User talk:IgnatiusofLondon/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome!

Hi IgnatiusofLondon! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! --Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Rimini edits

I just wanted to leave a note to let you know that, while your extensive contributions to the Trolleybuses in Rimini article are very welcome (and impressively good quality for someone who identifies as a new editor), and have – within this month – made the article far longer (and better overall) than any of the other 15 articles about individual trolleybus systems in Italy, you appear to have a lot more time to work on this than I do (perhaps you are retired; I am not), and I have a long list of other WP articles I want to edit. I won't be able to keep working on that article every day, or even every third day. But, as I said, your work on this has been very welcome, and impressive for someone who says he is not a transport enthusiast. FYI, until this past week, the best "Trolleybuses in [city]" WP articles for Italy were those on Bologna and Modena (BTW, I realize you have no interest in working on those; your interest is in Rimini subjects), but the Rimini one is now better than either of those! But for certain other cities, those articles are extremely brief (e.g. Ancona), and now that I and you have greatly expanded and improved the Rimini article I am more interested in spending my very limited WP editing time improving some of those rather than continuing to work on the Rimini one. But I am not saying I'm stopping altogether. – SJ Morg (talk) 08:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

You can post your reply here, to keep the conversation in one place, as I'll temporarily watchlist the page. SJ Morg (talk) 11:00, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Dear @SJ Morg, thank you ever so much for your thoughtful and kind words. I think it has been a great and fruitful blessing that we converged on the Trolleybuses in Rimini article at the same time. I'm particularly grateful for your copyedits and corrections, not to mention the care of an editor with experienced insight from the transport world, and the offline sources you have contributed, which also expanded the Metromare article. It is of course only right that we edit Wikipedia as our circumstances, commitments, and pleasures permit -- but I suspect that, between both of our expansions, we have probably written as much as the universe of online sources will allow. For what it's worth, I have personally been very surprised that there has been that much to write about the trolleybuses and their history! The articles now, I believe, also provide greater depth than their Italian-language counterparts, which might prove an interesting project for me. I intend to keep both articles permanently on my watchlist, in the hope that a future editor with access to the printed works will 'complete the (hi)story'. More immediately, I think I will scour Google Search if there are any further citations to bring in about the Dr Fabbri section that I have largely ignored, and then move onto writing a history section for Federico Fellini International Airport. (I thought also to close the move discussion I started on which we initially conversed after at least a week has passed, in case any other editors would like to contribute, with the consensus neither to move nor split.) Wishing you happy editing, and every success for the other trolleybus articles! IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 17:28, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Wimbledon Land Rover school crash, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rimini Fiera has been accepted

Rimini Fiera, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Fiabilandia

Hello, IgnatiusofLondon. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fiabilandia, 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) 13:07, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Fiabilandia

Hello, IgnatiusofLondon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Fiabilandia".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (talk) 14:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

I saw you add Carla Ronci to List of people declared venerable by Pope John Paul II‎, and what an excellent article! You should definitely nominate it for Did You Know. Always love to see more people working on saints! — Moriwen (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Ooooh, what an excellent idea, the Vespa saint on Wikipedia's front page!! I will nominate. Thank you for your very kind encouragement (and taking the time to offer my first biscuit, wow!), dear Moriwen; it really means a lot! :)) IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 17:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Carla Ronci

Hello! Your submission of Carla Ronci at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Oltrepier (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

On a(nother) side note, I'd like to suggest you some of the local media you could look for more information on: try Il Resto del Carlino, Corriere Romagna and altarimini! Oltrepier (talk) 17:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks very much for your excellent work on Amintore Galli! JJLiu112 (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Inter language links

Hi if you’re using the standard skin for Wikipedia the way you create ILLs is:

1. Go to the “tools” menu top right and hit “edit interlanguage links.” 2. This brings up a dialogue box asking you for the language you’re connecting to (e.g. “itwiki) and the name of the article you’re connecting to (e.g. “Inno dei lavoratori”). 3. That’s it. Mccapra (talk) 18:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Mccapra: Thank you so much for taking the time to leave these instructions for me; I really appreciate it. I can't believe I missed that link; it looks so obvious now! And thank you for your article review. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 19:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Carla Ronci

On 11 January 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carla Ronci, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Carla Ronci, an Italian declared venerable by the Catholic Church, is remembered as the "Vespa saint"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carla Ronci. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Carla Ronci), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Schwede66 00:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pope Francis and LGBT topics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al Jazeera.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

My deepest thanks regarding Fiducia Supplicans

You have persistently been one of the best editors of Fiducia Supplicans, and have helped me make better edits and have made incredibly helpful fixes to my unneeded or erroneous statements. Looking over your profile, you are doing a fantastic job overall.

