on the Alaskan Creole draft page was an action of "ownership." You then demanded that I read the page for ownership disputes, WP:OWN, yet you yourself, being an Admin, ignored the very lines within that read "Always avoid accusations, attacks, and speculations concerning the motivation of any editor."
- Your supposed basis for your accusation was that I blanked the page and put a deletion tag. This a Wikipedia sanctioned action under the deletion rule WP:G7.
- You escalated this encounter to a personal level attack by making baseless accusations based on your unwarranted speculation. This behavior is not becoming of someone who has been a Wikipedian for as long as you have, and especially not of an Administrator.
- I want you to apologize to me now for your personal attacks and baseless accusation and I implore you to read the very rules that you purport to be upholding rather than slandering Wikipedia members.
Aearthrise (
talk) 21:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I am sorry that you choose to take things so harshly. I merely looked to help you see how your actions were viewed. G7 is definitely a legitimate criteria for deletion. Without such state criteria, the request looked like lashing out in frustration. With the criteria, it appears less so. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- I merely pointed out how your actions look. You decided to take it as slander. I have not attacked you. I still suggest you read
WP:OWN. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 21:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- You accuse me of lashing out without any evidence; I won't tolerate your slander, and I want you to apologize to me now for your attack on my person.
Aearthrise (
talk) 15:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please peruse
WP:OWN. Blanking the draft was not called for and looks like an act of lashing out at the perceived denigration of something you own. -
UtherSRG
(talk) 15:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm not really sure what you were trying to accomplish by pasting a massive informational template at the top of Promyshlenniki and Russian America, nor by previously moving them to draftspace, but it is disruptive and I have reverted it. Please see WP:POINT and be more careful about invoking templates that you are not familiar with. signed, Rosguill talk 16:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you @ Rosguill:, i'm looking to post the template for a content dispute on ths page. Aearthrise ( talk) 16:27, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
| discussion copied from Onel's talk page |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Onel5969 reverted the page immediately thereafter with the line only with the word "nonsense".
Onel5969 then reverted the page a second time with the line "unwanted comments from someone who is not interested in conversation, only arguing. Now go away and don't post on my talk page again." These are not the actions or words dignified of a Wikipedia administrator; they should understand that the actions and words made in their position is held in a higher regard than standard editors, and should not make accusations unless they have ample evidence. |
I want Onel5969 to explain now what he meant in his closing words because he implied I broke WP:OWN rules, and my reputation is at stake. Aearthrise ( talk) 16:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- First of all, Onel5969 is not an admin. I'm not really sure why OWN would apply here, but WP:POINT does per your decision to take drastic action against other articles in response to their draftifying of Alaskan Creole people. Please refrain from invoking templates without reading their documentation (or at least just hitting preview before publishing the edit to make sure you're doing what you want to do! I've now had to revert you twice.); dispute resolution processes are not begun by placing requests for intervention on an article, they are begun with discussions on the article's talk page.
- My guess as to why Onel drafted the original article was not due to an issue with the underlying verifiability of the content at the articles you pulled it from, but its suitability in establishing notability of the new subject. To establish that the subject "Alaskan Creole people" is notable, you need to provide sources that describe the subject directly, by name, in detail; sources about Promyshlenikii or other Russian groups are not sufficient. Now, looking at Google Scholar, plenty of usable sources exist, so you should have no trouble creating a suitable draft. If you like, I can restore the draftspace revision Draft:Alaskan Creole people so that you can continue work if you like. signed, Rosguill talk 16:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dominican Creoles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bambara.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Aearthrise. Thank you for your work on Alaskan Creole people. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Hello! Thank you for creating this article. I have marked it as reviewed. I encourage you to write more articles! Have a blessed 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) 13:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I thank you for your kind words. Have a good weekend! Aearthrise ( talk) 21:56, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alaskan Creole people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Byzantine Church.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Saint-Domingue, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dominican Creole.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Mario & Luigi
Hello Aearthrise. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Mario & Luigi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Please provide a valid reason for speedy deletion based on the criteria for speedy deletion for take it to redirects for discussion.. Thank you. BangJan1999 00:34, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Hey there — I'm reverting your revert of my edit on Cajuns. Your version:
Although the terms Cajun and Creole today are often portrayed as separate identities, Louisianians of Cajun descent have historically been known as Creoles.
My version:
Although the terms Cajun and Creole today are often portrayed as separate identities, Louisianians of Acadian descent have sometimes been considered Creoles.
