User talk:Modussiccandi/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Modussiccandi. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The article Thebaid (Latin poem) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thebaid (Latin poem) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 14:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Just one additional thought: I don't know if you've reviewed anyone else's GANs, but it would be good if you could do so. The more reviewers we have, the shorter the waiting list will get. Tim riley talk 14:45, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

@Tim riley: incidentally, I did a review on American Civil War just two days ago. Your timing was so perfect that I thought you'd picked up the Thebaid review because I had concluded mine (albeit with a fail). I shall be reviewing more in the future. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:53, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Presidential cabinets of the Weimar Republic you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JBchrch -- JBchrch (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Toddle (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Alexandermcnabb: May I ask why I am the recipient of this message? I moved the page in question to draft just a few minutes ago. The page you tagged for A7 is already being deleted under R2 after the move. Modussiccandi (talk) 14:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Very good question and the answer is I'm not at all sure!!! I think you moved it to draft as I was tagging it for A7? For some reason the edit conflict wasn't picked up. I've reverted and hope that sorts out any mess!!! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Alexandermcnabb: Yes, that may be what happened. Anyway, don't worry about it. I was just surprised. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I DID have a fleeting impression that a more experienced editor that I'd have expected from the article flashed in front of my eyes... :) Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

	Women in Red Women in Europe contest
	Modussiccandi Thank you for your additions May 2021 WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@WomenArtistUpdates: Thank you for this! It is much appreciated. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 06:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

The article Presidential cabinets of the Weimar Republic you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Presidential cabinets of the Weimar Republic for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JBchrch -- JBchrch (talk) 23:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

The article Presidential cabinets of the Weimar Republic you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Presidential cabinets of the Weimar Republic for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JBchrch -- JBchrch (talk) 21:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

	A raclette for you!
	Thanks for thoroughness and reactivity at Talk:Lohn Estate/GA1! JBchrch talk 00:02, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much, JBchrch. Yesterday, I watched the Switzerland-Wales match, finished the Lohn Estate review, and ended up with a serving of raclette — rather fitting I'd say. Let me know if you ever need help with anything. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

You would be a good admin

PopbobHausemaster (talk) 01:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@PopbobHausemaster: thank you for the offer but I'll have to decline. Your account seems to be subject to a block due to sockpuppetry; so I'm not sure I'd like my chances with you as a nominator. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the R. A. B. Mynors article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 28, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 28, 2021, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:27, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, Modussiccandi, and thanks for participating in the contest. You might be interested in covering one or more of the centenarians in Peaceray's detailed redlist. We have decided to target them for the remainder of the contest as all but one are from Europe. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:34, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ipigott: Thanks for the heads-up. I might just find the time to cover one of them this weekend. Best and happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 12:46, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

On 19 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sather Professorship of Classical Literature, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Helene P. Foley's Sather Lecture on the reception of Greek theatre in the United States was described as "something of a milestone" in bringing the subject closer to the mainstream? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sather Professorship of Classical Literature. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Sather Professorship of Classical Literature), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

On 19 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thebaid (Latin poem), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that, according to Robert Maxwell Ogilvie, the Thebaid "cannot be said to be about anything"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thebaid (Latin poem). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Thebaid (Latin poem)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your acceptance of the article on Beatrice Honikman RoachPeter (talk) 14:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@RoachPeter: it was my pleasure. I'm always glad to review articles on female academics. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:53, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		Thanks for all the effort (usually thankless) you put in over at AfC. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 16:11, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: thank you very much for this. Small wonder that this is coming from you, given the admirable volume of NPP work you do. I'm always glad to see the articles I wave trough at AfC get confirmed by you or one of the other heavy-lifters at NPP. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for improving articles in June, with some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you very much for your kindness – the flowers look gorgeous. I hope all is well with you and yours. All the best, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:18, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, and yes, although too many that I know are ill to say "all is well". I added: missing SlimVirgin, and RMF festival opening --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:36, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the barn star, much appreciated! Emperostheoros2 (talk) 14:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

@Emperostheoros2: no worries; the pleasure was all mine. Best and happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

If you thought the article Peter Pernin was a contender for DYK, would you mind looking at the self-nomination Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on June 21, which hasn't found a reviewer. Just trying to learn the process in a way... Thanks! Emperostheoros2 (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@Emperostheoros2: will do; in general, though, I'd say that it's not uncommon for DYK noms to stay in the pile for quite some time. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 20:54, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Emperostheoros2 (talk) 11:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I've addressed the issues such as I could. Thanks very much for your time and attention.... Emperostheoros2 (talk) 16:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Emperostheoros2: very good. Can you post another reply on the DYK review page? It's usually done there and I want the page to be complete so that the other people at did you know have to full picture. I'll reply there. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 16:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Forget it. Just saw your message. Modussiccandi (talk) 16:32, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Dear Modussiccandi

many thanks for your review and suggestions. We have deleted un-necessary chatter within the Book Details Page. It would be great if you could review it again and let us know your feedback. We would love to make this page as subjective as possible.

