User talk:Mathglot/Archive 22

I saw what you did, but does that work with named references? In any event, I will check out how to do this... The timestamps are correct and from today; is the best thing to do just to repeat the citation with the appropriate timestamp? Elinruby (talk) 04:16, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby:, Yes. If you're referring to the Lafont documentary, what I would do if you have multiples, is use {{sfn}} with param |loc=, and then tie them all to the full citation in the § Bibliography section. So, let's say you had one ref at 20:50, and one at 1:30, then I'd do it like this:

* He was born.{{sfn|Devillers|2015|loc=at 1:30}}. Much later, he was executed.{{sfn|Devillers|2015|loc=at 20:50}}

== Bibliography ==
* {{cite AV media |language=fr |date=21 May 2023 |people=Jean-Pierre Devillers (director) |orig-date=3 December 2015 |title=Henri Lafont, le parrain de la Gestapo |trans-title=Henri Lafont, the godfather of the Gestapo |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ2N0fFd94w |publisher=imineo |type=Documentaires |via=YouTube |ref={{harvid|Devillers|2015}}}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

which generates this:

If you want to use named refs, you can; in that case, instead of the {{sfn}}'s, you would code:

• ...Much later, he was executed.<ref name="Devillers-2015" />{{rp|at=20:50}}

for the second one, after naming the first one as shown.

Either way, whether with sfn's or named refs, if you want, you can direct-link the short or rp link directly to the time point in the video, which is very nice for verifiability, thus:

• ...was executed.{{sfn|Devillers|2015|loc=at [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ2N0fFd94w&t=1250 20:50]}}

and likwise for the {{rp}} param |at=. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 05:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:02, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Louis Farrakhan on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Mathglot (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Witchcraft on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Mathglot (talk) 20:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Rfc hdr removed. Mathglot (talk) 20:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

This is problematic in two ways. First, that thread was never an RfC. Perhaps you meant to comment in the Carroll thread. And your comment will cause the thread to be retained quite a bit longer that it would be otherwise. Suggest you remove. ―Mandruss ☎ 20:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mandruss: Oh, sorry; thanks for the tip. Once the header gets removed, the link doesn't work anymore, and it's hard to figure out where it was. I'll fix that up right away. Mathglot (talk) 20:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I was sad to add the UPE tag to Edward Forman, but it came from an Upwork job that was very clearly to edit that article. I was actually a bit upset to see it, given the work that people like you did to help with the article and how it was quite negative about that help. But the only editor involed was Sabih omar - it had nothing to do with your work on the article, which not only involved good edits, but was very supportive of a new editor. - Bilby (talk) 12:36, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mathglot, me and Lynn both appreciate your work on the article. Lynn had a draft created, but she misunderstood the process of creating a Wikipedia article and was confused as to how to communicate that to you. When she asked for my help in Upwork, I agreed to modify her draft to make it suitable for Wikipedia. But I also misunderstood the etiquette, rules and consequences of paid edit in Wikipedia and just started replacing the article with my version. Now that we have full disclosure, I have started adding suggestions to improve/enhance the article in the talk page. Since you invested a lot of time and effort on this article, it would be only appropriate that you review my suggestions and update the article as you see fit. I would appreciate that a lot. Sabih omar 07:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Sabih, Thank you for your message. This is a kind overture on your part, and speaks well of your attempt to play by the rules as much as possible while engaging in paid editing at Edward Forman for Lynn. While I haven't examined your edits in detail at that article, I have browsed them, and at first glance I see no problems with your editing that would require my, or anyone's attention so far. They all seem to have improved the article, afaict. I will certainly have a look at the talk page, and try to help as best I can when I get a chance.

That said, nobody WP:OWNs an article—and that includes me—and so I'm not a "gatekeeper" that has to approve your edits, although I'm happy to check or review anything upon request, if I have the time. Right now, I don't have a ton of time, and I hope to get to it eventually, but in the meantime, I would recommend you place a brief message at a few related WikiProjects asking for reviewers. (There are four listed on the talk page; you could pick some or all of those.) You could add a section on the project Talk page(s) called something like, "Feedback requested at Edward Forman", then in a sentence or two, just say that you're a paid editor having updated that article, and that in the spirt of openness and collaboration, that you'd like any interested editors to review your edits and offer TP feedback, and/or to update the article as they saw fit. And you're welcome to link this discussion as well, if you think that will help. Best of luck, and please keep me informed how it's going. Please ping me in around a month, if you haven't heard anything from me before that. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 08:10, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Re: this edit, what spurious script warnings are you seeing at Special:ExpandTemplates?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:51, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Trappist. I'm seeing the following sfn "no target" errors in, and only in, Special:ExpandTemplates:

You can reproduce this by pasting the content of User:Mathglot/sandbox/citec into Special:ExpandTemplates. If the script is enabled, you should see the seven errors above. If you paste the same code into your sandbox, or any other non-Special page, you won't see any errors. (I tested in main, Talk, User talk, Template, and Wikipedia spaces, and no errors were generated in any of them. Afaict, the errors show up *only* in Special:ExpandTemplates.)

If the wikitext variable you mentioned in your explanation (diff) is 'nil' when used with Special:ExpandTemplates and that is responsible for the errors being visualized, then a nice enhancement to the script might be to detect the 'nil' condition, realize that something is awry because you can't have an article with no text, and then just refuse to issue any warnings or errors in that circumstance. (Even better, would be to dump one, big, bold, red, message: "Please use your sandbox; this cannot be tested in Special:ExpandTemplates.") Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:10, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Ping @Trappist the monk:; not sure if you're subscribed. Mathglot (talk) 20:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Or, are those coming direct from Module:Footnotes, and not the script? In that case, maybe it's the Module that needs to do an additional check for that variable. Mathglot (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

The error messages related to User:Trappist_the_monk/HarvErrors.js are dark orange; warnings are some-sort-of brown; duplicate errors messages are some-sort-of purple. Error messages from Module:Footnotes are the en.wiki standard error message color. I pasted your sandbox into Special:ExpandTemplates. The messages that I see are not from User:Trappist_the_monk/HarvErrors.js but are from Module:Footnotes. Are you seeing dark orange / some-sort-of brown / some-sort-of purple messages in the Special:ExpandTemplates rendering?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:53, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Trappist. No; just red; looks like they are straight out of Module:Footnotes. It seems clear now, that the locus of the problem is there, and not the script. Someone interested in that module should fix that. I'll elevate the one-sentence discussion I previously created there, into a Module Edit request. Thank you so much for your investigation into this, and your responses; it has been very illuminating. Mathglot (talk) 21:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