I understand and appreciate the broader point, but surely you'd acknowledge that Louisiana Acadians/Cajuns have only sometimes been considered Creole, historically speaking. Sometimes they have! But there are hundreds and hundreds of references through the 19th and 20th centuries that differentiate "Acadians"/"Cajuns" from "Creoles" of all types. To pick just a few:
George Washington Cable, 1881: "The Creoles proper will not share their distinction with the native descendants of those worthy Acadian exiles who, in 1756, and later, found refuge in Louisiana." [1]
Carl Brasseaux, 2005: "The heirs of these three colonial cultural traditions are, of course, white Creoles, Creoles of Color, and Cajuns." [2]
Ruth McEnery Stuart, 1896: "Among the interesting peoples who are ensconced in picturesque homes in remote localities over the Western continent there are probably none about whom hangs so charmed a glamour of romance as the three principal American communities of French speech: the Canadians of Quebec, the Lousiana Acadians, and the Creoles of New Orleans. Although the first two are essentially different from the last, there are certain inherent national qualities in them all that have, through successive generations, preserved them separate and distinct peoples." [3]
And "of Acadian descent" makes more sense than "of Cajun descent," given that Cajun identity is a 19th/20th-century creation, and the key referent is their earlier Acadian ancestry. Flaggingwill ( talk) 17:13, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- You'll find that the usage of the term "Cajun" came about only after the Civil War, evolved throughout the destruction of Louisiana Creole society; for all the time period before the Civil War, there was no discussion about whether Acadian descendants were Creoles or not. They were Acadian Creoles, and thusly so as Creole refers to Latin Louisianian culture. The phrase makes a contrast with the modern understanding of Cajun and Creole, and sheds light on the fact that historically they indeed were known as Creoles, specifically Acadian Creoles. If the reader wants to know how the word evolved from the historical meaning of Creole, they read the sections specifically dedicated to that information: "Etymology and historical usage of the term", and "Cajuns as Louisiana Creoles"
- So, I shall revert the phrase back. Aearthrise ( talk) 18:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=7egxAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA10&dq=cajuns+creoles&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwic4Ji64fL-AhUykIkEHenXB4kQ6AF6BAgMEAI#v=onepage&q=cajuns%20creoles&f=false
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=j2IAZ7563soC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=%22The+heirs+of+these+three+colonial+cultural+traditions+are,+of+course,+white+Creoles,+Creoles+of+Color,+and+Cajuns.+The+oldest+of+the+white%22&source=bl&ots=YXxj2goUk9&sig=ACfU3U0Kt3xgClguJ82Ye41hqGXORa49PQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiLqNPh4vL-AhW9jIkEHWoAAXIQ6AF6BAgGEAM#v=onepage&q=%22The%20heirs%20of%20these%20three%20colonial%20cultural%20traditions%20are%2C%20of%20course%2C%20white%20Creoles%2C%20Creoles%20of%20Color%2C%20and%20Cajuns.%20The%20oldest%20of%20the%20white%22&f=false
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=Oviw712mvHUC&pg=PA7&dq=cajuns+creoles&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiQ3sSL4_L-AhVDmIkEHSCZDBA4ChDoAXoECA8QAg#v=onepage&q=cajuns%20creoles&f=false
If you want to nominate Draft:Mario & Luigi for deletion, the correct place is at redirects for discussion. The G6 speedy deletion criterion and proposed deletion processes are for uncontroversial deletions, and you've been reverted by five different editors at this point. However, I would warn you that your concern (that there is a redirect in draftspace) is a very common occurrence, given that accepted draftspace submissions by the Articles for Creation project tend to have redirects from draftspace to the mainspace. You may also be interested to read WP:RDRAFT and Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 135#Draft Namespace Redirects. Sdrqaz ( talk) 18:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Each one of those reversions by the editors did nothing to further the cause of deleting that redirected draft. I thank you for your initiative to bring this information to at least my talk page. This is an uncontroversial deletion; can you delete this redirected draft, not only for me, but also all future draft reviewers, so that they may not be bothered by a misplaced draft?
