User talk:Altenmann

Hey! I noticed that you were doing some copyediting for Poozy (thanks for that), but I wanted to ask: do you know of any high-quality sources I could use for Arik Einstein? I've been searching for some on Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library and found that one journal I keep citing, but otherwise nothing that's entirely about him. There is this biography that was cited in the Hebrew article for Poozy, but I can't find a digital version of it, nor even its ISBN. I ask because I think that article, if given the time, could easily become a GA level article and even an FA, given its subject matter (Einstein has been covered extensively in Israel, I'm sure you know that by now). If you don't have any, that's fine, thanks for trying to help anyway. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 19:32, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@SignedInteger: Which "one journal" and which "this biography" you have in mind?. I added one more ref to the lede of Arik Einstein. The two refs^[1][2] are rather detailed. --Altenmann >talk 22:31, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

This one is the journal; it focuses heavily on the 1960s part of his career. As for the biography, I cannot find the ISBN number, but it is called "אריק איינשטיין: זו אותה האהבה"; it appears to be partially an autobiography since it is from back when Einstein was alive. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 22:34, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't quite sure which quality sources you need. If you want some "NPOV balance", here is a critical text by anti-Zionist Tom Pessah. Here are pieces of an en-lang book covering Israeli rock.

Altenmann is a proud descendant of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and embraces all cultures that emerged there, "from sea to sea" (and "from the river to the sea :-)

I am not really a "goood article" writer. I just notice pieces of knowledge I find interesting but which missed enwiki attention and usually write reasonable stubs/starts of sufficient content just off the radar of deletionists. For example this year I cobbled up Nathan Shahar (Arik Einstein here :-), Shulamit (of considerable notability, but not for enwikipedians:-), Eliahu Mordecai Werbel (to relate with Shulamit). --Altenmann >talk 22:31, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, aside from the weird userbox template that's for some reason on here. Yeah, I understand that you're not a GA editor. To quote one of your own subpages that you linked, you make articles about things that "nobody else gives a fuck" about. (I admit that not only made me laugh, it made me respect you more, that's the kind of attitude more niche topic editors should have).

By "high quality", I mean anything that's not newspapers or the like, not that those are bad, they're fine, and I will be organizing them for this as well. The book you linked is good, the other...not too sure, but I'll keep it bookmarked in case it is needed.

Oh! And as for suggestions for new stubs/starts: Any of the members of Kaveret that still somehow don't have English articles, they're all clearly notable enough for English Wikipedia and many of them have successful solo careers too.

Thank you for your help! I'll be getting to work on improving the article later, probably when I'm done with Einstein's 1969-1971 albums (easily his most notable and acclaimed) or perhaps even later than that, but again, thanks! _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 22:44, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@SignedInteger: This is from the book you wanted; I guess, a preface. This is about the publisher and WorldCat gives us ISBN 9789653781184, ISBN 9653781189 ; Here is NLI entry. So, unless you are in Israel, you are out of luck :-( --Altenmann >talk 01:15, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. Welp, I don't live in Israel at the moment so I guess checking that book is off the list. Thank you nonetheless. As I said in another comment, I'll get to work on this article when I am done with making articles for Einstein's first albums (1966-1971, or even 1964-1971, if the Yarkon Bridge Trio albums are notable enough for inclusion). Once again, thanks! I've bookmarked the other sources that you did cite here. _{S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits)} 11:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Despite the p-block we might still have to deal with his theories again: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Александр Макович. Mellk (talk) 18:21, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you removed my edits from the Sova (surname) Wikipedia page without any clarification. I have since added a source to the page on the connection with the surname Sova and Sauvé. ObjeCity (talk) 23:55, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Teleoconch 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/2026 January 23 § Teleoconch until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:17, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

moved to article talk. --Altenmann >talk 00:37, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Next time, please add merged-to and merged-from templates to the articles' talk pages. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

@Clarityfiend: I usually do, but AFAIK lists are not subject to copyright in the US, see Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. --Altenmann >talk 16:43, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A Bitter Fate, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lizaveta was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Kir Bulychev films 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 23:47, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Deathying (talk) 23:52, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Crescent City Orchestra requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be 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. ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 15:40, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey, @Altenmann. Why are you reverting my edits at Anatoly Dneprov (writer)? (diff)

