• Archive 1: April 2006 - September 2006
• Archive 2: October 2006 - February 2008
• Archive 3: March 2008 - April 2009
• Archive 4: May 2009 - March 2011
• Archive 5: April 2011 - September 2011
• Archive 6: September 2011 - August 2013
• Archive 7: September 2013 - August 2020

Picture of the day

Bistorta officinalis, also known as he common bistort, is a species of flowering plant in the dock family Polygonaceae. It is native to Europe and northern and western Asia, but has also been cultivated and become naturalized in other parts of the world such as in the United States. It is typically found growing in moist meadows, nutrient-rich wooded swamps, forest edges, wetlands, parks, gardens and disturbed ground. A herbaceous perennial, it grows to a height of 20 to 80 centimetres (8 to 31 inches). It blooms from late spring into autumn, producing tall, erect, unbranched and hairless stems ending in single terminal racemes that are club-like spikes, 5 to 7 centimetres (2 to 3 inches) long, of rose-pink flowers. This B. officinalis inflorescence was photographed in the Austrian Alps.Photograph credit: Uoaei1

Archive – More featured pictures...

Hello John, Here's the citation: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svea_Welander Bliv kvar hos mig, text: Henry Lyte. Stockholm: Svensk Musik. translation: Stay with me, text: Henry Lyte. Stockholm: Swedish Music

T. E. Meeks ( talk) 21:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks. I've cited the Swedish web page (rather than Swedish Wikipedia) as the citation for that information and moved it down into the "Abide with me" section of the Lyte article. John Foxe ( talk) 22:04, 13 October 2020 (UTC) reply

I changed the Svea Welander article mention from "Stay with Me" to "Abide with Me" - glad you pointed this out. I should have realized it myself! T. E. Meeks ( talk) 11:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Precious

Six years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Gerda. John Foxe ( talk) 16:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, I came across this article in the new pages queue and found it interesting so I was scrolling through it. I took a look at the sources; Ref. 1 which is a link to the National Register of Historic Places website shows the building name as "Earle Town House" and not Wyche Pavilion. Is it an alternate name for the building? -- Ashley yoursmile! 18:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Yikes. I'll have to change that. Thanks for catching it. John Foxe ( talk) 18:13, 11 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi John Foxe, thanks for correcting the reference. I've reviewed the article. Since it is new enough and interesting, would you like to nominate it at the WP:DYK? I have a hook in mind, in case you are interested. Ashley yoursmile! 18:32, 11 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks. I'd be glad to nominate it, but if you have the hook--and more experience along those lines--maybe you should nominate it. John Foxe ( talk) 22:41, 11 March 2021 (UTC) reply

I have nominated the article at the DYK. You can find the entry here. Thank you for your work on the article. Ashley yoursmile! 05:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks so much! John Foxe ( talk) 15:26, 12 March 2021 (UTC) reply

No problem! The nomination has been reviewed btw. :) Ashley yoursmile! 19:00, 13 March 2021 (UTC) reply

On 17 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wyche Pavilion, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Wyche Pavilion, a two-story historic building in Greenville, South Carolina, was originally intended to serve as a paint shop for the Greenville Coach Factory? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wyche Pavilion. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Wyche Pavilion), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Precious

Seven years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Gerda. Always good to hear from you. John Foxe ( talk) 15:28, 9 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Isaac Case, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Spudlace ( talk) 20:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Precious

Eight years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:03, 9 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for taking time to spread good cheer on Wikipedia, Gerda. John Foxe ( talk) 03:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

No matter what we think about article subjects, summaries like the one used here are not appropriate. Please keep a more dispassionate tone. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 16:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC) reply

No, not about Charles R. Pellegrino, who's a liar and a literary fraud. His misdeeds ought to be exposed on Wikipedia, and we shouldn't be reluctant to say why. John Foxe ( talk) 16:44, 27 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Yes, about every living or recently dead person, whether or not they have an article, anywhere on Wikipedia. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 18:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC) reply

I make no apologies; but you should be ashamed of yourself for abetting the perpetuation of lies and literary fraud. John Foxe ( talk) 01:05, 28 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Precious

Nine years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Gerda. May you continue to enjoy spreading good cheer on Wikipedia! John Foxe ( talk) 15:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hey there. Thanks for the critique on Ken Ham, I’m looking for sources. On another note; I am looking at arguing the opposite of what I am arguing for Ken Ham for Stephen Meyer, because I think that, unlike Ham, he has been wrongly labeled without citing any source. I have tried to reason with people on the talk page, probably too much so, but it has been to no avail.

Would you be willing to take a look? Warning in advance, the latest comments are a long read 😳

Thanks in advance. Chrisallen87 ( talk) 23:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It seems to me that the use of the term "pseudoscience" on the Stephen C. Meyer page is properly cited to named sources, as in "Cook also criticizes Meyer's proposal that if something cannot be fully explained by today's science, it must be the work of a supreme deity. Calling it a 'masterwork of pseudoscience....'" Of course, there's irony in the fact that Meyer has a PhD in the philosophy of science. I assume he's being labeled a pseudo-scientist because mainstream scientists perceive his writings as a more significant challenge than those of Ham, written for a popular audience. John Foxe ( talk) 03:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Billy Sunday. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. User:Namiba 17:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. User:Namiba 22:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024

• IEEE and Haaretz now available
• Let's Connect Clinics about The Wikipedia Library
• Spotlight and Wikipedia Library tips

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply