User talk:Dimadick
Please leave a . |
|
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1902 animated films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1902 animated films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1902 in animation
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1902 in animation indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1453 in Oceania
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1453 in Oceania indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:07, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1450s in Oceania
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1450s in Oceania indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:07, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Years of the 15th century in Oceania
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 15th century in Oceania indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:08, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Films directed by Jon Burton
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Films directed by Jon Burton indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Observances in Transnistria
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Observances in Transnistria indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 06:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Category:Morgan le Fay has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Morgan le Fay has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Events in Transnistria
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Events in Transnistria indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 18:48, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1855 disestablishments in the Russian Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 06:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1892 disestablishments in the Russian Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 06:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1964 disestablishments in the Soviet Union indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 06:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Levantine Arabic FAC
[edit]Hi Dimadick, I nominated Levantine Article for FAC. As you contributed to West Semitic languages in the past and given your interest in Arab countries, I thought you could be interested in reviewing this nomination. Thanks for any help you can provide. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Iranian Azerbaijani men
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Iranian Azerbaijani men indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 18:12, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
ANI
[edit]There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.65.94.99.221 (talk) 06:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
What the hell was this junk you deleted?
[edit][1] I mean really, "the feudal ruling families which were black people)"? I've brought up other edits of his at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Concern about an editor going through articles changing Jewish to Israelite. Doug Weller talk 07:33, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Anancidae
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Anancidae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:46, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you!
[edit]Thank you for the Talk page info at Draft:Christianization of the Roman Empire as diffusion of innovation. However did you even find it? You seem way more experienced and knowledgeable than I, and if you don't mind helping out a bit more, I have some other questions. Diffusion of innovation is a section title, and when I went to work on the draft it came up with the full title and (section) next to it. Then the next time, it didn't. I don't understand, and I am wondering if I need to change the title, and how to do that. Also, this is a total rewrite of another article Christianization of the Roman Empire. It got lots of objections, and I am wondering about changing its title to represent that it is a historiographical view. This draft is a rewrite of CRE from this other perspective, should CRE just be deleted instead? I would love it if you wanted to participate here! Input from an editor of your quality would be valued and appreciated! Thanx again. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- If you remember, I already made changes to the original article a few months ago. I am just interested in the topic. You can rename the draft through simply pressing the move button and adding a new title. Dimadick (talk) 18:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Did I offend you in some way? If I did I am genuinely sorry. I do tend to have strong opinions on this subject. I try to always keep it civil, and if I failed to do that, please forgive me. Others have strong feelings as well and have certainly frustrated me by repeatedly voicing opinion rather than sources, but I'm guessing that probably wasn't you. It's possible my frustration spread to those who didn't deserve it, so if it did, I am heartily sorry. I probably deserve it, but please don't hold whatever I did or said against me anyway. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:53, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- No I was not expressing anger, and you are unusually courteous for a Wikipedian. I was just explaining that the draft can be easily renamed. I will see what I can do about copyediting. Dimadick (talk) 04:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you - I think! Not too unusual I hope. Let it reflect that you are worth the effort rather than that I have some unusual virtue - I assume you think it's a virtue! Nevermind! I am losing ground here... Thank you for the help given so far and any future assistance you may feel led to provide. I do know that collaboration always produces a better result.Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've sent all the thank you's the system will allow, and it isn't a drop in the bucket! Bless you! Thank you in multiples! 17:34, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you - I think! Not too unusual I hope. Let it reflect that you are worth the effort rather than that I have some unusual virtue - I assume you think it's a virtue! Nevermind! I am losing ground here... Thank you for the help given so far and any future assistance you may feel led to provide. I do know that collaboration always produces a better result.Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- No I was not expressing anger, and you are unusually courteous for a Wikipedian. I was just explaining that the draft can be easily renamed. I will see what I can do about copyediting. Dimadick (talk) 04:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Did I offend you in some way? If I did I am genuinely sorry. I do tend to have strong opinions on this subject. I try to always keep it civil, and if I failed to do that, please forgive me. Others have strong feelings as well and have certainly frustrated me by repeatedly voicing opinion rather than sources, but I'm guessing that probably wasn't you. It's possible my frustration spread to those who didn't deserve it, so if it did, I am heartily sorry. I probably deserve it, but please don't hold whatever I did or said against me anyway. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:53, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Late Neolithic
[edit]Hi Dimadick. Thanks for creating Category:Late Neolithic. I think we might need to separate the "Late Neolithic" in SW Asia from the "Late Neolithic" of Europe though, since these are unrelated entities separated by a few thousand years. And more broadly the subdivisions of the Neolithic are region-specific (e.g. the Pre-Pottery Neolithic exists only in SW Asia; the Eneolithic exists only in Central and Eastern Europe) so if we're going to subcategorise Category:Neolithic by period there should be some indication of the geographical scope of each category. I probably created the possibility for confusion when I moved Pottery Neolithic (about the SW Asian period) to Late Neolithic based on it being the more common name, not considering that it is also much more generic. Any ideas on how to proceed? – Joe (talk) 09:35, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- For the time being, I am simply locating the articles that have texts concerning the Late Neolithic/Pottery Neolithic. The geographic scope can be covered in subcategories, provided that there is some kind of supporting text for them. Dimadick (talk) 09:38, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- But this is creating a category that mixes totally unrelated articles like Dagenham idol (an artefact from England from c. 2250 BCE), Çayönü (a site in Turkey abandoned by c. 6800 BCE), and Yueshi culture (a culture in China dated to the 2nd millennium BCE). Even if we had subcategories for the regional periods, they shouldn't be categorised under Category:Late Neolithic, because they don't share a defining characteristic, just an overlap in terminology. – Joe (talk) 09:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- As with the Neolithic itself, it covers a phase in the technological/cultural development of various regions. Not a direct lineage between cultures, nor a terminology limited to a single region. Most of these articles had not even been categorized as Neolithic sites or artifacts, not even marked as archaeological locations. Dimadick (talk) 10:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- It really doesn't, but okay, you do you. Any categorisation is better than no categorisation, I suppose. – Joe (talk) 10:21, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- As with the Neolithic itself, it covers a phase in the technological/cultural development of various regions. Not a direct lineage between cultures, nor a terminology limited to a single region. Most of these articles had not even been categorized as Neolithic sites or artifacts, not even marked as archaeological locations. Dimadick (talk) 10:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- But this is creating a category that mixes totally unrelated articles like Dagenham idol (an artefact from England from c. 2250 BCE), Çayönü (a site in Turkey abandoned by c. 6800 BCE), and Yueshi culture (a culture in China dated to the 2nd millennium BCE). Even if we had subcategories for the regional periods, they shouldn't be categorised under Category:Late Neolithic, because they don't share a defining characteristic, just an overlap in terminology. – Joe (talk) 09:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:19th-century Holy Roman Emperors has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:19th-century Holy Roman Emperors has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:States and territories established in 1069 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:50, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Bugs Bunny has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Bugs Bunny has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Bosko has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Bosko has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring the Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes) has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring the Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Porky Pig has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Porky Pig has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Yosemite Sam has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Yosemite Sam has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Tweety has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Tweety has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Buddy has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Buddy has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:35, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Beans (Looney Tunes) has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Beans (Looney Tunes) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Foxy has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Foxy has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Piggy has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Piggy has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:40, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Goopy Geer has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Films featuring Goopy Geer has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Red (animated character) has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Red (animated character) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Mammy Two Shoes has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Films featuring Mammy Two Shoes has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Barney Bear has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Barney Bear has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Tex Avery's Big Bad Wolf has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Tex Avery's Big Bad Wolf has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Butch (animated character) has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Butch (animated character) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 10:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
I think I owe you an apology
[edit]I just reread your comment on the talk page of Christianization of the Roman Empire as diffusion of innovation and I think I may have misunderstood. I thought your comment was to me and now I think it wasn't. My response comes across as offensive - and pretty stupid... So, I am a little crazy this year, and I just wanted to apologize that some of it ended up on you. I am sorry. I hope you can forgive me. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I found your answer strange, but not offensive. Some people give me a hard time on Wikipedia, but an off-hand comment is not particularly troubling. Dimadick (talk) 19:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- It was strange! I thought you were talking to me, but you weren't, were you? You were asking him for something constructive and actually relevant. I see that now. I didn't see that at first because I am so thin skinned these days that I am interpreting everything as an attack. I am walking around with my skin turned inside out and all my nerves exposed because my mother died and my sister stole from me, and I am hurt and angry, and it's made me a little crazy. Thank you for not getting offended. People give me a hard time on WP too - as you can see from the comment that we both responded to. These two articles - CRE and CRE as diffusion - have really been subject to a hard time. In the end, though, it has improved both articles, and that's something that makes me feel better in spite of everything else. So thank you again. I hope to see you around. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- "and my sister stole from me" This reminds me of my father. During quarrels over their inheritance, his sister stole a large sum from him and his brother tried to strangulate him. Dimadick (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- OMG!! This is actually the second time she has done something like this to me, and I know of things even worse that she has done to others. She wiped out her first husband's bank accounts when she skipped town with her boyfriend. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. I haven't spoken to her since, and I won't. She's out of my life for good this time. I knew that was who she used to be, but I actually thought she had changed - gotten a decent job and a good relationship and straightened up - I hoped. But there was no way for me to prevent this. Now I've lost both my sister and my mother. Thank you for understanding. It's proving to be a difficult year.Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Easy to understand. My mother and the great-uncle who mostly raised me both died in 2016. It left me quite depressed, even when not taking into account paperwork over who was going to inherit their residences and an uncle who disputer the terms of the wills. Families can become nasty dens of vipers when money is at stake. Dimadick (talk) 18:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- And that's so backwards and short sighted isn't it? People have innate value, everything else has derived value. Take all the money out of the world, and people will still find a way to trade and value their work and cooperate. Take all the people out of the world and money is worthless; animals can't eat it, it can't reproduce on its own, all it can do by itself is sit and rot. Money only has power because we give it power, and it only has the power we decide it has. My sister sacrificed me for money. Those are her values, that's her character, that's what valuing money first has made her, when the real truth is that people are what matter most. People make history, make art, make beauty and goodness and love. People build and create. People do all of that and more because they can, because people have the power, and people have the value and the will and the ability to decide for themselves who they want to be. Difficulties and troubles don't turn us into something we're not, they just have a way of revealing that true character, that's all. It's who my sister is and always has been. It makes me sad, but it's hers to do with as she will. I just can't let it change me. Friends help with that. If it's okay with you, I am going to count you as a friend from now on. Kind and understanding hearts don't show up on WP all that often if you know what I mean! I'm glad to have met you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- "People have innate value, everything else has derived value." Almost everything on this planet has the value we assign to it. What seems essential to a certain culture or region may be seen as trivial or worthless to another one. But humans are social animals, and we need other humans to properly function or to survive. That the people we meet may not be trustworthy does not mean that our need for others ever ceases. Thanks by the way, for chatting with me. I haven't had much opportunity to do that for the last couple of months. Dimadick (talk) 05:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- You are so right, and therein lies the rub, as they say. I have enjoyed chatting with you, and thank you as well. I've been getting yelled at a lot in the last two months, but no real chatting for me either, so yes, this has been good. I appreciate that you have taken the time to respond. I don't get to have many philosophical discussions especially. I do not understand why others find it boring... It seems we are like-minded in many ways. That's especially nice to find. I'm sure it proves you are brilliant. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- "People have innate value, everything else has derived value." Almost everything on this planet has the value we assign to it. What seems essential to a certain culture or region may be seen as trivial or worthless to another one. But humans are social animals, and we need other humans to properly function or to survive. That the people we meet may not be trustworthy does not mean that our need for others ever ceases. Thanks by the way, for chatting with me. I haven't had much opportunity to do that for the last couple of months. Dimadick (talk) 05:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- And that's so backwards and short sighted isn't it? People have innate value, everything else has derived value. Take all the money out of the world, and people will still find a way to trade and value their work and cooperate. Take all the people out of the world and money is worthless; animals can't eat it, it can't reproduce on its own, all it can do by itself is sit and rot. Money only has power because we give it power, and it only has the power we decide it has. My sister sacrificed me for money. Those are her values, that's her character, that's what valuing money first has made her, when the real truth is that people are what matter most. People make history, make art, make beauty and goodness and love. People build and create. People do all of that and more because they can, because people have the power, and people have the value and the will and the ability to decide for themselves who they want to be. Difficulties and troubles don't turn us into something we're not, they just have a way of revealing that true character, that's all. It's who my sister is and always has been. It makes me sad, but it's hers to do with as she will. I just can't let it change me. Friends help with that. If it's okay with you, I am going to count you as a friend from now on. Kind and understanding hearts don't show up on WP all that often if you know what I mean! I'm glad to have met you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Easy to understand. My mother and the great-uncle who mostly raised me both died in 2016. It left me quite depressed, even when not taking into account paperwork over who was going to inherit their residences and an uncle who disputer the terms of the wills. Families can become nasty dens of vipers when money is at stake. Dimadick (talk) 18:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- OMG!! This is actually the second time she has done something like this to me, and I know of things even worse that she has done to others. She wiped out her first husband's bank accounts when she skipped town with her boyfriend. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. I haven't spoken to her since, and I won't. She's out of my life for good this time. I knew that was who she used to be, but I actually thought she had changed - gotten a decent job and a good relationship and straightened up - I hoped. But there was no way for me to prevent this. Now I've lost both my sister and my mother. Thank you for understanding. It's proving to be a difficult year.Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- "and my sister stole from me" This reminds me of my father. During quarrels over their inheritance, his sister stole a large sum from him and his brother tried to strangulate him. Dimadick (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- It was strange! I thought you were talking to me, but you weren't, were you? You were asking him for something constructive and actually relevant. I see that now. I didn't see that at first because I am so thin skinned these days that I am interpreting everything as an attack. I am walking around with my skin turned inside out and all my nerves exposed because my mother died and my sister stole from me, and I am hurt and angry, and it's made me a little crazy. Thank you for not getting offended. People give me a hard time on WP too - as you can see from the comment that we both responded to. These two articles - CRE and CRE as diffusion - have really been subject to a hard time. In the end, though, it has improved both articles, and that's something that makes me feel better in spite of everything else. So thank you again. I hope to see you around. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring Andy Panda has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring Andy Panda has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 08:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring pets has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring pets has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 08:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring hypnosis has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring hypnosis has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 08:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Films featuring feuds has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Films featuring feuds has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 08:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Good morning
[edit]Good morning Dimadick how are you? TBTSP (talk) 13:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Other than a few dizzy spells in the morning ours, fine. Dimadick (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
OK can I ask you something? TBTSP (talk) 13:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- That is what talk pages are for. Go ahead. Dimadick (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
What do you think of horror films? TBTSP (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- There are on my favorite film genres. I have enjoyed several films about vampires, werewolves, and slasher-style serial killers. Dimadick (talk) 13:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Can you fix something on there? TBTSP (talk) 13:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
You have to be careful about MrOllie he ain't right sometimes. TBTSP (talk) 13:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Now about horror films since 2020s is still a new decade it's not ready yet can you change it as a 2010s section for now? TBTSP (talk) 13:48, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Which article are you talking about? Dimadick (talk) 13:49, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Two articles actually Horror film and History of horror films. TBTSP (talk) 13:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
And if you edit the history of horror films article make sure you remove the link list of horror films of 2020s off the 2010s section. TBTSP (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- There is no 2020s section in either of the two articles. Dimadick (talk) 13:52, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Nope and I know it sucks. TBTSP (talk) 13:52, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#IP_sockpuppets_of_Jinnifer, this is a block evading editor who would like you to help them get around an article protection that is in place because of them. Also note that they twice tried to blank my message from your talk page. - MrOllie (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- MrOllie, I already noticed your message. I just have no idea what this request is about. Dimadick (talk) 13:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Dear Dimadick if you want to restore 2010s and 2020s for the horror film article you can nobody's forcing you. MeWuYi (talk) 16:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Coagula & the Women's WikiProject
[edit]After you replaced {{WikiProject Women}}, I had a double-check, and my apologies are due. I've thought that WikiProject Women was only concerned with non-fictional women, i.e. biographies and the like. I was wrong, and I'm quite sorry for having wongly removed it in the first place. IAW that project's scale, I've classified the article at "C" (and replaced the otherwise-harmless spacing in the WPBS, but which helps with visual distinction between the shell and its contained templates). — Fourthords | =Λ= | 13:56, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1608 establishments in the Thirteen Colonies indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:04, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you started the page Deaths in May 1993. You just beat me to it since I wanted start on it shortly. One request: please correct the cause of death part of your entries to match the format of the other list articles:
- use a comma not a point
- 'Death from' is redundant
- try to keep the CoD short
Cheers Mill 1 (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- The cause of death can't contradict the sources in the main article. I prefer full sentences to overuse of commas. Dimadick (talk) 14:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Dimadick You are entitled to your own preferences but this is a collaborative effort. You can always start a discussion to present your arguments before changing the format that is used in 330+ articles. Mill 1 (talk) 14:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Valleygirl
[edit][2] JudgeJudyCourthouse25 (talk) 15:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Computer-related introductions in the 1840s indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Request for arbitration in dispute about inappropriate use of "Palestine" for 1st century Roman Judaea
[edit]This is notice that I have requested input from a third opinion over the issue: Wikipedia:Third opinion#Active disagreements Fides2022 (talk) 00:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Category:Hoaxes in fiction has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Hoaxes in fiction has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:33, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:19th-century people of the Holy Roman Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1972 disestablishments in Mississippi
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1972 disestablishments in Mississippi indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Audiovisual introductions in 1659
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Audiovisual introductions in 1659 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1734 crimes
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1734 crimes indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1659 introductions
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1659 introductions indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1599 crimes
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1599 crimes indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1947 disestablishments in Greece
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1947 disestablishments in Greece indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 23:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Hamat Gader
[edit]I see that you added Hamat Gader to WikiProject Nudity, but the article doesn't mention nudity. I was going to perform the assessment for WP Nudity, but there was no info to do that. I was just wondering if you planned on expanding the article to include this topic?Demt1298 (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Demt1298
- Actually, I added the WikiProjects covering the main article for hot spring. WikiProject Nudity covers several topics on bathing. Dimadick (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1902
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1902 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Tamam Shud case
[edit]I don't understand your recent additions to the talk page Talk:Tamam Shud case.