- Thank you, and I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Aearthrise (
talk) 19:12, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think that the reason why
"[e]ach one of those reversions by the editors did nothing to further the cause of deleting that redirected draft"
is because they didn't agree with the deletion. As I've noted, this is not an uncontroversial deletion – apart from the people objecting in that page's history, I have highlighted pre-existing community consensus on the issue. Again, having a redirect from draftspace to the mainspace is a very common occurrence – being"bothered by a misplaced draft"
is very unlikely. My role as an administrator is not to circumvent community consensus. If you want the redirect to be deleted, you should use the redirects for discussion process. Sdrqaz ( talk) 20:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think that the reason why
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cajuns, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arcadians.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:04, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BlackcurrantTea. After editing Alaskan Creole people, I looked at your contributions out of curiosity. I noticed that many of them were marked as minor, although they weren't minor in Wikipedia terms, e.g. changing the wording and link in a hatnote, changing 'French Creole culture' to 'The Catholic Latin-Creole culture', adding an image, and changing 'German' to 'Palatine'. If other editors have 'hide minor edits' ticked in their watchlist and recent changes preferences, these changes would be hidden from them. Please take another look at WP:MINOR and be careful when deciding whether to mark an edit as such. Thank you, BlackcurrantTea ( talk) 01:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Swiss Amish. Your edits appear to be
disruptive and have been or will be
reverted.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Better to discuss on the talkpage rather than leaving a diatribe in the edit summary. Eric talk 22:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- This whole post is nonsense: you seem to lack the ability to communicate effectively, as your only communications with me on the article Swiss Amish were reversions with no context other than you claiming the information to be "contradictory" to the articles content:
- Here are your nonsense reversions with no context, and my reversion with context:
Reverting edit(s) by Aearthrise (talk) to rev. 1179717180 by Materialscientist: Reverting presumed good faith edit that both contradicts the article content and introduces an inappropriate graphic (RW 16.1)
Undid revision 1193449609 by Eric (talk) You claim that the statement "Amish come from Switzerland" is a contradiction, but this whole article has to do with Amish coming from Switzerland. Either you're blind or you don't comprehend the article
Reverting edit(s) by Aearthrise (talk) to rev. 1193449609 by Eric: 2nd rv of unhelpful edit (RW 16.1)
- I detailed a full response detailing logic for the edit, which you should have responded with a proper response or argument against the edit. You failed to communicate entirely, and rather decided to post this useless drivel on my page.
- Indeed, coming to my page to post this nonsense is just a bullying tactic from your part, to end the conversation through false authority which does not apply at all in this case. All of this instead of providing your detailed reasoning for reverting the edit.
- I will not play your ego game, and further, I shall revert your unhelpful, nondescript reversion on Swiss Amish, and I expect you to communicate your reasoning on either the Edit Summary or on the the Talk:Swiss Amish page as you should have done from the beginning. Aearthrise ( talk) 23:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- As is stated in the Swiss Amish article, the Amish came from what is now France and Germany as well as from Switzerland. Placing a Swiss flag in the article, with the caption "The Amish come from Switzerland", is incorrect and runs counter to Wikipedia's encyclopedic style. Eric talk 02:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
I noticed your recent edit to the ' Holy See' article, changing the term 'Holy See' to 'Holy See of Rome' in the first paragraph. While the latter term exists, in the present time it's not used by the Holy See itself nor by major organizations like the UN, US Department of State, UNESCOor CIA to refer to the See of Rome. For clarity and consistency with established usage, I have reverted the term 'Holy See of Rome' to 'Holy See' as it was before.
Cambridge dictionary definition for Holy See: "the government of the Roman Catholic Church, under the Pope"
Oxford dictionary definition for the Holy See: "the job or authority of the Pope" EXANXC ( talk) 13:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I was alerted to your piece on Axsum by a discussion on Twitter citing your erroneous information on Greek and the ptotemies in Ethiopia, which is false. Location is unknown and no ptolemies remains have been found in Eritrea or Ethiopia and is said to be Aqiq. No scholar agrees with such. You then make claims Greek was the official language without providing sufficient evidence to such, the script was not invented in the 4th Century, for example Wazeba uses it and neither did Ezana promote the script, I have no idea where you got that from. Definitely needs to be revised. Can you show me inscriptions in Greek prior to Ge'ez? Habesha212 ( talk) 16:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Don't bring this nonsense to my talk page. Make your argument under
Talk:Kingdom of Aksum#Greek.
Aearthrise (
talk) 17:23, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Your agenda drivel nonsense should be bought to the forefront and therefore you will be called out. I saw the discussion on twitter your claims are false and when challenged you can not seem to answer. Habesha212 ( talk) 17:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Are you aware that the user "Djflem" redirected the article "New York Dutch" over to "Dutch of New York City" essentially erasing it from the encyclopedia without consensus? Jonathan f1 ( talk) 01:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Aearthrise. Thank you for your work on German Pennsylvania. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
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) 10:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)