User talk:Yngvadottir/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Yngvadottir, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Berig (talk) 17:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Otto Lee edits

I was going to whack your recent edits to this page, but I thought I'd discuss it with you first. They seem out of place. It's just too much detail. There isn't likewise a mention in that article of the fact that he was elected to the Sunnyvale City Council twice, nor is there mention of the percentages that he won by in those elections. So why are we calling out the specifics of an election that's going to be forgotten by everyone a year or two from now in an encyclopedia biography of a relatively non-noteworthy figure? While the election was current, it was relevant. Had he won, it would obviously have been relevant. Since he lost, it seems less so.

As a comparison, I looked at the bio for Ron Gonzales, former mayor of both Sunnyvale and San Jose, and certainly more noteworthy than Lee. No mention of vote percentages anywhere. No mention of lost elections (although he may not have lost any).

So I'm inclined to delete that paragraph as largely irrelevant. Let me know your take on all of this. Jokeboy (talk) 19:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Follow-up. I think he had a one-paragraph page before the election came along. I think that someone who knows him created it around when he became mayor, figuring that "Mayor of Sunnyvale" reached a point of relevance. The edit wars came along later. I've tried to be hands-off, because I know him personally and supported his campaign. But people on the other side didn't do the same, unfortunately.

I like your edits. I still think the vote percentages is needless detail. But I suspect that if he grows in significance (as I expect he will), and if more material of relevance is added, that detail will shake itself out. So I'm fine with things as they stand. Thanks for the thoughtfulness, and feel free to delete my comments here when you've read them. - Jokeboy (talk) 19:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Charlie Crist

Thanks for the copy-edit. That page has been in a state of flux since the election, and it needed a good solid proofreading. Horologium (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Amounderness

Thank you for your message. Yes indeed the source templates can be baffling. There is a way though to make using them a lot easier -

• Click on my preferences at the top right of the page, then select the Editing tab. On that page, make sure that the Show edit toolbar is ticked. Then select the Gadgets tab, go to the Editing gadgets section, and the refTools box. Tick this box. It then "adds a cite" button to the editing toolbar for quick and easy addition of commonly used citation templates." So then when you are editing an article and need to add a source, above the editing box where you are editing appears the editing toolbar with a "cite" button on the right hand side. Click on that and some of the most comonly used templates (such as web, news and book) appear as tabs. Click on the one you want to use and it opens an easy to use "toolbox" (for want of a better expression). All you need do then is add the relevant info then click on add citation and it is inserted into the article for you in the correct format. Though I find that it often adds it to the top of the article, so I jsut copy and paste it into the correct place. Hope that helps! If you need any help at all just let me know. It is a lot easier than it looks!

With regard to Google Books - I've certainly seen the site here as I have added URL's for them to article sources a few times. With regard to the formatting - the book title comes first, then the article title and author. However, if you have the URL's for the Google Books links to each book, we can add them in so that other users can then see that, and hopefully making the source easier to understand! --♦Tangerines♦·Talk 15:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Keystone Cup

I take you are new to the world of Junior hockey? The reality is that Junior B hockey is not more or less notable than Tier II Junior A hockey. Tier II Junior A is usually in slightly bigger towns, or a town with a slightly higher hockey following that can sustain a higher player boarding budget. In Tier II Junior A there are fewer restrictions on importing players from other regions to play on the team, thus the need for a higher boarding budget. Junior B players have a limit to the amount of imports they can use, and the rest have to be locals -- therefore they can get away with running smaller budgets.

I am not saying that I am against using succession boxes on the Keystone Cup gold medalists' articles... but there have been 27 champions and only 7 actually have an applicable article (I see this as a problem). Also, you are running into WP:Other stuff exists by using the Royal Bank Cup/Centennial Cup succession box as grounds for a Keystone Cup succession box. I do believe the Keystone Cup is notable enough for succession boxes... but at the same time... so is the Don Johnson Cup -- which has a similar problem -- not enough articles...

Before posting succession boxes up... how about you and I continue talking about fixing this problem... because there is probably a way. The most obvious to me is to make an article for every Key Cup and DJ Cup champion... there are two points of established notability... Western or Atlantic Junior champions... as well as the fact that they are Junior teams, which is a feeder system to pro. Your thoughts? DMighton (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hurricane Hazel

Thanks a lot for copyediting Hurricane Hazel, I really appreciate it. I thought you also might be interested in looking at, and copyediting, Raymore Drive and Effects of Hurricane Hazel in Canada, which relate directly to the main article. While the aftermath section in the effects article is unfinished, I hope to expand it when I get so more time to do so. You may also be interested in checking out the Guild of Copy Editors, and/or article review areas such as Peer Review or Featured Article Candidates. Thanks again for the copyedit. Maxim_(talk) 22:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Name translation

To my knowledge there's no wikipedia guideline regarding "naming as in en.wikipedia". Why do you feel translating this name is the right thing to do? Eduard Fortunat is the proper spelling because in most cases the right thing to do (if there were one) would be to keep the original spelling. Just google for the variations and you'll see my point. I'm changing it back, sorry. --Fhmann (talk) 04:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the answer, but to be honest I don't like the idea. The amount of internet sources using the German spelling is overwhelmingly superior to anything that can be found in any other spelling. I'm against the translation of first names altogether; between German and English then, I find it's that more unnecessary since most German spellings are also found in English-speaking countries, e.g. Karl. There's virtually no mention of any other spelling anywhere. It will only lead to confusion imo. --Fhmann (talk) 10:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Archer's Hall (Latin)

I couldn't find any crib on the Interweb so assume you translated it yourself, assuming you haven't a parallel text. Your Latin is obviously much better than mine!

Do you think the translation is a little high-flown, or was that the intention? In particular, the word order is a bit unnatural to the modern eye, but I can see that might be deliberate.

So how about a minor reordering of words? Here goes and please feel free to disagree.

Behold the quiver-furnished Scots, of breasts of Mars (? born of Mars ? Nursed by Mars ? Or, of warlike breasts ? Dunno. )
To their enemies, however furious, they will bring (forth?) tremendous missiles
No people whatsoever who provoke Caledonia go unpunished
Oak and ardour imbues the archers through and through.

Just some suggestions. Your translation makes perfect sense, just the word order was a little hard for me to read naturally the first time.

Normally I would suggest moving it, anyway, to the part of WP:PNT for "needing additional cleanup" but since I think we are unlikely to find someone approaching dual native Latin/English (the Pope, perhaps?) I can't much see the point. I am happy to add a note there if it helps.

Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 16:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I was also reaching for the dictionary and was swearing I must have got some of the words wrong myself, so was glad that you translated it much as I would, only much better.

I agree, it is wise to keep it as close to the original as possible. I still think that simple changes of word order are the norm though. I know from translating other languages (primarily French but with my partner occasionally Hungarian), sometimes after all that work with the Shortbread Eating Primer or whatever one cannot remember the natural English word order!

The alternative of course would be to make it truly a "translation" in the classicist sense you mean, i.e. put it into an English poetical form:

Behold the arrow-furnish'd Scots, the  breasts of Mars they sup quite lots

Those they dislike and thus espy, will get a large one in the eye

All people from beyond their ken, Get scotched by darts once and again

True oak and passion, Is their full fashion

As if it just came off the ration

Well, maybe not quite like that...

Move it to Needing Cleanup if you want. You may want to see how I treated the quotations at e.g. Sambuca (musical instrument) or Timpani – again I am no musicologist so had a little to reword it to make sense in English e.g. the problem with the number of symphonia I never quite solved in the English. (It was in Enc. Brit 1911 where I supposed they assumed every reader would understand Latin.) I put the quotations directly inline, which seemed to please the primary editor of the article, and I think considering the prominence of the inscription it may deserve the same treatment here?

Still, it's good I think, providing it is not misleading.

I suppose it would be too obvious to think that Archer's Hall would themselves have an English version?

Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 23:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

PS. I only just recognised the significance of the arrrows etc. Archer's Hall, duh. SimonTrew (talk) 23:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I am glad you liked the parody. It would not surprise me, actually, if it finds its way to someone at Archer's Hall and gets repeated. I was particularly pleased with "Gets scotched by darts" to get around Caledonia. Not so happy with the last two lines. I was actually genuinely worried that you would think I was taking the piss (well of course I am but not of you), some people really will say like stop messing about this is a Serious Encylopaedia.

The way I look at it, PNT is the last refuge for articles that have had no chance of translation elsewhere. The translators generally have to work without sources and must go on their gut feeling. That means the translation cannot be perfect according to the original author (in this case rather dead) but has to be done as best as possible by its own lights. I have translated articles long and short, and without the context of the translation it can sometimes be very difficult, I think. One cannot simply say "Do you mean this or that", as I can with my Hungarian girlfriend when we team up to translate Hungarian to English, and make sure we choose the right sense — for words she does not know, she will consult a dictionary, but that often gives a very old-fashioned or specialised word that is better put in English by rephrasing. As Carroll said, take care of the sense and the sounds will take care of themselves.

So actually I probably could put it into a more realistic and serious English poetic form, but I agree that would veer too far from the literal. Our job is done. They have the English, and can make of it what they will. I was tempted, I must say, to attempt to put it in the Lallans of Burns, but I don't think I am up to that. I will tidy up the article if it has not been already, then it can go from PNT as done.

One slightly disenchantment with PNT is one rarely gets a thankyou from those who have submitted for translation, and never from the people who take care of PNT itself. A simple thanks dropped in a box when it is taken off the list would count a lot. Not a barnstar (whatever they are) or anything, but just even an automated "this has now been listed as complete. Thank you" would be enough. SimonTrew (talk) 20:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Magic, Inc. (organization)

I have nominated Magic, Inc. (organization), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic, Inc. (organization). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Orange Mike | Talk 05:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Karl Heinz Klee

Thank you. Some of the changes I should have made myself, like the bolding of the first mention. Hopefully, we'll find someone with Legal experience in Austria or German...Naraht (talk) 15:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

George Frideric Handel

Hello Yngvadottir, I was suprised the other day to see all the changes you made to G.F. Handel, thanks a lot. I like your alias too: I suppose you have an Islandic background. I still dont like the later years and legacy section in the Handel article. Hopefully you will improve my english when I gathered enough courage to go on. Taksen (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Did You Know problem

Hello! Your submission of Viking Society for Northern Research at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Note: I always leave approvals to others. Art LaPella (talk) 05:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion and later rewriting my invitation

Looks like you already noticed, an alternate account deleted my poorly worded invitation on your talk page. Some editors disagreed about these deletions.[1] and also went to ANI about it.

I actually appreciate this deletion because I completely rewrote the template.

Thank you for your comments on that page! Ikip 04:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Biographies of Living persons solution?: Projectification

As someone who commented on the BLP workshop I created, please review this proposal to see if it is something that the community would support.

Harsh constructive criticism is very welcome!

Better to figure out the potential objections now. I am looking to remedy any potential objections by the community.

Thanks. Okip (formerly Ikip) 03:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Höfðaletur

Hi Yngvadottir. Great work on this article! Thanks for your contribution. Favonian (talk) 23:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

A couple of notes

Færeyinga saga is in more than one part in Flateyjarbók, that's presumably why it's listed twice. Also, every ethnic Icelander is descended from Egill Skallagrímsson. In fact, it's enough to go back to the 16th century - every Icelander is descended from Bishop Jón Arason. There are probably even more recent common ancestors. Haukur (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I'm never sure where to reply, so this time I'm responding here, hope that's ok. I noted that several of the things in Flateyjarbók are broken up, in fact interlaced, but I was working from the contents to the Guðbrandur Vigfússon/Unger edition on Google Books and there are errors in that - at least one page listing is wrong and has been corrected in the copy, and Grœnlendinga saga is called Grœnlendinga þáttr. So I can't be sure this isn't also an error, or 2 different versions: Færeyinga saga is listed in 3 page ranges in volume 1 and then 2 page ranges in volume 2. That seems a bit of a wide spread and I looked in vain for someone else who had actually listed the complete contents (I don't have Ashman Rowe's book and it isn't viewable on Google Books) so I thought I'd better note the anomaly. On Egill Skallagrímsson, lol, ok . . . the thing is the source makes a to-do about Eiríkr's wife being descended from him. She was asked to appear in national dress at one of her husband's visiting lectures because they wanted to see the redoubtable warrior-descended woman, or something to that effect. I would have been able to tone down whimsy like that in the article if I could have seen more than the tiniest snippets of Stefán Einarsson's bio, but I felt that within reason I should reflect the emphasis in the sources I had . . . and there are now 2 lengthy treatments of the Victorian enthusiasm for "Viking" stuff. My original intent was to rewrite Guðbrandur's article so it is no longer such a museum piece . . . that's gone on the back burner as I've realized how many other articles are (were) simply missing, such as Eiríkr's, or are in even worse shape, but great scholars of the past damn well should have articles. By the way speaking of inaccuracies, if I have time this morning I will rewrite dís. It's terribly inaccurate as well as disorganized, but I don't want to throw out anything so it will take quite a while to move it all around. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Good times! It's great to finally have an article on Eiríkur Magnússon, I'd been missing one for a long time. You're doing good work on all this stuff. Haukur (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I never had an opportunity to thank you. I appreciate your comments. You just don't know how much these comments from complete strangers helps me :) To say the past week has been a turbulent time for me is a definite understatement. If there is anything at all I can do for you, message me or email me. I have four years of experience here, and I know how brutal things can sometimes be for editors with few connections.