I suspect you really meant to add those things to the talk page Talk:Somerton Man.
--07:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC) DavidCary (talk) 07:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Redirects are also covered by WikiProjects. Dimadick (talk) 07:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- OK, thank you, all good. I hope you agree with me that if those categorization templates are on a redirect page, they should *also* be on the page they redirect to. I was (mistakenly) pointing out they were *only* on the redirect page. I see now that those categorization templates are *also* on the "Talk:Somerton Man". Apparently I missed them because they are hidden behind a "collapsed" Wikiproject template until I hit the "show" button. Thank you again! --DavidCary (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
possible corrupt 1944 chart
[edit]Warning Corrupt 1944 chart I just saw my posts that you pasted on 1940s In Music talk page. Is there a problem I should address? Tillywilly17 (talk) 13:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- I was actually trying to delete a disruptive message from an anonymous user, which is why my most recent edit is a deletion. I am not certain whether I accidentally duplicated text in the talk page, but I have made no proposed changes to the article. Dimadick (talk) 13:12, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks these are our charts, not mine, and I am extremely sensitive to others. I would rather not make judgments like this myself. Any changes or suggestions, 1920-1950, I have all the numbers and research, just let me know-Dave Tillywilly17 (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Stop protecting David Zaslav from the criticism he deserves
[edit]I'm sorry but the man is never going to sleep with you. So stop brown-nosing him and trying to protect him from criticism. 2600:6C5E:267F:F3DF:E92C:90FB:54E0:328F (talk) 15:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Your opinion on a possible plan for Template:C21 year in topic
[edit]Hello Dimadick! First off, thank you very much for adding many more countries who have a 'year in television' article series to the Template:C21 year in topic. One thing I have noticed though is that the template appears to be getting pretty long with the addition of the new countries, and the fact that many of the countries which are now on there such as Belgium, Brazil, Croatia, and Denmark do not have a very large article series, and many of their pages have no citations. This has thus put more red links on the template for many of the years, and with the template being highly viewed, I was trying to think of a way to fix this.
I'm thinking besides listing the all countries which have their own year in television series in parentheses beside the link to 2022 in television, I could make a template for them instead which would change by year, acting similarly to something like [ Year in Europe|2022 ]. The template's use would theoretically be on every 'year in television' page. I would absolutely be willing to put in the work to make something like this happen, making the template and making sure it is placed where it is needed. It would be a big project, but it is something I have been brainstorming about for awhile, and I think it could look good. Do you have an opinion on this? I felt it would only be right to ask you because 1. you added many of the countries making me aware that the year in television series was larger than I previously thought, and 2. because you have been on Wikipedia longer than me and have more experience. So what is your opinion on this? Is there anything that needs be changed or clarified first? I would be happy to know. Thanks! Johnson524 (Talk!) 16:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- I realized a couple of years ago that we have an ever-increasing number of "years in television" lists which are difficult to find, and have few articles linking to them. I have been periodically adding them to the year templates just to avoid their near-orphan status. If you can find a better solution to make their presence known to readers and editors, go ahead. As for the number of articles, we actually have more articles in this format for Belgium and Denmark than the United States. For some reason, List of years in American television goes no further than 1971. Dimadick (talk) 16:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the support and information! It is kind of a shame to see some of these articles get lost in obscurity because of no easy way to learn about them and that they exist, so hopefully this template will make them more readily able to find. Thank you for your quick response! Johnson524 (Talk!) 21:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1679 in Africa
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1679 in Africa indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 03:53, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Why were my edits on Peter Pan (1953 film) reverted?
[edit]I made the descriptions, which were largely unsourced and partially written in an in-universe style, more concise and matter-of-fact. What's wrong with that? Colonel Knight Rider (talk) 05:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- The plot section is already stripped of any information on the characters. What you did makes the page incomprehensible. Dimadick (talk) 05:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
How does making something more concise by taking out of the Cast section a lot of what reads like an expanded description of the plot make it harder to understand? Colonel Knight Rider (talk) 16:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- "Concision" typically translates to "uninformative". Every time I hear someone making an article more concise, it typically means that that they have gutted the article and excised key information. Single-sentence descriptions hardly inform readers who the characters are, or what is their role in the wider context of the story. Normally we would reserve such details for a list article on the characters, but this film does not have such a list. Dimadick (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
I wouldn’t exactly call half the info there “key,” but perhaps we could come to a compromise wherein characters are amply described as you so desire, but does not include what they do in the plot (which I see a lot of). Is that acceptable? Colonel Knight Rider (talk) 17:20, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Yes. I am less interested in reiterating the plot, and more interested in describing character traits. Dimadick (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1991 computer-animated films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1991 computer-animated films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 02:25, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1851
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1851 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1760s in Greece
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1760s in Greece indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Pied Piper of Guadalupe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guadalupe.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Films directed by Mark Quod
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Films directed by Mark Quod indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
User is bias on abortion
[edit]This user said; "What she said is accurate. The entire anti-abortion movement is aimed to take control of women's bodies, not to protect lives. Dimadick (talk) 18:43, 25 September 2022" on this page; Talk:Stacey Abrams - Wikipedia.
Any comment or edit by this user -- on the topic of abortion, or women's rights -- should be regarded with extreme suspicion. This person has obvious bias. 24.57.55.50 (talk) 18:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
American Presidents navboxes
[edit]Hi, I noticed you created 17 navboxes for presidents that did exist before August. Was this something you had on your mind for awhile or did you see the list on my sandbox page? Just curious. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- I did not see your list. I had created Template:George H. W. Bush back in 2012, and I hoped that someone else would be working on the rest of the missing templates. My watchlist notified me that the Bush template had been updated, but then I noticed that over 10 presidents did not have templates. Dimadick (talk) 06:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Well, thanks for creating them. I was going to do them for the presidents you created. I've been doing something similar on my sandbox for world leaders. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Good, there is nothing unique about the significance of American presidents. We just have more spin-off articles. Dimadick (talk) 18:08, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Well, thanks for creating them. I was going to do them for the presidents you created. I've been doing something similar on my sandbox for world leaders. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Archaeology of Chad
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Archaeology of Chad indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Deletion of Cold War 2 category
[edit]This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Dimadick (talk) 19:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- The previous version was a laundry list of political and military events which did not even mention the concept. The current version only includes articles which specifically discuss the concept. Dimadick (talk) 19:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- What articles are tagged with the category is not what is at issue. The category itself was XfD'd as "Delete". Do not recreate it. There are other avenues for contesting deletion discussions. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- So what the heck is at issue if not the uncategorized articles? We have a book of predictions about the Second Cold War, an article connecting a 2010s arms race to the concept, a coalition of countries as geopolitical rivals to China, and a foreign policy in Russia which is thought as having terminated the Pax Europaea. Dimadick (talk) 20:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- You can read the deletion discussion. If you disagree, the first line says to go to WP:DELREV. You may discuss it there. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I did read it, before recreating the category. The discussion specifically addressed the placement of the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, the War in Donbas (2014–2022), and the Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the category, while their inclusion was not supported by the then-available sources. I included none of these articles. Dimadick (talk) 20:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- If you disagree with the deletion of the category, please go to WP:DELREV. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I did read it, before recreating the category. The discussion specifically addressed the placement of the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, the War in Donbas (2014–2022), and the Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the category, while their inclusion was not supported by the then-available sources. I included none of these articles. Dimadick (talk) 20:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- You can read the deletion discussion. If you disagree, the first line says to go to WP:DELREV. You may discuss it there. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- So what the heck is at issue if not the uncategorized articles? We have a book of predictions about the Second Cold War, an article connecting a 2010s arms race to the concept, a coalition of countries as geopolitical rivals to China, and a foreign policy in Russia which is thought as having terminated the Pax Europaea. Dimadick (talk) 20:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- What articles are tagged with the category is not what is at issue. The category itself was XfD'd as "Delete". Do not recreate it. There are other avenues for contesting deletion discussions. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Telamonian Ajax
[edit]Hi, I tried to revise the page on Telamonian Ajax, but you deleted my modification. The sources that are quoted are inadequate. Tzetzes is a 12th century AD source, not an archaic or classical Greek one! Moreover, the book I referred to is the new reference book on the hero and has been published with Oxford University press. It's be grateful if you could keep the revisions. It improves the entry. 87.74.8.220 (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- I have no objections if you want to replace a source. But the notification on my watchlist notes that multiple sources have been removed. Dimadick (talk) 23:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Merger discussion for Murder of Sarah Payne
[edit]An article that you have been involved in editing—Murder of Sarah Payne—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 19:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Your recent edits to Category:Fictional wizards
[edit]You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Category:Fictional wizards. 2001:44C8:4722:3F85:63B9:A19B:9ED3:260 (talk) 12:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Disruptive Editing: Badarian culture
[edit]Hi Dimadick,
I know you have edited and monitored the article page on Badarian culture. However,there has been recent disruptive editing from a user, LouisBStevenson who continues to remove content repeatedly and has ignored warnings/rules on this. Could you possibly assist in this case ? WikiUser4020 (talk) 13:41, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
- Shouldn't you notify Wikipedia:Requests for page protection instead? Dimadick (talk) 13:44, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1825 establishments in Peru
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1825 establishments in Peru indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1825 in Peru
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1825 in Peru indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 18:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Santas's Workshop2.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Santas's Workshop2.jpg. 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. (Oinkers42) (talk) 05:04, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Removed your comment on Talk:Adam Sandler
[edit]The edit request was regular Tate related disruption, so I removed the whole section, including your response. Just giving you a heads up, since I removed your comment when I removed the section. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:11, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Grandparent taxon categories
[edit]Hi, I've had to revert a couple of your recent edits which added grandparent taxon categories to articles about taxa which had their own categories. The last one was Mayfly, which is rightly marked as the owner of [[Category:Mayflies| ]], i.e. that is the taxon categorisation sorted. Adding the next category up - Mayflies/Ephemeroptera belong inside the Palaeoptera - is unnecessary and wrong, as the Mayflies category is marked as belonging to that group. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:12, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
The page Category:Films set in the 1763 has been deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. As the page met any of these strictly-defined criteria, it was deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been deleted are:
- The category had been empty for seven days or more and it was not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories. (See section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. Liz Read! Talk! 02:05, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2nd-century BC Japanese monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:2nd-century BC Japanese monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:3rd-century BC Japanese monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:3rd-century BC Japanese monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:29, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:4th-century BC Japanese monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:4th-century BC Japanese monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:5th-century BC Japanese monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:5th-century BC Japanese monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:6th-century BC Japanese monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:6th-century BC Japanese monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:7th-century BC Japanese monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:7th-century BC Japanese monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:31st-century BC Sumerian kings
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:31st-century BC Sumerian kings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:32nd-century BC Sumerian kings
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:32nd-century BC Sumerian kings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:33rd-century BC Sumerian kings
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:33rd-century BC Sumerian kings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:35, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:34th-century BC Sumerian kings
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:34th-century BC Sumerian kings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:35, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2nd-century BC Japanese people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:2nd-century BC Japanese people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:3rd-century BC Japanese people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:3rd-century BC Japanese people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:17, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:4th-century BC Japanese people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:4th-century BC Japanese people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:25, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:5th-century BC Japanese people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:5th-century BC Japanese people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:5th century BC in Japan
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:5th century BC in Japan indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:6th-century BC Japanese people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:6th-century BC Japanese people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:6th century BC in Japan
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:6th century BC in Japan indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:7th-century BC Japanese people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:7th-century BC Japanese people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:7th century BC in Japan
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:7th century BC in Japan indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:25th-century BC murdered monarchs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:25th-century BC murdered monarchs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:34th-century BC rulers
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:34th-century BC rulers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 21:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:34th-century BC people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:34th-century BC people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hanna-Barbera's Christmas Sing-A-Long!
[edit]Hello? I just created a new page on an obscure Hanna-Barbera item, Hanna-Barbera's Christmas Sing-A-Long!. However, I need some help with improving it. Visokor (talk) 06:35, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- How am I supposed to help? I have never heard of this album, and I do not know if it is covered in histories of Hanna-Barbera. Dimadick (talk) 07:23, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also, I completely forgot it was actually a direct-to-video special from 1989. The album came a few years later in 1991.Visokor (talk) 13:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Partial range block
[edit]I placed a partial block on an IP range, which will hopefully stop that harassment. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:18, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, it was getting really annoying. Dimadick (talk) 14:19, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm sorry you felt "harrased" and "annoyed" by me talking about Jesus.
[edit]Annoyed is a kinda strong word, no?
Also, tell ScottishFinnishRadish I'm sorry I called him ScottishFinnishRUBBISH the other day.. but he's a sport, he took it much better than you today.
Annoyed? lol. Irritated, pestered, distracted, maybe... but annoyed? C'MON MAN, lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.161.82.233 (talk) 16:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Ok. I'll stop "harassing" you. You're quite the sensitive one, aren't you.
[edit]I'm sorry.
But I think you're kinda laying it on thick there. Don't block my IP again please.
See ya around the block. Tell ScottishFinnishGuy to keep keeping it real.
196.108.155.28 (talk) 16:43, 9 December 2022 (UTC)LauraLoomerFinnaDragSOMEBODY
- Quite the sensitive guy indeed. Lord have mercy on Dimadick. Theologism (talk) 17:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Newly created category
[edit]Hi, here's a new category that I created that you can add to your userpage. Category:Wikipedians who have earned the 100,000 edits award. Davidgoodheart (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Oh my, lots of U.S. presidential navboxes
[edit]Hello, and thank you very much for recently creating many (all?) of the missing U.S. presidential navboxes. A labor of love. I just discovered Van Buren's and Harding's, and moved them out of the navbox cages on their principal pages and added them to a few listed articles. A large job ahead: distribution of the navboxes (I'll do quite a few of them) to their listed pages. Would you please make a list of the presidential navboxes you've created to give an idea of the scope of this distribution? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:24, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't remember them all, I just covered every missing president. The first navbox I created was Template:George H. W. Bush back in 2012. Dimadick (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Cool. Every one? Nice work. I meant the recent ones, such as Harding and Van Buren (I'm assuming Bush has been distributed since, guess I've never checked). A team should be assembled. I'll do Harding, McKinley, and Van Buren page distributions and then look for more, but at a minimum may I ask that you check which ones aren't in visible space on their principal pages (Harding and Van Buren's weren't in view on their articles). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- I placed all of the templates with the other hidden templates at the bottom. Dimadick (talk) 11:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that's how I found Van Buren and moved it to visible space. These should not be hidden away on the principal pages. Anyway, I'll work on McKinley now, that should take some time. This is like the joy of finding a gold mine, but the work that it still needs mining. I don't know if we've ever communicated before but I've seen and run across your work for years, so many thanks again for all you've done. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- You did everybody. The Andrew Jackson navbox and the rest, nice work, great additions to Wikipedia's presidential navbox collection. I think I've got them all moved into visible space on their namesake article, and have distributed the William McKinley template to its entries (am working on Van Buren). Randy Kryn (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Done, have distributed the 17 navboxes to their linked articles. Thanks, learned a lot about some of the U.S. presidents in the process. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- You did everybody. The Andrew Jackson navbox and the rest, nice work, great additions to Wikipedia's presidential navbox collection. I think I've got them all moved into visible space on their namesake article, and have distributed the William McKinley template to its entries (am working on Van Buren). Randy Kryn (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that's how I found Van Buren and moved it to visible space. These should not be hidden away on the principal pages. Anyway, I'll work on McKinley now, that should take some time. This is like the joy of finding a gold mine, but the work that it still needs mining. I don't know if we've ever communicated before but I've seen and run across your work for years, so many thanks again for all you've done. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- I placed all of the templates with the other hidden templates at the bottom. Dimadick (talk) 11:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Cool. Every one? Nice work. I meant the recent ones, such as Harding and Van Buren (I'm assuming Bush has been distributed since, guess I've never checked). A team should be assembled. I'll do Harding, McKinley, and Van Buren page distributions and then look for more, but at a minimum may I ask that you check which ones aren't in visible space on their principal pages (Harding and Van Buren's weren't in view on their articles). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
WikiProject categorization of Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies
[edit]Hi, I noticed that you readded the WikiProject Logic/Philosophy tag to Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. I understand that the article for controversy in general is covered by the Logic task force. However, none of the other pages about specific controversies are tagged as belonging to the logic task force, and I think we can both agree that this article does not relate to logic or philosophy. As a new and passionate member of the Logic WikiProject, I want to keep it as focused as possible on its intended topic, so do you think you could agree to this change? Best regards, NicolinoChess31415926 (talk) 23:26, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Dimadick!
[edit]Dimadick,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Film series intoduced in 1897
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Film series intoduced in 1897 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Populated places disestablished in 1752
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Populated places disestablished in 1752 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Relatives.