I've deleted the spurious script warnings issue from User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors as not-an-issue.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:30, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Mathglot (talk) 22:06, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Does English have one and does Anomie convert to it from whatever the French uses? The French number template used to break, and I have been manually removing them, but our eye-opening conversation about references has made me wonder whether I mihgt not there too be fighting a fight that needs to be fought Elinruby (talk) 01:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Does English have one and does Anomie convert to it from whatever the French uses? The French number template used to break, and I have been manually removing them, but our eye-opening conversation about references has made me wonder whether I mihgt not there too be fighting a fight that doesn't need to be fought Elinruby (talk) 00:55, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Elin, I noticed it, too, and unfortunately our number template {{number}} does something completely different from theirs, so you can't just leave it in place. And AnomieBOT cannot convert it, because it doesn't know your intention: whether you meant the English one, French one (or some other language Wikipedia one). If you don't have an offline text editor that allows you to do global replace, you should really get one. Then, if you change all occurrences of French '{{number|12345689}}' to '{{formatnum:123456789}}' (note the colon, and *not* vertical bar), and then it will do the right thing, namely to insert commas every three digits if you have North American preferences, and dots if you have European prefs (and inversely, for decimal point or comma). Mathglot (talk) 01:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. As I mentioned before I am working on a variety of devices and that isn't always practical. Usually not as a rule, but that is another set of problems. I am reasonably content to do this manually; but if I was making life harder for myself than it had to be I was willing to discover that ;) Speaking of life being harder, the evacuation alert in my area has been lifted now. We still have heavy ground-level smoke until a wind comes along. But I can unpack my go bag now.

Actually though, come to think of it, I could manually make the replacement you describe, since I'd be right there doing manual stuff anyway. Shakescene drew my attention to a discussion about using thin spaces instead of commas, is what set off this train of thought. Just checking to see if there was a better way to do things. Elinruby (talk) 02:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Elin; I wouldn't; {{thinspace}} corresponds to neither side of the Atlantic, and would be non-standard. Most flexible is to just use the formatnum magic word. 02:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of African countries by population on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Hai! InternetArchiveBot run #14571 (submitted by you) seems to be going very wonky - it says it's run through the single page in the batch job, but apparently hasn't realized that it needs to finish the job and release its bot worker for other use. Could you maybe try manually killing the job and see if that clears up the issue? Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 18:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Whoop whoop pull up:, killed; thanks for the ping. What do I do now? As I recall, that was for only one page; do I need to do something and resubmit it? Or file a bug? Mathglot (talk) 19:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Thx! You shouldn't need to resubmit it; the bug appears to be with the bot worker failing to release itself at the end of the job once it's already finished running through all the pages in the job. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 19:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

It looks like IAbot did what it was asked to, in this edit on 15 August, so I wonder why it was stuck? Mathglot (talk) 19:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

No clue; the bot's maintainers've been trying to figure out the problem for months now. Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes} 19:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2023 on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

\

I let it do its reference translation thing on something I have going in a sandbox where I am valiantly trying to master the grouped sfn stuff that seems to be in vogue on French wikipedia these days. It did indeed save me from manually fixing dozens of reference errors I had going on at the time, but I have suggestions in the french->english area for how to make it cooler:

• I don't know what that "plume" parameter is (icon?) but afaik it corresponds to nothing on en-wikipedia: delete it.
• auteur-> author is true and is what was doing myself for a long time until I realized that this was the reason I wasn't getting Harvard references to work. If it could somehow learn to split these into last1 and first1, etc... I realize this would require it to distinguish last names from first, and sometimes it would be wrong, but it would also sometimes be right, reducing the amount of tedious cruft-culling involved in translating this syntax, and what could possibly go wrong? Sure asking that question un-ironically is asking for trouble, but the occasional Grenard Fabrice is fixable.

Since I know you like links: User:Elinruby/National pastime: it's for the Maquis Lecoz redlink in the black market article, but bonus, is also itself a good article over there, plus a good case study for my project to reduce the oversimplification of World War II narratives. Possibly more than DUE for English, but there is a lot of that going on in my life right now. A couple of questions while we are here -- if you don't know the answers or can't easily find them, no worries, I can always try the help desk or dig/experiment some more.

• Legend template: got that to work for boxes of color on the black market article, but for this one I need several lines of (textbox containing a number, text explaining what that number is on the map), with a reference thrown in to make life interesting. The reference doesn't seem to be a problem but getting text that is not in the text box to appear right after the textbox might be. I had just the textboxed number, then everything in the textbox... There was an outage last night just as I thought I had solved this, and I haven't looked in on its current state. Plan B would be to simply forget the textbox flourish, so this isn't real important.

I got this to something I consider at least somewhat satisfactory but if/when you look, if you have feedback on a better or more elegant way to do this, please do share. Elinruby (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

• The article has notes plus references (sometimes nested} and also a bibliography for the sfn -- is there a requirement that these sections be in a particular order? I had the sfn stuff working but now the ref groups are only appearing as lists of citation numbers. Which do work (for the most part so far), but this is not what I want. To ask this more technically: can an sfn in a reference group match itself up to its corresponding item in the Bibliography? Do they all need to be in the same section or can there be a notes section in addition to a reference section in addition to a grouped reference section? Maybe too many headers is the problem?

As always, for all you do, thank you. I keep finding your name reassuringly in the history of various French civil law article. Elinruby (talk) 22:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Elinruby.

• |plume=oui affixes the pen icon, and it's to distinguish between a general source and a "Further reading"-type source. Fr-wiki's verifiability and sourcing is much weaker than ours, and not only do they not insist on inline citations with page numbers and let you just dump the name of a book source in the "Bibliographie", they also don't generally support a "Further reading" section, so that sources that would go in "Further reading" in en-wiki, just get dumped into the "Bibliographie", along with all the sources they actually *did* use to write the article with. So, how do you tell which ones are actual sources that back the content (supposedly), and which ones are just random, other cool stuff to read for viwers? Voilà—the plume icon identifies the books that are sources. So, we don't have to keep them in our articles, but you can use them to push off all the books that *don't* have a plume to our "Further reading" section. For an example of this in use, see fr:Épave_de_Mahdia#Bibliographie.
• auteur ⟶ author: I have some regular expressions to split authors into last= first=, but I'm guessing you don't do regexes? I could probably assemble it into a template, which could process a citation, and output the split version. I have similar ones that reverse the order, so that they end up |last= |first=, and not the other way around. If you have a list of stuff like that, I can probably create a template for it.
• Legend/text/ref – will have to look at this later; getting late here. Mathglot (talk) 07:44, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I have done regex; it's not in my current repertoire but... late here too and I am trying to close a bunch of open tabs with half-finished work. As I recall one of the problems I had at the time was that there were multiple versions, but that's another story. Is there a WP page I could look at? (when you have time. The Legend issue is circumvented to my satisfaction but there was probably a better way to handle it and if so please do tell. I may have had a lightbulb moment on the notes vs references thing but I haven't implement it yet and it too is kind of a kludge. So no rush on these questions.