Congratulations on all of your DYKs. Okip ^{BLP Contest} 02:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank You Number 2

Hello! I would just like to say thank you too for your work editing the page i have built up from scratch over the last year or two on Bank Hall. I would like it to reach a GA status and possibly be a featured article one day! What would you rate the article as now? I am an expert on Bank Hall and know alot of history about it from research as you have probably gathered! Have you ever visited bank hall? If not then its well worth a visit! Many thanks again! Bankhallbretherton (talk) 20:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

TWA Flight 800

Thanks for your copyedits to this article. Are you using tools or just your knowledge of English and/or WP:MOS? Lipsticked Pig (talk) 07:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

John Murphy (techncial analyst)

thanks for the kind merge suggestion, i went ahead and moved it, that's what i get for following misspelled red links. hope you don't find my comment at RfC/BLP cynical, rather Sisyphus is happy. Pohick2 (talk) 21:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Danny Mangold

The sources are more about Metro All Stars than Danny. Why not just move it to Metro All Stars? Having an article on him but not the band is like putting the cart before the horse. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:43, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

That occurred to me too, but I don't know squat about rock music and so many newspapers are behind paywalls and search-inaccessible now, that I'm not sure we're getting a good idea of what's been published about either. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I moved it to be about the band after finding a source in Billboard. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Stonefunkers

Thanks for helping out with the Stonefunkers page! VsanoJ (talk) 00:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism on WTMJ page

You seem like a stand-up, educated member with a lot of positive contributions to Wikipedia, so in the interest of assuming good faith, I'm going to ask why your account so flagrantly vandalized the WTMJ_(AM) page. Is it possible an unauthorized entity gained access to your account? Needless to say, I have reverted the vandalism. --Nonstopdrivel (talk) 22:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments! I've responded on your page; I believe you've got who did what tangled up.Yngvadottir (talk) 23:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's why I asked -- because I knew there was certainly a decent possibility that I was confused. I don't have a ton of experience interpreting revision histories. Thank you for clarifying this issue. --Nonstopdrivel (talk) 03:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK: Earthquakes in Germany

Hi. I've nominated Earthquakes in Germany, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. PFHLai (talk) 14:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC) BTW, if you have them handy, please add footnotes and refs to the "Geology" section. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 14:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, both of you, Mandsford & Yngvadottir, for your [[Wikipedia|collaborative writing of an encyclopedia article]] on earthquakes in Germany. The article is not FA-quality yet, but it has a very good start and most certainly qualifies for DYK, a section on Wikipedia's MainPage to showcase new additions to the encyclopedia. Please feel free to add more stuffs such as the 1951 Euskirchen quake to the page. I could see the article grow into a GA in the near future. (It has ITN potential, too, but for the sake of the people who live in Germany, I hope it never will get there.) Keep up the good work! Happy editing. --PFHLai (talk) 17:19, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of New Danube

Hello! Your submission of New Danube at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Todor→Bozhinov 19:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Singasteinn

Thanks for your fantastic contributions to the article! Verkhovensky (talk) 00:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk:House of Lichtenberg

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Talk:House of Lichtenberg.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

De728631 (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Hæ Yngvadottir. If we learned anything from this mess it is a brief glimpse into the confusing politics and names of all the wee states in the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation ;) De728631 (talk) 20:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Helping hand

Hello Yngvadottir, I see that you're doing some good work on subjects that I also work on, and it's always good to see more capable hands around. If I can help out or just copy edit, please let me know! :bloodofox: (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I appears

(according to my talk page) that we are going to loose the image of Einar Hjörleifsson Kvaran that I just added over a copyright issue. I have not had luck finding a free one, perhaps you can do better? Carptrash (talk) 14:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

In the USA, whic is, I think were wikipedia is located, any image, book, sculpture, etc. created before 1923 is copyright free. My image posted was from 1930, but I have no idea who the artist is/was. Gotta go/Carptrash (talk) 19:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Query re Ninth Avenue derailment

Hi, I've been reviewing the above article's DYK nomination, and there is one minor change I would like to see to the article. The last sentence says:

"However, Kelly should have seen that the signal indicated the switch was set for Sixth Avenue; he was driving recklessly fast and went into hiding after the accident."

Could it be made clear that this is the opinion of some source or inquiry, and not that of Wikipedia? for example:

xxxx said that Kelly should have seen that the signal indicated the switch was set for Sixth Avenue and that he was driving recklessly fast. He went into hiding after the accident.

Thanks, and sorry for being so nit-picky Quasihuman (talk) 20:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, if another, more experienced editor passed it as being ok for DYK, I think its fine. By the way, its a very interesting article, and a great hook. Quasihuman (talk) 10:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Anglo-Saxon turriform churches

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Anglo-Saxon turriform churches, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.thepaleochorasite.com/wiki/index.php?title=Anglo-Saxon_turriform_churches&action=edit&redlink=1. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

More on language

I would have sent the translation, but I figured you'd have more fun finding it on your own. --- OtherDave (talk) 11:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Pumpie's "translations"

Pumpie's editing is troublesome, and he doesn't respond to comments on his editing at all. Just check his contributions in Talk namespace and in User talk namespace. As I've tried to make clear to him on his talk page, his English is horrible (just look at the grammatical errors, and the incorrect use of words like "rarely", "nearly" and "rely"), and he clearly doesn't understand French. I have no idea what's his native language, if it's English there's something very wrong with the school system where he lives. He makes mistakes that noone with the tiniest understanding of French would make, and just omits crucial words from sentences (apparently because he doesn't understand them). And the silliest typos, like Amine instead of Amiens (see his recent Gare de Serqueux article). I don't read Greek, so I can't judge his skills there, but according to User:Cplakidas, it's rubbish as well. I don't think it would be a big loss if he would stop editing. He only creates lousy articles about minor interest subjects, e.g. minor French train stations, tiny villages in Greece, and rather obscure Greek films. I suppose a RfC is a good idea. Markussep ^Talk 08:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I added the navigation box to the Epinay article, and moved it to Épinay-sur-Seine (Paris RER), which seems to be the naming standard for RER stations. Markussep ^Talk 09:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello! As I wrote to Markus too, there is also the question of the RfC's "desired outcome". Obviously what we'd like him to do is either start contributing "normally" or, failing that, stop creating new articles. But is not the latter tantamount to asking for a ban? Constantine ✍ 15:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

All right, I largely agree with you here, except, pulling his auto-patrol is another form of sanction, and it will not prevent him from creating work for others. I feel that if we don't want this RfC to go the way of the last one, and in order to have Pumpie respond meaningfully, there should be a degree of compulsion: i.e. that he agrees to respond to messages, appropriately tag and copyedit the pages himself, and in general change his editing behaviour drastically, with the clear proviso that failing that, he will be subject to sanctions. I also feel that he should state clearly what languages he speaks and in what degree. If he states that he can't actually read Greek or French, then it is obvious that he should not get involved with attempting translations at all. Constantine ✍ 17:33, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with your changes, I suppose as the RfC progresses we will see what can be done if Pumpie carries on as usual. I am waiting for Markus' response, and then I'll place the RfC (although I may be absent from a PC for the next week or so)... Constantine ✍ 20:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

The RfC has been posted. Constantine ✍ 10:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Coca Cola Secret Recipe

Hi,

You say my comment about the theory showing that the secret recipe does not exists is speculative. Well, why don't you say the same about the contrary theory. As it is mentionned in the article : "the company presents the formula as a closely held trade secret known only to a few employees, mostly executives." There are no sources for this but it is in the encyclopedia. I say then that this article is a part of Coca Cola brand strategy and it is not objective. FYI I don't work in any company of the beverage market. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.32.30.68 (talk) 07:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Hemings þáttr Áslákssonar

Shooting an apple off one's child's head - interesting article, although the references are a bit odd. My copy of the Orkneyinga Saga is not very well indexed but I can't find the incident about Hemingr Áslákson. Any clues? Ben MacDui 10:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Shooting an apple off one's child's head

Hello! Your submission of Shooting an apple off one's child's head at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Hotspur

I don't know if you noticed but this is in one of the queues now (I had a bit of a jog around with it). – B.hotep •talk• 15:22, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to thank you

for your work on Einar Hjörleifsson Kvaran, an article that I started with my father while trying to convince him that wikipedia was a good thing. Eventually I did. But here is the real reason that I am writing you. I have some Icelandic (it came from a friend of mine) that I would like translated and my father (my usual translator) no longer has the eyesight for it. If I email you a work of art, a drawing, and a scan of the text hand written on the back would you consider trying a translation? If you wish we can move this discussion over to my email address, eeklon at yahoo dot com In any case thanks for your good work and for your consideration. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 23:40, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. A scholar? In a place that might want some books in Icelandic? My father turns 90 in November and some time in the next decade his small Icelandic library will become available. In the meantime I will try the editor that you suggest. Carptrash (talk) 23:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Gioia del Colle

I've tried to simplify something here and there and to better translate some expressions; if you can take a last look to make sure it's now written in correct English I'd be grateful. Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 16:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

The Brass Rail (Hoboken, New Jersey)

Wow, sometimes you never notice how poor a speller you are until someone like this comes along.. ha thank you for fixing the article - Theornamentalist (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tony Clunn

Hello, your nomination of Tony Clunn at DYK was reviewed and comments provided. --NortyNort (Holla) 03:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

RfA Pumpie

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Pumpie and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Markussep ^Talk 14:07, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your statement. After being away for a month I was certainly not pleased to see that he continued creating rubbish articles even though I explicitly urged him to clean up his previous creations first. I see no other way to stop him, and I've given up hope that he'll take editing advice from us or a mentor. From the arbitrators' comments I get the impression that a simple block request (like at WP:ANI) might also work. Markussep ^Talk 07:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Senate of Berlin

Thanks for your contribution to the article on the Senate of Berlin. I have to admit that I got a bit frustrated when it was proposed for deletion two minutes after I created it. But it seems now that there is hope that it will survive. --11011 (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Gare de X moves

Hi, I'm not sure whether the discussion at WP:TRAINS is finished or not, but the outcome seems to be either "X railway station" or "X Railway Station". I'll try to push the discussion towards a conclusion ;-) Markussep ^Talk 08:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Jelling stones and your new article, Jelling stone ship

Hi, should these be merged? It looks to me like maybe one is talking about part of the other, but I don't know enough to say that for certain. LadyofShalott 01:45, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I had just added the ship article to the See also at Jelling stones when I was informed of your message. The latter article really is just about the stones; it says nothing about the successive stages of construction of the Jelling complex or the history of the church. And we have independent articles on other stone ships. So although someone may at some future point wish to make an overall article about the Jelling royal monuments, it seemed better to me to fit it in with the way things have been started and make a separate article. Thanks for asking and for adding the category. I'm fitting the creation of this one around Yule activities and it will be built in fits and starts. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I happened upon your article while doing a little new page patrolling, and from there looked at Thyra and Jelling stones. It's interesting stuff, and I don't know much about it; so thanks for your work! LadyofShalott 02:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for starting that article, Yngvadottir. :) :bloodofox: (talk) 19:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Thanks for the good idea :-) I wanted to do at least one heathen article for Yule. I've asked Berig whether he can find us a pic, but he doesn't seem to be active any more - any ideas? I've ransacked Commons and the closest I find is the pic of the south mound from behind the runestones that is being used as main image on Jelling stones. I'll put that on this article also for the moment, but it's far from ideal. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Is there one on Flikr either with an appropriate license already or for which you could convince the photographer to give an appropriate license? LadyofShalott 20:09, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I have some shots of the National Museum's reconstruction of the site - it's basically just a wall-mounted 3D map of the location that includes where the ship apparently was. I am wondering if it's copyrighted or if it is fair game to upload to Wikipedia. Otherwise I have not yet made it out to Jelling (although since I learned that there was once a massive stone ship there, it has gone way up on my priority list!). :bloodofox: (talk) 20:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I doubt there is on Flickr, since it's been largely removed. As to the legality of using the shot of the museum's diagram, I wonder who one would ask? I am very far from knowing the law on such. Although I can adduce one parallel: I migrated this pic that someone took of a scale model in a visitors' centre to Commons from de.wikipedia; no one seems to have questioned the use of that photo, and like yours it is derived from an exhibit. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I brought up the idea of uploading the image of the diagram to a friend who is up on these things, and he told me that it is likely a bad idea. The problem is, of course, that someone may hold copyright to the work. Still, surely it would be OK to produce an original graphic based off of the diagram and upload it into the public domain? Whatever the case, I have the photos and am willing to send them to whomever. If anyone is interested, just send me an e-mail. :) :bloodofox: (talk) 05:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Es leuchten die Sterne