[edit]Doesn't Priscilla have 4 grandchildren? 67.86.9.151 (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2022 disestablishments in Croatia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:2022 disestablishments in Croatia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
[edit]Hey! I would like to thank you for helping me with the "Branches Of Neuroscience" category. As a gift, here is a kitten for you! Enjoy!
Sirtinia (talk) 17:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Education
[edit]I read back in 2020, when she first ran for Congress, that she had gotten a GED during the primary, so she hadn't graduated HS by that point. I just checked Snopes, that confirmed that she had gotten one before the November election that year. So she would have been 33 at that point. On the other hand, her honesty has been repeatedly questioned. Back then I'd read that she'd charged her campaign for driving 38,000 miles while running. At the time, the federal reimbursement for mileage was about $.55/mile. So she was living close to the 40th parallel. At that latitude, that would have been the equivalent of driving twice around the world. If memory serves, and I'm not going to claim my memory is all that good, she bought a Cadillac Escalade, which cost $75 grand back then. Could be why she was given to late pay for the cooks and waitpersons. If she wasn't paying employee taxes, that's probably a criminal offense. I also read recently that her landlord refused to renew her lease of the restaurant. Activist (talk) 20:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oops. I hadn't read the article in a couple of years before I'd posted to it this week, and found that the GED and lease were covered in it. I could have saved both of us a minute. I did find she'd won her election last year by less than 600 votes. I thought it was half that, but I may have gotten that notion from early returns. I know the district having traveled there before and after redistricting. Activist (talk) 21:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Category:Comics about birds
[edit]I'm confused about this edit, can you explain it to me? I don't see how pasting in the definition of bird helps to explain the inclusion criteria of the category. What am I missing? Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 02:03, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- You are missing that editors keep on adding wrong articles in categories due to misconceptions about taxonomy. Dimadick (talk) 06:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, I see, thanks. What sort of misconceptions are there? Confusing insects with arachnids etc.? --Jameboy (talk) 13:04, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- For some reason, pterosaur articles get added to bird-related categories. Dimadick (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, I see, thanks. What sort of misconceptions are there? Confusing insects with arachnids etc.? --Jameboy (talk) 13:04, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Category:Paranormal places in Sweden has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Paranormal places in Sweden has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 26
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hrid Majharey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soothsayer.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Category:Rulers of Lesbos has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Rulers of Lesbos has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Book series introduced in 1751
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Book series introduced in 1751 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Category:11th-century BC Kings of Israel (united monarchy) has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:11th-century BC Kings of Israel (united monarchy) has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Mass media franchises introduced in 1751
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Mass media franchises introduced in 1751 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 22:18, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Book series introduced in the 1750s
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Book series introduced in the 1750s indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 22:21, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Mass media franchises introduced in the 1750s indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 22:23, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1777 in Hungary
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1777 in Hungary indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 03:21, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1770s disestablishments in Hungary
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1770s disestablishments in Hungary indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 05:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 19
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Herbert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Castletown.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Conglomerate companies disestablished in 2006 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 18:30, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
"Ch'al Andar" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]The redirect Ch'al Andar 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/2023 April 11 § Ch'al Andar until a consensus is reached. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:32, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Life Begins for Andy Panda1.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Life Begins for Andy Panda1.jpg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 19
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amma (deity), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Desert fox.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Sunpyre2.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Sunpyre2.jpg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Category:Works attributed to David has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Works attributed to David has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1742 songs
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1742 songs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:26, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:13th century in the Grand Duchy of Moscow indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Non-free rationale for File:Sunpyre1.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sunpyre1.jpg. 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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 21
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Deceivers: Allied Military Deception in the Second World War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washington.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Neoclassical architecture in Israel
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Neoclassical architecture in Israel indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 02:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
Millennial Day Theory
[edit]Hello Dimadick, Please advise me why you removed my 'New "Theory"' and "Additional Support for the above "Theory"' from the Wikipedia page "Millennial Day Theory"? Ggiraldi (talk) 12:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- I never removed anything from that article. Based on the revision history, your additions were reverted by User:MOTORAL1987. Dimadick (talk) 15:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Dimadick,
- I am sorry for not seeing MOTORAL1987 as the one who removed my addition edits.
- Sincerely yours,
- Ggiraldi Ggiraldi (talk) 14:44, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:21st-century viceregal rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:21st-century viceregal rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Conglomerate companies disestablished in 2006 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 02:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:4th-century BC Seleucid monarchs has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:4th-century BC Seleucid monarchs has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
New message from Jo-Jo Eumerus
[edit]You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:African humid period § Younger Dryas category. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:10th-century BC Kings of Syria has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:10th-century BC Kings of Syria has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:45, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:6th-century rulers of Brittany has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:6th-century rulers of Brittany has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:19, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
Reversions at "Pan (god)"
[edit]I saw the reversion and re-reversion of the infobox in Pan (god), and I'm not sure what your reason for preferring the older version was. There may well be accounts where Pan's not the son of Hermes and Dryope, but that's by far the best-known, and I don't recall any involving Aphrodite being his mother, although I'm not saying there couldn't be such an account. But there are so many minor variations on otherwise well-known Greek myths, that I'm not sure the infobox is the place to include them all. Surely the best-known version, or if there's a second widely-known one , then two, should be enough. The words "many variations" probably can go without saying, since they could apply to almost any detail in any infobox involving Greek mythology; and having them there seems to demand an explanation which is better dealt with in the body of the article. "Silenus" is the usual English form, not "Silenos". So my recommendation would be to leave the edits, instead of reverting them again—to me they look like an improvement, streamlining and regularizing. There's plenty of room in the article to discuss variants. P Aculeius (talk) 04:06, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- There's also nothing on the page about Aphrodite, so that's a bit of a breach of MOS:INFOBOX. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:14, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes the IP's edits are all improvements. Paul August ☎ 13:22, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: I've just undone your latest revert (here), could you please explain yourself. Paul August ☎ 14:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- The user keeps changing Silenos (Greek) to Silenus (Latin). Dimadick (talk) 14:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- We don't see "Silenos" in English, any more than "Dionysos"—most Greek names from classical antiquity are spelled following Latin orthography in English. P Aculeius (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: Yes exactly. And there were other good edits that the IP made which you also reverted. Why did you revert those? 14:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- For the same reason I revert unsourced changes. Because the version is not supported by any source. Dimadick (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that makes sense. Do you mean a source for writing it as "Silenus"? There is no source (or mention) given in the article for Pan being a child of Aphrodite, which you added back. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: The IP didn't need to add sources, since they didn't add any content. Paul August ☎ 15:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know about Aphrodite, but the article on Dryope mentions no connection to Pan. Dimadick (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: The IP didn't add Dryope, they just changed the spelling from "Driope" to "Dryope" (while removing the redirect). Also note that Dryope is mentioned (with sources) as one of the names given for Pan's mother. As for Aphrodite the IP removed it, as the mother of Pan, which is appropriate since no source is given for this. Paul August ☎ 15:46, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, looking at the sources for Dryope being Pan's mother, those cited at Pan's article don't seem to support that parentage (but rather the parentage with Penelope as the mother). Dryope (daughter of Dryops) mentions that Pan is her son by Hermes, but looking at the Homeric Hymn itself, it states that Pan's mother is the daughter of Dryops ("a surging desire had come upon him to unite in love with Dryops’ lovely-tressed girl"), but doesn't seem to name the daughter in question, and Gantz, p. 110 and Hard, p. 215 also state that she isn't named. But while this could go to improving the article, this doesn't justify your reversion, since, as pointed out, the IP didn't add Dryope, and simply removed the redirect there. – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- "Dryope (daughter of Dryops) mentions" So the article links to the wrong Dryope? Dimadick (talk) 16:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- The point I was trying to make was that I think the article Dryope (daughter of Dryops) is incorrect (from the quick look I've done here), and so neither page should be linked at Pan. However, as I said, this isn't relevant to your reversion of the IP's edits. – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:29, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Wrong, since I thought that he/she changed the parentage to an unrelated person. I changed the link to Dryope (daughter of Dryops) per your proposal. Dimadick (talk) 16:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- You thought that "Dryope" was an unrelated person to "Driope"? (both linked to the same page) – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:40, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- This is not the first wrong redirect I have encountered based on similarly-sounding names which have different spellings in the original texts. It was quite possible that Driope was an entirely different character. Dimadick (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- So you reverted the IP's edits because maybe Dryope could have potentially been different to Driope in the original texts (with nothing to suggest this, and it spelled "Dryope" in the actual body of the article), without checking those sources yourself? This is ignoring your re-addition of Aphrodite, and your changing of the spelling of Silenus. I won't bother to argue this further, there is no point. I will go to the articles involved and see if I can address the issues I brought up in my comment above, trying to make sure that our presentation of the parentages is in line with the sources we are working from. I did not propose we try and fix the issue by instead just linking to Dryope (daughter of Dryops) instead, but I will go and see if the matter can be resolved by properly sourcing the statements we're making.
- There would have been nothing wrong with simply admitting you made a mistake, after the matter was raised. – Michael Aurel (talk) 17:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't consider it a mistake. We get vandals regularly changing spellings, names, and identifications in all kinds of historical articles. Dimadick (talk) 17:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- This is not the first wrong redirect I have encountered based on similarly-sounding names which have different spellings in the original texts. It was quite possible that Driope was an entirely different character. Dimadick (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- You thought that "Dryope" was an unrelated person to "Driope"? (both linked to the same page) – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:40, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Wrong, since I thought that he/she changed the parentage to an unrelated person. I changed the link to Dryope (daughter of Dryops) per your proposal. Dimadick (talk) 16:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- The point I was trying to make was that I think the article Dryope (daughter of Dryops) is incorrect (from the quick look I've done here), and so neither page should be linked at Pan. However, as I said, this isn't relevant to your reversion of the IP's edits. – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:29, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- "Dryope (daughter of Dryops) mentions" So the article links to the wrong Dryope? Dimadick (talk) 16:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, looking at the sources for Dryope being Pan's mother, those cited at Pan's article don't seem to support that parentage (but rather the parentage with Penelope as the mother). Dryope (daughter of Dryops) mentions that Pan is her son by Hermes, but looking at the Homeric Hymn itself, it states that Pan's mother is the daughter of Dryops ("a surging desire had come upon him to unite in love with Dryops’ lovely-tressed girl"), but doesn't seem to name the daughter in question, and Gantz, p. 110 and Hard, p. 215 also state that she isn't named. But while this could go to improving the article, this doesn't justify your reversion, since, as pointed out, the IP didn't add Dryope, and simply removed the redirect there. – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: The IP didn't add Dryope, they just changed the spelling from "Driope" to "Dryope" (while removing the redirect). Also note that Dryope is mentioned (with sources) as one of the names given for Pan's mother. As for Aphrodite the IP removed it, as the mother of Pan, which is appropriate since no source is given for this. Paul August ☎ 15:46, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know about Aphrodite, but the article on Dryope mentions no connection to Pan. Dimadick (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- For the same reason I revert unsourced changes. Because the version is not supported by any source. Dimadick (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: Yes exactly. And there were other good edits that the IP made which you also reverted. Why did you revert those? 14:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- We don't see "Silenos" in English, any more than "Dionysos"—most Greek names from classical antiquity are spelled following Latin orthography in English. P Aculeius (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:20th-century German emperors has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:20th-century German emperors has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:21st-century heads of state of Germany has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:21st-century heads of state of Germany has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:21st-century heads of state of France has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:21st-century heads of state of France has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:58, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Category:21st-century heads of state of Greece has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:21st-century heads of state of Greece has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Category deletion discussion
[edit]Hi, Dimadick! Since I see you've worked on somewhat related categories before, I thought you might have some input on the deletion discussion currently going on over Category:Novels set in fictional villages. — the Man in Question (in question) 04:08, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Murdered Azerbaijani children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Murdered Azerbaijani children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of 1945 in American television
[edit]If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on 1945 in American television requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
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 deleted 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tirishan (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
- I am still working on it, I just started. Dimadick (talk) 19:12, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Re premature tagging of works in progress
[edit]I seem to have successfully stopped that from happening on mine. I work from a subpage of my user space, and nobody bothers me. When I'm ready, I either do a page move to the article space, or copy and paste it to the new article space. You could name your sub page whatever works for you.
User:Maile66/Marker is an example of the most recent article I did that on. I probably should blank it, because I did create the actual article a day or so ago. That article is now in Main Space, and I can re-use this user space again.
Note "This is a Wikipedia user page." template:Userpage|noindex=yes" I have at the top. I keep that at the top of any subpages of my user space, It really helps. Good luck. — Maile (talk) 20:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:Rulers of Monaco has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Rulers of Monaco has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:02, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:19th-century Regents of Egypt has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:19th-century Regents of Egypt has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:40, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
June 2023
[edit]Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Yggdrasil, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 18:18, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- I already know all that. What is your point? Dimadick (talk) 18:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Why are you repeatedly adding irrelevant categories to it, then? Also MOS:OVERLINKS. TylerBurden (talk) 18:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Yggdrasil. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- 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. TylerBurden (talk) 18:21, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- The article already links to Fraxinus excelsior, which has an entire section devoted to Yggdrasil. And I doubt it is overlinking to link to terms mentioned in the article. They are not familiar to the average user. Dimadick (talk) 18:23, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- No it does not, you linked to Eurasia and mankind, those are general terms. TylerBurden (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Okay so it linked through a pipe, thanks for explaining that, the links though remain overlinks. TylerBurden (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have not restored the links, so I am not certain why you are insisting on them. Dimadick (talk) 18:31, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Since you now accused me of "disruptive editing", it's on you to explain your edits, if you are adding an entire category based on a piped link, explain it so it is clear. Open a discussion on the talk page and explain, don't edit war. You argued for the links again, so I don't see how me explaining to you that they are general terms is insisting. TylerBurden (talk) 18:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Eurasia is a specific geographic term with its own article. Overlinking would be to terms that the average reader is expected to already know. And I still have not restored the link or made any modifications to the text since yesterday. Dimadick (talk) 18:35, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- So what? All blue links have articles, Eurasia is two continents, people tend to be familiar with continents. I am not saying you have added the links again, am I? I am responding to your statements about them here. Either way, try using edit summaries, they help with avoiding misunderstandings like this, and more importantly, don't edit war. Are we done here or are you going to accuse me of something else, or argue that somehow continents and mankind are terms people aren't familiar with? TylerBurden (talk) 18:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Eurasia is a specific geographic term with its own article. Overlinking would be to terms that the average reader is expected to already know. And I still have not restored the link or made any modifications to the text since yesterday. Dimadick (talk) 18:35, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Okay so it linked through a pipe, thanks for explaining that, the links though remain overlinks. TylerBurden (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- No it does not, you linked to Eurasia and mankind, those are general terms. TylerBurden (talk) 18:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- The article already links to Fraxinus excelsior, which has an entire section devoted to Yggdrasil. And I doubt it is overlinking to link to terms mentioned in the article. They are not familiar to the average user. Dimadick (talk) 18:23, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Azerbaijani children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Azerbaijani children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:10th-century Kings of the Romans has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:10th-century Kings of the Romans has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
History of Arda vs "history of fantasy"
[edit]Hi, I've reverted your assignment of this article to the History project, and pace your edit comment "Reverted. Yep and it a large part of the history of fantasy.", because you have conflated the "history of fantasy", i.e. the real-world history of Tolkien's (large) contribution to fantasy over many years through his Middle-earth writings, and the purely fictional history (in-universe) of Arda. This mock-historical backdrop has exactly nothing to do with the "history of fantasy" which, I repeat, exists in the real world, embodied in books, games, and films published in the 20th and 21st centuries, not in the "First Age of Arda" or whatever. I do hope this is clear. If not, I'm happy to discuss here or on the article's talk page. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:15, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have not conflated anything. Tolkien's works are an example of mythopoeia, a key element in modern fantasy.Dimadick (talk) 16:17, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Careful. All his fantasy works exemplify it, but unlike several other Middle-earth articles, this one is not about mythopoeia and has nothing at all to do with either the real-world process of writing fantasy, nor with real-world time scales. If we were to sweep any article about any aspect of in-universe fantasy into the net of History, we would have to include every
- Middle-earth article. Very few of them are about either the creative process or the wider history of fantasy, and this article is not one of them. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:States and territories established in the 5th millennium BC
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:States and territories established in the 5th millennium BC indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 22:54, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:13th-century rulers of Monaco has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:13th-century rulers of Monaco has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:16th-century BC women rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:16th-century BC women rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:08, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:4th-century BC women rulers has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:4th-century BC women rulers has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:3rd-century BC women rulers has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:3rd-century BC women rulers has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:47, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1952
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1952 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 07:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 18 § Category:Association football people by prefecture in Japan
[edit]You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 18 § Category:Association football people by prefecture in Japan. Qwerfjkltalk 16:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Irish emigrants
[edit]Thank you for your comments on the discussion of Irish emigrants.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1890 supernatural films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1890 supernatural films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Category:2nd-century BC women rulers has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:2nd-century BC women rulers has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 17:22, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
?