Many thanks for all your help!

Maltesebooks (talk) 15:00, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Maltesebooks: I've seen that your draft was again rejected, this time by a different reviewer. I'm afraid the submission sounded more like an advertisement about Pantović, and not an encyclopaedic article. Unless you change your approach and begin writing from a neutral perspective, you will have a difficult time getting articles published on Wikipedia. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 15:34, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Re:Draft Sope Willams Elegbe ModussiccandiHello the draft was sent in error just like every other thing in my sandbox was trying to move a draft :Ori olokun for review and I sent everything in my sandbox for review. Then wanted to blank the send drafts I ended up blanking my sandbox. Apologises for the mix up and trouble.This particular article has already being published and I am translating to Yoruba.

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Callimachus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Extraordinary Writ -- Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:20, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

	Women in Red Women in Europe contest
	Modussiccandi Thank you for your additions June 2021 WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:47, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:

• The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
• Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
• Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
• Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
• Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
• BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.

In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

The article Callimachus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Callimachus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Extraordinary Writ -- Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for monitoring our works. I'd appreciate being mentored by you in the longest run. You're a true Godsent. TshepoR (talk) 12:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@TshepoR: thank you very much for this. I appreciate your words. Feel free to send me a message on here if you ever need help with anything. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello - I will be reviewing the submitted article for needed amendments ...though I'm somewhat baffled, but will try and figure it out. I also see the photo was removed - there was no copyright issue per using the photo as I had permission / was provided the image upon requesting it from the subject, etc - I don't know how else I could have gotten a photo of her. -- Limestone9 (talk) 14:31, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

@Limestone9: thank you for reaching out. I must say that declining Draft:Marcia Cebulska was a straightforward decision: articles with large unsourced swathes of text cannot be accepted. this is especially true when these articles are on living people. The article is also a blatant violation of our guideline on external links (WP:EL), which states that these links should not be used in articles. The opposite, an article with numerous such links, can at times point towards a promotional intention.

Now, about the picture. I was not involved in the deletion of the image and can only try to re-construct what happened from the file history. According to the history, an administrator came to the conclusion that the picture was taken from this website. I don't know whether you did indeed take the picture from this website. All that I can say is that it would have taken my ten seconds to download the image, after which I might well have re-uploaded it to Wikipedia without the permission of the copyright holder. I presume this answers your question ("I don't know how else I could have gotten a photo of her"). Such copyright violations are exceedingly common on Wikipedia and we sometimes have to act with an abundance of caution when the uploader has not credibly asserted their ownership of the material.

Please do not hesitate to contact me again with further questions! Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 16:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I will continue to put my hands in this and or perhaps some others with better knowledge than me, will help. Yes, I did know that you were not the one who took down the photo. I've likewise reached out to that person. I do understand that many copyright violations do occur here and other places, that's why I reached out to get a photo directly from Cebuska. I realize that I might not have documented properly, though it seems that I used a wiki type form for how I did it. Limestone9 (talk) 18:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Modussiccandi:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 2200 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

• Andytuna (talk · contribs)
  • Zoe Norton Lodge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Zoe Norton Lodge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

It is interesting to me that the page about Zoe Norton-Lodge has been moved to draft and then rejected. Other pages I have created about men with less references haven't been treated like this. I feel this is an example of sexism in the wikipedia community.

Andytuna (talk) 00:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

@Andytuna: thank you for reaching out. I presume you haven't had the chance to peruse my user page. If you did, you'd have seen that I'm always keen to create and promote new content about women. In fact, I make a point of reviewing almost exclusively women articles via AfC. Whit that out of the way, may I suggest that what you see as "sexism in the [W]ikipedia community" could just be a lack of knowledge of the relevant notability criteria? What counts for notability are reliable third-third party sources and, in the case of authors, independent and reliable reviews of their books. Zoe Norton Lodge was lacking in those. What is more, it contained unsourced content about a living person which cannot under any circumstances be accepted for publications. All the best, Modussiccandi (talk) 08:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

This is not to say that we haven't got a problem with sexism; sadly we and all major institutions in society do. It's just that I don't usually review articles on men and I'm not familiar with what other editor to differently when they approach articles on them. All I can say is that I base my decisions on the relevant policies and guidelines. I normally like to interpret them conservatively because I feel that we owe it to ourselves and our readers to at least try to stick to our own rules. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 08:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