Actually I agree with you. But too often when we opine a "re-write and keep", it never gets done and editors looking at a poor version pile on with their deletes... and the article gets deleted. So I have begun working on a fresh version in a sandbox, and I figure that if I get User:MichaelQSchmidt/The Stars Shine (film) finished in time, I can do a cut-n-paste of my new version over the old. Check it out.. and feel free to assist. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:05, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Now I'm thinking... as my article is quite different from the one that was nominated, perhaps I should simply create it as a new article and suggest a redirect from old to new title. At least this way I can reward my work with a DYK. :) Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

LOL I was intending to do exactly the same thing, but without the sandbox step. Getting a DYK out of it will be a bit hard since the infobox won't count towards the 5x expansion, but if you can find good enough sources, I'd say be bold and go for it. IMO that's the best way to demonstrate that something is notable but was written up completely wrong - especially when the sources are all or mostly in languages other than English. A xenophobic element or simply an inability to judge comes into play in these cases. My search before I posted to the AfD had only reached the stage of finding mentions in reference works, I see I have another tempest arising over a different article, and I'm not going to have much time today without interruptions, so I encourage you to go ahead and do it. I'll render what aid I can. But I think it should be an overwriting of the existing article, since the existing one is at the right title. Hoping between us we can find enough material for a 5x expansion . . . I have the impression the plot was a twisty turny one about a country girl coming to the big city? And participation in it was used against some of the actors? Go for it! Yngvadottir (talk) 15:49, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I did exactly that with Kloster Berge school, which was a deplorable piece of misunderstanding at Klosterbergen and for which I did get a DYK. But the original for that was shorter than this one. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

And toward the film itself being propaganda... it is, but not as a blatant anti-semetic animation. In the late 1930s the Reich was trying to convince the world how wonderful it was as a society... all light and happiness... while darker things were being planned. The film was one of many that acted to pretend everything was perfect in the Reich with the film acting to put a good "spin" on what later could not be "spun". And sadly, most of those involved... cast, crew, writers, etc... were simply trying to create an entertaining musical. And for balance, there will need to be a section addressing this in context. Feel free to assist if you have the time. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

• Its live: The Stars Shine (film). Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:04, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

• Maybe you might consider revisiting the AFD discussion and change from "keep and re-write" to "delete and redirect"? I think my mew article is a decent beginning, and by all means you are welcome to furthe improve the new one. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!

Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 13:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

AfD

I responded to the Afd at my talk page. I love your user boxes, so I am taking and modifying the "some words" boxes for my user page. Thank you in advance for letting me do that. Bearian (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

AFD: Northvegr Foundation

Hello Yngvadottir, I thought you might be interested in my AFD nomination of Northvegr Foundation; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northvegr Foundation. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the headsup, but I'd actually seen it. I don't think I have anything useful to say, though. I avoid that site because I have it on good authority that they have silently changed the wording of texts to suit their opinions and because I am aware of accusations of bad dealings against them that led to a boycott that I still honor. There is a problem with almost anything pagan, especially heathen, in finding acceptable reliable sources; so I do sympathize with their supporters trying to find statements in places acceptable to Wikipedia - not other heathen websites or print publications - to attest to their notability. But I don't know of any, partly because I avoid the site. Further, I have done work for a rival text site, so anything I say at an AfD about the usefulness of their site could justifiably be seen as tainted by conflict of interest. And further, I seem to have made myself unpopular at the John Lindow AfD - it was just closed as keep, to my great surprise (please, if you know of anything else to add to the article, do so - very little was found either by me or by those who wanted it kept) and I got accused of having a "specialist ax to grind." So maybe my expertise would be a detriment at this other AfD '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:07, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Your vote is welcome, either way. It seems that you are knowledgeable about the site, and no one has thus far commented. And I wouldn't sweat making yourself unpopular on AfD; I think most such discussions on Wikipedia are really "water under the bridge" in the face of quality work, and you're certainly doing plenty of the latter. That helps us all, of course, and that is really what matters here. Plus, you're hardly the first to vote for the deletion of something—don't be tempted to take it personally. :)

I would like to flesh out the Lindow article more, but I can't find much else to add yet either. The only reason I was able to flesh out the Davidson article to the extent of which I have is because of her obituary. As a side note, although I've been reading her works over the last decade, and although she is easily one of the most visible and public-focused figures of the past 50 years in Germanic philology, only within the last month have I seen a photograph of her. I guess that just goes to show how dusty these areas really are! :bloodofox: (talk) 21:34, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the words of appreciation - that dig really hurt, especially as I don't actually understand what was meant. Through one of those bizarre twists of collaborative editing, as fall-out from the Lindow AfD we now have articles on Ursula Dronke, Margaret Clunies Ross, and Gro Steinsland. As you know, I hadn't dared start any such articles for lack of confidence I could defend them should they be challenged - but now I have to make them worth keeping! I did emergency improvement on all 3 and chose Steinsland to really work up first, because her article will involve foreign-language sources that I'm relatively unusual in being able to read - I'd used her as an example of the influential scholars in the field outside the English-speaking countries. She turns out to currently head a think tank and to have written several Op Eds, as well as having her picture and interviews all over the press, which I'd rather expected in the context of a small country with a vivid interest in its cultural history and its scholars. Very different from Dronke, who is guarded by the traditional British privacy - and from 90% of American academics. (In fact when I worked at state institutions I was specifically warned against talking to the press.) I may speak at the Northvegr AfD, but I'm still not sure what I can usefully say. I do think our notability guidelines need to be rethought for paganism if we have any claim to be working against institutional bias. But I also don't think Northvegr meets any useful standard of notability. Even their scandals are internal heathen matters, no major lawsuits or anything else that would leave a trail. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Sorry for the delay in the response here, I am just now seeing it. Every now and then I'll write an article on the sly as an exercise and then hop on to insert the content, iron it out, and then hop off, you see. I am glad to see that we have an article for these three scholars, and I was also unaware how public a figure Gro Steinsland is. I think you're right in your observation about the visibility of academics, and I think it's quite unfortunate that more of them don't try to reach out and communicate with the public rather than simply publish to one another. Exactly what do they expect to happen to their field, with new blood so rarely feeding into it? And they even have an ever-expanding audience; neopagans of various stripes clamoring for any decent publication on the subject that they can find. Well, at least we can make a difference by having some respectable articles here. And thank you for your input and work at the AfD. I'm sure we've been giving the site a large portion (if not the majority) of the traffic it receives, troubling considering that the site is not only very dubious, as you point out, but also otherwise useless at this point. :bloodofox: (talk) 06:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Seaford Head Community College

Thanks for cleaning that up. I hadn't noticed that the ages in the Infobox were all messed up. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Names of God

No. I myself am Pagan, I know our beliefs. Also, it is not my interpretation. Zeus, Woden, Amun, Odin, Thor, etc. were the King Gods of the Gods, thus they were Names of God. You can't dispute someone who themselves is a Pagan. I revert the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eclectic Angel (talk • contribs) 02:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Just because I need a break from homework, I'm going to jump in here and disagree with Eclectic Angel, and since I am a Pagan myself, I most certainly can dispute with you.

Eclectic Angel, you're assuming that these Kings of Their respective pantheons are therefore the same being, but you haven't established that (and can't. Nor can I establish the contrary, FWIW). I reject completely the notion that Zeus=Woden=Amon=Odhinn=Thor (particularly that last, who is Himself not a King of anything): there's nothing in the contemporary mythologies that indicates this. Odhinn is never called "Zeus" or "Amon" in any of the Eddas, for example, nor do Classical or Celtic deities make "cameo" appearances. The Romans were somewhat of syncretists, but their conclusions were based on their own opinions, not on the original tales of these deities.

If you want to believe they're all the same, that's fine, but it is most decidedly your belief (not that you're alone in it, by any means): the original myths do not support this. Given the amount of conflict between some of these deities, I'd say what evidence there is pretty much speaks against this all-is-one outlook. The jump you make from "Kings of the Gods" to "Names of God" is unsupported.

Not trying to be offensive (although I'm probably managing: it's late and I'm very very tired), just firm and definite. "Names of God" refers to names of a specific deity, not of all deities, or even all senior, top-dog deities.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 05:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Septegram. Eclectic Angel, neither you nor I can speak for all pagans. There are many disagreements, and one could start with the notion of a "king of the gods." But the fact remains that while you are free to roll everybody up into one big bundle of Oneness, you can't impose that on encyclopedia pages that are about individual deities, any more than a Brahmanist can maintain that you and I are the same person. As I said to you before, anyone who holds that "all are one" is able to draw the conclusion from the category "deity" - there's no need of forcing everyone else to look at it that way. Put another way, I'm not telling you what kind of pagan you should be - quit trying to tell every reader of this encyclopedia how they should view gods. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers, you seem to have a clear grasp of our notability, verifiability, copyright, and biography of living persons policies; based on a review of several of your article creations and a review of your user talk page. I'd come across you because of your recent improvements to Hallsteinn Sigurðsson‎.

Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! --j⚛e decker^{talk to me} 06:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the hand

copyediting HuejotzingoThelmadatter (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Halldór Guðmundsson

Thank you for your contributions to Halldór Guðmundsson. Please consider creating an article on Halldór Guðmundsson in the Icelandic Wikipedia at http://is.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halld%C3%B3r_Gu%C3%B0mundsson as well. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 19:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 February newsletter

So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Heinrich-Heine-Straße (Berlin U-Bahn)

There's a query on the DYK nom for this. Johnbod (talk) 00:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Personal section for Jacob L Mey III

Please do not post any personal information without prior permission from the family - thank you for understanding —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.236.40.188 (talk) 15:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I've responded on your talkpage and left a note on the Jacob L. Mey talkpage. --Yngvadottir (talk) 18:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

A question for Yngvadottir

Yngvadottir,

Hail. Is there a way to contact you via e-mail? I have some questions, and possibly some information to provide in turn, regarding an article that you worked on here, but I would rather discuss it in private. 216.69.219.3 (talk) 20:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, see "e-mail this user" in the sidebar. --Yngvadottir (talk) 22:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I would have done that first instead of posting here, but the usual link that I recall from a few years ago is not present. Perhaps only available to those with registered accounts? I fear my memory of Wiki rules is a bit rusty. 216.69.219.3 (talk) 22:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah yes, you're right; I verified it by logging out. In that case I'm afraid you will have to either beat around the bush or follow up on your guess as to who I am (assuming you have one, it may well be right - small world) with an online search. Unless you recall the password to your former account. --Yngvadottir (talk) 22:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Northvegr.org

Hello again Yngvadottir. Since the Northvegr article was recently deleted as non-notable and you participated in the discussion, you may be interested in my post here: MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#northvegr.org. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey

The article on Luukanen (that you improved a bit) is a joke. It's not worth improving an article that presents her like a nutcase. (That's what people say about the article.) It's full of wrong information: She was appointed Chief Medical Officer of Lapland in 1975 (not a provincial job, nor are there Provinces in Finland) and she has never "attributed her interest in UFOs to injuries sustained in a 1986 car accident" (of course) or claimed that "they practice mind control on the world population using cell phones". She says that mind control *could* be done with cell phones but that's entirely different when you say "could be done". Most of the things she talks about are changed or twisted to make her look like a nutcase. Deliberately, it seems. Thanks for listening. :) BackInDisguise (talk) 04:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Responding on your talkpage.--Yngvadottir (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Elves

Hello again Yngvadottir. You may be interested in the discussion going on at Talk:Elf_(Middle-earth)#Elves_and_user:Davemon.27s_mysterious_.22Northern_European_mythologies.22 and, subsequently, spreading to Talk:Elf#Coatrack. Recently I've started rewriting a lot of articles relating to elves and intend to rewrite the "elf" article sometime soon. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter

We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 01:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Heirat

Thanks for the language lesson. Heirat = Hochzeit = Eheschließung is not ambiguous, meaning the formal beginning of Ehe, a lifelong relationship (at least meant to be). "Nach der Ehe" would be after a divorce or death of a spouse, but "nach der Heirat" deals with the newly-weds. Now is there an English word for Ehe? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not surprised that it's unambiguous in modern usage; German resists ambiguity very hard! Sadly, in English "marriage" can mean either the ceremony or the legal relationship, although it usually refers to the latter. Using "wedding" is very specific to the 20 minutes or the one day and would imply (to me at least) that he only thought about getting and furnishing the flat after the reception was over. Maybe my first guess was wrong and English tends to prefer "marriage" where German speakers would use one of the words for the ceremony because of the feeling that wedding is just that brief time and what's important is that it starts the life together? But I don't know, nor am I an expert on German usage over the ages; I thought I had seen Heirat used for the life together but all I can find right now is the fact it's cognate with A-S hīrēd, a family or household - undoubtedly Jacob Grimm wrote about it, but I may still be totally wrong :-) . . . By the way, I see you added the photograph of Richard Riemerschmid to the article. I thought about doing so, but it's flagged on Commons as not out of copyright under US law, so I thought better not in the English-language Wikipedia. Now that it's there I'm happy for it to stay until Commons decides one way or another about images in that class - they say they're having a centralized discussion. But just so you know, it may get yanked for that reason. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:32, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, helps. Did you see the "fireworks" above? I added the pic to DYK Germany, looks nice! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Still open question: what is "Ehe" in English if not marriage? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is "marriage" - that's it's primary meaning. It's just sometimes used for getting married, as well. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

For helping

		The DYK Medal
		Came to find William Hunt Painter and the silly comments that people were putting on the errors I made .... to find out that someone had fixed it. Thanks that what DYK is meant to be about Victuallers (talk) 22:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter

Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Hurricanehink (submissions) and Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of John Stanley Coombe Beard

Hello! Your submission of John Stanley Coombe Beard at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 09:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I just saw. Reviewing a nomination is on my list of tasks for today. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:46, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for taking the time to copy edit the Joshua James (Life-Saver) article. After working on an article for such a long period of time, I've just stop seeing the mistakes.