[edit]Is this comment in the location you intended? (The placement seems odd to me.) --JBL (talk) 00:28, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Trajan
[edit]I've seen you are too restoring deleted information from Trajan's article. The user Venezia Friulano (most likely also 2A02:2E02:D90:1F00:C85:E65:F3CE:392B) already tried to remove info from the body of the article to push this fringe (and wrong) theory that Trajan was of indigenous Iberic lineage rather than Italic; I've shown in the talk page that the biographies on Trajan and sources used for writing the page all say the exact contrary, namely that Trajan's hometown in Spain was an Italic settlement (Italica) and that he came from an Italic family (Ulpi Traiani). We agreed on a formula for the body of the article, but now this user wants to remove this mention of Trajan's origins from the introduction, saying it's not relevant (except it's always been there in some form, it's on page 1 of Bennet's biography, it would be like removing the info that Cleopatra was of a Greek dynasty rather than indigenous Egyptian from her page, and it would be done to subtly promote a wrong theory). This user is doing the same on Hadrian's page. Barjimoa (talk) 04:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
ANI Notice
[edit]There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding lack of civility in WP:CFD. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 04:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Categories and Wikiprojects
[edit]The articles in Category:Supporters of witch hunting aren't related to the Wikiprojects you added. The main article on witch-hunt has a broader scope than this subcategory, so you can't just copy the projects. For the categories about magic and demons in comics, you misunderstood my comment when I removed the projects. The magic in these comics is not the same as the magic you for example find in biblical miracles or in occult groups. Fiction or not is irrelevant: fiction about for example demons in Islam would fit under the Islam Wikiproject, but not Category:DC Comics demons, because they have nothing to do with Islam. Ffranc (talk) 10:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- "because they have nothing to do with Islam." How? We have numerous demons from religious sources depicted in comics and other fictional works. Dimadick (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- DC Comics is not an Islamic company, its fictional universe is not based on Islamic lore, and its fictional demons are not based on an Islamic conception of demons. If someone came up with a theory about how they are part of an invisible Islamic project, that person would be crazy. That's how they're unrelated to Islam, along with the rest of the projects. I'm removing the templates again now, please don't reinsert them. Ffranc (talk) 08:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "that person would be crazy. " You don't sound particularly sane yourself. A company does not need to be Islamic to use Iblis and any other figure from Islamic mythology. Dimadick (talk) 08:25, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The point is that DC Comics doesn't. If you don't bother to read what I write, you don't need to answer either. These strawman arguments are a complete waste of time. Ffranc (talk) 08:36, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "These strawman arguments are a complete waste of time." Are you describing your own arguments? Several religious and mythological demons have appeared in The Sandman (comic book) and related series by Vertigo Comics. Dimadick (talk) 08:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- If any such DC Comics demon has a Wikipedia page, you can add the appropriate wikiproject to that article. The sample I looked at in the category was all pop-culture demons, with no discussion about any particular religion in their articles. Thus, they're outside the scope of those projects, as is the overall subject the category covers. Ffranc (talk) 08:50, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- You do not get to define the scope of projects based on any random samples. And again there is no particular distinction between fiction and reality in most project scopes Dimadick (talk) 08:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The scopes are defined at the pages of the wikiprojects, and are usually very intuitive: an article that has to do with Islam belongs in the Islam wikiproject, for example. If the fiction is not related to the religion in question, it is outside the scope of the wikiproject, as I've written all along. I have not made any point about fiction/non-fiction, that's one of your strawman arguments. Ffranc (talk) 08:58, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Have you forgotten your own text? "its fictional universe is not based on Islamic lore". Dimadick (talk) 09:01, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know what you're trying to say. If the fictional universe of DC Comics was based on Islamic lore, I would agree it belongs in WikiProject Islam. The point is that it isn't based on Islamic lore. Ffranc (talk) 09:04, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The universe? No. Certain of its afterlife depictions and their residents, are based on every available lore. Hell (DC Comics) lists Middle Eastern demons and damned, Greek and Roman demons, Aztek demons, etc. Dimadick (talk) 09:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- OK, so since it's only about some elements that draw from a variety of religions and mythologies, can I remove the templates now without getting reverted? The current tags at Talk:Hell (DC Comics) - WikiProject Horror and WikiProject Comics - seem appropriate, given the loose inspiration from various sources the article describes. I took a look at Talk:Demon, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you copied the list of wikiprojects from there, which is similar to how you appealed to the wikiprojects at Talk:Witch-hunt when you reverted me at Category talk:Supporters of witch hunting. The main articles are here tagged with various wikiprojects relevant to their broad coverage. You can't just copy that to a subcategory or a tangentially related subject, where the scope and coverage will be different. Ffranc (talk) 09:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "where the scope and coverage will be different." The scope is part of a larger whole, not particularly different. Dimadick (talk) 09:35, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The scope in demon is obviously different from Category:DC Comics demons. It's much broader. Can I remove the templates without any edit warring or not? Ffranc (talk) 09:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Ofcourse not. You keep ignoring everything I say. Dimadick (talk) 09:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced by what you say, but I have addressed all of it. You have copied wikiprojects from articles with a broad scope to categories with a more narrow scope. Your arguments in favour of this have changed over the discussion, so I don't think you have ignored what I have said either. Your latest argument was that the scopes don't really differ, which is not supported by the texts in any of the articles, which clearly describe different subjects, relevant for different wikiprojects. Hell (DC Comics) mentions an influence from "Abrahamic mythology", but there is no discussion of any particular religion, likely because the connection is just too weak. In the articles in Category:DC Comics demons, the best I've found is Hades (DC Comics), which mentions the influence from Greek mythology and could warrant a tag for that, but that doesn't mean the category should have the same tag. Ffranc (talk) 10:10, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "and could warrant a tag for that". You are free to add. Categories typicallyu have a wider scope than any specific article.Dimadick (talk) 10:24, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- We're not talking about articles and categories in general but these particular ones. The tags you have taken from other articles - not the main articles of the categories - just don't apply here. That's not going to change because you make vague, generic claims or bring up tangentially related subjects. Ffranc (talk) 11:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Well, if we follow your absurd claims, a WikiProject on Religion would end up with 5 or 10 categories. I noticed that after your frequent removals, Category:Category-Class Neopaganism articles only includes 100 categories, and almost no related subjects. That is disturbing. Dimadick (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Whether a subject belongs in a WikiProject is determined by the subject, not the number of articles already tagged by the project. Some projects cover pretty niche subjects. 100 does not sound like a very low number for WikiProject Neopaganism, although there are many more that could be tagged. Looking at the category now, the three categories we've discussed here definitely look out of place. I'll make a new attempt to remove them, and after that I will tag a large number of other categories I know exist, to compensate for the drop in quantity. Ffranc (talk) 08:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- The number is now more than doubled. Ffranc (talk) 09:16, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Well, if we follow your absurd claims, a WikiProject on Religion would end up with 5 or 10 categories. I noticed that after your frequent removals, Category:Category-Class Neopaganism articles only includes 100 categories, and almost no related subjects. That is disturbing. Dimadick (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- We're not talking about articles and categories in general but these particular ones. The tags you have taken from other articles - not the main articles of the categories - just don't apply here. That's not going to change because you make vague, generic claims or bring up tangentially related subjects. Ffranc (talk) 11:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "and could warrant a tag for that". You are free to add. Categories typicallyu have a wider scope than any specific article.Dimadick (talk) 10:24, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced by what you say, but I have addressed all of it. You have copied wikiprojects from articles with a broad scope to categories with a more narrow scope. Your arguments in favour of this have changed over the discussion, so I don't think you have ignored what I have said either. Your latest argument was that the scopes don't really differ, which is not supported by the texts in any of the articles, which clearly describe different subjects, relevant for different wikiprojects. Hell (DC Comics) mentions an influence from "Abrahamic mythology", but there is no discussion of any particular religion, likely because the connection is just too weak. In the articles in Category:DC Comics demons, the best I've found is Hades (DC Comics), which mentions the influence from Greek mythology and could warrant a tag for that, but that doesn't mean the category should have the same tag. Ffranc (talk) 10:10, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Ofcourse not. You keep ignoring everything I say. Dimadick (talk) 09:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The scope in demon is obviously different from Category:DC Comics demons. It's much broader. Can I remove the templates without any edit warring or not? Ffranc (talk) 09:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "where the scope and coverage will be different." The scope is part of a larger whole, not particularly different. Dimadick (talk) 09:35, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- OK, so since it's only about some elements that draw from a variety of religions and mythologies, can I remove the templates now without getting reverted? The current tags at Talk:Hell (DC Comics) - WikiProject Horror and WikiProject Comics - seem appropriate, given the loose inspiration from various sources the article describes. I took a look at Talk:Demon, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you copied the list of wikiprojects from there, which is similar to how you appealed to the wikiprojects at Talk:Witch-hunt when you reverted me at Category talk:Supporters of witch hunting. The main articles are here tagged with various wikiprojects relevant to their broad coverage. You can't just copy that to a subcategory or a tangentially related subject, where the scope and coverage will be different. Ffranc (talk) 09:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The universe? No. Certain of its afterlife depictions and their residents, are based on every available lore. Hell (DC Comics) lists Middle Eastern demons and damned, Greek and Roman demons, Aztek demons, etc. Dimadick (talk) 09:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know what you're trying to say. If the fictional universe of DC Comics was based on Islamic lore, I would agree it belongs in WikiProject Islam. The point is that it isn't based on Islamic lore. Ffranc (talk) 09:04, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Have you forgotten your own text? "its fictional universe is not based on Islamic lore". Dimadick (talk) 09:01, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The scopes are defined at the pages of the wikiprojects, and are usually very intuitive: an article that has to do with Islam belongs in the Islam wikiproject, for example. If the fiction is not related to the religion in question, it is outside the scope of the wikiproject, as I've written all along. I have not made any point about fiction/non-fiction, that's one of your strawman arguments. Ffranc (talk) 08:58, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- You do not get to define the scope of projects based on any random samples. And again there is no particular distinction between fiction and reality in most project scopes Dimadick (talk) 08:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- If any such DC Comics demon has a Wikipedia page, you can add the appropriate wikiproject to that article. The sample I looked at in the category was all pop-culture demons, with no discussion about any particular religion in their articles. Thus, they're outside the scope of those projects, as is the overall subject the category covers. Ffranc (talk) 08:50, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- "These strawman arguments are a complete waste of time." Are you describing your own arguments? Several religious and mythological demons have appeared in The Sandman (comic book) and related series by Vertigo Comics. Dimadick (talk) 08:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- The point is that DC Comics doesn't. If you don't bother to read what I write, you don't need to answer either. These strawman arguments are a complete waste of time. Ffranc (talk) 08:36, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:25th-century BC rulers has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:25th-century BC rulers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 06:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:Persian queens consort has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Persian queens consort has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:1st-century BC women rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:1st-century BC women rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:49, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:Dutch queens consort has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Dutch queens consort has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:06, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:Empty tomb has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Empty tomb has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
[edit]This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Darker Dreams (talk) 22:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1799 disestablishments in the Papal States indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 05:43, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:14th-century rulers of Monaco has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:14th-century rulers of Monaco has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:22, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Category:3rd-millennium executions has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:3rd-millennium executions has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:01, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:16th-century murders in France
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:16th-century murders in France indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Capri films cat
[edit]Hello Dimadick,
Is there a reason why you named Category talk:Films set in Capri, Campania with Campania and not simply Category talk:Films set in Capri? I find this precision confusing, personally. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:59, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
- I did not create this category, but its parent category is Category:Capri, Campania. Dimadick (talk) 03:32, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hello
- Ah, yes, true. Sorry! I’ve asked on the category TP -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Political violence in the Byzantine Empire has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Political violence in the Byzantine Empire has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:05, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested - New consensus on Millennials Talk page
[edit]Hi Dimadick,
Thank you for your recent contribution at Millennials. I have taken on board your point of view. I have proposed to improve the Date and age range definitions section of the article to address your concerns, to ensure the section is not unbalanced towards certain viewpoints and to add more information on neglected viewpoints. There is an encouraging sign that a new consensus is forming to support the change as one of the main objectors has noted that concerns have been taken on board and now supports improvement. I would really appreciate if you could add your new opinion to this section of the Talk page to avoid the article being stuck at Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling.
Thank you for your time! Richie wright1980 (talk) 09:44, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Morana
[edit]Hello mr Dimadick. I edited and added New titles in Morana page as goddess of sleep, dreams and harvest. But I deleted goddess of cold and frost since she is the goddess of winter she is every phenomenon associated with winter. Please dont delete my adds and tell anyone to not delete it. 2A02:1388:408B:8A7E:0:0:FC50:17F5 (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Tropical cyclones in 1891 has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Tropical cyclones in 1891 has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NoahTalk 20:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks!
[edit]Thanks for responding to recommend a wiki break at the witchcraft article. It was thoughtful and I appreciate it. Indigenous girl (talk) 21:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:13th-century kings of Jerusalem has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:13th-century kings of Jerusalem has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:57, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1690s disestablishments in the Spanish Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 00:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Apatosaurinae
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Apatosaurinae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
August 2023
[edit]Hi Dimadick! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 19:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Dimadick,
- I'm not sure why there is a difference of opinion on categorizing dinosaurs but please do not let it lead to edit-warring. Take it to a talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 19:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- More than a difference of opinion. He/she simply blanked a category and removed all its contents. Dimadick (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- I should have started off explaining my reasoning, for which I apologise, but after I started explaining my reasoning you continued to revert with this as the edit summary: "Reverted after deletion". That comes across a bit rude as if you weren't reading my explanation. Lavalizard101 (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- More than a difference of opinion. He/she simply blanked a category and removed all its contents. Dimadick (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
accidents and incidents are not disasters
[edit]Re: [3] etc
Rather than incorrectly categorising 2023, perhaps you should fix the other years' categories. Please read Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aviation/Aviation_accident_task_force#Accidents_and_incidents_are_not_necessarily_disasters - if you still think accidents and incidents are necessarily disasters, then continue the conversation on that page. If you agree that Accidents and incidents are not necessarily disasters, then please fix the other years' categories, rather than breaking the one that is correct. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- WikiProjects can not unilateraly change entire category trees, particularly when their scope is barely relevant. The relevant WikiProject is Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management which has been covering aviation accidents for many years. Category:Aviation accidents and incidents is itself a subcategory of Category:Transport disasters. Dimadick (talk) 05:54, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Aviation accidents and incidents is itself a subcategory of Category:Transport disasters
— Well that's easily fixed.- Note that WikiProject Disaster management was invited to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force#Accidents and incidents are not necessarily disasters. Mitch Ames (talk) 06:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Murdered Bosnia and Herzegovina children has been nominated for discussion
[edit]Category:Murdered Bosnia and Herzegovina children has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:German queens consort has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:German queens consort has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:6th-century Arabic poets has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:6th-century Arabic poets has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:48, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1689 disestablishments in England
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1689 disestablishments in England indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1673 disasters
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1673 disasters indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 18:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1775 disestablishments in England
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1775 disestablishments in England indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1671 establishments in Nova Scotia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1671 establishments in Nova Scotia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1902 disestablishments in Nova Scotia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1902 disestablishments in Nova Scotia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ivorian children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Ivorian children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 16:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1671 in Nova Scotia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1671 in Nova Scotia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:22, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1902 in Nova Scotia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1902 in Nova Scotia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Child welfare in Ivory Coast
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Child welfare in Ivory Coast indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Welfare in Ivory Coast
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Welfare in Ivory Coast indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wealth in Ivory Coast
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Wealth in Ivory Coast indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:39, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Empty categories
[edit]Hello, Dimadick,
I seem to have come across a lot of empty or soon-to-be-emptied categories that you created today. Many of Wikipedia's most prolific category creators have asked me to NOT post notifications of CSD C1 taggings on their talk page because they deal with so many different categories that they really aren't invested in what happens with individual ones they created, perhaps, years ago. Would you like to be added to my "No CSD notices" list? It's just a matter of unchecking a box.
Mhy apologies if I have already asked you about this before and forgotten. I hope you are having a good weekend. Liz Read! Talk! 20:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- I would like to not be notified. In most cases, it is years or months since I created the categories, and I can not remember which articles were included. Dimadick (talk) 05:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Okay then, I'll continue to notify you. We have an ongoing problem with editors emptying categories out-of-process so if you see any empty categories that should not be empty, feel free to revert the removals. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 17:38, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1700 disestablishments in Ireland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1700 disestablishments in Ireland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1799 disestablishments in Ireland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1799 disestablishments in Ireland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1813 disestablishments in Ireland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1813 disestablishments in Ireland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:19th-century writers on archaeological subjects has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:19th-century writers on archaeological subjects has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 14:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Singaporean children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Singaporean children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Kosovan children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Kosovan children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Jamaican children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Jamaican children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Botswana children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Botswana children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Taiwanese children
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Taiwanese children indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1700s disestablishments in Ireland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1700s disestablishments in Ireland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:38, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:European expatriates has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:European expatriates has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:European expatriates in Afghanistan has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:European expatriates in Afghanistan has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 17:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:European expatriates in North Korea has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:European expatriates in North Korea has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:European expatriates in Saudi Arabia has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:European expatriates in Saudi Arabia has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:Roman victims of crime has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Roman victims of crime has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:59, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:Roman prisoners and detainees has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Roman prisoners and detainees has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 01:06, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:Roman prisoners of war has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Roman prisoners of war has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 01:07, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:Romans from unknown gentes has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Romans from unknown gentes has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 20:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Category:1486 in the Holy Roman Empire has been nominated for discussion
[edit]Category:1486 in the Holy Roman Empire and other categories have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § X by Y in Z
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § X by Y in Z on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 11:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:15th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:15th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kpratter (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:16th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:16th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kpratter (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:17th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:17th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kpratter (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:18th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:18th-century rulers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kpratter (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:Fictional Cimmerians has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Fictional Cimmerians has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:43, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Biden
[edit]Read this: https://reason.com/2023/09/18/theres-plenty-of-evidence-of-corruption-around-biden/
“Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” - John 8:31-32 69.113.233.201 (talk) 14:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 15th century in the Holy Roman Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:05, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 14th century in the Holy Roman Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:05, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 13th century in the Holy Roman Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:05, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 12th century in the Holy Roman Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
,,Palestinian" history
[edit]You can't delete something and defend it by saying it's ,,pro israeli". These are basic facts, proven by archeological researchers and historians. Quit fanboying islamization. AstroSaturn (talk) 15:27, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- The facts and the archaeology are covered in the article Timeline of the name Palestine, starting in the 12th century BCE. Dimadick (talk) 15:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- As i said, these names have nothing to do with the Islamic movement in israel. Ofcorse they have a desire to be independent, that is basically what islamization is all about. Islamic states inside of sovereign countries. There never was a country with the name ,,Palestine". Again, please stop watching social media propaganda and actually study the whole story. Nothing personal but honestly these pro pali movements are pathetic. AstroSaturn (talk) 16:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- "stop watching social media propaganda" Actually read the article and the use of Palestine by Greek sources, long before the Romans. I am not discussing the independence movement. Dimadick (talk) 16:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- If you're talking about Greeks that used the term "Palestine" in 500BCE, i
- "stop watching social media propaganda" Actually read the article and the use of Palestine by Greek sources, long before the Romans. I am not discussing the independence movement. Dimadick (talk) 16:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- As i said, these names have nothing to do with the Islamic movement in israel. Ofcorse they have a desire to be independent, that is basically what islamization is all about. Islamic states inside of sovereign countries. There never was a country with the name ,,Palestine". Again, please stop watching social media propaganda and actually study the whole story. Nothing personal but honestly these pro pali movements are pathetic. AstroSaturn (talk) 16:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
have bad news for you. Judah was a state within the Persian Empire. Ultimately, this shows that it is just a random name used by some ancient Greeks. How is that a part of the Islamic independence movement?