Thanks for the plume explanation -- that probably explains an error I didn't understand Elinruby (talk) 07:59, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby:, some of it is at User talk:Mathglot/Tips#Regex. Mathglot (talk) 08:11, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I'd swear I remember receiving a ping from you recently, and I'd thought it was at Wikipedia talk:Pages needing translation into English. I was about to reply belatedly just now but I can't find your message there and don't know where it is. Am I making this up or did you contact me? Largoplazo (talk) 12:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Largoplazo. My memory is swiss cheese, but I'll look around to see if I did. The most I can say for sure, is that I've been looking at the duflu/needtrans merge, and I only remember that because it was today. Otoh, if you did get a ping, it should still be there in your notifs; try clicking the 🔔 icon at the top (after your username) and if I did, it should be in the dropdown. Mathglot (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Have you considered the possibility that you are clairvoyant, and you got the ping from this edit before I made it? Mathglot (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on "Society, sports, and culture" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Mathglot, please for the love of god, leave me alone! I do not have to source everything! Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 13:14, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, you do, if it's an assertion of fact you added. I'll follow up at your Talk page, like it or not. Mathglot (talk) 18:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright, Jesus. Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 18:54, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

May you please check my recent edits? I added in sources just like you told me to. I want to make sure I'm doing this right. Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@Autisticeditor 20: I absolutely will, but I'm out of time. Will try to get to it later today, if possible. Mathglot (talk) 19:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Fixing broken ping: User:Autisticeditor 20. — Mathglot (talk) 19:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Can you please let me know when you've seen my new edits and sources I've placed? Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 15:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Autisticeditor 20 I will; I'm just busy with some stuff I've been putting off for a while, and I need to catch up, because the books are library books that will come due. Is it okay if I get back to you in a few days? If you can't wait that long, let me know, and I'll make it sooner. Mathglot (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

That's fine take your time. Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 03:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Mathglot, thank you so much for your advice yesterday and respecting my feelings. I'm sorry if I was in any way harsh to you in my replies. Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm glad to help, and no worries—I have a thick skin, and I understand the frustrations you've been feeling in reaction to some of the posts on your Talk page. Just carry on with sourcing your edits (I've seen them, just haven't had time to respond to them) and you should be fine. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I really hope I sourced everything right. I tried to find the most reliable sources on Google Books. Have you checked any of them yet? Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Autisticeditor 20, Not yet; I'm very backed up. I can see from History that you've done a whole bunch of sourcing, and you must have also noticed my request on your UTP to add page numbers to citations where feasible, because I see a bunch of page numbers being added, too, and that really helps WP:Verifiability, so thanks very much for that. From 40,000 feet, it looks like a big improvement recently and that you're on the right track, but I haven't checked them in detail.

If you need more detailed feedback about your recent sourcing sooner than I'm able to get to it, you could ask any trusted editor for help, or ask at the Wikipedia:Help desk. I'm not sure who might have time right now and would be willing to get involved checking your most recent sourcing, but I'll try Tamzin and if they don't have time, maybe they could suggest someone (or I'll try again). In the meantime, no news is good news, so if no one is complaining on your Talk page, probably all is well. But I'll either find someone to help check your most recent edits for sourcing and verifiability, or I'll get to it myself eventually. Thanks for checking in again with me about this; I know you want to do the right thing, and I know it hasn't been easy, lately, but I definitely see the progress, so carry on! Mathglot (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:North Africa on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Mathglot (talk) 00:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mathglot. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jurisdictional dualism in France".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 14:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Undeleted, here. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

This draft is now being used to source content at Jurisdictional dualism in France, after which it can be deleted again. Mathglot (talk) 09:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Mathglot. May i suggest you revisit your reversion. You say Undid revision 1176837055 by LindsayH (talk) Unexplained removal of sourced content, but i removed no information merely, as my summary clearly stated, moved some to a better location in the article. We now have, again, an article with two sentences about the variety of cheeses in the middle of a section about its history instead of in the section about the variety of cheeses. Please undo your edit, thanks. Happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 09:05, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done. On second look, you are correct. The Diff program results are sometimes hard to interpret. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 09:11, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Ha! Came here to quote your summary and agree, they can be difficult sometimes. Thanks for reverting :) Happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 09:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback on my question about the use of 'Semantic Web Tags' in Wikipedia articles. Yes, I will be stripping them all out and going exclusively with 'Wiki tags'. Th74 (talk) 23:58, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Th74, (referring to this) You're welcome! Mathglot (talk) 00:38, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Based on your comments at Hulk576's Talk page, I decided to take a look at the Jehovah's Witnesses article on the Simple English Wikipedia. Somewhat neglected, the article had fallen victim to a fairly non-neutral treatment. I've attempted a copyedit of that article. I suspect a backlash. Are there different admins on the other Wiki if necessary?--Jeffro77 (talk) 09:01, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Jeffro77, Simple: is a completely different environment, with its own rules, and its own set of (active) users and admins. Since a global userid project was completed a few years ago, if you have an account on any wikimedia project, you now have an account (with the same password) on all of them, even if you've never used another one. It's possible that there's an overlap in user activity, and that some admins seen a lot here are active there as well, but that's entirely up to them, and indeed, to any user to decide what project(s) they wish to contribute to. As you get started over there, if you have any questions, probably the first port of call is simple:Wikipedia:Simple talk. Admins hang out at simple:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, and simple:Template:Helpme works the same way over there as here, so you can ask a question on your own Talk page (or anywhere), add the {{Helpme}} template to your message, and someone will drop by to answer your question at whatever venue you asked it. Thanks for volunteering over there, and good luck! Mathglot (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

I think it's great that you are taking the time to coach them. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Mathglot (talk) 09:33, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm unsure if we are talking about User talk:Hulk576 here. If we are, I'm truly impressed with the detailed and helpful suggestions you left that user. That must have taken you quite some time to write up and really should prove valuable. Nicely done. --Yamla (talk) 10:26, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mathglot. There a bug with reflib in Glossary of French criminal law, and I can't work out what's wrong. If you look in the Works cited section one of the entries is "Template:Reflib/French criminal law". It comes between "Elliott, Catherine (2001)" and "Garé, Thierry; Ginestet, Catherine (September 2022)", so it's should be the output from "Elliott-Jeanpierre-Vernon-2006". I've checked Template:Reflib/French criminal law and the setup in the article and can't see anything wrong, but the cite won't display correctly. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 14:18, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Checking... Mathglot (talk) 17:58, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

The only thing I see so far, is no in-link warning for Tomlinson-1999; will fix that later. The page doesn't appear to be in Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors, and I don't see visible warnings from Trappist's script on the page, so I wonder what you're seeing? Also, you fixed one issue here (thanks for that!) but that was prior to your message here. Still checking.... Mathglot (talk) 18:25, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

ActivelyDisinterested, Okay, I found something: a duplicate sfn whitelist param (dropped here). That seems to be in the same area you pinpointed above; so did that fix it? The problem for me is, I don't know what symptom you noticed, so I can't tell if it's gone away now. Also, what the heck is a flaff? M-W thinks it's "a flutter" or "gust", but if so, I still don't get it in the context of the edit summary. Curious minds want to know... Mathglot (talk) 18:39, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Definitely still there for me, from your browser search the page for "Template:Reflib/French criminal law".
Sorry I'm being colloquial, flaff could probably be described as "bothersome". If I didn't already know how reflib works, I doubt I would have been able to work out where to find "Dickson-Hübner-1994" or known how to set it up. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 18:46, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