Seansasser (talk) 04:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Santa Odin

Hello Yngvadottir, the discussion occurring here may be of interest to you. I always find the subject fascinating and would love to dig up more scholarship on it. :bloodofox: (talk) 11:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Trisakti shootings

I have addressed your concerns at the DYK suggestions board regarding the Trisakti shootings. I hope ALT1 is satisfactory. Thanks! Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:13, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I have added a quote from Gatra. Could you take a look? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter

We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Racepacket (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Donati

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Haruth's talk page.
Message added 16:06, 11 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Das häßliche Mädchen

What an interesting and informative article--I approved it for DYK, another good one! I hope you don't mind that I did some copy-editing in the article itself, to make it (I thought) easier to read. Sharktopus^talk 13:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Maria Bashir

Can you run a quick search on Wikipedia to help me confirm that Maria Bashir doesn't have an article yet? I don't want to end up making another duplicate one. Silverseren^C 21:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Silverseren^C 22:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Korkoro

Thanks for the improvement you made to the article. Regarding the usage of the term 'Gypsy', I thought about that too, but chose to go by the sources. _morelMW^illiam 05:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't like the term Gypsy myself, as it is a pejorative term, and wanted some other editor to change it, as the sources I had were using Gypsy. So it is perfectly fine. Thanks again for your inputs. As you can see from the article history, I am trying to expand it to make it GA worthy. It lacks info on the film's production. Any further edits would be more than welcome._morelMW^illiam 06:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I see you read Swedish

One hesitates to mention the Swedish moose botfly (Cephenemyia ulrichii) to someone of perhaps delicate sensibilities, but I started an article about it based on a story in The Local and the English summary of a 3-page medical paper in Swedish. Could I interest you in collaborating on the article for DYK? Sharktopus ^talk 11:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I replied on my talk page to your reply on my talk page. Sharktopus ^talk 00:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, I submitted it with both our names and the hook "that the moose botfly Cephenemyia ulrichii shoots its larvae into people's eyes, perhaps because human eyes and moose nostrils both face forward?" here. Feel free to improve any or all of this, and thanks again. Sharktopus ^talk 12:39, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I might have sent you an email. Heck, I might have sent you two identical emails. Or I might have sent you zero emails. The Wikipedia servers were restless this morning. Sharktopus ^talk 16:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK of Baku Museum of Modern Art in Azerbaijan

Hi, I was wondering if you'd be interested in weighing in at the DYK nomination for Baku Museum of Modern Art. OCNative (talk) 09:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at OCNative's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiCup 2011 June newsletter

We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was Casliber (submissions) who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by Wizardman (submissions), claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by Eisfbnore (submissions), who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by Hurricanehink (submissions), who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.

No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.

We would again like to thank Jarry1250 (submissions) and Stone (submissions) for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.

Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

50 DYK Medal

		The 50 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		Nice work! Your Scandinavian, Central European, and British articles are a great asset to Wikipedia. Congratulations on getting 50 of them featured on DYK. Thank you! OCNative (talk) 07:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

The proper fireworks were last Saturday: you should have seen Burg Klopp illuminated all red with the fireworks above it (Rhein in Flammen). - Please give us more! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

And fireworks are imminent in the US, no doubt also to celebrate your 50 DYKs. Congratulations on having created so many good ones! Sharktopus ^talk 10:43, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at OCNative's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For taking the time to assist newcomers to navigate the rocky shoals of Wikipedia and become more effective contributors. Dolphin (t) 03:02, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Rosetta Barnstar
	For Yngvadottir in recognition of outstanding efforts (and abilities) to enrich en.wikipedia.org with material written in many languages other than English. Also given in recognition of her just plain general awesomeness. Sharktopus talk 10:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Potsdamer Platz-related articles

Hello Yngvadottir!

Just a quick message to say great work with your articles on the Haus Vaterland and Columbushaus. Although it's a while since I was last there, I've had a fascination with Potsdamer Platz for quite a few years and probably contributed the bulk of the actual PP article, but there's no doubt that several of the individual buildings and locations in the area, past and present, deserve their own articles. I've worked on some (Potsdamer Bahnhof, Anhalter Bahnhof, Voss Strasse, Ebertstrasse, Siegesallee), but I also love to see other people's contributions.

Keep up the good work!

Kind regards Tonythepixel (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Giant Foot Award for your mighty feats

	The Giant Foot of Stomping on Difficulties
	Every time I look around you are trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored difficulties that beset young articles, such as Sugar Museum (Berlin). Just like the Monty Python foot that descends from the heavens to go ... stomp! Sharktopus talk 16:45, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

ROFL thanks! Yngvadottir (talk) 16:51, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I am working on a hook for it at the moment. I wanted something about slavery, since that was the thing I found most memorable when I visited the museum perhaps 10 years ago -- that the humble sugar beet and the nerdy academic scientist had played important roles in ending slavery. I was thinking of ...

… that sugar beets helped to end slavery, according to Berlin's Sugar Museum.

Other ideas are of course welcome! Sharktopus ^talk 13:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

That's hooky, but consider also . . . that the Sugar Museum in Berlin is the world's first, opened in 1904? (fairly basic) and . . . that the Berlin Sugar Museum features a 1903 painting showing Franz Carl Achard presenting King Frederick William III with a loaf of beet sugar? (quirkier) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:29, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Aux armes, citoyenne?

I have found a suitably small-but-interesting article on a France-related topic to 5x expand. Louis Delaporte (1842-1925) was an admirer and collector of Khmer art who has articles in fr and de and ru but a mere mini-stub in en. His drawings from the 1860s were used to help reconstruct a major religious site near Vientiane in the 1930s. He was a young French sailor when he first got invited into an excursion to see Angkor Wat, because he could draw. He taught himself photography ("aplanar lenses and gelatin processes" no less) so that he could bring back news of this amazing art to Paris, where he exhibited his discoveries in the 1878 Exposition Universelle. He founded his own Musée Indochinois du Trocadéro in Paris with the stuff he brought back, but after his death it all went to the Musée Guimet. How about this quote from him about Angkor? "je n’admirais pas moins la conception hardie et grandiose de ces monuments que l’harmonie parfaite de toutes leurs parties…" Talking like a sailor seems more complex for the French. Does this interest you, or are you too busy elsewhere? Sharktopus ^talk 01:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

You seem to be managing him fine, except that you've apparently missed that the museum was the Musée du Trocadéro, which we have at Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro (and I may expand that - nasty stub). I'll take a few more looks. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:02, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes and I see some more errors of mine in that comment above now. Love what you are doing at the Musée article. I found a picture I think would be good with your text mentioning the Champs de Mars and left the picture and a note at Talk:Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro. I had fun writing Mr Delaporte's article but it was slow work because I kept wanting things that had to be really worked for, like one of his drawings of the temple in Vientiane. Sharktopus ^talk 21:59, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

There, just posted that DYK Template_talk:Did_you_know#Louis_Delaporte. Going to nominate your museum article next once I've eaten some dinner, unless you say not to. I'd like to have them have time for review before July 14 gets to our sillons. You've been doing a beautiful job on the Trocadero! Sharktopus ^talk 00:05, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks; I hope you don't mind that I made some changes at Louis Delaporte. It turned out that I was wrong and there was a separate Indochinese Museum at the Trocadéro - different establishment dates. I fear the Musée d'Ethnographie is never going to be adequately sourceable to DYK standards. The infighting and neglect revealed by the sources I can see explain why. I saw your note, but the history and the appearance of the galleries are really interwoven; if you compare the fr.wikipedia article you'll see I've massively rearranged the material. If there were sources, a list of the galleries as we do with extant museums would clarify matters (and a floor plan of the Trocadéro Palace as it was in 1890 would be nice, too!) The whomping great history section comes from the complicated story plus the presence in so many places of adverse reactions to the museum. I love that aerial view of the Champs de Mars, but I think it really belongs in Exposition Universelle (1878). Yngvadottir (talk) 02:22, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• M. Delaporte is delighted with your changes. As for the references needed on the Museum, it is more blessed to ask forgiveness than permission. I say nominate it now to get it out there and then we can work on adding references -- or on subtracting unreferenced material, if we have to. Here's the nommy thing I was working on:

{{subst:NewDYKnom | article= Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro | hook=... that the [[Palais du Trocadéro]] in Paris ''(pictured)'' devoted one wing to the '''[[Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro]]''', the other wing to the [[Musée national des Monuments Français]]? | status=expanded | author= Yngvadottir| nominator= Sharktopus | reviewed= Ach Herr, mich armen Sünder, BWV 135| revieweddiff= http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know&diff=prev&oldid=438946886 |image= The Trocadero, Exposition Universal, 1900, Paris, France.jpg |caption = The Palais du Trocadéro in Paris}}

• What do you think? Do you have a better hook? Sharktopus ^talk 02:35, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmmmmmm. That link would have to be [[Trocadéro#The old Palais du Trocadéro|Palais du Trocadéro]]. And I am afraid that since they evidently had the Musée Indochinois in there somewhere too, that hook won't wash very well. Most of the hooks that occur to me are negative, such as: ... that according to a member of the Chamber of Deputies, the Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro shamed France? But possibly ...that Picasso said he discovered "what painting was all about" in the Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro? Yngvadottir (talk) 03:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Great idea, how could I forget Picasso? He will evoke the right Fête Nationale spirit. Sharktopus ^talk 03:25, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Wow, Architecture of the night is, er, deLIGHTful. I am briefly perched in Manhattan and can hardly wait for sun to go down so I can see the stuff showing up in Google Images for Manhattan + night. Don't you want to put it up at DYK? It would be a natural, IMO. Sharktopus ^talk 22:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Say hello to my old home town! I assume that somewhere on Commons there must be good pics of the spectaculars in Times Square, including the current ones at the downtown end? I am frustrated beyond words that we don't have more on Commons for the 1920s and 1930s buildings. I already ran into this with the Berlin Lichtburg - that would have been a hell of a DYK pic, and it's all over the architecture press, but even German Wikipedia doesn't have a pic. And of course many of the New Objectivist buildings were brightly colored and/or used colored light (one of the many postcards of Potsdamer Platz at night reveals that Haus Vaterland used red illuminated lettering, presumably neon, in addition to the whirling effect on the dome, which was presumably all white), but they were documented almost exclusively in black and white. Anyway it's early days yet. I have to mine a considerable rock face of architectural verbiage, including one book that is such a masterpiece of eyepopping design and interwoven multilingual text that it's hard to make sense of it. I'll let you determine in a few days whether there's a good hook fact :-)

Broadway sends regards right back to you. I would have seen more of it but unaccountably the skies opened up and everybody ran for cover. No rain was predicted for Manhattan today but ... there it was. And there I was, trying to look as if getting solidly rained on was part of my plan. I look forward to seeing what more you will do on that article. Sharktopus ^talk 02:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Je suis né d'une cigogne‎

Hi! Your revision of the common section statement for the Themes section introduced a potential POV. The sources don't say that the film differs from Godard due to its theme. Thanks otherwise. _morelMW^illiam 17:45, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

After adjusting something else I noticed when looking at a source, I checked the source cited there, and how do you like it now? Yngvadottir (talk) 17:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I would prefer keeping the two separate, as the sources don't state that Godard's techniques are the only techniques used. There are sources that state that the film's final look is not that of a mere Godardian one. As the common section for the Themes subsections is supposed to be a summary of what follows, it makes it look like the film is totally faithful to Godard, which is not the case. And isn't 'early' a bit too redundant? There are no more sources available for the film, to my powers, and I can only be happy with what can be made out of the available info. Thanks a lot. _morelMW^illiam 06:12, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I took "early" from the source you cited for that sentence. The sources all seem to be very emphatic about the Godard stylistic homage. I don't think it's terribly important to have a thesis sentence for the entire section; maybe the best solution would be to deal with style and themes in separate sections? I hope I didn't muck the article up too much, I don't have much of a horse in this race, but I agree with you, they are two separate things. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Two separate sections would mean two small sections and hence I clubbed them. You were really helpful in improving the article's tone. Thanks. _morelMW^illiam 21:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi. Thanks for making my language less formal/more popular, and for orthographical corrections etc.