On 11 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Marja Kubašec, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Marja Kubašec was both the first Sorbian woman to receive a formal teacher training and the first woman to write a novel in Upper Sorbian? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Marja Kubašec. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Marja Kubašec), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

On 12 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Maria Simon (sociologist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Maria Simon and her husband met through a Jewish youth group in Austria but did not marry until ten years later after reconnecting while living as exiles in England? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Maria Simon (sociologist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Maria Simon (sociologist)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

On 18 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Callimachus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Callimachus wrote more than 800 books, but almost none of them have survived? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Callimachus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Callimachus), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article L. D. Reynolds you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 08:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The article L. D. Reynolds you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:L. D. Reynolds for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 11:21, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The article L. D. Reynolds you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:L. D. Reynolds for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 17:41, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Modussiccandi,

You reviewed an article by me and rejected it in April - could you please view it again and make suggestions? I edited it right back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rotraut_Jampa_Wurst#cite_note-33

@CaitlinKEMM: thank you for reaching out. Having looked through the article at a glance, I can tell you that it is not yet ready for another review. Indeed, there are quite a lot of problems with it. Here are some of the things that have to be fixed: 1) make sure to have a source for every claim you make about the subject. The 'Biography' section is currently unsourced and the article will never go through if this isn't addressed. 2) Please remove all references the subject as 'Dr'. Academic and honorary titles are not to be used in article bodies. 3) Remove all external links from the text. 4) There is no need to cluster several references after a single sentence. What is wrong with using just one? It is unnecessary and impractical to have to go through so many sources. As I said, it's more important that the content is completely backed up with good sources. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 21:45, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback it is much appreciated.

Well done indeed for bringing Sir Roger to the front page. The buzz that comes with your first TFA is a wonderful experience. It may suffer a little vandalism, but many watchers are on hand to correct this. And, very occasionally, you get a comment that can actually improve the article. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 06:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@KJP1: thank you very much for thinking of me. Indeed, I was surprised to wake up to lots of changes to the article. Fortunately, there hasn't yet been any proper vandalism. Thanks again and happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The “Vergil/Virgil” change is regrettable. Knowing your preference, and given that our main article acknowledges both variants, it would have been better left unchanged. And the spelling now conflicts with the blurb. But not worth fighting over during the article’s day in the sun, methinks. You can always change it back when it is out of the spotlight! KJP1 (talk) 08:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@KJP1: yes, I am slightly bothered by that change, especially since we are normally tolerant with regards to acknowledged variants. I find it surprising that people with no apparent background in the field should feel so strongly that they can't resist the urge to change an accepted variant. Anyway, you are entirely right that this should be addressed, if at all, after today. Thank you for your sympathetic words. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 08:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I feel the spelling should be brought to the accepted FA status right away. Have no time or would do it myself. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. I have restored the old spelling. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Couldn't say it better! Thank you today for R. A. B. Mynors, "about the Latinist Roger Mynors who wrote the standard editions of the Latin poets Vergil and Catullus. Though he's mostly known for those books, he did interesting work on manuscripts and catalogued several library collections. What's more, he is unique for having been the senior chair of Latin at both Oxford and Cambridge."! - Next L. D. Reynolds? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

How kind of you, Gerda Arendt. I was hoping that having a TFA would bring with it a delightful picture from you. I seem to have been right! Yes, L. D. Reynolds will probably be coming to FAC. I'm currently waiting for a response from his college, whom I've asked for an image of him. Be that as it may, turning to something more important than Wikipedia: I sincerely hope nobody you know (or, indeed, you) suffered any harm in the horrible floods in NRW and Rheinland-Pfalz. I'm currently near Bonn and am glad to see that everyone I know is fine. Modussiccandi (talk) 07:48, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