From a lover of all things Wikipedia, I would like to express my sincerest thanks for all of your good work and commitment to quality and Wikipedia standards.

You have also managed to point out flaws in edits, both of my own and others in a constructive and charitable way.

Your great work has not gone unnoticed. I very rarely go out of my way to leave a topic like this on someone's page, or any topic at all on someone's profile for that matter, but because of your exceptional work and commitment I felt that it deserved recognition. Ysys9 (talk) 15:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Ysys9: Thank you for your exceedingly kind and much-appreciated comments. As a new-ish editor who usually works on much less "heated" articles, it means a lot to hear that my contributions are of some value to the community! Your words really mean a lot; thank you. It is a great joy to collaborate with you, and you, equally, have creatively added a great deal of balance and perspective to the current article. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 22:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Use British English on San Marino articles

Hi there can I ask why you are tagging a large number of articles about geographic places in San Marino with the use British English tag? I don't see how WP:TIES would apply here? AusLondonder (talk) 16:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I had actually not come across MOS:TIES before; I am really, really grateful you've stopped by my talk page to share the link. Thank you. In all honesty, I didn't realise it was an issue:

• I had assumed there was not necessarily a preference between varieties of English, something which, on reflection, I think is supported by the guidelines. MOS:ENGVAR explicitly states: the English Wikipedia prefers no national variety over others. In my reading (and correct me if I'm wrong), MOS:TIES requires tied articles to use a specific variety, but is silent on articles that are not tied (which would include articles relating to San Marino).
• Nonetheless, I see now that the guidelines say: When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, maintain it in the absence of consensus to the contrary and use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety. This is a policy I have almost certainly unknowingly violated on several articles on San Marino. That being said:
  • I'm not sure which articles you have in mind, but most of my tags are probably from this mini-project, targeting stub-articles on Sammarinese curazie for WP:FEB24. I think these stubs had no established English variety (nor do I believe they use any words/spellings specific to an English variety). Having now read the guidelines, there was clearly no reason to add the tag to these stubs, but nor does MOS:ENGVAR suggest it is necessarily inappropriate.
  • That being said, as my userpage shows, most of my edits concern major revisions to articles in the local area, and I think MOS:ENGVAR permits an editor used to writing in a specific variety to tag stub-class articles they expand with that variety. Of course, my mini-project was not an article expansion, but that is to say that British English tags on other articles I have previously revised on San Marino may be justified (e.g. Funivia di San Marino, Torraccia Airfield). This clearly does not apply to the curazie mini-project, which I assumed flagged my tags for you.

I would be happy to go back and remove my tags. But I would suggest that this might not be a matter of priority for the vast majority of the articles affected by the mini-project, and, if you're happy, I can "get round to it" as and when I revisit these articles, which I do intend to expand as much as possible in the medium- to long-term. (Most of those articles are WP:PERMASTUBs that are officially recognised and therefore pass WP:NGEO, but have little realistic prospect of major expansion.) An editor recently warned me that I was capitalising Province in wikilinks on Italian articles against a consensus of which I was unaware, and that editor was similarly happy for me to fix my mistakes as and when I return to those articles.