The |nationality parameter is deprecated and should be removed or replaced with the |citizenship parameter per MOS:INFONAT. Best regards, —KuyaMoHirowo (talk • contribs) 14:00, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@KuyaMoHirowo: Correct. But you did not do it. I did.--Altenmann >talk 16:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Okay. Fine. —KuyaMoHirowo (talk • contribs) 23:27, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

The consensus of the Deletion Review for Gohar Harutyunyan was that I shouldn't have speedy deleted it and instead brought it up for an articles for deletion discussion. This discussion will cover whether the article is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gohar Harutyunyan until a consensus is reached and you are invited to contribute to the discussion. 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. Sincerely, --SouthernNights (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

		Apologetic Barnstar
		For not notifying the author about nominating their article for SD. I didn't think that someone who writes an one-sentence article would care so much of it. Sincerely, Ross's gull (talk) 15:24, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@Ross's gull: People have different reasons to write articles. Some like toiling on GA, others like to fix typos. I like to fill red links for underrepresented countries and cultures, even in the areas I do not care much. I see the value of Wikipedia not in information per se but in interconnecting information, both within WP and with reliable sources outside WP. --Altenmann >talk 16:20, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Title of office (position) 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/2026 February 13 § Title of office (position) until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:59, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Title of office (address) 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/2026 February 13 § Title of office (address) until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:00, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

The article Lilit Mkrtchyan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:BASICSPORT. Precendent: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gohar Harutyunyan

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:32, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

The article Valentyna Honcharova has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:BASICSPORT. Precendent: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gohar Harutyunyan

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:32, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tim Bergfelder is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Bergfelder 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.

Uhooep (talk) 04:41, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

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/2026 February 17 § Dialects by language of nation-state on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of people accused of bribery in Russia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people accused of bribery in Russia 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.

— An anonymous username, not my real name 02:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

The article Title of office has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Delete following deletion of both Title of office (address) and Title of office (position) per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 13#Title of office (address).

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:39, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Altenmann! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore a version of Banjo Band. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages in order to try to reach a consensus with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement at Talk:Banjo Band, please use one of the dispute resolution options that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 09:24, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Right; See WP:BRD. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Thank you --Altenmann >talk 09:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey great work on the Christopher name template. You created it; do you think the names should be alphabetized? PikachuMai (talk) 06:42, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

@PikachuMai: I did try to do this, in sections, but probably I missed something. --Altenmann >talk 06:46, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Do you want me to alphabetize them? PikachuMai (talk) 06:54, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

@PikachuMai: Yes, as long as you keep the grouping. --Altenmann >talk 07:09, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Done! :)

Feel free to edit if you'd like. PikachuMai (talk) 07:22, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Template:Christopher-name. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:27, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I am confused why my edit recently was reverted. You left no explanation for it at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm: which one? --Altenmann >talk 18:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If your have in mind Solaris (fictional planet), your edit is your original research, not supported by source cited. --Altenmann >talk 18:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd call it OR, but I admit there was some SYNTH going on there as Lem only insinuated Solaris was used as a plot device rather than outright saying it. I tried to add it again in wording that is solely based on what is directly written by Lem. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Commie block 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/2026 March 4 § Commie blocks until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 14:28, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Abigail is a similar name, so I think it should be under a "related names" section, but not in a way that implies that it and Avigail are pretty much identical. PikachuMai (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I reverted your blanking and orphaning of Lohia family. Please consider AfD if you think the business family as a distinct unit is not notable, thank you. --Paul_012 (talk) 23:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

{{Language influence}} has no transclusions. Templates with no transclusions are often deleted. Do you have plans for it? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:59, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: I started working on it when I noticed that it makes sense the items in its first line to be grouped into a navbox. The I noticed that there are two related templates , {{Interlanguage varieties}} {{Linguistic influence}}, then I noticed something that looks like WP:CFORK:Anglicism vs. Englishisation. So I understood that the structurization here is in a bit of a mess... And then I forgot all about it. I will restart thinking about this. Probably I will disperse it after all. --Altenmann >talk 16:00, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

I deprodded this because there are plenty of available sources. I added a couple. Bearian (talk) 01:14, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@Bearian: <Ugh> I have no idea how I missed this. There are also plenty of sources in Russian. I expanded a bit, to fix some IP vandalism and cover more bases.--Altenmann >talk 05:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. A gentle reminder to use edit summaries – it can be 2 or 3 words. Bearian (talk) 10:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