--- Aaemn784 (talk) 12:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've now worked my way through to the end, although I may go back and conceal more of those URLs in references . . . and if I can, add some better refs. I hope you don't find too much to object to in how I've re-worded and in some cases retranslated things. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Notice

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Fjordman. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

Please refrain from repeatedly removing quotes and information you simply do not like. I much prefer we discuss matters on the talk pages first. Charlie 08:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

That's not what I'm doing. If you had looked, you would have seen that the info about his being called an extremist was already included, with that ref, in a better place. Also there are BLP concerns: Collect removed the entire paragraph, short though it was. I've been trying to get her to engage on the talk page so that other editors can see the range of viewpoints among editors. I am sorry that my editing of your contribution to remove repetition and tidy up citation struck you as biased removal. Copying this response to the talk page now. --Yngvadottir (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:48, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE requests list

Hi

I am going to try and address the concerns you have raised, at least from the point of view of GOCE. I have this page on my watchlist and so any conversation can be continued here without needing a talkback on my talk page, or any more discussion on the GOCE requests page (where I have indicated that I am dealing with the matter).

First of all, can we establish the articles you are asking for copy-editing on? If they are covered by a categor(y/ies), listing as [[:Category:The category title]] will display it here without adding the category to this page (see below).

The GOCE requests page, where you made your post, has a stipulation that an editor cannot raise more than three article requests at a time. While your request was not specific in the number of articles, I am guessing that "all" means there are quite a few and more than three? If not, please feel free to list them by article name.

Once we have established exactly which articles you are talking about, we can consider adding various "copyedit needed" tags and banners to those articles (which will list it in Category:All articles needing copy edit), making specific requests on the GOCE requests page, or handling it in another way. Chaosdruid (talk) 19:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

As I understand it from reading your Psychology project post, the articles are:

• Absent-mindedness
• Adult development
• Anthropophobia
• Army Substance Abuse Program
• Asian Psychology
• Coping (psychology)
• Coping strategies
• Crying
• Euphoria
• Feeding disorder
• Horror and Terror
• Hot cognition
• Human-canine bond
• Illusion of transparency
• Infant cognitive development
• Mood Disorder Not Otherwise Specified
• Moral reasoning

• Nervous laughter
• Night Terrors
• Nervous laughter
• Nyctohylophobia
• Optimalism
• Pain disorder
• Perceptual psychology
• Performance Psychology
• Prodome
• Psychology of combat
• Reminiscence
• Sequence learning
• Sobriety
• Social disruption
• Social undermining

People

• Karl Bowman
• Herbert Freudenberger
• Howard Gardner
• Seymour S. Kety
• Edwin C. Nevis
• James W. Pennebaker

I see. I hadn't realized there was a limit. That presents a bit of a problem since some of the articles were created by the students, and others expanded, and that plus variation between students means they really should all be checked. I'm striking out Herbert Freudenberger - that was worked on by the instructor and I believe it went to DYK; at any rate it looks good - Optimalism, which has been merged, and Illusion of transparency, which I copyedited myself. I had posted the same link at the GOC requests page as at the Psych Project; I will double-check whether there are any there that you haven't listed above. And I will copyedit some myself and strike them out above after doing so. If I wind up doing the lion's share, that's not a problem except that I have limited Wikipedia time, so it will take a while, and Illusion of transparency was badly in need of copyediting. If you think it best to tag those that need copyediting, I'll obviously remove the tag after doing it. Thanks for the prompt response and the work deriving a list! Yngvadottir (talk) 22:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Can I suggest we use  Working {{working}} for those we are currently looking at, Y {{y}} for added to GOCE req page, and striking once completed/needs no action?

I have added the list to one of my userpages User:Chaosdruid/currentgoingson/GOCE. Would it be possible to keep the record there for ease of use? If you do not like the idea I can just mirror it. Chaosdruid (talk) 00:16, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

That sounds good. Thanks again. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:28, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I have also moved the request page post to the co-ordinators talk page, rather than archive it, so that all are aware of it. Here Chaosdruid (talk) 00:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For being a most fine and prolific editor on matters Germanic and heathen, I bestow upon you the Original Barnstar! :bloodofox: (talk) 23:23, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

"the new nomination procedure is daunting"

Regarding your comments at WT:DYK#Cutting through the...stuff about the new nomination procedure being daunting, could you let me know in particular what you find daunting about it? (Especially, is it the new reviewing checklist, or is it the technical details of how to post a nomination.) I am one of the editors who designed the current nomination system (by which I mean the templates and subpages used for nomination, not the new rules and new reviewing checklist) and I'd like any feedback I can get on ways it can be made smoother. rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I might have done this wrong but ...

... check out http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:42nd_Street_Studios&action=edit&redlink=1

All best, your travel-weary friend Sharktopus ^talk 02:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you thank you!! Going to add one of those to the article right away. Gods, that's eyepopping. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:08, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

England vs Britain

I think England is a part of Britain so in the Physical attractiveness article, my guess is that the IP change, from England --> Britain, is probably correct, but I'm not certain since I'm american.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 09:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

It is, and also part of the UK (Northern Ireland is part of the latter but not the former). In the case of that article, the issue was that the source presumably said "England," hence "unexplained" in my edit summary. In other articles, the IP was either changing "English" or "Scottish" to "British," etc. - in cases such as a former Miss Scotland and an England soccer international - (and frequently leaving the "an" from "England" in place to produce "an British") or adding UK as if Scotland or England needs further explanation. It doesn't. In just one case I left it alone - the "nationality" field in an infobox, where "British" is correct. Someone with a bee in his/her bonnet, I'm afraid. It's a complicated matter - and with English and Scottish nationalists, let alone the Irish question, a fraught one - but passports say "British," Glasgow is in Scotland and Leicester is in England and that suffices, and players get international caps for England, Scotland, or Wales. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:22, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm frustrated

I doubt that I will contribute to DYK anymore especially with this new response, "User:mbz1 or Joe Chill are among the "DYK creators" for articles that had serious NPOV or COPYVIO issues. Presumably there are plenty of non-problematic DYK creators under the easy system." on the DYK talk page. One article that I wasn't around to fix made me notorious I guess. Joe Chill (talk) 18:41, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I made sure to. Joe Chill (talk) 18:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Bigfin reef squid

Thanks for jumping in! :D Much appreciated. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 20:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome - was going to drop you a note as a talkpage lurker. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Since I watchlist every page I edit, I am now your lurker as well. *cue Jaws theme*. ;P -- Obsidi♠n Soul 20:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Salina Normal University

I found another image of the school this time a front view and used it as the main picture, and replaced the poor quality Photo with the one you suggested, although I still think a regular photo would be best, if a better one is ever found. I added the school moto, opening date, and arranged the paragraphs as: overview; concept, contruction, features; student/faculty activities; destruction. I also found two other links that might be useful to you http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84027670/1884-03-06/ed-1/seq-1/ it's under the illustration of the Salina High School, and says there is another column about the University, http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84027670/1884-03-06/ed-1/seq-2/ the center of this page, a column titled 'The College'. I tried to update the article, but I know nothing of educational curriculums and stuff like that, so with that part, and the stuff near the bottom of the page which is nearly unreadable, I was only able to get a little more info about the actual place. If your interested in just general college and universities you might like this http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn86063615/1899-08-28/ed-1/seq-6/ this newspaper seemed to have a series of School related articles. here's another from that series http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn86063615/1899-07-10/ed-1/seq-6/

I started looking for old pictures of local buildings about a month ago when I bought a old yearbook from 1919, from Salina High School. Later I put that and another on the Internet Archive http://www.archive.org/details/TheHabit1922CommencmentIssue they sometimes have pictures of Universities that the students can go to after graduation. Kansas Wesleyan University also had a year book, but even though both it and the Salina High School had yearbooks from 1900, I haven't seen any for the Salina Normal University. I'm not even sure if it ever had an exact address, most articles just list as in Salina, Kansas. It still could use {{cite book-web}} templates, but I'm lazy when it comes to that type of stuff, as trying to find the publisher of the book, and author of newspaper articles, sometimes the editor, but not always.

Thanks! That adds quite a bit of info. I'll smooth the edges a bit between your referencing style and mine; but I won't be using citation templates, I loathe them :-) I originally researched and wrote up the college because it was such a mystery (I saw the street name and heard rumors, which turned out to be garbled, that the city had been laid out to have two colleges). Hardly anything is ever said about it in Salina, and it lasted such a short time. When I did research it, the disagreements between sources and some of what I read made the fire seem awfully convenient for those who then immediately founded Kansas Wesleyan. But even if they were just lucky, the normal school has been pretty successfully forgotten. Yet it educated some important people (including at least one black person of note) and as you have shown me, it had a pretty darned imposing building. I believe the complexity about curriculum stems from one of the keys to its success - it apparently worked like a modern community college, with students stopping and starting study when they wished and taking courses at a range of academic levels from basic business skills up through liberal arts and fine arts. Of course the whole context of the Normal Schools is unfamiliar today; many products of those had a very basic education, somewhere at what we would call high school level, because the bulk of their work was to be teaching the 3 Rs in one-room schoolhouses. Kansas Wesleyan was founded with a much more limited vision - and then to fill the gap, what became Brown Mackie was started as a secretarial school offshoot. And Kansas Wesleyan was endowed in a very different way. Competing visions. It would have been good for the city to have both, IMO, but whether deliberately or not, Salina Normal was destroyed. I am so thrilled we now have pictures of it, but I really doubt any more are out there. It just didn't have a very long run. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I found a better illustration of the building with smaller trees, and even found this link, http://books.google.com/books?id=Eb65AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA712&dq=%22Salina+Normal+University%22&hl=en&ei=lTdPTr3kD8eKsQLS3cHwBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=%22Salina%20Normal%20University%22&f=false it says the school had about 1,000 books, at the time the town did not have a library, and had to wait till 1903 before one was opened, http://books.google.com/books?id=DtTGV0kyBhIC&pg=PA130&dq=%22Salina,+Kansas%22+1858&hl=en&ei=GUNPTv7iJ8ilsQK2hZnXBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Carnegie&f=false I don't know if it had the most books in town at the time, but it was probably one of the biggest collections, that might be worth a mention, the Carnegie Public Library that opened in 1903 originaly only had 3,000.