Let me know what you think. Once again, thank you for stopping by and alerting me! IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your reply, sorry for my delay in getting back to you. My understanding is the ENGVAR tags should only be used on articles with ties to one variety of English: for example, an article on Toronto should use Canadian English while Las Vegas should use American English. The other time the tag should be used is when an article on a topic not related to any one country was created using one variety of English, as with Orange (colour) using British English. The San Marino stubs such as Cà Giannino are not using any specific variety of English and don't have ties to any one variety. That's why I don't think the tags are necessary or appropriate. It's not an enormous problem but I'd suggest not adding the tags in future unless there's a rationale for using them. AusLondonder (talk) 16:18, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion sorting

Hello, IgnatiusofLondon. You added a deletion sorting notice on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forlivese dialect, but you did not add the discussion to the pages you mentioned. To add a deletion to a sorting page, you need to add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARTICLE TITLE}} to each sorting page. I have added the link to Italy, Language, and Literature. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 03:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello!! Thank you for letting me know – I was under the impression that this was done automatically once the notice was added. I really appreciate the correction, and thank you for fixing my mistake! IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 13:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hi IgnatiusofLondon. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group for a trial period of three months. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. If you wish to retain the right after your three-month trial period has concluded, you may re-apply for this right permanently at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Game Over (2013 film)

I have reversed your "keep" closure at this discussion and relisted it. There was no consensus for a "keep" result at this discussion, as only one individual argued to keep and a later one asserted that there was nonetheless insufficient reference material available to justify an article. Please don't let this discourage you from helping out with closing AfDs, but do take care that there is in fact a consensus prior to doing so. Otherwise, relisting for more discussion may be the best call. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:36, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @Seraphimblade, thanks for letting me know. I thought there was sufficient consensus against a deletion to avoid relisting the article, but this is a helpful correction for the future. For similar reasoning, I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Frodsham, if that's a closure also to revisit. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 14:40, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Raffaello Baldini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Administrator changes

• Sdkb
• The Night Watch

• East718
• Isabelle Belato
• Mzajac
• Staecker
• Stan Shebs
• Sugarfish
• Tamzin

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

• The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

A citation barnstar for you

		The Citation Barnstar
		For good work during WP: FEB24 drive! Davidindia (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Davidindia, thank you for taking the time to recognise participants. This is very, very good and kind of you! I really enjoyed the drive, and signed up to the WikiProject. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 20:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

February 2024 WikiProject Unreferenced articles backlog drive – award

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to IgnatiusofLondon for collecting more than 200 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's FEB24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing 14,300 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Where is Kate?

Whether or not the article remains, I want to acknowledge the effort you, IgnatiusofLondon, put into building the above mentioned article from scratch. However, it's important to remember that Catherine's biography is meant to be a concise outline of her accomplishments, not a detailed record. Avoiding unnecessary expansion of the main article is crucial, which is why the article you created provides a platform to discuss conspiracy theories and rumors without cluttering the main page. I have nothing more to add at this point, but I hope we can continue collaborating in the future. Please feel free to reach out if you need any assistance. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 14:06, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

@IgnatiusofLondon Please understand that renaming pages related to Catherine's wedding and engagement ceremonies to "Kate Middleton" would not be appropriate. It could be seen as endorsing tabloid journalism rather than maintaining the factual and respectful tone expected on Wikipedia. It's important to uphold the integrity of the information presented on the platform. Thank you for your understanding. Regards MSincccc (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind and courteous reply. I particularly appreciate your recognition of the work that went into Where is Kate?. I'm sorry that my following comments might not appear to match your grace, but I hope you can trust that my intentions are good:

• You need to be really, really careful, because this comment, on a discussion in which I am not involved (I have not said anything about a page move), could be seen as canvassing. The proper course of action is to encourage any editors suggesting a page move to follow the instructions at WP:RM#CM, beginning a discussion on the appropriate talk page(s) and notifying involved editors. I suspect any move discussion will be speedily closed as not moved. We should appreciate that TheSpacebook is a new-ish editor, and may need reminding of Wikipedia's policies and processes, patiently and kindly, while they learn the ropes, like we all are still learning the ropes. The current discussion, by not following the established process, is unlikely to lead anywhere.
• I've mentioned in the AfD discussion that I think there are WP:OWN issues affecting Catherine, Princess of Wales. Some of this comes across evidently in your comments. The article is not meant to be a concise outline of her accomplishments, nor, in my view, is it meant to blanket-ban any discuss[ion of] conspiracy theories and rumours if they have received significant coverage in reliable sources, though I appreciate the latter question is being discussed by the community at the AfD discussion. Editors acting in good faith, myself included, believe Catherine, Princess of Wales has shortcomings in its coverage for an encyclopaedic article, and may run into WP:NPOV concerns. In that respect, what is an unnecessary expansion of the main article is not down to any individual editor to decide, and you have to build consensus. I appreciate that it's emotionally tricky when an article you extensively edited and helped to promote is suddenly in the news and everyone wants to edit it, but that is what Wikipedia is. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