On 15 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Annie Stainer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Annie Stainer "would appear to fly, by delicately and continuously undulating her arms as if they were remarkable wings" during her solo shows? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Annie Stainer. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Annie Stainer), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 12:03, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Software life cycle 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/2026 March 17 § Software life cycle until a consensus is reached. Melozone crissalis (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Got a source? PikachuMai (talk) 03:10, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

@PikachuMai: I dont need one; it is in "see also" section, where often similarly written titles are placed, to help in search --Altenmann >talk 03:12, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, I see one for Toma. But Tomi seems to be an unrelated name. PikachuMai (talk) 03:14, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

@PikachuMai: Read my response again. By the way, in "Toma" the ref is wrong and I removed it. --Altenmann >talk 03:18, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh so if a title of one page sounds similar to the title of the main page, it can go in the "see also" section? PikachuMai (talk) 03:22, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

@PikachuMai: In cases when one can expect confusion. Use common sense. Calf and Cough sound similar, but people are not expected to confuse these subjects. But in case of Thomas, actual variants of the name must go into the list above. --Altenmann >talk 03:30, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Altenmann, how are you? Just a note to let you know that I've recently declined a couple (1, 2) of your speedy-deletion nominations – we can't delete under WP:G5 if the page creator was not blocked when the page was created (i.e, the creator is a sock), and we can't delete under WP:G13 if the page has been edited by a human in the previous six months (apart from the addition of the deletion tag, of course). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:51, 21 March 2026 (UTC) PS I wouldn't mention it if I wasn't already here, but ... could you perhaps make more frequent use of an edit summary?

As apparently you are oblivious of our manual of style, songs are not disambiguated by country. It is absurd you think this is the only Russian song that exists or will exists from that country. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 17:52, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: As apparently you are oblivious that you have to check that you rae breaking other connections. --Altenmann >talk 17:54, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Why you can fix by yourself. Can't you? And your lack of edit summaries is equally questionable. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 17:55, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I have a question regarding sources presented in a later comment at the AfD, which you possibly may have missed. Your response would be appreciated at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Lohia family, thank you. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:58, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that my recent edits to the article Antisemitism in Poland were fully reverted. I’d like to discuss this, as my intention was to improve neutrality and bring the wording more in line with Wikipedia’s neutral point of view policy.

In particular, my changes aimed to:

• reduce wording that could be interpreted as attributing collective responsibility
• better distinguish between state actions, individual actions, and broader social conditions
• ensure that interpretations (e.g. by specific historians) are clearly attributed rather than presented as uncontested fact
• add contextual factors such as wartime coercion, political conditions, and postwar instability

I’m concerned that reverting these changes in full may reintroduce wording that places undue weight on particular interpretations or frames events in a way that could be seen as imbalanced (see WP:UNDUE).

If there are specific parts of my edits you disagree with, I’d really appreciate discussing them individually so we can reach a consensus version. I’m happy to adjust wording as needed, as long as we maintain neutrality and proper attribution to sources.

Looking forward to working this out collaboratively. -~2026-22316-36 (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, I just realised that your edit linked to Antiquity_(journal)#Antiquity_prize, not just Antiquity_(journal). I'm still confused as to what exactly the link should navigate to? Antiquity (journal) has only one header, Editors-in-chief, so Antiquity_(journal)#Antiquity_prize is currently linking to a text snippet within that pseudo-lead that is the main text. In the end, Antiquity_(journal)#Antiquity_prize is just redirecting to a slightly lower part of Antiquity_(journal).

Would it be sensible to create a header for prizes in Antiquity (journal) and refer to that?

Cheers, Barbalalaika 🐌 16:18, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Barbalalaika: Yes, you may do this.--Altenmann >talk 16:31, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Barbalalaika: Initially I noticed only one prize, so a microsection looked redundant. --Altenmann >talk 16:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Please stop unilaterally retargeting redirects after a discussion closes with a different outcome than the one you argued for. You did this following the "Schmear" AfD and again with the recent "Commie blocks" RfD. If you disagree with the outcome, take it up with the closer, open a deletion review, or open a new discussion to make your case. Or move on. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

@Myceteae: - there was no binding outcome in the discussion. the suggestion was to move to Urban planning in Communist countries, which failed. I do not know any rules that forbid further editing in such situations. --Altenmann >talk 18:45, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