Category:People from Pompeii (ancient city) has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:People from Pompeii (ancient city) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:29, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Genocide against Palestinians
[edit]Hi, I would greatly appreciate your contributions to this topic. It is a fledgling project. Obviously feel free to say no though.
Thank you,
From Scientelensia (talk) 21:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Ken Feder
[edit]You probably won’t, but if ever want info on Ken I can get it for you. I only know him from the Internet but we are in contact a lot. His little girls are hilarious. I need to remember to add his new book [4]. Crazy expensive though. Doug Weller talk 18:07, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Israel as a person name
[edit]Thank you for this revert, as that nonsense obviously didn’t belong. One interesting fact, though, is that Jacob in the Bible did also have the name Israel, and that’s (according to the Bible) where the name of the land came from. So it was also a person, but obviously that’s not what the Land of Israel article is about. Just fun trivia, and I always love sharing that. Have a great day! —OuroborosCobra (talk) 15:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
|- style="margin:0;padding:0;" |align=left|This user supports labor/workers' rights.
|align=center| This user supports labor/workers' rights. |linked pages
[edit]This user supports labor/workers' rights. |
The message title text should have displayed instead of the mess in your userpage in the same code. Still a mess. Fix the problem in your userpage. Equalwidth (talk) 07:34, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:18th-century Scottish LGBT people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:18th-century Scottish LGBT people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Malcolm III of Scotland
[edit]Malcolm III of Scotland has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 14:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:People of Roman descent has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:People of Roman descent has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 20:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
""Virgin goddess"" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]The redirect "Virgin goddess" 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/2023 November 12 § "Virgin goddess" until a consensus is reached. TNstingray (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
"Virgin goddess" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]The redirect Virgin goddess 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/2023 November 12 § Virgin goddess until a consensus is reached. TNstingray (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay
[edit]Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.
Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.
Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Bring the Jubilee
[edit]Rebert E Lee and Thomas Dewey are minor background characters in "Bring the Jubilee" (as also George Bernard Shaw). There's a sentence or two discussing from a historical distance Lee's mostly unhappy post-war presidency of the CSA (though "Leesburg" the new name of Mexico City, occurs a number of times), while Dewey is just mentioned in passing. AnonMoos (talk) 23:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
edit summaries
[edit]Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! DoctorMatt (talk) 18:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
- Can I chime in to ask the same thing? This is a courtesy you can extend to your fellow editors. Please do give this your consideration. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to co-sign this recommendation as well. I know they can slow down the process a bit but it's a respectful courtesy to other editors. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is rather concerning that Dimadick has not even bothered to respond to these comments, and has continued to edit without using edit summaries — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I use edit summaries fairly often when 1) I revert texts, 2) disambiguate terms, 3) find obvious errors in text or categorization. I hardly think they are necessary or have anything to do with courtesy. When I check my watchlist, most of the vandals I encounter use edit summaries like "I fixed typo" or "improved grammar" when they actually delete text or add nonsense. Frequent use of edit summaries is typically what alerts me that something is wrong with the edits. Dimadick (talk) 04:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'd like to co-sign this recommendation as well. I know they can slow down the process a bit but it's a respectful courtesy to other editors. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Dimadick. Re this IP edit, I think the edit summary breaches WP:BLP and might need to be rev-del'ed. What do you think? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- It sounds like libel to me. Dimadick (talk) 10:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- I guess it's really just unsourced gossip, but yes. I have added a warning to the IP's Talk page. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Fictional characters from the 6th millennium has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Fictional characters from the 6th millennium has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
overcategorization for eponymous categories
[edit]The categories themselves are really helpful, but I've noticed some overcategorization in your (relatively) recent eponymous category creations, like Category:Leka, Crown Prince of Albania. It's important to remember that categories should reflect core defining features that are applicable to all pages within (WP:OCEPON). For example, including Category:21st-century Albanian military personnel [5] might be relevant to Leka, Crown Prince of Albania personally, but not necessarily to every page in the category, such as Mausoleum of the Albanian Royal Family. A more focused approach with one or two pertinent categories would be more effective. Mason (talk) 23:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I have been editing Wikipedia for twenty years. None of the categories I have created take note of "every page in the category", which I found to be an absurd standard. I move the parent categories from the main article to the category, and consider only the topic of the category, never its content. Dimadick (talk) 07:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not sure how to respond to this, other than to encourage you to revisit your approach as it conflicts with WP:OCEPON. Mason (talk) 13:49, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Ben and Polly (Doctor Who)
[edit]Please comment on the Talk:Ben and Polly (Doctor Who) page. Christian75 (talk) 11:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Fictional characters from the 6th millennium has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Fictional characters from the 6th millennium has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Films about ungulates
[edit]Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_December_18#Ungulates,_again. – Fayenatic London 19:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Assessing articles
[edit]Thanks for your work assessing articles. When you add the |class=
parameter to the banner shell, it would be very helpful if you could also remove it from the individual banners (example). This removes redundancy and also discourages editors from using these parameters and causing rating conflicts. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 21 § Works by setting
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 21 § Works by setting on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:39, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Fictional Canaanite people has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Fictional Canaanite people has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Communications in the Cocos (Keeling) Islands indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 11:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Eponymous categories
[edit]I might not be the right person to say this, because I pretty much disagree with lots of your edits and the only reason I don't contest it more is because categories & wikiproject tagging don't matter enough, but... I strongly disagree with the various eponymous categories you've been creating lately, and even when they're valid, they're being applied wildly loosely. See WP:EPONYMOUS. These are for very, very direct child categories. For example, Category:John McCain includes articles that are obvious spin-offs such as his specific presidential campaigns, but does not include things like Operation Rolling Thunder nor does it include, like, books that happen to mention him (but that aren't about him). Basically, all of these categories are wrong you've added in this diff. Merely being mentioned in a work isn't enough, lest George Washington's category have a zillion articles. It needs to be about that person. Or take Category:Judas Maccabeus: you've indiscriminately added every battle he took place in. But Category:Dwight D. Eisenhower doesn't include every battle he ever commanded. It's also very unclear how much Judas was involved in Roman–Jewish Treaty and some others. These articles are more properly part of other, larger topics.
You're a very active editor; people aren't going to be able to chase down every edit you make. Others have pointed this out to you before (see Smasongarrison's comment above). Some of these categories might be valid, but please don't just tag anything and everything that mentions a subject. SnowFire (talk) 18:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- "Category:Dwight D. Eisenhower doesn't include every battle he ever commanded." Then the category is incomplete and needs further work. I disagree with everything else that you said above. The main issue I have with Wikipedia is how uncercategorized everything is, making it harder to locate articles. Dimadick (talk) 18:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- I fixed the link to Eisenhower's category (I typed it from memory before). And your statement is not correct as to the current community guidelines and a fast path to massive WP:OC. The WP:MILHIST project in particular doesn't do this - they have multiple FAs and don't categorize as such (look at Category:Battle of Gettysburg - you won't see any "Categorization by commander" there). If you disagree with this, can I at least convince you that is the standard on Wikipedia? What would it take for you to believe that your preference is not in fact the Wikipedia standard? A conversation at WT:MILHIST? Nominating your categories for CFD? A trip to ANI? SnowFire (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- There is no such thing as overcategorization. It always reminds me of Don Quixote attacking imaginary giants. WikiProject Military history barely manages to tag its own categories, and I keep finding ommissions. "That is the standard on Wikipedia" Of course not. Such a standard would be for laughs. "Nominating your categories for CFD" Ah, bullies always resort to threats. Dimadick (talk) 19:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Believe it or not, that was my attempt at persuasion, not at threats. But this is a community project and your contributions aren't guaranteed to stay if they're not in keeping with guidelines, so CFD is absolutely a possibility. Rest assured there are lots of areas where my preferences differ with the standards, and I might bend the rules occasionally where they're flexible, but these are rather more than a bend. Frustratingly, I think some of your new categories might be valid, but if so, they'd be very small ~5 article categories, and I'm not sure CFD is well set-up for handling "this category can exist but should be trimmed down." Ugh. I have so much more other stuff I'd rather do than this. Anyway, I'll try to take a look, and maybe CFD it'll be for some.
- As a slight olive branch, I don't doubt you when you say there's lots of categorization still to do. I'm sure many of your additions are fine. That said, that doesn't mean all of them are, and if multiple editors tell you about our overcategorization guideline - which is absolutely a thing even if you disagree with it - you should consider taking the hint. There are lots of editors who like categories but believe they are more powerful if used only for core defining attributes, which is in fact one of the category rules. It's not just for every stray mention. SnowFire (talk) 19:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- "used only for core defining attributes" Two decades of disagreements over category deletions have only proved than Wikipedians disagree about what would be "defining". Dimadick (talk) 19:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- There is no such thing as overcategorization. It always reminds me of Don Quixote attacking imaginary giants. WikiProject Military history barely manages to tag its own categories, and I keep finding ommissions. "That is the standard on Wikipedia" Of course not. Such a standard would be for laughs. "Nominating your categories for CFD" Ah, bullies always resort to threats. Dimadick (talk) 19:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- I fixed the link to Eisenhower's category (I typed it from memory before). And your statement is not correct as to the current community guidelines and a fast path to massive WP:OC. The WP:MILHIST project in particular doesn't do this - they have multiple FAs and don't categorize as such (look at Category:Battle of Gettysburg - you won't see any "Categorization by commander" there). If you disagree with this, can I at least convince you that is the standard on Wikipedia? What would it take for you to believe that your preference is not in fact the Wikipedia standard? A conversation at WT:MILHIST? Nominating your categories for CFD? A trip to ANI? SnowFire (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Female characters in fairy tales has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Female characters in fairy tales has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Category:Christians of the Children's Crusade has been nominated for discussion
[edit]Category:Christians of the Children's Crusade has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 02:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Slavery in the Americas
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Slavery in the Americas indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 15:40, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Your massive reverts
[edit]Hello,
I realize that sometimes one can be unhappy with another editor's edits. I see that you are currently blankly reverting a number of edits I made on Americas categories. However, may I kindly ask you if we can discuss the topic? A few things worry me, especially since you seem to blankly revert anything without seemingly much looking at the actual edits you make. Examples:
- You sometimes add a <topic> in North America category in <topic> by continent in addition to <topic> in the Americas (example), which I find redundant per WP:SUBCAT, and sometimes you don't (example). May I ask what is your logic and how do you think this category structure should be organized?
- I took the time to tweak the introduction texts in some categories, but you blankly revert that anyway without a clear explanation. May I ask why?
In short, I found a problem in the way some categories were organized, mostly the work of long-gone blocked editors such as AquilaXIII. By massively indiscriminately reverting edits of editors who attempt to solve a problem, you are adding the problem back. Place Clichy (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- You practically emptied the category tree for the Americas, damaged the category tree for the Nordic countries, and added non-defining categories in articles which have nothing to do with sub-regions like North or South America. I fail to see any improvement here, just you creating problems where previously there was no problem. Dimadick (talk) 16:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- "Practically emptied" is not serious. That said respectfully. Articles and categories I added to North/South America all have content about North or South America. I tried to explain the improvement in my message above, which you do not answer. The situation I attempted to fix was broken, by reverting indiscriminately you are adding problems back. Sure I may make mistakes on the margin like everybody, and I am available to work collaboratively on fixing these mistakes. But but blankly cancelling the work of editors who attempt to fix things, you are part of the problem, not the solution. Also, North America and South America are continents, not "sub-regions". Place Clichy (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Category:20th-century Soviet television series debuts has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:20th-century Soviet television series debuts has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1890s pornographic films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1890s pornographic films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 05:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Category:Fictional travelers has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Fictional travelers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1942 disestablishments in Yugoslavia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1942 disestablishments in Yugoslavia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Antisyntagmatarchis for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antisyntagmatarchis 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.Chidgk1 (talk) 12:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1476 in Poland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1476 in Poland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 27
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ryakunin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miyako.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:47, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Stop edit-warring
[edit]You need to stop edit-warring and bring the categories up on the article talk pages. If you don't, you'll be reported for edit-warring. Parsecboy (talk) 10:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- I already responded to the talk page of Deutchland. Your threats are meaningless when you refuse to discuss. Dimadick (talk) 10:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Do you not find it ironic that you made this comment and then have refused to actually discuss on the talk page? I see you’re still actively editing. Either actually discuss the issue or undo your revert. You have been around far too long to be engaging in this behavior. Parsecboy (talk) 11:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- "or undo your revert" You have already undone my revert. What would be the purpose of further editing the article? As for discussions, I consider taking part in naval exercises and being escorted to international travels to be an essential part of Wilhelm's career. Dimadick (talk) 11:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Not this one.
- He sat on a ship for a few hours and watched an exercise that he had no role in. How is that “essential” to his career? In others, he merely traveled on the ships somewhere (and in the case of Leipzig, he was merely planning on traveling aboard another ship in the vicinity with Leipzig, but he didn’t even do that). I fail to see how any of that is “essential” to Wilhelm. Parsecboy (talk) 12:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- "or undo your revert" You have already undone my revert. What would be the purpose of further editing the article? As for discussions, I consider taking part in naval exercises and being escorted to international travels to be an essential part of Wilhelm's career. Dimadick (talk) 11:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Do you not find it ironic that you made this comment and then have refused to actually discuss on the talk page? I see you’re still actively editing. Either actually discuss the issue or undo your revert. You have been around far too long to be engaging in this behavior. Parsecboy (talk) 11:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Hativkah
[edit]O while within a Jewish breast, Beats true a Jewish heart, And Jewish glances turning East, To Zion fondly dart;
O while the tears flow down apace, And fall like bounteous rain, And to the Fathers’ resting-place Sweeps on the mournful train;
And while upon our eager eye Flashes the City’s wall, And for the wasted Sanctuary The tear-drops trembling fall;
O while the Jordan’s pent-up tide Leaps downward rapidly, And while its gleaming waters glide Through Galilee’s blue sea;
And while upon the Highway there Lowers the stricken Gate, And from the Ruins Zion’s prayer Upriseth passionate;
O while the pure floods of her eyes Flow for her People’s plight, And Zion’s Daughter doth arise And weep the long, long night!
O while through vein in ceaseless stream The bright blood pulses yet, And on our Fathers’ tombs doth gleam The dew when sun is set!
Hear, Brothers mine, where e’er ye be, This Truth by Prophet won; “’Tis then our Hope shall cease to be With Israel’s last son!”