Here's another image, an actual photo, however in worse shape then the othe images, it looks to be a postcard. http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~kssvgs/history/earlysalina/schools.pdf (Floppydog66 (talk) 06:18, 20 August 2011 (UTC))

Added both the library info and the Rootsweb link, thanks! Yngvadottir (talk) 15:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I was wondering why you removed the exact date the school opened? I think it's intresting that it lasted 20 years and two days. If it's just the wording it could read "on September 2, 1884 at College Street, and the western end of Iron Avenue." Since I've never seen a number for a street address. I think one of those two links also said that it was still under construction when it was opened. (Floppydog66 (talk) 17:09, 20 August 2011 (UTC))

Yes, the sources really don't support the exact date. That was the target date given in the promotional article in the newspaper. (Note that I said this in that footnote.) Then a later source says the building was completed late and they opened the school anyway. The sources I originally read when I put the article together gave a confused picture that added up to serious problems: there was massive unhappiness with the guy they brought in to run it—yet one source claims it was his idea, and yet he had brought students and faculty with him from Illinois—in less than a year, there was a big walkout of students and faculty. (What was wrong with him?) They had trouble raising enough money—it sounds as if not enough people bought the plots of land. Kansas Wesleyan had Methodist Church backing; the original group of investors/ boosters who backed Salina Normal seems to have melted away. They went through rather a lot of changes of leadership, and the numbers of students bounced up and down. I'm smelling coverup. It does now look as if the Arcadia book got the opening year wrong, and from that account of opening even though the building wasn't finished it looks like September 1884, as planned. But I see only the booster article saying September 2, and that was a promise published 6 months before. (The fire looks suspicious as all getout, especially right at the start of term, 20 years later. And why were there only 3 students in residence?) But from the sources I've seen so far, September 2 was the target date but all that's established is that they opened (in some unspecified state of disarray) that month. And the sources are sufficiently conflicting that I don't think we can assume the booster's promise was fulfilled. (Although I think it bears saying that the quality of education there was apparently good.) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Nail Men

This is fascinating. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

You're very welcome :-) I will of course be expanding it tremendously. The de: article is actually a Good Article, but I'll be using a lot more in-line refs. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I see. Yes, that German article is really a list--I don't see how that would become a GA for us. That article looked a lot different when it became a GA--and has only one reference besides a few weblinks. I wonder if they've upped their game since then and have adopted more stringent requirements. Good luck working on it; I'd offer you help, but I think your German is probably better than mine. Drmies (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:

• Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
• PresN (submissions), Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
• Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
• Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
• Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
• Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
• Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists, Another Believer (submissions), Piotrus (submissions), Grandiose (submissions), Stone (submissions), Eisfbnore (submissions), Canada Hky (submissions) and MuZemike (submissions). Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk · contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

English

Thank you for "Englishing" the Blumes! - And to the above: your editing transformed the article to acceptable for DYK, therefore you deserved co-authorship, no blushing needed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Norrköpings Tidningar

The article was 327 characters before the expansion. 327 times 5 = 1,635. The article is only 1,535 characters. Sorry about my earlier mistake. I hope that it can be expanded more. SL93 (talk) 21:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Janus Djurhuus

Hello! Your submission of Janus Djurhuus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Yngvadottir, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser for the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign, we're interviewing as many of the very active and productive Wikipedians as we can to broaden the range of appeals we run come November. I wonder if you would want to tell me more about your experiences editing and writing here? If so, I'll ask you your personal story and I'll ask you some general questions about Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're interesting by emailing amuszalskiwikimedia.org. Thanks! Aaron (WMF) (talk) 00:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

extra info

de:Rezess Agathoclea (talk) 15:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed. However it is used in English in the specific Imperial application, I can add a ref from the 1911 Britannica. About to do the first save at Recess (Holy Roman Empire). Yngvadottir (talk) 15:14, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Mughal Army

Answering the question you asked here, I believe from this that the source is this book. The editor, however, is a sock, who has just gone on a vandalism rampage. I don't think he will edit much more. --Muhandes (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah. Oh dear. With it being an out of copyright book, I would usually make an attempt at integrating and wikifying it, but I don't know enough about the period. I was out of my depth as soon as I got to "Mansabdari system" and I have no idea whether he was right to swap Mirza Najaf Khan for Hrithik Roshan Khan in the second line. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm tempted to revert to the state before his edits, at least then it was stable. --Muhandes (talk) 08:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 September newsletter

We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by Miyagawa (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Sp33dyphil (submissions), all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 12:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Pillnitz Castle

I looked at the new Pillnitz Castle and think it would make a beautiful DYK, if only it had refs. But the author also (first) wants a native speaker to improve it, could you work your magic again? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Heh, thanks for the vote of confidence; I'll see what I can do, though it's a bit out of my usual date range for castles '-) Also I have either a filthy cold or a mild case of the flu, so I'm making more errors than usual and going slowly to try to allow for this. By the way, speaking of my date ranges, have you seen Augusta Victoria (ship) is on the mainpage now? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:13, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Take your time, get well first, I'm going to nominate now, not to miss the deadline. The ship is gracing P:DE, the third in a day, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks; I worked slowly and hope I didn't mess up. I would normally have also looked for sources but I see you've been doing that, so I just unknotted one ref that was still in German and referred to 2 different books. I was unable to see the second one on GoogleBooks, unfortunately, so I'm not sure how relevant the Vgl. was in this case. Next up for me is either Heinrich Wiegand or Johann Poppe, both of which take me back into German material, but first the Norddeutscher Lloyd article needs more TLC. I'm holding off on any of that till I can be more sure of not leaving a trail of Freudian slips and malformed markup. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Didn't have the time to look yet in detail, but it is approved already, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Yngvadottir! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Poppe and Bach

Thanks for the source for Poppe. I will be off now, - Ah forgot Bach, BWV 169 is open, due to traveling I was slow in nominating and answering, it should be ok now (but I still prefer the original hook for private reasons), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm very sorry but I do avoid doing music articles because I can't hear it well enough to check any musical issues I may have a question about (for example on the Haugtussa song cycle I would have checked whether by "changing every time" what was meant was "modulation", but I am just too deaf). Plus cantatas are Christian :-( If it were only a nice loud organ toccata and fugue . . . However I see it's come down to the hook, so I've made a suggestion, since you say you'd like to use the original hook. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:46, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, in prep. - You do a great job in language for whatever topic! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Yoghurt". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by May 12, 2011.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 15:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 October newsletter

The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is Hurricanehink (submissions), who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009) and Sturmvogel_66 (2010). The final standings were as follows:

1. Hurricanehink (submissions)
2. Sp33dyphil (submissions)
3. Yellow Evan (submissions)
4. Miyagawa (submissions)
5. Wizardman (submissions)
6. Casliber (submissions)
7. Resolute (submissions)
8. PresN (submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

• The Featured Article Award: Casliber (submissions), for his performance in round 2. Hurricanehink (submissions) matched the score, but Casliber won the tiebreaker.
• The Good Article Award: Yellow Evan (submissions), for his performance in round 4.
• The Featured List Award: Miyagawa (submissions), for his performance in round 4. PresN (submissions) matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
• The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics): PresN (submissions), for his performance in round 3.
• The Did You Know Award: The Bushranger (submissions), for his performance in round 1.
• The In the News Award: Candlewicke (submissions), for his performance in round 1.
• The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews): Wizardman (submissions), for his performance in round 3.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Yoghurt, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK [•] 12:24, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

2011 WikiCup participation

Awarded to Yngvadottir, who reached round 2 in the 2011 WikiCup.

It was good to have you on board this time around- we hope you enjoyed the competition! In case you are interested, signups for next year are open. Thanks, J Milburn and The ed17 20:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Odin's wagon

Hi Yngvadottir, here is a citation from Ebbe Schön's book (page 204):

Enligt enstaka uppgifter rider inte Oden utan färdas i stället med ett hjuldon, något som de gamla myternas Tor ju var känd för. I Smålandssocknen Voxtorp har upptecknats:

Man trodde även att Oden under sina jaktfärder genom skog och mark färdades fram med en kärra, försedd med endast ett hjul. Hjulet tog härunder mark, och av den starka farten revs mossa och gräs upp, där det gick fram. Såg man därför en reva i skogsmarken och en avsevärd del framåt, sade man att där hade Odens jakt gått fram.

Hope that helps. Best,--Berig (talk) 15:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK expansion length calc

Could you help me better understand the DYK length rules and how to properly count a nom's length. I've nominated an article, Template:Did you know nominations/Guiding Eyes for the Blind, and just don't get how this works. You reviewed my last nom on Manitoba Hydro Place (here, there was a lot of fuss about the length, and it went right over my head. I've asked another reviewer on that nom to help also. Could you please respond on my talk page, thanks. 842U (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I remember now that on Manitoba Hydro Place, there was a discrepancy: you approved the length first and then others came along and took issue. There is a javascript that you can install on your skin (none of this means much to me) and now that I've installed it, it gives the actual character count, minus the parts of an article that don't count. It's this Prose Size Javascript, a little tricky to install, but then you get a new 'tool' listed at left under "Toolbox" for page size. Thanks again for your help! 842U (talk) 16:50, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Poppy Factory

Ping. -- Ferma (talk) 19:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, as you reviewed this DYK and it's missed today's date for going live, do you want to move it to the Special occasion holding area, just so it doesn't miss the 13th? I'd do this myself, but I'm not too sure I'm allowed as a contributor. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Odin article

Hello Yngvadottir. I noticed that you've recently commented on your dislike of the current Odin article. I strongly agree; it's long been overdue for a rewrite. I was wondering if you wanted to collaborate with a rewrite? My idea is to basically just handle it like the Thor article (although the Thor article is incomplete). Maybe we could divide up sections to work on. We could work on these sections on a test page. What do you say? :bloodofox: (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Gahhhh .... to be frank I avoid looking at it. I have a similar COI as I do with Thor, plus the situation of little academic treatment is reversed with Óðinn: massive amounts of stuff. My comment actually referred to the spin-off articles on the same god by different regional names - we've spoken before about how that's counterproductive to say the least, and that was my point about unbolding the other names of Thor, since they are all redirects and I wish them to stay that way. But yes, I know the Odin article needs work. I think my being out of the academic loop would be a problem in rewriting it; the same issues tend to recur, I would be surprised if anyone's come up with a genuinely new theory about Valfather, but it's obviously best to refer to the latest authoritative versions and I have only limited interlibrary loan access. Also there are other things that need doing: I'm about to seriously change Völsa þáttr, and we still lack coverage of Thor in the sagas. But it does need doing and nobody else is doing it . . . let's try this. Throw me specific questions/tasks and I'll see what expertise I can summon up. That way I will not be unduly influencing the shape of the article. Same with the missing bits of the Thor article. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:28, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Once upon a time many of the Germanic mythology-related articles were as bad as the Odin article, if not far worse (I shudder at the memory of the pre-rewrite Sigyn article!). I've often put this one off because I knew how much work would need to go into it, but I think it's time to get it together. I propose we rewrite the Odin exactly the way the Odin, valkyrie, and many other articles were rewritten, including the reference formatting. I've set up a template over at User:Bloodofox/Odin rewrite. Want to do the etymology section for now? I'll take a crack at the "modern influence" section. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:34, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Grünes Gewölbe (Green Vault)

Hello Yngvadottir, Gerda Arendt referred me to you. I have been working on the article Grünes Gewölbe for quite some time. Now I am finished but I would like that an English native speaker goes through it. Could you help me with this? It was so much work -- now I would like to see it getting 'polished' by correcting any English mistakes I did. Your help would be really appreciated! (BTW, the names of the rooms and the objects are from the museum guide -- help is more needed with the general statements, object descriptions, etc.) Thank you very much! --Linear77 (talk) 11:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I've gone through it doing what I could. I did have to retranslate Pretiosensaal, because "pretosia" is an error for pretiosa, which, however, is a Latin word that few English speakers will understand. And the translation of the French inscription was inaccurate, so I found one online and quoted it with a ref. The other thing I wonder about is the Moor with Emerald Cluster. From the German, it looks to me as if that should be Platter of Emeralds, but I found the blackamoor page to which you had linked uses "plate" in the picture caption so I went with that. I suggest you look in English sources such as Géza von Habsburg's book to see what it's usually called; museum guidebooks are not always good at translating the titles of objects. You will see I've consistently (I hope) put the names of art works and gems in quotes and only the German in italics; this is for clarity, and you may want to have the English names of artworks also in italics, but it was inconsistent between the lists of objects in the various rooms and the discussion of selected items that followed.