A bit pressed for time: there's a thread Flood on my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Congrats 👏👏👏 JBchrch talk 10:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@JBchrch: thanks a lot. By the way, I was pleased to see Lohn Estate at DYK earlier this month. Well done. Modussiccandi (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to add my congratulations to the rest of the group for getting this article on the Front Page. Always an achievement worth noting! -- llywrch (talk) 15:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Llywrch: thanks a lot. It goes without saying that the article wouldn't have been promoted without your generous help. Have a great rest of your day, Modussiccandi (talk) 15:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Yesterday I had two interesting DYK (I think), and the day before was at a concert with Daniel Barenboim just playing piano, and afterwards he and the orchestra received last year's prize (pictured). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Well done on getting your article into the limelight, great stuff! Gog the Mild calmed my nerves when people started randomly editing my FAs, see User_talk:Gog_the_Mild/Archive_6#Advice_please! for what he said. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 19:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: thank you very much indeed. Gog's words of wisdom make for an interesting read. I must say I'm still a bit bothered by the experience of having random IP editors tinker with the article, but I shall follow Gog's advice. I really appreciate your congratulations since it was you who set me on the path to getting Mynors to FA by reviewing the article for GA status. Best and happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 20:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I see you are trying to contact Brasenose about photographs of L. D. Reynolds. It's a bit of a tricky time as the college has basically closed for the summer. I believe the college archivist, who would know what pictures we have, is currently on furlough. Which image were you thinking of? Legal permission would have to come from the Bursar, who should be contactable by email but who tends to be a bit nervous about letting go of control (though I did get him to release photos of myself and another fellow a while back). I asked the current Latin Tutor if knew of anything, and he didn't off the top of his head but said he would have a think about it. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 14:06, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathan A Jones: thanks so much for reaching out. The image I suspect to be in the college's possession is the cover photo of this obituary. I've now received a reply from the Deputy Archivist who confirmed that the college will be closed for the next three weeks. Is there a way of finding out whether the college owns this particular portrait (or indeed any image of Reynolds)? It would probably be wise to ascertain that the college would actually be able to help before contacting the bursar directly. Or should I just wait for the archive to return from their summer break? What would you say is the best course of action? Thank you, again, for chipping in. All the best, Modussiccandi (talk) 16:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought you meant that one. No idea whether we have copyright. The photographer is Oxford based (though they have now moved out to Kidlington) and still do our annual group photo, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's one of ours - certainly the Latin Tutor (who tends to know this sort of thing) didn't know about it. We don't often take individual photos of fellows (most commonly when we do a big revamp of the website), but times change, and that might possibly have been taken when he was vice-Principal. But I also wondered whether the British Academy might have arranged for it to be taken when he got his FBA?

For wht it's worth my advice is (1) that you won't resolve this swiftly given sumer closures; (2) your best bet to discover who has the copyight is your own enquiries via the archivist; (3) if we do own it and you want permisison then you should then - but only then - ask the Bursar for permission - don't bother him until it's completely clear what the situation is. Feel free to mention my name at that point if you wish, but not before. Meanwhile I'll let you know if the Latin Tutor comes up with any alternatives. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 17:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathan A Jones: thanks for this. I will do my best to follow your recommendations. I've had to liaise with the odd bursar in my time, so I'll be sure to avoid the usual pitfalls. Thank you for all your input! Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 18:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

On 14 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article L. D. Reynolds, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the classicist L. D. Reynolds wrote his first publication on the birds of the Caerphilly Basin? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/L. D. Reynolds. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, L. D. Reynolds), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

• Matroot (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Tom Faulkner (businessman) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Matroot (talk) 12:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Can you give me advice on how to get this piece published. Which bits are making it sound too much like an advert? I have tried to be completely factual!

Thanks Matt Matroot (talk) 12:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Matroot: hello and thank you for reaching out. The main problem of you draft is that is written in the style of a sales brochure. Examples of this include statements like "Faulkner’s work is known for its simplicity and lack of adornment", "Accessories include candlesticks, mirrors and screens", and "TF Ltd supplies furniture and accessories to both private clients and interior designers". Remember that the article is a biography and not a description of the company. The next big problem is your use of sources. Generally speaking, you need to try and back up the content of your draft with good quality sources such as newspaper articles and books. At this time, it is quite hard to verify any of the details you purport to be facts. For example, you say that "[h]e started making furniture from his home in 1993" but there is no footnote given. How should readers now where this statement comes from and whether it is accurate? Please read WP:V and WP:BLP for more information. I hope this answers some of your questions. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 12:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

On 21 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zollstock, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Zollstock, a district of Cologne, takes its name from a local tollhouse? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zollstock. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Zollstock), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure that Craven Fellowships are funded by benefactions from John Craven, 1st Baron Craven of Ryton. Currently only the Oxford versions seem to still exist, see [1] and [2], but there may have been fellowships at Cambridge back then.