O then our Hope—it is not dead, Our ancient Hope and true, Again the sacred soil to tread Where David’s banners flew! 69.113.233.201 (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:1910s business films has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:1910s business films has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Jezebel
[edit]Hi Dimadick, I use and support Wikipedia monetarily a lot but contribute very little content. I have found my latest contribution rejected by you, probably because I added it to the main text of the article by mistake. You correctly advised me to add my comment to the talk page. But was my comment deleted there too? I see that you wrote "Deleted nonsense. Complains about the Bible not being a reliable source". Could you clarify for me please? Do you mean that I claim the Bible is not a reliable source, or do you mean my comment is nonsense? Is it the consensus of Wikipedia that the Bible and the Quran are fiction? Thank you very much for your clarification, and my apologies for using Wikipedia wrong. MinuteSoul (talk) 05:26, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have not worked much on articles concerning the Quran's historicity, though it should not be taken at face value. But Wikipedia has a Wikipedia:Reliable sources concerning which sources we can use. Historians and archaeologists have concluded that much of the Bible is fictitious (including The Exodus and the Nativity of Jesus) and we report their conclusions. Biblical literalism can not be reflected in the articles. Dimadick (talk) 07:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Dimadick. I hope you mean "Historians and archaeologists have concluded that much of the Bible is mythical and cannot be proven". To say it is fictitious imputes bad faith to the authors, that they intentionally passed off as true, something they knew to be invented, which is something you couldn't possibly know. MinuteSoul (talk) 10:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- You think this is my personal opinion? See the article on The Exodus: "The consensus of modern scholars is that the Pentateuch does not give an accurate account of the origins of the Israelites, who appear instead to have formed as an entity in the central highlands of Canaan in the late second millennium BCE (around the time of the Late Bronze Age collapse) from the indigenous Canaanite culture. Most modern scholars believe that some elements in the story of the Exodus might have some historical basis, but that any such basis has little resemblance to the story told in the Pentateuch." Dimadick (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Suggested read: Wikipedia:Myth versus fiction MinuteSoul (talk) 12:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- You think this is my personal opinion? See the article on The Exodus: "The consensus of modern scholars is that the Pentateuch does not give an accurate account of the origins of the Israelites, who appear instead to have formed as an entity in the central highlands of Canaan in the late second millennium BCE (around the time of the Late Bronze Age collapse) from the indigenous Canaanite culture. Most modern scholars believe that some elements in the story of the Exodus might have some historical basis, but that any such basis has little resemblance to the story told in the Pentateuch." Dimadick (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Dimadick. I hope you mean "Historians and archaeologists have concluded that much of the Bible is mythical and cannot be proven". To say it is fictitious imputes bad faith to the authors, that they intentionally passed off as true, something they knew to be invented, which is something you couldn't possibly know. MinuteSoul (talk) 10:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Years of the 15th century in Poland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 15th century in Poland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Byzantine female prostitutes has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Byzantine female prostitutes has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Byzantine prostitutes has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Byzantine prostitutes has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Byzantine sex workers has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Byzantine sex workers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Byzantine people in the sex industry has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Byzantine people in the sex industry has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Sex industry in the Byzantine Empire has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Sex industry in the Byzantine Empire has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Prostitution in the Byzantine Empire has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Prostitution in the Byzantine Empire has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 00:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 3 § Category:Libraries by year of establishment
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 3 § Category:Libraries by year of establishment on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 21:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Vehicles introduced in the 18th century
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Vehicles introduced in the 18th century indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:19, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Dan Quayle drug dealing
[edit]you requested a link to an article implicating Quayle to government drug dealing (I'm adding here because my edits are usually reverted, this will be my 3rd attempt for adding this to Quayles talk page)
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-11-04-me-984-story.html 2601:5CF:8000:6B60:883B:6D7:A3A7:2EA8 (talk) 00:40, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:African victims of crime has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:African victims of crime has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 05:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Re: Characters created by Ken Sugimori
[edit]I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding that he didn't create ALL the Pokemon. The source in Ditto's article that's shared with the other is stating that he finalized the designs to give the game a cohesive style and make last minute changes. Several like Raichu and Eevee were made by other developers, while others weren't credited as of yet at all. Out of over 1000 Pokemon, he's only acknowledged as creating 49 of them. Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I am going by the credits given in the article text. Dimadick (talk) 01:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unless you're misreading a lot of these I don't think you are...you've reverted it several times on Ditto and Mime for example and neither of them state Sugimori *created* them, just again finalized their designs.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- "their design finalized by Ken Sugimori"[1]Dimadick (talk) 01:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- No offense meant but you do understand "Designed by" and "Created by" are two different parameters in the article, right? He finalized Pikachu and Raichu as well, but he's not credited as the creator of either.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- These articles mention other creators, while Ditto, etc. do not. Dimadick (talk) 01:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- That's original research then if we're assuming he made them without a source. Out of all the pokemon character articles the ones with sources stating he created them are Gengar, Voltorb, Gyarados, Snorlax, Mewtwo, Unown, Brock and Misty.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. That there is no creator attached does not tell us that Sugimori is the creator. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: Looking at Mr. Mime, that appears to be an error, given that the sourcing does not support that he created Mr. Mime. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- These articles mention other creators, while Ditto, etc. do not. Dimadick (talk) 01:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- No offense meant but you do understand "Designed by" and "Created by" are two different parameters in the article, right? He finalized Pikachu and Raichu as well, but he's not credited as the creator of either.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- "their design finalized by Ken Sugimori"[1]Dimadick (talk) 01:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unless you're misreading a lot of these I don't think you are...you've reverted it several times on Ditto and Mime for example and neither of them state Sugimori *created* them, just again finalized their designs.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ Morrissy, Kim. "Pokémon Designers Reflect on History of Eevee's Design". Anime News Network. Archived from the original on 2022-11-26. Retrieved 18 August 2020.
Hasmonean Coinage
[edit]Hello, may i ask how exactly my edits can be seen as vandalism? DutchPatriot (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- You replaced most of the categories with red links. Dimadick (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- What exactly are "Red links"? I don't mean it in a bad way, i just want to know.
- I added links that talk about Hasmonean coinage and the names on them. I personally do not understand what went wrong. DutchPatriot (talk) 07:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Red links are links to Wikipedia categories and articles which do not actually exist. Dimadick (talk) 09:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- What do you mean by that? I used the links because they have information about that topic. Still, if i did it wrong, sorry. DutchPatriot (talk) 13:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Red links are links to Wikipedia categories and articles which do not actually exist. Dimadick (talk) 09:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1910s historical action films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1910s historical action films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Cultural depictions ...
[edit]After you've finished Great Lives you might like to have a look at List of In Our Time programmes. Meanwhile I'll hold off from adding the current updates until you seem finished with adding the cats, to avoid edit conflicts. PamD 11:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- But really, a mention in Mnemonic verses of monarchs in England is not a "Cultural depiction": I think your addition of categories to that article is inappropriate. I suggest that you consider deleting them. ... No, on second thoughts, I'm going to roll them back: definitely overcategorisation. PamD 16:15, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- I doubt that they are inapropriate. These song appearances and their television versions are much of the attention these kings have had in recent years. Dimadick (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not quite sure what you mean there: are you ignoring all attention paid by historians, readers of historical fiction and non-fiction, visitors to historic buildings, and pretty much everyone else? A mention is not a "cultural depiction": it does not "depict" the person concerned in any way apart from telling us that they were a British monarch, and who reigned before and after. PamD 16:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- The television versions described in the article include sketches with the kings. And songs are depictions. Dimadick (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- But I don't think a share of a 4 1/2 minute children's television show is enough of a depiction to merit a Wikipedia category as a "Cultural depiction". I'll ask for other opinions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories#What constitutes a "Cultural representation"?. PamD 16:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- The television versions described in the article include sketches with the kings. And songs are depictions. Dimadick (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not quite sure what you mean there: are you ignoring all attention paid by historians, readers of historical fiction and non-fiction, visitors to historic buildings, and pretty much everyone else? A mention is not a "cultural depiction": it does not "depict" the person concerned in any way apart from telling us that they were a British monarch, and who reigned before and after. PamD 16:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- I doubt that they are inapropriate. These song appearances and their television versions are much of the attention these kings have had in recent years. Dimadick (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Sexuality in the Byzantine Empire
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Sexuality in the Byzantine Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
The redirect Cultural depictions of Sweyn Forkbeard 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 13 § Cultural depictions of Sweyn Forkbeard until a consensus is reached. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1470s in Poland
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1470s in Poland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Category:Hebrews has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Hebrews has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 15 § Category:Zombies and revenants in popular culture
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 15 § Category:Zombies and revenants in popular culture on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:57, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 20 § Category:Educational organizations established in 1547
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 20 § Category:Educational organizations established in 1547 on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Paul I's true paternity.
[edit]I removed the information about Sergius Saltykov's alleged parentage of Paul I from the lead section, because it was inconsistent with the information in the rest of the article (Peter III is consistently referred to as Paul's "father" in the rest of the article) it was a deviation from the norm (other monarchs whose paternity was disputed, namely Edward IV, Sweyn Forkbeard, Joanna la Beltraneja and Alfonso XII, do not have such rumours in the lead section) and, most importantly by including it in the lead section, it gave unjustified credence to unsubstantuated rumours. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 16:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Crook o' Lune
[edit]Seriously, you think Crook o' Lune belongs in the queens categories because of some blatantly peripheral (and definitely folkloric, and quite likely mythical) connection from one tiny aspect of the topic? If those categories are valid, then I know longer know what Wikipedia categorisation is for. Dave.Dunford (talk) 16:44, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you think folklore is irrelevant, then apparently you know nothing about Wikipedia categorisation. Dimadick (talk) 17:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is not the folklore, it's the ludicrously loose association. She allegedly liked the view, so the article goes into Category:Elizabeth I??? I've got a 500+ page biography of Elizabeth I downstairs. By your bizarre interpretation of categories, everything mentioned in that book that has a Wikipedia article – everyone she met, everywhere she went, everything she ever mentioned (with or without documentary evidence) – should go in Category:Elizabeth I. It's totally absurd. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- If by everyone she met, you mean her courtiers, we already have Category:Court of Elizabeth I. And everywhere she went is not remembered 5 centuries later for its connection to her person, unlike the well itself. Your Reductio ad absurdum seems to discard what the sources actually say about a location, in favor of an exclusivity that never works in categorization. Dimadick (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
If by everyone she met, you mean her courtiers...
If I'd meant that, I'd have said it. If you look at the Category:Elizabeth I category, most of the contents are reasonable; they are clearly relevant and widely associated with Elizabeth I. Whereas Crook o' Lune, and others you've added (e.g. The Woman in the Moon)? You literally have to open the article and search three-quarters of the way through it to work out what the connection is – which turns out to be "a place she might have been to" and "a play she might have seen". I don't have to use reductio ad absurdum, these inclusions are already patently absurd. If your policy was applied consistently then every article that mentions Elizabeth I would be there, and it would be pointless. That's simply not what categories are for. Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)- The Woman in the Moon was specifically created as court entertainment, and seems to have had no public performances. "search three-quarters of the way through" That is the problem with leads, which often do not reflect the article's contents or outright contradict it. I have been trying to add more specific subsections to article, rather than 10 paragraphs under the same title. By the way, I still found your reasoning "patently absurd". Your arguments convince me that I have to add more articles to Elizabeth I at some point. Dimadick (talk) 10:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- If by everyone she met, you mean her courtiers, we already have Category:Court of Elizabeth I. And everywhere she went is not remembered 5 centuries later for its connection to her person, unlike the well itself. Your Reductio ad absurdum seems to discard what the sources actually say about a location, in favor of an exclusivity that never works in categorization. Dimadick (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is not the folklore, it's the ludicrously loose association. She allegedly liked the view, so the article goes into Category:Elizabeth I??? I've got a 500+ page biography of Elizabeth I downstairs. By your bizarre interpretation of categories, everything mentioned in that book that has a Wikipedia article – everyone she met, everywhere she went, everything she ever mentioned (with or without documentary evidence) – should go in Category:Elizabeth I. It's totally absurd. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Yep, as I figured, replying was pointless, since you determinedly refuse to acknowledge the point. According to my biography, Elizabeth I by Anne Somerset, Elizabeth once visited Croydon (I opened it at a random page – for the record, p. 447). So you'd best add Croydon to Category:Elizabeth I then (/sarc – please don't). Crook o' Lune and Elizabeth I are essentially two unrelated articles. If there was a legitimate connection, Crook o' Lune and The Woman in the Moon would surely be mentioned in the index of an 820-page biography of Elizabeth I. Guess what – they're not. Over and out. Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Croydon was not yet developed into a town during her reign. What she visited is probably Croydon Palace. Dimadick (talk) 10:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Stop nitpicking and address the actual issue. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- That is the actual issue. The article already mentions her visits there, as part of her relations with the Archbishop of Canterbury (who owned the palace). I have no reason to add the category, as she never owned it or had a close association to it. Dimadick (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- The issue is that the connection between Crook o' Lune and Elizabeth I (and the other queens whose categories you added) is tenuous in the extreme, and I contend insufficient to justify the article's inclusion in the categories. I'm not advocating that my hypothetical counter-examples should be categorised in this way, obviously, but Croydon Palace has a better case than Crook o' Lune does. Elizabeth I never "owned ... or had a close association" with Crook o' Lune either – that's exactly my point. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- The opposite. She is remembered for her connection to Crook o' Lune, but when have her visits to the Archbishops of her era become commemorated in English folklore? And by the way, the Archbishops of Canterbury continued using the palace until the 1780s. Dimadick (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
She is remembered for her connection to Crook o' Lune
By who? Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)- Why are there traditional tales about Elizabeth I and Mary I in Crook o' Lune, but no one cares about her connection to Croydon?Dimadick (talk) 15:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- I've opened a section at Talk:Crook o' Lune and requested third-party opinions. Dave.Dunford (talk) 23:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why are there traditional tales about Elizabeth I and Mary I in Crook o' Lune, but no one cares about her connection to Croydon?Dimadick (talk) 15:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- The opposite. She is remembered for her connection to Crook o' Lune, but when have her visits to the Archbishops of her era become commemorated in English folklore? And by the way, the Archbishops of Canterbury continued using the palace until the 1780s. Dimadick (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- The issue is that the connection between Crook o' Lune and Elizabeth I (and the other queens whose categories you added) is tenuous in the extreme, and I contend insufficient to justify the article's inclusion in the categories. I'm not advocating that my hypothetical counter-examples should be categorised in this way, obviously, but Croydon Palace has a better case than Crook o' Lune does. Elizabeth I never "owned ... or had a close association" with Crook o' Lune either – that's exactly my point. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- That is the actual issue. The article already mentions her visits there, as part of her relations with the Archbishop of Canterbury (who owned the palace). I have no reason to add the category, as she never owned it or had a close association to it. Dimadick (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Stop nitpicking and address the actual issue. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 27
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American literary nationalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Profane.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1591 in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1592 in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1593 in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Category:4th-century novelists has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:4th-century novelists has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Category:3rd-century novelists has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:3rd-century novelists has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Category:2nd-century novelists has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:2nd-century novelists has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:10th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:10th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:8th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:8th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:7th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:7th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:6th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:6th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:5th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:5th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:11th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:11th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:9th-century fashion
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:9th-century fashion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Staff or rod
[edit]Actually, both are almost equally common. I've done a very overdue redirect. Johnbod (talk) 17:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 16
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reincarnated.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
What to do in this case?
[edit]I just read your comment here. I noticed that account was definitely not a rookie as well. Unfortunately, there's no way to tie it to another account that I can see, as it's pretty much an SPA for whitewashing the Joe Kent article (see this comment that they made a while back). Is there any way to report this sockpuppetry if the master isn't known? Fred Zepelin (talk) 00:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
- I am not familiar with ways to report sockpuppetry, since I never filed a report. Dimadick (talk) 00:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Infrastructure completed in the 8th century BC indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:18th-century Scottish LGBT people
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:18th-century Scottish LGBT people indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Dimadick,
- It looks like an edit war occurring at Henry Benedict Stuart but I can't take action here because I am involved. But I thought I'd alert you about it and ask you to check out the talk page. Although this involves an IP and a newly registered account, they seem awfully familiar with Wikipedia policy talk. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2010 Syrian television series endings
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:2010 Syrian television series endings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:38, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2010 disestablishments in Syria
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:2010 disestablishments in Syria indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 02:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:June 1996 events in South America
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:June 1996 events in South America indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Discrimination in Liberia
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Discrimination in Liberia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Discrimination in Honduras
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Discrimination in Honduras indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Discrimination in El Salvador
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Discrimination in El Salvador indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Category:Beringia has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Beringia has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Category:Virginia dynasty has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Virginia dynasty has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Infrastructure completed in the 1180s
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Infrastructure completed in the 1180s indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 03:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Victorian Turkish baths
[edit]Hi Dimadick, Thank you for taking an interest in the new Victorian Turkish baths (VTb) page and its categories. I'm not sure whether you have just read the page itself or had time to go through the past year's talk page and the discussion between R Prazeres (talk) and myself, especially about the reasons for separating [Hammam] from VTb, and the current discussion about the proposed change of the Redirect from the no longer used 'Turkish bath' heading. To cut a long story short, there is no connection between the two subjects apart from the fact that they are both public baths derived from the Roman thermae. So while both Hammam and VTb are sub-categories of 'Public baths' and 'Bathing', neither is a sub-category of the other. In particular, VTb is not a sub-category of Hammam and it might confuse all the work of the past couple of years to make it such. I hope you would not mind if I were to delete the category. If, when the remaining sections of the page are finished you still feel Hammam to be relevant here, then I would be happy to discuss its replacement further.
I see that you have also added a Wikilink on the the VTb page itself for Queen Victoria. I would not go to the stake over this, but she was one of about 50+ Wikilinks which were added by an editor shortly after the page went online. This included almost every location mentioned and many other pages referring to individual phrases used on the page. In a most helpful discussion with the editor about this and many other points also (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mmberney), I wrote 'In general, however, I have removed most of your wikilinks which distract during the reading process, do not usually relate to further knowledge about the subject of the article, and, I believe, should not aim to be a general index to the encyclopaedia nor a national gazeteer. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Overlink_crisis
However, your link does point to something important that was missing and I am adding Victoria's regnal dates in parentheses after her name, and hope that this will meet with your approval as a substitute for linking to a long irrelevant article. 2A00:23C6:E381:7701:F912:F07E:8A8B:91BE (talk) 15:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I have never heard of an overlink crisis. The article as it stands has walls of text, and is severely underlinked. The article that should linked is probably Victorian era. Dimadick (talk) 15:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I messed up and forgot to sign in.