You seem to have left out some details that are in the German, such as that the malachite-green columns are now totally encased in mirrors, the historical background of the tradition of storing one's treasures in the vaults under one's castle, the separation of the anteroom from the rest of the Historic Green Vault by a climate-control barrier, and some of the objects, such as Ivan the Terrible's goblet. And you don't mention the diamonds on the Bath of Diana. I would guess references can be found for these. Also the German varies in a couple of places: most notably, it says same-day tickets are available only for the anteroom of the Historic Green Vault. I mention these because I think they might interest English-speaking readers. Anyway, feel free to re-change some of what I changed, I hope teh edit is helpful for the most part. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:38, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your work! I really appreciate your help. Just four remarks to your comments: (1) I had checked before intensively, "Moor with Emerald Cluster" is mostly used. So I changed it back to this; I also changed the name in the blackamoor article. The other mentioned names I added in the text (also known as...). (2) Yes, I skipped things mentioned on the German site which I had trouble expressing in English or consider not as important. (3) The naming issue (Green Vault) I addressed again (it is important): The first four rooms had the bases of the columns (pillars?) and their capitals painted green (not the columns itself), so the name was born. You can hardly see the green color today, it is mostly gone or partly covered. I now clarified this in the German and English version, I hope I succeeded. Could you please have a look at the initial sentence ("It is named after the formerly malachite green painted column bases and capitals of the initial rooms.") because I am not sure with expressions like "formerly", "initial rooms" etc.? (4) Sorry, but the German article does not state "same-day tickets are available only for the anteroom of the Historic Green Vault", at least I cannot find this. And it is not correct. Every morning you can purchase tickets for a specified time slot of the same day that allows you to visit the historical green vault. (They are sold out in less than half an hour.) So the current English version " A limited number of tickets is also sold every morning." is correct. -- I would appreciate if you could have a fast look at my latest changes to make sure I did not mess up your wonderful English. Thank you very much again!!!--Linear77 (talk) 16:53, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I see what I did: I had missed Jeden Morgen wird zusätzlich ein beschränktes Kontingent an Karten verkauft., but a couple of paragraphs below that is what I had seen, under Vorgewölbe: [Es] kann als einziger Raum auch ohne Zeitkarte betreten werden.
I suspected from the German that Smaragdstufe might be a specialist gemologists' term for the cluster, but then I saw the other article taking it as describing the plate or platter on which the figure is holding the emeralds. I think that one merits a bit of searching around to see how English-speaking art historians describe the piece. I'd also do that with the bath of Diana, because I think there you've left out a little too much description of the object, although you've done a good job with informational linkage on the mythology.
On the green paint, here's the German intro: von den malachitgrün gestrichenen Säulen . . ., die heute allerdings mit Spiegeln ummantelt sind. That very clearly says that the entire columns/pillars were painted green, not just the capitals and bases, but that yes, they are now mostly covered up by mirrors. Perhaps the museum source means that only the tops and bottoms can now be seen? Looking at the 1904 photograph, that's also what I see - only the capitals and bases (actually more of an ornamental top to the mirror) are visible. In such cases I tend to go with accurate translation and hunt for an older source. Also the German article says the name Grünes Gewölbe comes from just the one room, the Pretiosensaal. So check the sources on those 2 issues related to "green", but yes, the wording you have in the lead is clear enough. I fixed a couple of small things, but I'm glad you like the English overall :-)
Is there anything I can advise you on regarding rendering it into English? (And by the way, please feel free to correct my own translated articles - I read German to a very high level but I am not a certified translator and there are limits to my specialized knowledge that I am only too aware of. I have them listed on my userpage and Gerda and others periodically catch me in errors :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for catching those errors. You are right, Smaragdstufe is a very special term so I had no clue how to translate it correctly and so checked the various books etc.: "cluster" is mostly used when it comes to the statue.
I also have a couple of books in front of me w.r.t. the coloring issue -- according to all of them, in the first four rooms the column bases and the capitals were green. This is also what the guides tell you. So I removed the mirror part because this is misleading (it would indicate the columns were green as well). Now everything should be consistent, including between the German and the English version of the Green Vault.
I don't see important things that need to be translated as well, all the important stuff is there. Thank you very much for your offer! If I have some time left I might look once more into the Diana description -- but getting it more detailed seems too complicated for me. (Feel free to add details of the description from the German site.)
Yes, I will look at your articles and help whenever I can! Let me thank you again for helping with the Green Vault - it was a lot of work and having it checked by a native speaker makes it "complete". Thanks.--Linear77 (talk) 18:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello again, there is one sentence I wanted to add to Diana but the translation was too complicated: Auf dem als Waldboden gestalteten Schalenfuß liegt so das Haupt des in einen Hirsch verwandelten Aktäon, über das die Hunde gierig herfallen. -- Could you help me with this one sentence? This would make the description of Diana's bath more elaborate. That should be it. Thanks a lot!--Linear77 (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I fitted it in, plus a little information about the bowl part of the tableau; how does it look to you now? Yngvadottir (talk) 16:28, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Perfect!!! Thanks a lot again.--Linear77 (talk) 21:44, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Nobility Law (Norway)

Hei, og takk for sist. Siden du åpenbart er god i engelsk, kan du, hvis lyst eller tid skulle være til stede, gjerne gjennomgå og kanskje forbedre min oversettelse av Adelsloven.

Nobility Law (Norway)

--- Aaemn784 (talk) 13:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, your confidence in me is gratifying but this is not an area in which I have much expertise, and I had to leave one term untranslated. However, I've made 2 edits and done what I could, including adding a few references in support of the content that precedes the text. I hope it's helpful! Yngvadottir (talk) 21:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Mange takk! Oversettelsen ble bedre på både ordvalg og klarhet.

--- Aaemn784 (talk) 08:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh good, you're very welcome :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Pillnitz Castle

Hello Yngvadottir, some time ago you corrected "my" Pillnitz Castle article so that Gerda Arendt could nominate it for DYK (thanks a lot!). I just did some extensions to the history section and I am afraid it messed up the good English. Could you please have a look at this short part? Thank you very much!--Linear77 (talk) 21:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll be happy to check it, but not for a few hours. And I doubt you've messed it up anyway! Yngvadottir (talk) 21:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the corrections! You put a link to Zacharias Longuelune, even this page does not exist, was this on purpose?--Linear77 (talk) 08:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Good, glad you like it :-) Yes, redlinks serve to tell people that the topic is notable. They then become links when a page gets created; and they serve as an easy way to create the article. In this case I saw that he has a de.wikipedia page and was mentioned a couple of times on en.wikipedia. I originally thought a redlink meant that the page had been deleted, but someone referred me to WP:REDLINK. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, now I learned something. Hopefully someone will take it up, otherwise I might put the basic data in there. (I am just surprised that he is not on fr.wikipedia.) Thanks again for your help, I really appreciate it.--Linear77 (talk) 07:18, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Just-World Hypothesis

Hi Yngvadottir. Thanks for your comments and help with the DYK nomination of the Just-world Hypothesis page. I have made edits and corrections. I would like to revise the hook as you suggested, but I am unsure how to do this? Thanks! Cheaal01 (talk) 22:53, 6 December 2011 (UTC)Cheaal01

Jötunn, Troll, Thurs and Risi Madness

Hello Yngvadottir. Have you noticed how bad our current coverage is on these subjects? It's been an issue long troubling me here on Wikipedia, but English scholarship on the subject seems to frequently be a mess. For example, many translations of the Old Norse material just glosses all four terms as "giant", whereas it is not remotely clear how "giant" any of them are intended to be. Sometimes thurs gets glossed as "ogre". This seems to be due to little more than Greco-Roman influence in scholarship. What do you think? I propose that we write articles on all four and just note the glossing madness glossing on the side. Opinion? :bloodofox: (talk) 04:14, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Mailcall

Hello, Yngvadottir. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

About Enterprise Group Freudenberg Article

Dear Yngvadottir: Thanks for your recommendations about my article. I am sorry that I don't have enough time to keep editing the article because I am preparing the College Entrance Examination. And the most importing problem is that I haven't find out enough and appropriate source about it.

However, I have seen the website about German Version you had sent to me. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unternehmensgruppe_Freudenberg In my opinion, this article can be linked to German Version, which can be the best sources for editing the English Version. Because this company is initially built in Germany.

Sorry I am not skilled in editing Wikipedia, I am just a beginner. Please help me if you are convenient.

Thanks again you for your recommendations! Hwayang (talk) 14:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

About Enterprise Group Freudenberg

I have researched some data from its official website. http://www.freudenberg.com/ecomaXL/index.php?site=Freudenberg_e_locations_new_showlocation&locid=Weinheim&mapId=34

And compared with some information on the German Version, (Sorry I am not master in German.) For instance, the Company Trademark, and its partner incorporated in the group such as "Freudenberg NOK Mechatronics","Freudenberg IT","Freudenberg New Technologies". The things are same with those on the official site.

With these proof, maybe we can definitely recognized it as the same Enterprise we are talking about on the German Version.

Thank again for your recommendation. Hwayang (talk) 01:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

filicide

Thank you so much for making the lead article more recognizable. The synopsis misses now that these parents find out only after the killing that the victim was their son. Also I still have not the slightest idea what the lead wants to tell us about tyranny and fate, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Heh, you noticed :-) You're welcome. I saw that there was a fuller explanation a little later in the paragraph, so I didn't put in the "unrecognized" that I had originally thought of sticking in. I agree, the end of the lead paragraph is a mess - the reviewer should have spotted that. But I couldn't do anything about it without pretending to be able to read Polish. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

What do you think about just dropping the unspeakable "visions of totalitarianism", it's really "misguided", the poor man doesn't deserve it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Boldly changed it based on what Google translate makes of the second cited source, but I feel very uncomfortable about doing so - I don't read Polish. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2012 WikiCup

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Augustus II the Strong

Hello Yngvadottir, Happy New Year! May I ask you (again) for a favor? Augustus II the Strong was quite an important figure in Saxon history, so his article is referenced and used very often. However, it did not have any references, so I took care of this and also improved the formatting etc. Two issues remain: (1) I would like that someone checks the English -- with all the different contributions, I feel this article needs some "polishing" to sound more fact-based. (2) I don't know what to do with these "personal/opinion statements" in the header "...he is nowadays held in low esteem...", "...are considered failures...", etc. Could we make them sound less "absolute"? (Perhaps they should even be moved down to the "Legacy" section?) Historians still debate this issue -- and so I would like to get this "opinion" a bit more separated from the "facts" about his life. However, this "making it sound softer/opinion-like" is beyond my language abilities -- could you help me with this? Thank you very much.--Linear77 (talk) 14:18, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I've taken a stab at it; take a look. However, the sections on the Great Northern War and his second reign as king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth present it as fact that he was unsuccessful in his political aims and that the war led to increased Russian influence in the Commonwealth, so I made the statement in the lede match by removing the "is considered" and for political substituting in relation to Poland-Lithuania. Rather different from what you asked for, but that's what the article as a whole is saying. The other thing I noticed was that his conversion was introduced with no explanation at all of how he came to be King of Poland, so I put in a little bridging statement there; and the matter of his conversion seemed important enough in the article that it should be in the lede. Yngvadottir (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I like your solution, the article looks now concise. (There are various prospectives on this person, the German and Polish historians somewhat differ here.) It is good that you introduced his conversion in the lede, it is rather important. I was just worried that the lead paragraph was already too long, but obviously we are still in a tolerated length range here. Thanks again!--Linear77 (talk) 10:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Rademann

Thank you so much for careful ce! Just one question: Hochschule is much closer to university than to conservatory, therefore I tend to leave the term untranslated. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Hochschule is problematic for speakers of American English: it's a "false friend" with "high school," which has a very different meaning (secondary rather than tertiary). The usual best translation is "college" (although a recent reform of the UK secondary system has introduced the problem that schools covering the last 2 years of secondary education, which were formally called "sixth-form colleges," are now called simply "colleges," so increasingly that is the first meaning of "college" that comes to mind for UK English speakers. But in this case it's a Musikhochschule, and English speakers are familiar with the term conservatory/conservatoire for those, so that provides the simplest fix. You also used "institute," but in English that usually refers to a primarily research branch within a university or an independent think tank or research agency; the general term you were probably reaching for was "institution," but that is extremely vague and would not have helped non-German speakers grasp what kind of educational institution was meant. Plus there are always childish jokes when that term is used because it can also refer to a place where problem people are placed, often unwillingly, such as a mental asylum or a school for the handicapped or for "wayward children." You would think readers would simply click the link to educate themselves about what the Musikhochschule Dresden is or what the Erzgebirge are, but it requires less of them and makes the prose clearer if the term is followed up with a clear English term (in the latter case our article is actually at Ore Mountains, though I had never encountered that until Wikipedia; but then again I hated geography in school and what I know about it focuses on places I have been or read about in foreign-language contexts). Yngvadottir (talk) 22:20, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, very helpful, only: Konservatorium (conservatory?) is much less scientific than Musikhochschule, is there a way to express that difference? The Musikhochschule Frankfurt translates to Frankfurt University of Music and Performing Arts, and Dresden is similar, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

National differences in usage, I believe. Institutions such as the Juilliard School use "school" in their names, but is described as a conservatory in its lede paragraph - which is piped to Music school, where the lede paragraph mentions conservatory as a common term, and gives a German example for the Hochschule terminology translated as university. The problem is, universities are, by their very name, more or less universal in the fields they cover - the relatively few specialized institutions in English-speaking countries therefore tend to use different words, like Juilliard (School), MIT (Institute), and the truly odd Cooper Union. There may be some, but I can't think of an example of a music university or performing arts university in an English-speaking country that calls itself a university, though note that the Royal College of Music is described in the lead as a conservatoire - again piped to Music school. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Freudenberg Group

Hello! Your submission of Freudenberg Group at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:28, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out!