@ActivelyDisinterested: Oh! Didn't notice that before!! Wait a minute, I just saw it, and now I've refreshed the page and it's gone. What the heck was *that*?! I also refreshed *before* seeing it just now, so something very strange is going on. I think it must somehow be related to the duplicate item I removed, although why there should be a time lag mystifies me. Can you reload or purge the page, and see if it's gone for you, too? If if is, do you have a clue what's going on here? Mathglot (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Fix broken ping. ActivelyDisinterested. Mathglot (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Very strange I still see it, so I tried purging the page and no change. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

FYI - I've subscribed to this thread, so you don't need to ping me as well. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:02, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh, no; that's the worst kind of problem, when behavior is different per user. Might have to check if Wikipedia has a "safe mode", so it doesn't load my common.css or js, to see if there's some strange interference. Or, maybe I can try it logged out, but that'll have to wait, as I've gotta run. Thanks for all your efforts pointing this out and trying things; will get back to this. Mathglot (talk) 19:10, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

After messing about in a test page for awhile, I found that reflib doesn't like duplicating cites. So if you have "Elliott-Jeanpierre-Vernon-2006" twice, even in different instances of the template, it behaves in unexpected ways. And sure enough "Elliott-Jeanpierre-Vernon-2006" appeared in the B-C template as well as the E-L template, now fixed. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:27, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Hm, that's interesting. A template, as a mini-program, can only do what it's told, and the template code is quite, simple, albeit repetitive. All it does is invoke Standard section transclusion repeatedly. I wonder if there's an issue with that, so my next avenue of research might be some simple tests invoking section transclusion twice, and see if I can reproduce the error with a minimal amount of code. If so, maybe there's a Phab ticket already for it, and if not, we can write one. Alternatively, if the locus of the problem is template code (though I don't see how) then it should be fixed.

One thing the template does not currently check for, is identical param values for two different params, ie., passing the same section name twice. That should be possible to fix in the template, although ironically, it's non-trivial, and I'd probably write a another template just to handle it. Of course, that would not have helped us here, where the same section name was passed in two separate invocations; that's essentially impossible to detect. In the meantime, I think some updates to the Reflib /doc page are warranted (maybe in "Technical issues") to warn about this case, regardless what the locus of the problem happens to be.

Thank you for your work in clearing these harv errors, and pausing on the tough ones to point them out, and going above and beyond in order to diagnose and even fix them. Much appreciated. Mathglot (talk) 01:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I logged out and it's still there for me, I thought to try and purge it while logged out but my IP address range is blocked. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:12, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

As a result of this discussion, I've made a change to Template:Reflib, which now detects duplicate parameters, and generates an error message instead of passing them through to the article. This will stop future problems in the case where a user inadvertently includes the same section name twice in one transclusion of the template. Of course, this wouldn't have stopped the case you discovered with two separate transclusions, but it's a start.

I've also upgraded the template doc to specifically address this issue; please have a look at the second paragraph at {{Reflib#Technical notes}}, and feel free to edit it if it needs further clarification. I haven't looked at reproducing the bug using duplicate section transclusion yet, and I may not get to it right away; the upgrades to the template should prevent most future problem cases, and the /doc upgrade should provide the user with an explanation of the more tricky, undetectable case, as well as the solution for it. This whole discussion and investigation has resulted in the template (and /doc) becoming more robust, and that's a win. Thanks once again. Mathglot (talk) 08:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Glad I could help. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 10:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

The redirect Wikipedia:ChatGPT 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 October 2 § Wikipedia:ChatGPT until a consensus is reached. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 10:22, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello Mathglot,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages.

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 18:14, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2023 Manipur violence on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:State of Palestine on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hamas on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done (opposed). Mathglot (talk) 22:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Yom Kippur War on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Freddie Freeman on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mathglot, a few years ago you suggested that instead of a redirect for 'gay lifestyle' and 'homosexual lifestyle', it might be preferable to create an article on this term. I was wondering about doing so as I have quite a few sources covering the topic. I'm not sure if you still agree, so wanted to consult you first.

You wrote I have no objection to its being expanded it into an article, but I'm not sure whether that would appear to be a content fork of "Homosexual agenda". One alternative would be to explain the evolution of the term "Homosexual lifestyle", and add that as a new section to the article "Homosexual agenda". The only solution that makes no sense to me, would be to leave it as it is, pointing to LGBT culture. "Homosexual lifestyle" is a pejorative term used by those opposed to LGBT rights; it should not redirect to LGBT culture. For how the term got that way from its humble beginnings as a neutral term used in academia and elsewhere, see #History of the term, below.

If you still think this is suitable, would it be better to draft name such as article 'gay lifestyle' or 'homosexual lifestyle'? Zenomonoz (talk) 03:12, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Zenomonoz:, Thanks for the link, and reminding me of that issue, which I had pretty much forgotten about, but it's coming back to me. Am thinking about this, and will get back to you. Mathglot (talk) 07:42, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Zenomonoz:, I apologize for the delay; I recall very clearly typing out a response a couple of days later, but evidently I must have gotten interrupted and never sent it. I only just noticed that now. A pity, because I think I went into a fair bit of detail, quoting and linking stuff, and now I don't remember exactly anymore, but I think I was mentioning something about having a terminology article, something like what we have at Transgender terminology (currently a redirect, but easily enough information for a stand-alone article). As I recall from glancing at the discussion you linked, the term homosexual lifestyle went through quite an evolution itself, and an alternative approach could be a new article on Evolution of LGBT terminology, with homosexual lifestyle occupying a section of it; I think that might be a more interesting, and comprehensive topic that likely will have more meat and more good sources you can use as references. I'm still trying to reconstruct the context and my thoughts about it, because I feel like I'm missing something important from my original (lost) response, but this is as much as I have for now. Sorry I can't do better at the moment. Mathglot (talk) 08:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

In this version the link to Elisabeth G. Flynn was blue. After your attention, in this version, it was red. What are you playing at? Please don't trash my work / the article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:38, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: It was inadvertent; please stand by while I fix it. Mathglot (talk) 01:02, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: Blue again; sorry for the bother. Mathglot (talk) 01:05, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Otzma Yehudit on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Talk:Ibrahim Aboubacar