I can take a look in the University Calendar to check his degrees if that would be helpful; will need to check a physical copy but can do that soon, probably Monday or Tuesday. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathan A Jones: thank you for keeping an eye on the Reynolds candidacy at FAC. I don't think it's necessary to check what the records say about his degrees: in my view the article need not say that he got a Bachelor of Arts since the main point (that he was educated at Cardiff and Cambridge) can be backed up by our source. Incidentally, the college haven't been in touch yet, so I presume they are still closed for the summer. This is no problem at all since the image can be added after the article is promoted to featured status. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

The college reopens on September 15th, though normal service will not be restored for a day or two. FWIW I checked in the calendar since I was in, and he is listed as "MA (BA Wales MA Camb.)" which makes sense (Cardiff BA awarded by the former University of Wales, Cambridge degree an MA as one would expect, Oxford MA by incorporation ad eundem gradum). Jonathan A Jones (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

It's be about two years since {{Reflist}} was updated, but now no parameters are required. When none are supplied, a single-column list will be generated if there are fewer than 10 references in the list. If there are have more than 10 references, the template will use columns of 30em wide if the device allows it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:52, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I wasn't entirely aware of this. Thank you for the reminder. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Modussiccandi. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Horatio Bland, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

...I've nominated Anthony Kohlmann at FAC, an article similar to Richards. I'm sure you have your hands full with Reynolds and other projects, but if you're interested in leaving any comments, they'd be welcome as always. Ergo Sum 17:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ergo Sum: No problem at all! I should be able to have a look at the FAC page this weekend. Reynolds is kind of lingering at the nominations page but I guess it won't be there for that much longer. I'm looking forward to reviewing your article. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 17:38, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		Congratulations! You have earned The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar for reviewing 54 drafts during the WikiProject Articles for creation July 2021 Backlog Drive. Thank you for your work to improve Wikipedia! On behalf of WikiProject Articles for Creation, Enterprisey (talk!) 00:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, Modussiccandi! The article you nominated, L. D. Reynolds, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello Modussiccandi, thank you for taking the time to review this proposed article.

With reference to the reasons given for declining the article I would like to make the following points, although given I am a relative novice to publishing articles on Wikipedia I understand my grasp of the references you have quoted may be limited.

1. As much of the information in the article was contained in the same source, The Grodynski Brigade (written by my father Andrzej and published nearly ten years ago without, to my knowledge, any challenges in the meantime), I did not think it necessary to provide repeated inline citations, but have included additional citations wherever there may be important details that could be contested, where these are available. Should I repeat citations to the same source throughout the article where appropriate?

2. Stanislaw, my grandfather, following WWI worked for the Polish Ministry of the Interior, so naturally much of his work was not 'public', but a cursory examination of his 'parallel role' as a 'Governor' (Starost) indicates that his appointments were strategically of high importance for Poland given their proximities to Russia (now Ukraine and Belarus) and Germany\Prussia (now north-west Poland). These appointments are all verifiable and there is evidence in newspapers of the day of his military status during WWII including his representation of Polish Forces at the Garibaldi Commemoration in Italy. The requirement to remain in the background with regard to his activities associated with the Ministry of the Interior extended to his role in support of the Polish Government in Exile, in London, following WWII.

3. With the substantial revisions to the first proposed article I attempted to change the wording into a more 'encyclopedic format' and remove any "Peacock Terms" but it seems I have been unsuccessful in this and would appreciate any advice or identification of specific words or expressions that should be changed in order to make this article acceptable for publication? --StanG 06:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

@Stanisław Grodyński: thank you for reaching out and for wanting to improve your draft article. With regard to inline citations, the following is true: ideally, you want to have a reference for everything you include in the article. In other word, every paragraph should have at least one inline citation which helps readers track down the information. Regarding your second point, I would just say that, if newspaper articles are available to verify information, track them down and include them in the article. If you can't find a reliable source for something, I would tend to not include the material in question. You could say, then, that all your writing should arise from the sources, not the other way around. Re. neutrality: the first problem is that the article refers to its subject as 'Stanisław'. To readers this signalises that the article is perhaps written from his perspective or that the author has a conflict of interest (which you do). A good start to a neutral perspective would be to switch to 'Grodyński' and to check whether everything is really written from a disinterested perspective. The following sentence illustrated well the kind of stuff you want to avoid: So, after many years of struggle and frequent changing of jobs, he finally succeeded in finding relatively enjoyable work for an appreciative company. Almost everything about this is non-neutral. My version of this sentence would be he found work at a company. I hope this helps. Don't hesitate to get in touch. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt and helpful response - I will endeavour to bring this article to an acceptable standard for publication! --StanG 08:37, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations and thank you for the work you have contributed to the project so far; long may it continue. Well done! 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ X 14:24, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapple X: Thank you very much for this. Best and happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with Draft:Alyson_Gorske. Have a great rest of your weekend. Wilton gorske (talk) 18:45, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wilton gorske: thank you very much for this! Best and happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 18:49, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Modussiccandi. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.