@IgnatiusofLondon I believe all that is going on presently should receive a place on Wikipedia and that's the reason for me having supported the article's retention. Further, the main article should not include such material as Keivan would also tell you. Further I would like to collaborate with you on improving the article's quality in the coming days. Regards MSincccc (talk) 15:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@IgnatiusofLondon Well your suggestion to delete Where is Kate? might be viable but I can't get what you actually mean when you say that a few lines from the above mentioned article be incorporated into Catherine's main article. Her recent health issues as well as the Photograph controversy related details have been sufficiently covered in the main article. I would like to know what more you would like to include -the speculation, all those conspiracy theories or that sighting of Catherine with William at Windsor Farm Shop or with her mother in the front seat of a car. But you yourself know that once she has returned to public duties full time , the endless media coverage at present would become rather insignificant. I have addressed this issue on the third AfD page as well. I hope you have a great day ahead and looking forward to knowing from you. Regards MSincccc (talk) 07:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi IgnatiusofLondon :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Don't template the regulars. Why did you think I needed an introduction to BLPs or contentious topics? I dragged the article to AfD precisely out of caution. If you have some disagreement with my edits, say it — don't use a generic template. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 23:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Re:Piada dei morti

I just finished reading everything you wrote to me, do what you think is right, and thank you. JacktheBrown (talk) 20:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

However, if you're good at adding descriptions (and you're) you could also do this for "panzerotto" on the list of Italian foods and drinks page (paragraph: common pizzas). JacktheBrown (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Current Events Barnstar
		For keeping Where is Kate? reliably sourced and having a neutral tone. TheSpacebook (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to take a moment to acknowledge your incredible effort and dedication in the article Where is Kate?. Your hard work and commitment to keep it reliably sourced hasn’t gone unnoticed. To protect the integrity of the main Catherine, Princess of Wales article, creating the article was the right thing to do, and your decision to put the article up for AfD immediately was also the right thing to do. It demonstrates your commitment to upholding the highest standards of quality and accuracy. Despite the uncertainty that comes with such a process, you stood by your convictions, and for that, I commend you.

The fact that the article survived the AfD speaks volumes about the consensus of the significance of the topic. Please know that there is absolutely no reason for you to feel guilty. In fact, the survival of the article is a testament to its notability and the compelling arguments presented in its defence.

Your contributions enriched the article. You wrote it with a neutral tone, well sourced, kept it focused on the media coverage, and well clear from promoting the conspiracy theories.

Once again, thank you for your outstanding work. TheSpacebook (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Rightly so, To protect the integrity of the main Catherine, Princess of Wales article as @TheSpacebook puts it, is the reason why the article will sustain itself on Wikipedia if it does exist in the future. So that whenever there is extensive media coverage on the Princess, apart from all that has been confirmed by the Palace and reliable high quality sources like the BBC and ITV, the remaining information can be thrust into this article given the page is moved to an alternative title different from its present one. Looking forward to our future collaborations with each other. Regards MSincccc (talk) 07:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @TheSpacebook, thanks for your kind words, all of which equally apply to you. Unfortunately, this is not a barnstar I feel that I can accept. Thank you, likewise, for all your hard work in continuing the article's reliable sourcing and high standards; it has been a pleasure to collaborate with you. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 12:05, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@IgnatiusofLondon Well will you collaborate with me to help fix the article's prose, citation parameters and other necessary stuff so as to help improve its quality and assessment class? I would be willing to do so. Regards and keep contributing to Wikipedia because regardless of whether the article is relevant or not you must have invested a significant amount of time working on it. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Per the notice on my userpage, I do not intend to make any further edits in this topic area. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 14:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)