Hello, Mathglot. I am reverting your reversion, not to quibble with you, but to go back and correct what needs to be corrected. I didn't understand your comment on the talk page but I'll try to figure out what's amiss. Thanks for pointing out that something needs help! Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 04:07, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Oona Wikiwalker, thanks for posting here. Sure, no problem. And you did fix it, thanks for that. Unfortunately, that left the Talk page with duplicate {{translated page}} templates, so I removed the second template from the talk page again. There is no need to have two of them. Per the guideline, there is no need to have even one of them; they are strictly optional. What is required, per Wikipedia's licensing, is the translated content attribution in the edit summmary where translated content was published. That is a must, and cannot be omitted, but the {{translated page}} template is just a "nice-to-have", and if we do have it, just one of them, please. Mathglot (talk) 04:31, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I had no idea there were licensing requirements among wikis! Thank you so much for explaining this to me; I had not been doing that. I've been picking up pages marked for "cleanup after translation," but machine translation can get weird so I've just been translating them my head and then rechecking that against the AI version. Do I need to insert an attribution on pages marked for cleanup? Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Oona, if I understood your last question, if you are fixing up English articles that contain some mangled French using your own English grammar chops without referring back to the French article, then it's just a "copy edit", and you don't need translation attribution in the edit summary. If you are translating from French Wikipedia, then you definitely need to include the attribution statement from WP:TFOLWP (the legal mumbo-jumbo is in sect. 7 of the wmf:Terms of use) in the edit summary. If you're fixing mangled French, and referring back to the French Wikipedia for clarification of certain points, then it's kind of a gray area; I would say, if you feel like you're "translating" it, then you should probably include translation attribution; if you feel like you're mostly just copyediting and could've done it without looking at the original, maybe you don't need it. If you've been translating from French Wikipedia (or copying text from one English article to another) and haven't been adding translation/copy attribution in the edit summary in the past, then you can, and must, add it retroactively. The instructions for this are at WP:RIA. Mathglot (talk) 08:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I did read the Terms of Service, and like every other "instructional" wall of text I read at Wikipedia, it explains without explaining. I do understand that this is because Wikimedia is an enormously complex project, but I still walk away without a reasonable grounding in what I was supposed to learn. I did understand that Wikidata and Wikimedia are different projects, but I thought all the -pedias not.

I'd been an anonymous, casual editor for a very long time. Recently I decided to give back more and registered an account that sat unused for a bit. When I came back to it, a Wikipedia bot offered me a tutorial: "Be bold!" it said. "Go forth and edit!" it said. Someone really needs to gently sit down and have a loving heart-to-heart with whoever thought that was a good idea. That tutorial is WOEFULLY inadequate. No matter how talented they are with building blocks, you cannot take a toddler out of preschool and send them to work restoring Nôtre Dame Cathedral.

Perhaps I'm still not making sense, but I know I'm taking up your time. I really appreciate your care so far. Thank you for that. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 19:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Oona, you are making sense, and, I understand what you mean; I ran into the same problem early in my wiki-career, and learning about copyright and Wikipedia's licensing requirements (and other things) is a gradual (and long) process. There's a noticeboard somewhere just for asking questions about copyright issues, and of course, there's an entire profession of copyright lawyers, so I don't beat myself up for not understanding it perfectly, and you shouldn't, either. I also ran into precisely the same issue as you described regarding the documentation at Wikipedia, namely, is something documented at all, and how do you know if it is or not, and where do you go to find it? Part of the reason for this, of course, is that Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and everybody gets to work on whatever they want, so there is no team "assigned" to making sure the documentation all makes sense, or is even consistent.

In fact, having clear doc and easy (or at least, "easier") access to it is a pet peeve for me, which is why I spend so much time trying to improve template and other documentation. If you run into a particular page that you think has unclear walls of text or other problems that need improvement, please go to the Talk page of that page, and start a discussion about it, and {{ping}} me from there, and I'll see what I can do to improve it. (Your Talk page "discussion" can just be one sentence or two, if you want, stating the difficulty you had understanding the page. Because all Talk pages are about improving the associated main page, please include at least one idea of how to improve the problem you raised—This page would be better if...—"just" complaining at a Talk page, without offering any suggestion how to mitigate the problem is seen as bad form, as Talk pages are supposed to be about discussing improvement to the page.)

Here's another idea for you: being that Wikipedia is a wiki that anyone can edit, if you find a confusing page of documentation, you can just WP:BEBOLD (ahem!) and edit it yourself to fix it the way you think it should be. Be prepared, of course, for someone to undo your edit if they think it's not an improvement, but you are totally within your rights to try to improve any page at Wikipedia by changing it. That is the Wiki way, and you're welcome to try.

Feel free to contact me anytime about issues you run into at Wikipedia. I guess you already know about the Wikipedia:Help desk and WP:Tea house, and there's also the {{Help me}} template, which you can use to get answers on your own Talk page. Carry on, you're doing fine! Mathglot (talk) 19:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your encouragement. You embody the Wikipedia ideal of kindness and civility, as do so many people I see in the Talk pages! (I give articles with Extended Protection a wide berth.) The part of Wikipedia I've been swimming in seems to be a community were people behave online at least as well as they would on a public sidewalk. This is a rarity that I enjoy very much. Is there a way to have a list of people you want to keep in mind without having to subscribe to their talk page? My phone nags me enough already, lol. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I maintain multilingual Wikimedia charts showing roadmaps to the various planes of the Unicode Standard.
I'm hoping you will provide French and Spanish translations for me. (I noticed your user name on the Wikipedia:Translators available list.)
The specifics are at User:Drmccreedy/roadmap_multilingual.
Currently the Spanish Unicode articles use the English charts and the French Unicode article doesn't use them at all.
Thank you for any help you can offer. DRMcCreedy (talk) 20:45, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, DRMcCreedy. I had a look, and I do a fair amount of translation from French, and wouldn't mind helping, especially for difficult points of translation. Most of these are not difficult, and machine translation can handle it adequately in most cases.

To lighten the load on your volunteer translators, here's what I suggest: use DeepL (free, online) to translate your French list (or any of about two dozen other languages that DeepL can handle) and just paste the values in to the table, but flag them as "needs proofreading" in some manner, and then when the table is full, ping your translator (me, for French, for example) and ask them to review it. They can fix up anything the machine translation got wrong, and ping you back, and then you can unflag everything.

As an example, I have added three entries to your French table using template {{xt}}, which places them in green serif font; that's my signal that these are raw, machine translations, not yet proofread. I suggest you fill out the rest of that table, using either that convention, if you like it, or anything else that separates the ones that are raw MT, from the ones that are proofread by human translator. Give me another ping when you are done, and I'll review the whole table. (Template {{xt!}} would place them in reddish serif font; maybe that's a better flag.)

P.S., a request: please do not use <br> on my talk page, or any page at Wikipedia, because it is an unterminated Html tag which screws up syntax highlighting on the rest of the page on which it appears. Instead, use either: the self-closing version of the tag, <br />, or the template version, {{br}}. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:22, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I like the machine translation idea. I've completed that task for the French translation so it's ready for your review. I have also updated my notes to use {{br}} in the future. Thank you. DRMcCreedy (talk) 23:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

DRMcCreedy, I've edited the France table, changing proofread items from red to green. I think I only changed one, which was "Surrogates"; the machine translation would've been okay in other contexts, but in the context of Unicode there's a particular term for it. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 01:09, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

I've updated the roadmaps with your help and have added the images to these articles:

• https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_des_caract%C3%A8res_Unicode_(0000-FFFF)
• https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_des_caract%C3%A8res_Unicode_(10000-1FFFF)
• https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_des_caract%C3%A8res_Unicode_(20000-2FFFF)
• https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_des_caract%C3%A8res_Unicode_(30000-3FFFF)
• https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_des_caract%C3%A8res_Unicode_(E0000-EFFFF)