- Well I thought that the overlink article I linked to was interesting. Most encyclopaedias are mainly textual, and Wikipedia is the only encyclopaedia I know of which has an article on the subject. I think that relevant images are a better way of breaking the text than coloured, often flashing links, which distract. I don't believe that someone who has not heard of Manchester, for example, would not be able to find it on Wikipedia without a link. Instead, I have used over 80 relevant images which have never been on Wikipedia before, and if it wasn't for copyright restrictions there would be more.
- However, I agree that Victorian era makes more sense and have changed it, and I will look again, in due couse, to see if I can add some more relevant links. There are, of course links to all the places which still have an operating VTb and, hopefully, these will be continuously updated by those who use them.
- Thanks for your views; they are very helpful for a newbie like myself.Ishpoloni (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Deleting comments
[edit]Here you deleted editor comments, I assume accidentally, please take more care. Selfstudier (talk) 20:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Category:Palestinian musicians by genre has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Palestinian musicians by genre has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 02:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Protected areas established in 1857
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Protected areas established in 1857 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Animators from Mississippi
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Animators from Mississippi indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1968 comedy horror films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1968 comedy horror films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Category:17th-century executions by the Province of New York has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:17th-century executions by the Province of New York has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 23:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Edit comments
[edit]Hi, I noticed that you recently made an edit at The Etymologies (Tolkien) without leaving an edit comment explaining what you were doing.
It would be appreciated by other editors (I suspect on many different WikiProjects) if you could remember to provide at least a brief edit comment.
This can be as simple as "add cat" if you don't want to type much; of course you can reuse such a phrase many times by pasting or using an editing tool to insert such a text field for you.
Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:18, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
OCEPON
[edit]As I and others have asked already (@SnowFire:) User_talk:Dimadick#Eponymous_categories [6], please stop copying every single category to the eponymous category. Please (re)view: WP:OCEPON. For example, Category:Gilbert_du_Motier,_Marquis_de_Lafayette does not need every category from the page. It's counterproductive. Mason (talk) 01:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- It says "An eponymous category should have only the categories of its article that are relevant to the category's content." Which confirms that the category must have practically every parent category that applies to the main article. I don't see how that supports your argument. Dimadick (talk) 09:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- To all the category's content. Look at the example: The article New York City is in Category:Populated places established in 1624, but this category is not necessarily relevant to the content of Category:New York City, so it should not be used on the eponymous category. Mason (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- That interpretation is not part of the text, and seems highly imaginitive to me. There is no ploblem with over-categorization, while Wikipedia has a chronic problem with uncer-categorization. Dimadick (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- What interpretation are you talking about? It literally says that "The article New York City is in Category:Populated places established in 1624, but this category is not necessarily relevant to the content of Category:New York City, so it should not be used on the eponymous category." which means that your interpretation that it should all be categorized is inconsistent. Do you really think that birth years should be added to categories?Mason (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- The example used is not a birth/death year category (which I personally find irrelevant to eponymous categories). It is part of the populated places by time category tree. It does not matter at all what Category:New York City contains, there is no reason to spotlight any particular place in a timeline of populated places. Dimadick (talk) 23:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's true that the example isn't exactly a birth/death category, but the principle is the same and pretty similar as both mark the beginning of something. Regardless, it demonstrates that not every category for the page should be applied to the category. At the very least, can you please ask yourself whether the category you're adding to the is relevant to all the contents of that category? Because categories are not the same as pages. Mason (talk) 02:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- The example used is not a birth/death year category (which I personally find irrelevant to eponymous categories). It is part of the populated places by time category tree. It does not matter at all what Category:New York City contains, there is no reason to spotlight any particular place in a timeline of populated places. Dimadick (talk) 23:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- What interpretation are you talking about? It literally says that "The article New York City is in Category:Populated places established in 1624, but this category is not necessarily relevant to the content of Category:New York City, so it should not be used on the eponymous category." which means that your interpretation that it should all be categorized is inconsistent. Do you really think that birth years should be added to categories?Mason (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- That interpretation is not part of the text, and seems highly imaginitive to me. There is no ploblem with over-categorization, while Wikipedia has a chronic problem with uncer-categorization. Dimadick (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- To all the category's content. Look at the example: The article New York City is in Category:Populated places established in 1624, but this category is not necessarily relevant to the content of Category:New York City, so it should not be used on the eponymous category. Mason (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Off-topic talk page comments
[edit] Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Mental health of Jesus for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. See also WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS: comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself (as opposed to comments and discussion about the treatment of the subject in the article).
50.221.225.231 (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- How is off-topic to mention that Jesus is treated as insane by several characters in the Gospels, including his immediate family? Dimadick (talk) 09:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: The comment you posted to this talk page was the following:
"Jesus' family, followers, and contemporaries seriously considered him delusional" Apparently, they figured out what was wrong with him.
- That falls squarely under
comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself (as opposed to comments and discussion about the treatment of the subject in the article)
, as stated in WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- No, it does not. It directly comments on the narrative of the Gospels, which depict Jesus treated as insane by the people he meets. His behavior was not rational. Dimadick (talk) 06:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: Do you really struggle to understand the meaning of
comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself
? Or are you merely pretending to be obtuse? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: Do you really struggle to understand the meaning of
- No, it does not. It directly comments on the narrative of the Gospels, which depict Jesus treated as insane by the people he meets. His behavior was not rational. Dimadick (talk) 06:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick:
Jesus is treated as insane by several characters in the Gospels, including his immediate family
I'd be curious to hear your source for that. With quotes. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- This is clearly the topic of the article: that Jesus was not sane by any standard, and that theologians can not change what is evident in the primary sources. Quit your disruptive behavior, and stop vandalizing the article. Dimadick (talk) 06:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- How many times do I have to explain this to you? Read WP:TALK:
If you continue your disruptive editing, you will be blocked. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Do not use the talk page as a forum for discussing the topic, nor as a soapbox for promoting your views. The talk page is for discussing how to improve the article, not venting your feelings about it.
- Still waiting on that source, by the way. With quotes. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:29, 6 June 2024 (UTC)'
- The source is already in the article and the Gospels: "There was again a division among the Jews because of these words. Many of them said, "He has a demon, and he is mad; why listen to him?"" Try reading instead of vandalizing. Dimadick (talk) 06:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Try reading instead of vandalizing.
Don't accuse me of what you are doing.There was again a division...
What does the verse immediately after the one you just quoted say?- Also, you still haven't proven your claim that
Jesus is treated as insane by [...] his immediate family
. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:38, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- You have got to be kidding me. Try the article on Mark 3: "According to Mark, this prevented Jesus and his disciples from being able to eat. "When his family (hoi par' autou) heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, 'He is out of his mind'." (3:21), or "beside himself", exestē (Strong's G1839), which could be read as Jesus' family accusing him of being crazy or describing what others had said about Jesus.[1] Either way they go to assert their control over him, perhaps to stop him from embarrassing the family.[1]" Dimadick (talk) 06:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Answer the question I asked. What does the verse immediately after the one you previously quoted say? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- See the entire text here. I don't see how does any verse contradict how Jesus' family treated him. Dimadick (talk) 06:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I want you to quote the verse immediately after the one you previously quoted (John 10:20). 50.221.225.231 (talk)
- I quoted Mark 3, not John 10. Dimadick (talk) 07:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Don't play coy. I said "previously quoted". You previously quoted John 10:20. Quote the verse immediately after that. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- You mean verse 21: "These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?" It quotes anonymous "others", not Jesus' family. Dimadick (talk) 07:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
not Jesus' family
Also true of John 10:20, which you quoted. So why did you quote it? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 07:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- As an indication of how the topic of Jesus'sanity was treated by the primary sources. I was not arguing that Jesus was a demon. Dimadick (talk) 07:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
As an indication of how the topic of Jesus'sanity was treated by the primary sources.
Then the same applies to the subsequent verse. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 07:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- As an indication of how the topic of Jesus'sanity was treated by the primary sources. I was not arguing that Jesus was a demon. Dimadick (talk) 07:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- You mean verse 21: "These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?" It quotes anonymous "others", not Jesus' family. Dimadick (talk) 07:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Don't play coy. I said "previously quoted". You previously quoted John 10:20. Quote the verse immediately after that. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I quoted Mark 3, not John 10. Dimadick (talk) 07:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I want you to quote the verse immediately after the one you previously quoted (John 10:20). 50.221.225.231 (talk)
- See the entire text here. I don't see how does any verse contradict how Jesus' family treated him. Dimadick (talk) 06:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Look at the concordance results for exestē (ἐξέστη) here and here. What do you notice? "Amazed". "Astonished". "Astounded". Jesus ἐξέστη. Read The Meaning of Ἐξέστη in Mark 3:21. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 07:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Answer the question I asked. What does the verse immediately after the one you previously quoted say? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- You have got to be kidding me. Try the article on Mark 3: "According to Mark, this prevented Jesus and his disciples from being able to eat. "When his family (hoi par' autou) heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, 'He is out of his mind'." (3:21), or "beside himself", exestē (Strong's G1839), which could be read as Jesus' family accusing him of being crazy or describing what others had said about Jesus.[1] Either way they go to assert their control over him, perhaps to stop him from embarrassing the family.[1]" Dimadick (talk) 06:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Pot calling the kettle black. You are clearly vandalizing the article and its talk page, adding bon-reliable theological sources. Dimadick (talk) 06:31, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Accusing me of what you're doing. Classic.
adding bon-reliable theological sources
What "bon-reliable [sic] theological source" do you claim I'm adding? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- Why do you keep treating Iosif Kryvelev as a reliable source? He was a philosopher and historian of religion, not a psychiatrist. Dimadick (talk) 06:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: I didn't add that source to the article. It was already there. You seem very lost and confused. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:46, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Accusing me of what you're doing. Classic.
- The source is already in the article and the Gospels: "There was again a division among the Jews because of these words. Many of them said, "He has a demon, and he is mad; why listen to him?"" Try reading instead of vandalizing. Dimadick (talk) 06:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- How many times do I have to explain this to you? Read WP:TALK:
- This is clearly the topic of the article: that Jesus was not sane by any standard, and that theologians can not change what is evident in the primary sources. Quit your disruptive behavior, and stop vandalizing the article. Dimadick (talk) 06:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
References
A tag has been placed on Category:2017 disestablishments in the State of Palestine indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Off-topic talk page comments (again)
[edit] Please stop. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Mental health of Jesus, you may be blocked from editing. See also WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS: comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself (as opposed to comments and discussion about the treatment of the subject in the article).
50.221.225.231 (talk) 05:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Off-topic talk page comments (yet again)
[edit]You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:Mental health of Jesus. Read WP:TALK:
Do not use the talk page as a forum for discussing the topic, nor as a soapbox for promoting your views. The talk page is for discussing how to improve the article, not venting your feelings about it.
See WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS:
comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself (as opposed to comments and discussion about the treatment of the subject in the article).
50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Your deletion of my talk page comments
[edit]Please stop. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Mental health of Jesus, you may be blocked from editing. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I fail to see how your comments are legitimate, as opposed to bad-faith edits. But I am simply reverting your deletions. Dimadick (talk) 06:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick:
I fail to see how your comments are legitimate
Are you sure you want to go down that route? Are you trying to get blocked? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 08:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- Stop with the threats, and stay away from deteting the talk page. Dimadick (talk) 08:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick: Accusing me of what you did. Classic. Just keep in mind you'll be blocked soon with that behavior. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 08:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Stop with the threats, and stay away from deteting the talk page. Dimadick (talk) 08:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick:
A tag has been placed on Category:People associated with the Burning of Smyrna indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 19:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Category:Protesters has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Protesters has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:983 works
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:983 works indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 07:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Category:Invasions of the Dutch Republic has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Invasions of the Dutch Republic has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 09:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 14
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Aztec Ace
- added a link pointing to Queen of Egypt
- Le Bal (1983 film)
- added a link pointing to Street fight
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Overcategorization and lack of familiarity with the subject matter
[edit]A deity being mentioned in a god list found in a specific city does not indicate an intimate connection with said city and might not even indicate they were necessarily worshiped there. Please refrain from further random inappropriate additions like placing Gazbaba in the Isin category, thanks in advance. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 07:46, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- This user has a radically inclusive attitude to categorisation but doesn't seem to accept that their application of categories is well outside the norms of Wikipedia. Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1st-century lexicographers
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1st-century lexicographers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 18:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1st-century BC lexicographers
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1st-century BC lexicographers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 18:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 20 § Buildings and structures completed by year, before 1000
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 June 20 § Buildings and structures completed by year, before 1000 on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
[edit]Six years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1458 novels
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1458 novels indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1450s novels
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1450s novels indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1458 books
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1458 books indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Faisal Baltyuor (producer)
[edit]Hi can you check this draft , thank you Julian1984u (talk) 10:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Child abuse, abortion and Zionism
[edit]Are you a zionist?
why do you downplay child abuse through your edits?
Why do you promote abortion so much?
Are you related financially or work in a non profit organization that promotes abortion or downplay child abuse victims such as law firms that defend abusers?
Thank you. Lazzldkdm (talk) 14:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- I believe that abortion is necessary to the well-being of a society, but I am not affiliated with any organization. Since when do I defend child abuse? Last I checked, I have never defended Zionism as an ideology, since I consider it to be a racist excuse to exploit the Palestinians. Dimadick (talk) 16:31, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Category:Fictional illeists has been nominated for discussion
[edit]Category:Fictional illeists has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. HPfan4 (talk) 22:10, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1920s adventure thriller films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1920s adventure thriller films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1874 disestablishments in Greece
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1874 disestablishments in Greece indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 15:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 7
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies
- added a link pointing to Collaborators
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1764 disestablishments in England
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1764 disestablishments in England indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 13:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Category importance
[edit]Please don't add blank |importance=
to categories, since it is unnecessary. See also User talk:Kanashimi/Archive 1#Please remove blank, 'na', 'NA' importance parameters where appropriate. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 20:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I typically copy the templates which I use in categories, while emptying the importance field. Does it fill some category which I am not aware of? Dimadick (talk) 07:20, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, but it is unnecessary. After all, we don't not-do-things because they don't add tracking cats, and we don't place every available blank parameter for every template, and we have "
Unused parameters may be deleted to avoid clutter in the edit window.