The outcome was "no consensus", which defaults to maintenance of the status quo, although this is certainly weaker and less definitive than a "keep" or "retarget". This is described in the Consensus policy at WP:NOCONSENSUS and the Deletion process guideline at WP:XFD#NOCON. In both the discussions I linked, the closer listed other actions that could be taken consistent with the views expressed. You were the only editor who supported a soft redirect to Wiktionary in this case. I think it goes without saying that unilaterally implementing a course of action that was not supported by a single other editor is against consensus, even following a "no consensus" close. In fairness, your position was raised late in the discussion and may not have been seen by all the participants. The other problem is that the commie block redirects do not meet the standards for a Wiktionary redirect as described at WP:SOFTSP and Template:Wiktionary redirect. In this case, I think deletion would be a better outcome but I think a repeat nomination so soon may be considered disruptive. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

@Myceteae: no I was not alone, not even first. I do not think that the nomination with a different target counts as "repeated nomination", especially, as you say, the idea of wikt redirect was down the discussion, so that not all people pondered upon it. --Altenmann >talk 20:40, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

@Myceteae: OK. I went a hard way :-) and found a place where the definition of "commie block" may be introduced rather smoothly, of course, with refs. Please review my addition to Urban planning in Communist countries. I think now it is a completely valid target, lacking alternatives. --Altenmann >talk 21:09, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Tavix did suggest a Wiktionary redirect first, although the objection was that a dab page is the wrong type of article. No other editors voiced support for this and Tavix subsequently supported an SIA, a suggestion which grew out of the specific issues identified with a dab page. Anyway, I like the addition to Urban planning in Communist countries. Thanks for making that improvement. This is now a justifiable target—certainly more justified than a Wikt redirect or Khrushchevka, which I don't think anybody supports. I would get rid of the Medium reference (see: WP:MEDIUM). Targeting there, with this content added, addresses many of the concerns raised and aligns with the general approach to redirects, so I'd be much more comfortable with this. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:15, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you removed my ONESOURCE tag at Mielagėnai Eldership, as one sentence doesn’t require any sources. Can you please clarify where in the WP policies does it state that very short stubs are exceptions to being tagged with the ONESOURCE tag, as it is not stated in WP:ONESOURCE. If I am not mistaken, the main concern with having only a single source in an article is notability, as stated in WP:ONESOURCE, rather than unsupported content of the article. Thank you very much! 𝕲𝖎𝖑𝖊𝖘𝖊𝖑𝖎𝖌™ :) 09:32, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

@Gileselig: - an elderships are official subdivisions of a country. They do not have problems with notability. Notice that WP:ONESOURCE is an essay, not to be taken as an absolute rule and WP:COMMON must be applied. --Altenmann >talk 15:42, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

As an autopatrolled editor with 20+ years and 250,000 +edits, I would expect you to know not to use things like random Flickr pages as sources in articles... Fram (talk) 10:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@Fram:, oh, I didnt pay attention to url. The texts looked solid. I concocted the badly missing artice in haste. --Altenmann >talk 10:48, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran–United States war. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 05:06, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Novo Nordisk, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medicare was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

hi, i'd like to know what was wrong with my edit? as far as i'm aware, "installated" is not a word (my spellchecker doesn't like it, and it isn't on wiktionary).

you might have wanted to revert the previous three edits? thanks, penguinencounter2@enwiki:~/talk/contrib$ 06:44, 7 May 2026 (UTC) (please ping me!)

@PenguinEncounter2: YOu are right. I have no idea how what was in my brain. Sorry. --Altenmann >talk 15:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

@Altenmann all good, thanks for clearing that up penguinencounter2@enwiki:~/talk/contrib$ 16:24, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi May I ask why you reverted this one Special:Diff/1353049013 ? It is clearly wrong there, for some reason it says Russian language in the code, now may I kindly ask, how in the world does Russian transliteration makes any sense there ? It should’ve been Ruthenian transliteration but since there’s no such option, I chose general East Slavic, that contains every East Slavic language without specific mentioning, as someone suggested it’s even better to use “cu” Church Slavonic, but definitely not Russian which didn’t even exist at that time. Scenic town (talk) 21:47, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the help here. I still have to finish converting the refs, and then I plan to go thru and verify everything fully, add or remove anything that needs to be, refurbish, etc. Obviously an arduous task (a shlep?), but I have enjoyed it so far. Piece by piece... ← Metallurgist (talk) 07:12, 10 May 2026 (UTC)