I've also added machine translations to User:Drmccreedy/roadmap multilingual#Spanish in preparation for Spanish translations if you're willing/able to do them. Thanks again. DRMcCreedy (talk) 23:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Which editing environment do you normally use? (See the list of mw:editors if you're not sure.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Legacy Vector; why, are you taking a survey? Mathglot (talk) 06:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Vector is a skin. I'm interested in which editor you're using – 2003 (no toolbar), 2010 (default), WikEd (popular with experienced editors), etc. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

2010. Never tried WikiEd I don't think, but have heard of it. If it's popular, maybe I should look into it. Mathglot (talk) 19:21, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

So about your note at WT:MED, your web browser should be remembering all of your previous edit summaries. Just start typing, and anything that matches should pop up. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:12, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that idea. That only works if you start with the right character, usually I do section edits wherever possible, which means it pops up the section name as the first part of the edit summary, like, say, /* World War II */, or when editing this section, /* Editing */; and so it doesn't remember the edit summariess except for the ones in articles that happened to have a section by that same name, if any even match, and those are hardly ever the ones I want. Even if I edit the whole article, so it doesn't prepopulate the summary field, you have to get the first few characters exactly the same, and if I think of the wording differently, it won't find a match if it matches the second word, or some other word; it has to match from the very beginning, letter for letter. Mathglot (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

If you switch to the 2017 wikitext editor, your browser won't be able to see the edit summaries, but the software will suggest options from your last 200 edit summaries. It does a full-string search, so if you start typing ab, it will pick up any edit summary that contains those two letters anywhere in it (e.g., any edit summary containing the word about). OTOH if you edit multiple wikis, it can only 'see' the edit summaries used on the local wiki. The web browser approach can see across all the wikis (and non-wiki websites). WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

That's a good point. Might be worth trying it out if for no other reason than that. Mathglot (talk) 01:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

I found that it took me a day or two to get used to it. For me, it's usually a bit slower to open the page, but never slow enough to really matter. Learning the keyboard shortcuts made a big difference to me, and I particularly like the link tool (⌘k on a Mac). WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:25, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

The article Russell Henderson (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title and no other topics can be found within a reasonable time.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

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) 10:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Russell Henderson (disambiguation) 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/Russell Henderson (disambiguation) 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.

NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 06:45, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 08:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tuple on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Reco: withdraw. Mathglot (talk) 21:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Palestinian political violence on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Recently I've created the section Social construction of gender#Transgenderism and social construction and would appreciate some help. Could you please tell me 1) if it can be maintained and 2) if you can help me phrase it better? Thanks!

(Also, my first language is Portuguese. Do you speak, maybe?) Gmsrubin (talk) 05:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Gmsrubin, I'd be happy to help, as long as it's not urgent, because I have a few things to take care of, and it might take a day, or several days; is that all right? I'm glad to hear about your native language; may I ask if it's BR-pt, or PT-pt? I do speak some, mais compreendo muito melhor que posso falar o escriver, partly because of interference from Spanish, which I speak much better. I've worked on some Brazilian topics along with a few other editors here, and we sometimes could use some help from a native speaker. Some of these articles are pretty mature, now, like Operation Car Wash (and the related articles Offshoots of..., Phases of..., Odebrecht–Car Wash leniency agreement, not to mention brief articles like Condução coercitiva, Caixa 2, and also this glossary to help create all the others.) If any of that interests you, it would be great to have a native speaker involved. I'll get back to you about the article you asked about after not too long, I hope! Mathglot (talk) 05:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

No problem at all! It's short in content, so hopefully won't take much of your time. (And, honestly, I'd love to see the section grow. I find it a very interesting topic and the debate is still alive.)

And it's BR-pt. I'll check those articles. Gmsrubin (talk) 07:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I really want the early and mid sections of these articles to change, for example, in the article 2000s in fashion, the sections Early 2000s (2000-2002) are changed to Early 2000s (2000-2003) and Mid 2000s (2003-2006) to Mid 2000s (2004-2006). It just does not seem right to me and other editors here. Is there a way to change or to convince the change? Thanks. Autisticeditor 20 (talk) 19:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

I noticed the unused template subpage Template:Sfnlink/colon in a report. Do you know about Template:encodefirst? I always forget about it. I keep a link to Help:Template#Problems and workarounds on my "hints to myself" page as a reminder. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Jonesey95, thank you so much for this. I don't know if you noticed these 7 edits in the template sandbox where I was banging my head against the wall trying to resolve that damn colon problem, and in the end, I never really did. I was not familiar with Template:encodefirst, so that is really handy to know. And for all the times I've visited Help:template (and Help:Advanced templates), I somehow never saw the #Problems_and_workarounds section (or if I did, it didn't register). I keep discovering new things about templates, and this notice is really welcome; thanks again, I owe you one. Have a great holiday season! (I've g7'ed the subtemplate.) Mathglot (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I've done that exact head-banging dance three or four times. I maintain User:Jonesey95/Tools, a page I visit when I am stuck to remind me of solutions to problems that I have had in the past. Thanks for tidying up with the G7. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mathglot, it's me again. I think Lipstick feminism fits enough into liberal/mainstream feminism to be linked as a variant, but I don't know how to do that myself. Could you please explain how the linking works? Gmsrubin (talk) 23:23, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Gmsrubin. You linked it in the second sentence above, so I'm not quite sure what you mean. Can you elaborate? Mathglot (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Sure! I mean putting it here, for example. Gmsrubin (talk) 00:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah I see, you want to add it to the Nav box. Just click the edit button at the top, find the ‘variants’ group label in the source, and add it in there. They are not in alphabetical order currently, so it might be worth trying to figure out if they are chronological, and then slip the new link in to the right place. One other thing I’d do is to try to find a source that confirms that it belongs there, i.e. a source that describes lipstick feminism as a type of liberal feminism. Hth, Mathglot (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding ping @Gmsrubin:. Did you know you can WP:SUBSCRIBE to discussions, so you automatically receive a notification even if someone doesn't ping you? Mathglot (talk) 17:24, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Yep, I just started using it :) Gmsrubin (talk) 20:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Elinruby, I got this Draft deletion warning today, Are you interested in working on this, or would you like to move it to your userspace? Or should I move it to my Userspace? I'm submerged in other stuff and probably won't be able to work on it for a good while. Mathglot (talk) 17:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Interested. My user space ok. Just barely back from wilderness

@Elinruby: Thanks;  Done. Moved to: User:Elinruby/Glossary of French administrative law. Mathglot (talk) 19:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Capture of Fez (1576) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Further on American Civil War books in addition to my comments on my talk page in response to your comment. You may (or perhaps may not) be aware that there is an article Bibliography of the American Civil War, which I did not call to mind when I wrote my comments. That bibliography has many sub-categories. Some are in addition to or possibly a little different from the ones in my lists. The Wikipedia page was started by Professor User:Rjensen in 2007 and has been added to by many users, including me now that I recall, over the years. Professor Jensen, long retired apparently, is still a prolific contributor to Wikipedia, including to bibliographies. There are several "main articles" for some of the topics, such as unit histories in addition to the books listed in the generic main article. The "main articles" on additional topics are also listed at the end of the Bibliography of the American Civil War article in "Bibliography subsections." As near as I can tell, all of the entries in the main article are in Chicago Manual of Style, not Wikipedia CS1 and CS2. I also see that many entries do not have ISBNs. The following categories are listed at the end of the article as well: Historiography of the American Civil War, American Civil War books, Bibliographies of the American Civil War, and there are six other "main articles" listed under that category. I did not try to check for the styles, or duplication which would be even harder to check. I would be surprised if any of these articles are in a style other than straight Chicago Manual of Style.