" advice on various templates. There are exceptions, like an empty|class=
in {{WPBS}} on a mainspace article, of course, since it's intended to be filled, but categories don't require|importance=
, so it will never be filled. - I was under the impression that this would be something easy to adjust in your workflow, so if it's a big bother to remove it, then don't worry about it. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 12:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, but it is unnecessary. After all, we don't not-do-things because they don't add tracking cats, and we don't place every available blank parameter for every template, and we have "
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1962 comedy horror films
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1962 comedy horror films indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:11, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Elizabeth Swann
[edit]Hello. I notice you recently reverted some of my edits on Elizabeth Swann. Would you be up for having a friendly chat about the page? Wafflewombat (talk) 23:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your explanation is that you are removing interpretation (as opposed to fact). Our job in an encyclopedia is to cover sourced interpretations. Dimadick (talk) 03:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. My concern was with unsourced interpretations, such as the bolded portion of this passage:
- "Early on in the first movie she often fantasizes about pirates and life at sea. This may have been fueled somewhat by her association with another character, Will Turner..." Wafflewombat (talk) 03:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello again. Since I didn't hear back from you, I just wanted to check in. Did my last comment make sense? Wafflewombat (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. If this is unsourced, it can safely be removed as OR. Dimadick (talk) 07:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Courtland Hector Hoppin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bryn Mawr.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wars involving Mauritius
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Wars involving Mauritius indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 20:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Category:Television episodes written by Michael Ferris has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Television episodes written by Michael Ferris has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 09:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved
[edit]There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 19:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why did you post here after I already replied to you? Dimadick (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Look at the timestamps and you'll see that I've posted here before you replied. I'm also required to post here by the policy at ANI, regardless. Gonnym (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Films directed by Gregg Hale (producer)
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Films directed by Gregg Hale (producer) indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Films with screenplays by Keith Calder
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Films with screenplays by Keith Calder indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Films directed by Phil Hay (screenwriter) indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:02, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Films with screenplays by Charlie Bean (filmmaker) indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:02, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Films directed by Ray Harryhausen
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Films directed by Ray Harryhausen indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Dimadick,
- It looks like editor Vegantics has been emptying out these small directorial categories today. Liz Read! Talk! 21:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I know about it. His personal page states his intention to diffuse the articles in Category:American film directors, Category:American film producers, Category:American filmmakers. I doubt that this is a good idea, but I feel too tired to protest. Dimadick (talk) 21:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Re-rate question
[edit]Hi Dimadick. Thanks for the copy-editing on the Adventure film article. I saw you edit the article to re-rank it as start class here. Previously it was start class in this state. I'm not going to ask you to re-rate or anything, but were there any clear issues or expansion you think would be appropriate for it to make it maybe C-class? Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:40, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not expansion. I think it has some sourcing problems in its definitions of the genre. Several of the early adventure films are adapting characters and tropes from adventure novels and pulp magazines, not introducing new genre conventions. Dimadick (talk) 18:12, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how it is not an expansion, the previous version was barely one or two paragraphs and used a single web source that does not even have an attributed author. As per the article, the sources note that the genre is broad and understudied has has many interpretations (which has been the same for genres without key iconography thriller film, horror film, crime film, etc.) so I'm not sure where you are getting that information from. I'm not sure what you mean by them being adaptations, as so far my research did not really come up with that. And it might not as the definition is broad. For example, tasker identifies films like Raiders of the Lost Ark that would include adventure film settings, while Chapman does not. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- A misunderstanding here. I did not mean that you did not expand, just that I am not requesting an expansion. Dimadick (talk) 19:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- "I'm not sure what you mean by them being adaptations" Early adventure film characters such as Zorro, Tarzan, and Allan Quatermain were all adapted from novels and short stories. Dimadick (talk) 19:07, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I guess I misunderstood "Not expansion." as "the article did not expand upon the previous version". which was also previously start-rated. As for those characters, they were definitely adapted into films, but I'm not sure if that is a key factor here and that might be considered wrong from some people who wrote about the genre. For example, Taves definition would ignore Raiders and I've only seen Tasker specifically talk about the jungle-themed films of Tarzan and King Kong. Its hard to connect those works when the genres definitions is this broad. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I tried to add *something* to that effect. I'm not sure that the adventure fiction genre is considered as broad as adventure film genre, but we probably should not assume they are the exact same thing even if they are similar, just as how the adventure game is really its own thing. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I guess I misunderstood "Not expansion." as "the article did not expand upon the previous version". which was also previously start-rated. As for those characters, they were definitely adapted into films, but I'm not sure if that is a key factor here and that might be considered wrong from some people who wrote about the genre. For example, Taves definition would ignore Raiders and I've only seen Tasker specifically talk about the jungle-themed films of Tarzan and King Kong. Its hard to connect those works when the genres definitions is this broad. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how it is not an expansion, the previous version was barely one or two paragraphs and used a single web source that does not even have an attributed author. As per the article, the sources note that the genre is broad and understudied has has many interpretations (which has been the same for genres without key iconography thriller film, horror film, crime film, etc.) so I'm not sure where you are getting that information from. I'm not sure what you mean by them being adaptations, as so far my research did not really come up with that. And it might not as the definition is broad. For example, tasker identifies films like Raiders of the Lost Ark that would include adventure film settings, while Chapman does not. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
July 2024
[edit]There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2024 July regarding a requested move in which you participated. The thread is Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2024_July#Srebrenica_massacre. Thank you. 122141510 (talk) 02:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Characters from Tiryns
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Characters from Tiryns indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Characters from Mycenae
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Characters from Mycenae indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:22, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 27
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Truckers (1992 TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sentient computer.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Athens link
[edit]I can't believe I did that. Thank you.Kmccook (talk) 21:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Please remove or edit
[edit]Hi. I hope you are well. You probably don't realize that modern Zionism is a movement to settle Jews in their indigenous homeland. The purpose is NOT to harm anyone, only to allow the Jewish people to flourish like every other nation. Now that you know what Zionism is, can you kindly remove your erroneous, and hurtful statement found here. Thank you. DaringDonna (talk) 17:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- "their indigenous homeland" They are not indigenous, they are settlers. Their "homeland" is called Palestine, and they are displacing or outright killing its natives. Zionism is a settler colonialism scheme. Dimadick (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is your misguided opinion and not a fact. Therefore it is inappropriate to state this falsehood on the Talk page. If you do not remove it or edit it, I will take further action. Thank you. DaringDonna (talk) 18:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- "I will take further action." This is not the first bullying threats I have had in Wikipedia. Actually read Nakba and Palestinian refugees for what Zionism is trully about. Dimadick (talk) 08:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is your misguided opinion and not a fact. Therefore it is inappropriate to state this falsehood on the Talk page. If you do not remove it or edit it, I will take further action. Thank you. DaringDonna (talk) 18:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I endorse the proposal to strike the vote as a previously uninvolved editor. The vote is based on opinion and not policy. Jdcomix (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Category:Labyrinths has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Labyrinths has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. MClay1 (talk) 12:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
CIR?
[edit][[[Special:Contributions/FairfieldAve]] Struggles with English, doesn’t under purpose of article talk pa. Doug Weller talk 19:14, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:2019 disestablishments in North Macedonia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Category:Wars involving Seychelles has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Wars involving Seychelles has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 13 § Characters in Greek mythology by location
[edit]A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 13 § Characters in Greek mythology by location on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mclay1 (talk) 13:29, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Zeppola/zeppole
[edit]Hi, in this encyclopaedia we have "panini", "cannoli", "panzerotti", "biscotti", etc., but not "zeppole"; it makes no sense. See here for more information: Talk:Panzerotti#Talk:Zeppola#Requested move 16 August 2024. JacktheBrown (talk) 12:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:1453 disestablishments in the Ottoman Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1918
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Fictional elements introduced in 1918 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 7
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beast King GoLion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beastmen.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Thankyou
[edit]I just wanted to say on record that we appear to have a mutual interest in promoting the factual and evidenced culture of Devon. I appreciate your many contributions and feedback greatly and thankyou for your work in relation to promoting this county. All my very best. 82.38.214.91 (talk) 20:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Category:1384 establishments in Italy has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:1384 establishments in Italy has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 02:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1883 disestablishments in France
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1883 disestablishments in France indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 04:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Category:Lighthouse of Alexandria has been nominated for deletion
[edit]Category:Lighthouse of Alexandria has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 15
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Space Battleship Yamato III, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human race.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Audiovisual introductions in 1925
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Audiovisual introductions in 1925 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 16:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Category:Political history of the Republic of Artsakh has been nominated for merging
[edit]Category:Political history of the Republic of Artsakh has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
WikiProject ratings
[edit]I am looking at this edit. Why did you think that Legality of cannabis would be a top priority (e.g., comparable to Cancer, Disease, Pregnancy, and COVID-19) for Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine? WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Because it is a topic that gets plenty of publicity over the last decade or more. I would actually rate pregnancy as low-importance, for not being newsworthy. Dimadick (talk) 04:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's generally my experience that WikiProjects don't appreciate someone declaring that someone else's favorite article is their top priority. I would avoid doing that, especially if you are unfamiliar with the group. Every group has different priorities.
- For example, you seem to prioritize newsworthiness, but I don't. Another person might choose Ghits (
pregnancy
gets about 5 billion;cannabis
gets 10% of that;legality cannabis
gets just 2%), but I wouldn't. Some might choose pageviews; I might use that as a tiebreaker, but the contents of Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Popular pages shows the limitations. The most popular articles often have more to do with politics and sex than medicine. I think that most WikiProjects focus on choose the centrality of the article to their specific subject area, which means that Legality of cannabis will have different priorities for different groups: higher for cannabis- and law-focused groups, and relatively lower for everyone else. - In the case of WPMED, we have a detailed importance scale at Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Assessment#Importance scale and anything involving laws is
|importance=Low
by default. It could perhaps be argued that since Cannabis is "High", then a major subtopic of cannabis could be "Mid", but the group is never going to agree that Legality of cannabis is more important to them than Cannabis itself, or more important than medical conditions that routinely appear in top-10 lists of causes of death. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)- Does WikiProject Medicine even cover causes of death? Because that is within the scope of WikiProject Death. Dimadick (talk) 04:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Cause of death is marked as mid-importance for WPMED on the talk page. It could be argued that it should be high-importance, but it won't make top-importance. We provide pretty detailed information about how to rate for priority, if you want to read it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Does WikiProject Medicine even cover causes of death? Because that is within the scope of WikiProject Death. Dimadick (talk) 04:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Adding articles to WikiProjects
[edit]I believe the Discrimination WikiProject is inactive. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)@Butlerblog: lots of WikiProjects are inactive, but that doesn't mean new pages should not be tagged for them:
- inactive ≠ defunct
- talk page inactivity does not necessarily mean project inactivity
- new pages might be enough to revitalize a project, and limiting or removing pages from a project is a surefire way to defunct it
- I frequently find myself using inactive projects' categories for projects I'd never consider myself a participant of
- just in case, when tagging pages with an inactive project, I generally like to have at least 1 labeled-active project to back it up
- Just my 2 cents. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 14:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Why did you add the template "Discrimination" to the article Christian fundamentalism? - 91.65.129.18 (talk) 14:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Because the Project covers sexism and racism, essential elements of fundamentalism. Dimadick (talk) 14:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- The words "sexism", "racism" or anything similar is not found anywhere throughout the entire article --91.65.129.18 (talk) 14:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- But the movement's support for child abuse is covered: "Christian fundamentalism has also been linked to child abuse[1][2][3] and corporal punishment,[4][5][6] with most practitioners believing that the Bible requires them to spank their children.[7][8] Artists have addressed the issues of Christian fundamentalism,[9][10] with one providing a slogan "America's Premier Child Abuse Brand."[11]" Dimadick (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thats not what "discrimination" is -91.65.129.18 (talk) 15:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- But the movement's support for child abuse is covered: "Christian fundamentalism has also been linked to child abuse[1][2][3] and corporal punishment,[4][5][6] with most practitioners believing that the Bible requires them to spank their children.[7][8] Artists have addressed the issues of Christian fundamentalism,[9][10] with one providing a slogan "America's Premier Child Abuse Brand."[11]" Dimadick (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- The words "sexism", "racism" or anything similar is not found anywhere throughout the entire article --91.65.129.18 (talk) 14:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- IP editor: re [7], the addition of an article to a project does not require discussion. It's not the same as adding a contentious label within the article or a categorization that is not supported. This is merely adding the article to a project that is interested in it. If an article is of interest to a project, the article can be added to the project without discussion. ButlerBlog (talk) 15:15, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am genuinely surrprised that the article covers the Christian right without even mentioning their hateful ideologies. Defective.Dimadick (talk) 15:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Fundamentalist Christianity and Child Abuse: A Taboo Topic". Psychology Today. Retrieved 4 October 2017.
- ^ Brightbill, Kathryn. "The larger problem of sexual abuse in evangelical circles". chicagotribune.com. Retrieved 27 November 2017.
- ^ "The reported death of the 'White Widow' and her 12-year-old son should make us face some hard facts". The Independent. 12 October 2017. Retrieved 27 November 2017.
- ^ Grasmick, H. G.; Bursik, R. J.; Kimpel, M. (1991). "Protestant fundamentalism and attitudes toward corporal punishment of children". Violence and Victims. 6 (4): 283–298. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.6.4.283. ISSN 0886-6708. PMID 1822698. S2CID 34727867.
- ^ "Religious Attitudes on Corporal Punishment -". Retrieved 4 October 2017.
- ^ "Christian fundamentalist schools 'performed blood curdling exorcisms on children'". The Independent. 16 September 2016. Retrieved 4 October 2017.
- ^ Newhall, Barbara Falconer (10 October 2014). "James Dobson: Beat Your Dog, Spank Your Kid, Go to Heaven". Huffington Post. Retrieved 8 October 2017.
- ^ "Spanking in the Spirit?". CT Women. Archived from the original on 9 September 2018. Retrieved 8 October 2017.
- ^ "Can Art Save Us From Fundamentalism?". Religion Dispatches. 2 March 2017. Retrieved 4 October 2017.
- ^ Hesse, Josiah (5 April 2016). "Apocalyptic upbringing: how I recovered from my terrifying evangelical childhood". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 4 October 2017.
- ^ "ESC by Daniel Vander Ley". www.artprize.org. Archived from the original on 4 October 2017. Retrieved 4 October 2017.
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2001 web series endings
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:2001 web series endings indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 03:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
{WikiProject Women's history|importance=low} - ROTFLMAO --Altenmann >talk 16:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of 1854 in animation for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1854 in animation 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.Fram (talk) 14:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
1927 in American television
[edit]Nice work there! I left some related notes at Talk:1927 in American television in case you want to do something with that. Or eventually maybe I will. I also have boxes of good old sources on television from when I wrote this paper, so let me know if you're looking for anything. Dicklyon (talk) 16:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Query
[edit]What was this edit about? AusLondonder (talk) 06:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Did you bother to read the article before your edit? The article states: "Author Elizabeth Gould Davis said breasts, along with phalluses, were revered by the women of Çatalhöyük as instruments of motherhood but after a "patriarchal revolution", when men had appropriated both phallus worship and "the breast fetish" for themselves, these organs "acquired the erotic significance with which they are now endowed".[1]" Dimadick (talk) 06:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I did. Still don't see how placing Category:Çatalhöyük on the cleavage article is appropriate categorisation at all. AusLondonder (talk) 12:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- It isn't appropriate categorisation. This user has a peculiar and individual understanding of the purpose of categories, but unfortunately continues to ignore Wikipedia conventions. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I did. Still don't see how placing Category:Çatalhöyük on the cleavage article is appropriate categorisation at all. AusLondonder (talk) 12:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Peveril Castle
[edit]Please stop adding person categories to places that are tangentially associated with them. As discussed previously, categories imply a hierarchy and there is no hierarchical relationship between Henry II of England or Eleanor of Castile and Peveril Castle. You could just as logically put Henry II and Eleanor of Castile in a hypothetical Category:Peveril Castle as you can put Peveril Castle in Category:Henry II of England and Category:Eleanor of Castile. Whenever it has been discussed, your unconventional interpretation of categories is deprecated (e.g. at Talk:Crook o' Lune and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/Archive 40#People categories and places, but you still persist. Please stop. Dave.Dunford (talk) 13:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think you even undrestand how categorization works. Dimadick (talk) 08:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- On the contrary: it's your interpretation of categorisation that is unconventional. How about answering the point about hierarchies? Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Categorization is not hierarchical. Just a convenient way to locate concepts and topics which intersect. Dimadick (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's precisely where you're wrong. WP:CATSPECIFIC explicitly says "Since all categories form part of a tree-like hierarchy, do not add categories to pages as if they are tags." ― which is exactly what you are doing. Links are how you indicate concepts and topics that intersect. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Links change much easier than categories and are less usefull in locating related topics, particularly when searching for articles about a specific historical era. Dimadick (talk) 15:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your personal convictions do not trump stated Wikipedia policies. Have you not noticed that numerous people on this User Talk page (including in the section immediately above this one) are making exactly the same point as me? Is there no point at which you might start asking yourself "is it me that's the problem here"? Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is suffering from undercotegorization and the deletion of a lot of hood categories. I have long resolved that much of the problem lies wiyj poorly thought guidelines. I have been editing for 20 years, and the bureaucracy keeps getting more absurd. Dimadick (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Right, so the answer to my final question is "no". I don't perceive this "undercategorization" at all – in fact, IMO cluttering up categories with every article that has a link, however tangential, makes that category less useful, not more. You seem to be fighting a one-man battle here: maybe a bit of self-reflection might be in order. Or look at creating some templates rather than categories, maybe. I genuinely think you've got this one wrong. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- "maybe a bit of self-reflection might be in order" I have done plenty of self-reflection after my suicide attempts. I feel that Wikipedia keeps getting worse, but I keep trying to improve it. And by the way, I have created several templates on American presidents over the years. I feel that categories are more usefull than templates. Dimadick (talk) 16:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry that you have mental health issues. But that's still no reason to ignore Wikipedia consensus. Wikipedia would be useless if everybody shared your attitude. There are guidelines I don't like in Wikipedia too, but I'm not so arrogant as to ignore them. It's not a crusade. I will continue to revert your edits when they affect articles on my watchlist. It's nothing personal. Dave.Dunford (talk) 07:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- "maybe a bit of self-reflection might be in order" I have done plenty of self-reflection after my suicide attempts. I feel that Wikipedia keeps getting worse, but I keep trying to improve it. And by the way, I have created several templates on American presidents over the years. I feel that categories are more usefull than templates. Dimadick (talk) 16:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Right, so the answer to my final question is "no". I don't perceive this "undercategorization" at all – in fact, IMO cluttering up categories with every article that has a link, however tangential, makes that category less useful, not more. You seem to be fighting a one-man battle here: maybe a bit of self-reflection might be in order. Or look at creating some templates rather than categories, maybe. I genuinely think you've got this one wrong. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is suffering from undercotegorization and the deletion of a lot of hood categories. I have long resolved that much of the problem lies wiyj poorly thought guidelines. I have been editing for 20 years, and the bureaucracy keeps getting more absurd. Dimadick (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your personal convictions do not trump stated Wikipedia policies. Have you not noticed that numerous people on this User Talk page (including in the section immediately above this one) are making exactly the same point as me? Is there no point at which you might start asking yourself "is it me that's the problem here"? Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Links change much easier than categories and are less usefull in locating related topics, particularly when searching for articles about a specific historical era. Dimadick (talk) 15:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's precisely where you're wrong. WP:CATSPECIFIC explicitly says "Since all categories form part of a tree-like hierarchy, do not add categories to pages as if they are tags." ― which is exactly what you are doing. Links are how you indicate concepts and topics that intersect. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Categorization is not hierarchical. Just a convenient way to locate concepts and topics which intersect. Dimadick (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- On the contrary: it's your interpretation of categorisation that is unconventional. How about answering the point about hierarchies? Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Category:Nineveh has been nominated for splitting
[edit]Category:Nineveh has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --woodensuperman 12:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Agriculture in Monaco
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:Agriculture in Monaco indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. AusLondonder (talk) 16:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1854 in animation
[edit]A tag has been placed on Category:1854 in animation indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 04:30, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello Dimadick
[edit]There's an ongoing discussion on the infobox of the War of the Sixth Coalition! This seems to be an article that you have some interest in, feel free to make your opinion known at Talk:War of the Sixth Coalition! AvRand (talk) 18:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Administrator Noticeboard Notice (October 2024)
[edit]There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- Just a note, I am not accusing you of anything. The AN/I notice is that a media article has accused you of violating Wikipedia guidelines, and this media article was mentioned at AN/I. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Category:Worms (obsolete taxon) has been nominated for renaming
[edit]Category:Worms (obsolete taxon) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- ^ Davis, Elizabeth Gould (1971). The First Sex: The Breast Fetish. Penguin Books. p. 105.