I can't be sure every one of my books are listed in the main bibliography article, much less in the sub articles, but certainly the main bibliography includes many additional books so I think few if any of mine are omitted. My full list is 152,574 bytes; the Wikipedia bibliography is 207,656 bytes. The six other "main articles" would only add to that. So there are definitely quite a few citations to American Civil War books available in Wikipedia articles above the number of books in my lists.

There is also a category Category:Bibliographies of wars and conflicts which may interest you if you have not seen it. I didn't know it existed until I saw that it was removed from the Bibliography of the American Civil War article for some reason. Now that American Civil War bibliography is omitted from the wars and conflicts categories, a user must to go through a couple of other categories, including Category:Bibliographies of United States military history to get to the American Civil War books bibliography if looking at categories rather than names of articles is their method of searching. I wonder whether this change may lose some searchers since they might not get past the wars and conflicts bibliography when looking for the more specific civil war books lists. That wouldn't apply to a direct search for a bibliography on some topic, of course.

The early user whom I mentioned is User:Hlj. He has a page User:Hlj/CWbibliography. This includes citations to books that he does not own. The introduction states that the list was updated through 2010 but in fact I see additions through 2018 in the edit history. I am sure this list also contains some books that I do not own. I can't be sure, of course, whether he added all of his books to the Wikipedia bibliography but I know he made additions to that page over the years. So I would not be surprised if he added them all. I am not sure whether I added all of mine over the years but I also have made a number of additions to that article over the years. I will add some that I have picked up in the past year or so in the near future if they are not on the lists already. As with the other bibliographies, the entries on Hlj's lists are in straight Chicago Manual of Style format. Interestingly, given my comment, I see an edit summary in Hlj's edit history: "add some books, restore original format (this is a personal user page and I don't appreciate other folks editing it--thanks."

So there are a number of sources for books on the topic of American Civil War, mostly in complete citation, but some missing ISBNs in the Wikipedia general Bibliography of the American Civil War. There are also more sub-categories for the books in that article than the ones I have used in my lists. As near as I can tell, none of the entries are in Wikipedia styles for citations. There may or may not be duplication in the topics.

If you go ahead with the project, these additional Wikipedia pages may not just be useful but should include everything that you or a searcher might need. I now see the additional books would create an even more massive task to avoid any unwanted duplication in a reflib (though I think some duplication might be appropriate) and perhaps more importantly to convert the citations to one of the Wikipedia styles if that is necessary or desirable - which I assume it probably is. Perhaps with these Wikipedia bibliography articles available, all of the information in a reflib is already in Wikipedia and indeed in Wikipedia articles apart from my library and Hljs. Some note about that could be left somewhere in connection with reflibs and the existence of the citation information for these books would be more widely or easily available. There would need to be the caveat that the style used in these lists is permissible but they are in straight Chicago Manual of Style format, not in a "Wikipedia style." Also, ISBNs will need to be added for some entries. They are easily found in WorldCat without needing to look at the books themselves. Donner60 (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

The general category, which I forgot to add to the comments above, is Category:Bibliographies of wars and conflicts. Donner60 (talk) 01:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Donner60, thanks for these comments, as well. I always imagined that the 'top-level' topic of the American Civil War' was too vast to be appropriate for a Reflib (just like say, the French Revolution is) and that likely it would end up requiring probably dozens of Reflibs on subtopics. (Unless there's some core set of sources that are used on widely unrelated subtopics, say, everything from Confederate attempts to raise funding from Britain, to particular campaigns in Pennsylvania.) It seems too vast to add right now in the current immature state of Reflib, where the main goal at this point is to get up to speed with about a dozen or so Reflibs on unrelated article domains, in order to have something with a bit of meat on it so that when I first raise it publicly for general comment, there is something to look at, and not just a bare bones framework empty of content. Attempting the Civil War in its entirety at this point would probably demand all my attention and slow the progress of Reflib in other areas, and as it's paramount to have a broad scope for the purposes of demonstration, I think I'm going to put the larger topic of the War in the large on the shelf for now, at the most general level.

However, I'd still like to find one bite-size chunk of it to include in Reflib now, rather than try to swallow the entire war topic, so maybe you could help me choose an article domain representing a subtopic (or sub-subtopic) of the ACW that night be amenable. An ideal choice would be a subtopic which would have several (or lots of) articles on the subtopic, and which would be likely to share some of the same sources. And ideally, of course, one which your bibliography (or that of rjensen or Hljs or anyone else you know of) already has some sources so it could help jump-start the Reflib by copying the citations instead of researching sources from scratch. Once identified, I can then proceed to converting what we have in that 'chunk' into a Reflib. Any advice on what subtopic might be appropriate for a more targeted Reflib domain on an ACW subtopic for now? Mathglot (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree that an "American Civil War" library would be too large to be of much use in research. That is why I divided my much smaller but growing book list into topics. I do have in mind that a list of the general histories of the entire war might not need to be extremely large to have good coverage and be useful. These books are not likely to go into much depth on any specific event or topic, of course. But I have cited them as additional references or used them as a basis to become familiar with an event or topic. Some are well enough written and have enough key detail that they can be used in many articles.

A list of "general ACW reference books" also could be helpful. Eicher's Civil War High Commands and Warner's books with sketches of Union and Confederate general are often used sources. There are at least 2,500 existing articles on American Civil War events and topics but many of the articles need to be expanded or to have additional citations. The general histories and reference might be good starting points to find some basic information for new articles on narrower topics as well.

I will think about whether these two topics might be named differently and look back at the bibliography topic titles in doing so. I suppose one title could be histories of the entire war, general histories, overall histories or maybe something more catchy. Perhaps the other could be general reference books or more specifically, general American Civil War reference books. I will look back at the bibliographies to see if there may be better titles. I will think about whether another already defined topic along the same lines might be helpful.

I am reasonably sure that most or all of the books in these two categories could come from two of my specific categories. I can give a quick look to see if any other books from my lists or the other available lists might fit in those categories and list them in addition in my lists as useful but not owned or simply identified to you separately.

I think this identification and any related work can be done without taking a large amount of time. You have also motivated me to look at the various bibliography articles to see if some books published in the past 6 or 8 years might be included in the Wikipedia bibliographies if they are not already. Also, ISBNs need to be added. That may be a project that can be done a little at a time. After all, the bibliographies have remained as they were written without ISBNs for the most part for many years now. Donner60 (talk) 03:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Donner60, I appreciate this; your plan sounds really good. By the way, there's no particular urgency to any of this – I also need to go find another half dozen or so entirely unrelated topic areas for other Reflibs, and that will keep me busy for a while, so if you do want to look through your stuff and see what might make sense, that'd be great, but by all means take all the time you need. It's great brainstorming ideas with you, our strong and weak points seem nicely complementary, and I'm learning a lot, which is one of the reasons I came to Wikipedia in the first place so many moons ago, and I'm having a ball. (Hope you are, too!) Mathglot (talk) 04:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

this is the source for the JBP

"Not much is known about Jewish varieties of Portuguese in contemporary communities. However, we do know that contemporary Jewish communities in Brazil often incorporate Hebrew terminology into their Portuguese, which is a common feature of Jewish languages. Some Yiddish words, and even Ladino in Sephardic communities, are mixed in as well. Check out the Jewish Brazilian Lexicon below to learn more about these words. " https://www.jewishlanguages.org/judeo-portuguese

and this is the source for the judeo venetian

"•Ai hamorim non piacciono I confetti: “Donkeys (i.e., ignorant people) don’t like sugar coated almonds.” •The law of Moses, some take it by the head and some take it by the feet— refers to the flexibility of the law •Chi de goi se fida hazir magna: If you trust goyim, you’ll wind up eating pork. Ma chi se fida del giudeo non magna gnanca quello—but if you trust a Jew you won’t get even that. Adoniai sefatai tiftah—is from the Amidah, but understood in a negative way Fare sefoh: throw up. (sefoh-to bring forth) Mispetenecamod—to ruin something Restar come un Mordecai giasa. Play on words: become a frozen Mordecai, be stunned. Tananai—cacaphony, from to make a claim Cabala: lie In Livornese, thief is a version of gonif. Orsai comes from Yiddish—yartzeit" https://humwp.ucsc.edu/vja/2006/PRIVATE/media/text/responses/ResponseBassi.AK.pdf

I cited these in my edits of JBP and JV respectively. Denninithan (talk) 19:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Denninithan, I believe you are talking about my removal of this edit of yours at Judaeo-Romance languages, is that right? If so, this is a content-related disagreement related to WP:Verifiability, and as such, my Talk page is not the best venue to discuss it. If you wish, I will transfer this discussion to the Talk page of that article, where discussion may be resumed and other interested parties may take part. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It would be good if you transferred this to the talk page, thanks for offering. But on the topic of verifiability I don't see any reason as to why the source for JV would be considered unreliable and for the JBP source I have used the same website and the same page before in the past without issue.

Thanks, Denninithan Denninithan (talk) 23:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Judaeo-Romance languages § Content regarding Judeo-Brazilan Portuguese and Judeo-Venetian

Also one thing I just noticed. I was having the same discussion with someone on the varieties of french article when i realized that person is you. But there you called my source (from the same website) "reliable" but on this article your saying the website is unreliable. So if you don't mind would you mind clarifying what you said.

Thanks, Denninithan Denninithan (talk) 23:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Denninithan, I've moved the top part of the discussion as indicated. Your last comment is about a separate article, Varieties of French, and content disagreement about that one belongs at Talk:Varieties of French. Again, I'll move this paragraph there if you wish, or since it's short, you can just start over at the Talk page. Lmk which you prefer. Mathglot (talk) 00:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

❄️ Happy holidays! ❄️

Hi Mathglot! I'd like to wish you a splendid solstice season as we wrap up the year. Here is an artwork, made individually for you, to celebrate. It's always great to collaborate with you. Take care, and thanks for all you do to make Wikipedia better!

Cheers,
{{u|Sdkb}} ^talk

Solstice Celebration for Mathglot, 2023, DALL·E 3.

(View full series)

Note: The vibes are winter solsticey. If you're in the southern hemisphere, oops, apologies.

{{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The redirect Planking (boat building) 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 December 24 § Planking (boat building) until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 10:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

★Trekker (talk) 10:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This link^[1] does it not prove that the PLD, a political party in my country, is not center-left? Oli (talk) 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Oli. Well, that link doesn't prove anything, unfortunately, because it is a dead link, and there is nothing there. Worse, the Internet Archive has no record of it. (I've changed the section heading above to something more evocative of the subject matter.) Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 06:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi again. There's a typographical mistake in that url; I think maybe you meant this one instead. I'll have a look at it. Mathglot (talk) 07:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I've had a quick look at the web page, and there's no reason to look more deeply, because basically, you cannot use that page or anything from website vaguardiadelpueblo.do for verification of assertions about the PLD except for very basic and uncontentious information (when they were founded, where there headquarters is located, etc.) because the Vanguardia del Pueblo is the official organ of the PLD, and therefore not an WP:INDEPENDENT source. You can add the information about the position of the PLD to the article if you can find an independent source for it. I hope this helps! Mathglot (talk) 07:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Is this message that the user Vif12vf left me in the editing summary of the Dominican Liberation Party Article considered a threat or not?:

"If you continue to use yourself and primary sources over over reliable third-party sources to support claims you make that make no sense, it will be considered disruptive editing!"

If not, then I'm very sorry, I know I'm very impertinent bothering you for nonsense like this, but I just wanted to know. Oli (talk) 06:19, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Not entirely sure how me saying that your edits might be considered disruptive is supposed to be a threat, I am literally not threatening to do anything! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 06:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Oli, first of all, it's not impertinent to ask, and you are always welcome to ask questions. Don't forget that I am only one editor, and you may get multiple opinions or advice if you ask a question at the WP:Tea house or the Wikipedia:Help desk.

The quotation you are referring to above is the edit summary from revision 1191531896 of Dominican Liberation Party of 03:22, 24 December. While the edit summary is a bit gruff (brusco), and in principle the content of an edit summary should only address how the edit improves the article, and should not be unduly harsh towards another editor in case of a revert, there is no threat in my opinion. I hear some frustration in that edit summary, but that is understandable given that there was some history before that edit, and the preceding five edits show that you weren't hearing the objections to the edit, but simply reinserting them; this leads to something called edit-warring, which is indeed disruptive, and can require admin attention to sort out at the Edit warring noticeboard, and you don't want that to happen.

Making a bold edit, even one that other editors disagree with, is fine once; but once you understand either by a revert or by comments on the Talk page that some editors are in opposition to your edit, that is the time to discuss the disagreement at the article talk page and to attempt to come to some kind of agreement (WP:CONSENSUS). It's not okay to simply ignore the views of other editors if they disagree with you by repetitively reinserting your content, so please both of you go to the article Talk page, which is at Talk:Dominican Liberation Party, and see if you can come to an agreement. That is the first step; but if that doesnt work, there are other methods of dispute resolution, such as third opinion, mediation, and Rfcs. Does this answer your question? Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted to thank you for the welcome message! I did actually have a small question if that's okay.

I'm running into a problem with finding sources for Russian and eastern European figures. I did some work on the articles for Pavel Blonsky and Lev Kassil. They both were influential in their times and respective fields, but there's basically zero reputable sources on them in English.

I was wondering, how would you recommend finding sources? Is there a way to ask Russian speaking editors to help flesh out these articles by translating direct from the Russian? Thanks! MunsterManicotti5092 (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Moved to User talk:MunsterManicotti5092 § Your questions about sources for biographies of Russian individuals

Mathglot (talk) 01:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Mathglot,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)