I wanted to drop by quickly and thank you for helping me make Hurricane Celeste a GA. Thanks and have a good day! Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I did?! You're welcome :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 23:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Léon Azéma – thanks

Thanks for tidying and correcting my translation in the Léon Azéma article. I was hoping someone with a better knowledge of French than me would check it out and amend any anomalies – and you have done just that :) Thank you. — Hebrides (talk) 21:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Rakni's Mound

Hello, Yngvadottir, and thank you for your contributions!

Some text in an article that you worked on Rakni's Mound, appears to be directly copied from another Wikipedia article, Rakni's Mound. Please take a minute to double-check that you've properly attributed the source text in your edit summary.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Rakni's Mound at any time. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I removed the tag after leaving a note on the article talkpage as instructed. The claim is that the page is a copyvio of itself; this must be some technical glitch? Yngvadottir (talk) 17:44, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

It is. For some reason, the code that's supposed to check if the bot found the article itself fails when there is a quote involved in the title – even though it's supposed to be suitably escaped. It's a niggling little buglet I've yet failed to track down; it's hard to reproduce because it's not often that Yahoo indexes the page so fast the bot finds it. — Coren ^(talk) 17:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

OMGs ROFLMAO. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:09, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Karlino oil eruption

Thanks for the message. I have revieved another DYK, and left a comment here [2]. Hope it is good to go now. Tymek (talk) 05:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Guido Dessauer - Horst Janssen

Thanks for improving Guido Dessauer! The term "modellos" was suggested by Johnbod. I started referencing and expanding Horst Janssen. At present the article looks like a story about his women, wifes and children, not like "der größte Zeichner außer Picasso. Aber Picasso ist eine andere Generation". How would that translate? Also the article heading from Der Spiegel: "Zwei Zentner Talent", playing on his enormous weight and talent. More precise terms for printmaker? I learned lithographer already. If I can interest you in expanding: 8.5k would be a 2* BLP, so I don't want to drop the stuff that is there, but weigh in art, in prose if possible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'd link modello and consider pluralising it in Italian fashion: modelli. Until I looked up our article on it, I had never seen it left untranslated. Maquette is far more a normal term in my experience. I looked briefly at Horst Janssen but I see you have a few days yet before hitting the DYK submission deadline and I'm staring at the deadline for Rakni's Mound, so I won't be able to offer any real help for a day or two, but I'll swing by then and see what I can do. As to the 2 translation questions, the first I would render as "the greatest draftsman besides Picasso. But Picasso is a different generation." (or: "other than" for "besides" - a little more formal; "draughtsman" for "draftsman" if using British English.) The second: "2 cwt of talent" (Brits of a certain age will know hundredweight - Americans and younger people, not so much). Yngvadottir (talk) 17:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, excellent translations! Dr. Blofeld created 3 related articles today, on my talk. The funeral is on Monday. I will return to models, never heard maquette, we know bozzetti, what's the maquette plural (just for curiosity)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Maquette is a French word, so it adds -s. The modello article does a good job of presenting the words used in different art forms (but you might do well to ask Johnbod whether he would write modelli or modellos). Yngvadottir (talk) 17:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I now linked "model" to the modello article. Getting picky: the weight translation would be of "2 Ztr", not of "Zwei Zentner", but "Two hundredweights" looks wrong. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Yup, the abbreviation cwt is not pluralised (just as lb is not pluralised in British usage), and if you look at the Hundredweight article you'll see that technically there are two differing hundredweights in use; the "short hundredweight" can also be called a cental, which corresponds directly to your Zental. But cwt is correct (one usually doesn't specify which one one is using, it goes by context) and preserves the joke without introducing a less well known precise word. (Confession: I usually don't bother translating titles of periodical articles and books. Thereby allowing everyone to have fun with their online translation programme of choice '-) Plus I would have had a heck of a job with Yann Kersalé - he clearly likes to give his works punning titles.) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll leave this one untranslated then, but it's the title of an important reference. Look forward to Janssen, for punning titles. For more of the kind, look at Fritz Graßhoff and enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK issue

Hi there Yngvadottir. Since you participated in a previous discussion regarding reuse of PD text in DYK submissions, you may be interested in contributing to a recent discussion on the same topic, here, or the proposal which follows it. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 01:29, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Nice job with handling the Abkindern thing by creating a fine new article (Marriage loan). Way to go! Herostratus (talk) 14:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :-D Yngvadottir (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Olaus Verelius

Greetings, Yngvadottir! Just letting you know that I've nominated Olaus Verelius for DYK. Cheers! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rakni's Mound

Hello! Your submission of Rakni's Mound at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mikenorton (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Bauerfeind, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kempen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 January newsletter

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

• 12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
• 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
• Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
• Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:23, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Precious

	help with translations
	Thank you for helping us Germanic contributors to fluent idiomatic articles, with your detailed explanations and admirable patience in copy-editing dedicated to precision, and thanks for covering a broad range of German topics, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Aww, thanks :-) That's beautiful, and it was an absolute scandal we had no article on the Steinerne Brücke. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I started looking at Christa Reinig, like a lot, agree that black humour ... also belong in the lead. Perhaps mention Benn, along with Brecht? The translation of Entmannung might come sooner, and I would like to see a translation of two main work's titles, to give a feeling: Die himmlische und die irdische Geometrie + Müßiggang ist aller Liebe Anfang. The paragraph about her writing seems a bit complicated, long sentences, some years vs. some durations. - The article is approved by the reviewer, right? I'll ask the author of Ulenspiegel to also look at it. Too tired to see more, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

On it again. I would mention in the prose the Bremen Prize and her staying in the West on that occasion, and the Villa Massimo, one year in Rome. The restrictions on publishing in the East could also be stronger. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:10, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I asked, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:13, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh gosh, I wish you hadn't. There has proven to be no defence against the accusation, and I do want the poor lady to get her moment in the sun. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, next time I know, and this time I will baby-sit if at all possible, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:29, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The other baby made Main page history, people in oppressive circumstances pictured, did you now? (And not pulled this time, for a change.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:24, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Walter D'Arcy Ryan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westinghouse (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy delete Battlefield Advanced Trauma Life Support

unreferenced, stub article

Jawadreventon (talk) 22:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for helping with my first article!

Much appreciated! Runestrommen (talk) 22:50, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Christa Reinig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Brandenburg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

New cfds regarding "Old Fooians"

Two new cfds propose the renaming of some twenty categories. Most of those who took part in last year's cfd "Former pupils by school in the United Kingdom" seem unaware of them, so I am notifying all those who took part in that discussion, to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus. Please consider contributing here and here. Moonraker (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Dresden Codex

Hello Yngvadottir, may I ask for your help again? 2012 brings a lot of attention to the Dresden Codex, so I added some essential stuff that I considered missing. Could you please have a look at this article and correct any English language issues you find? I would like to point some visitors to this article, but before I want to make sure everything sounds correct. I appreciate your help. Thanks a lot.--Linear77 (talk) 15:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Soooooo not my field, but I gave it a try (looking at de.wikipedia for that use of "leporello" and in vain for what was meant by "numen references" - see my edit summary). Have a look and see whether that helps. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It helps, thanks. I double-checked the sentence where you put the missing ref. and came to the conclusion that something is wrong here: Salvador Toscano died in 1947, at this time the codex was still undergoing reparation, how could he comment on its condition then? So I removed the sentence. -- Even if it is not your field, isn't this interesting? I am always fascinated by looking at the original of this Maya writing, one thousand years old. -- Thanks again for your help. Now I can send the link around :-) --Linear77 (talk) 19:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

cchallag

Would the references from Gizmodo or http://www.phonearena.com/news/Nokia-808-PureView-41-megapixel-camera-magic-explained_id27406 would ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchallag (talk • contribs) 06:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

cchallag

I have added the external links. Please could you remove the banner there. Thanks for helping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchallag (talk • contribs) 09:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Too big and Nokia

This page is ridiculously large. I have taken the liberty of asking MiszaBot to do something about it. Needless to say, you are at liberty to tell MiszaBot not to.

I was amused that Cchallag (talk · contribs) has saved us the trouble of a checkuser request by editing from 192.100.120.41 (talk) which is registered to Nokia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Re page size: many of the arguments in Wikipedia:article size apply equally to user talk pages. Have you thought about users of mobile devices? I tried to edit this page using Opera Mobile running under Android - it crashed the app. My personal size limit is 64K bytes. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I believe you are the first to raise the issue; I don't use a mobile device, and have only had trouble with picture-heavy pages. After you mentioned it, I had a look to see if I could find a policy, and noted that archiving is advised for article talk pages at 50K (which I take it this page exceeds), but I didn't find anything explicit in the guidelines for user talk pages, although those alluded in general to the talk page guidelines. As I say, I am considering making a thematic archive for the DYK notices; that should not impede people searching this page, and labeling it clearly should help those who just want to check whether I have more than 5 DYK credits. But it's fiddly so I won't be doing it right now even if I do. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Whaddya mean "which I take it"? Have you actually looked at the history? What is fiddly about switching on MiszaBot? OK, disk space is ridiculously cheap these days but even so gobbling up 300K bytes to make a 400 byte comment feels like a mis-use of the world's resources. Not to mention the bandwidth used to read it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Guys it was really great for the help and opening my eyes about this system. I give up now and I request you guys to kinds delete my user space as I dont want to be part of this anymore.cchallag (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC).

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chicopee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 February newsletter

Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was Grapple X (submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was Tigerboy1966 (submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were Ruby2010 (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions), Miyagawa (submissions) and Casliber (submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Ruby2010 (submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. When you recently edited Play (activity), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TED (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Dresden Codex

Hello Yngvadottir, I am sorry -- but I added two paragraphs to the Dresden Codex and I am afraid I messed up your good English from last week. Could you have a look at them once more? It is the last paragraph in 'History' and the last but one in 'Description'. Thank you very much.--Linear77 (talk) 20:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I hope that helps? I was a little unclear on whether the paint stuck to the glass after restoration, which is what it looks like, or whether the sections have had to remain out of sequence because they stuck to the glass before that and had to be restored in place . . . ? Yngvadottir (talk) 18:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, it helps! Your assumption is correct, the paint stuck to the glass after restauration. It is assumed that they put the sheets back too early. (There are not reports or witnesses anymore on how they did the restauration after the war, that's why the "assumed".) Would adding another word help? (...because [subsequently] the [previous/earlier] water damage caused some of the painted areas to adhere to the glass [after the restauration] [afterwards]). Or is it be clear with the current sentence? I don't want to put my above "assumed sentence" in; I would like to keep it short. Thank you for your suggestion.--Linear77 (talk) 08:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd leave it as it is, then. That's the implication of the current wording. (Yeesh.) --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Have a great weekend.--Linear77 (talk) 14:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue One - Recent news from the Teahouse

Hi! Welcome to the first edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Spring has sprung! Stop by the Teahouse for a cup of tea under the cherry blossoms.

• Metrics are out from week one. Week one showed that the need for Teahouse hosts to invite new editors to the Teahouse is urgent for this pilot period. It also showed that emailing new users invitations is a powerful tool, with new editors responding more to emails than to talk page templates. We also learned that the customized database reports created for the Teahouse have the highest return rate of participation by invitees. Check out the metrics here and see how you can help with inviting in our Invitation Guide.
• A refreshed "Your hosts" page encourages experienced Wikipedians to learn about the Teahouse and participate. With community input, the Teahouse has updated the Your hosts page which details the host roles within the Teahouse pilot and the importance that hosts play in providing a friendly, special experience not always found on other welcome/help spaces on Wikipedia. It also explains how Teahouse hosts are important regarding metrics reporting during this pilot. Are you an experienced editor who wants to help out? Take a look at the new page today and start learning about the hosts tasks and how you can participate!
• Introduce yourself and meet new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. New & experienced editors to Wikipedia can add a brief infobox about themselves and get to know one another with direct links to userpages. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, they'll surely be happy to feel the wikilove!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	That's an impressive list of articles and DYKs, Yngvadottir--congratulations. Don't expect to get tenure out of it, though... Drmies (talk) 17:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Harald Hardrada (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Samuel Laing

Theodor Rowehl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Zeiss

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Nokia 808 PureView

Tachchen. Erinnerst Dich: hattest mir´n link gegeben. Hab eigentlich (abgesehen von´n paar teilen inner einleitung) nen völlig neuen artikel gemacht. Natürlich nur die camera, alles andere interessiert mich nich. Isser verständlich, hab da einiges Fachwissen reingepackt. Tagremover (talk) 11:16, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Freue mich, und werde mal da 'n bissel rumschauen, aber sei gewarnt - vom Technischen weiß ich fast garnix. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Deswegen isses ja interessant für mich. Wollte auch mal deine umgangsprachlichen Fähigkeiten testen. Tagremover (talk) 20:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

(Switching to English to avoid possible accusations of skullduggery.) Sadly the article is still way, way beyond my ability to understand, although the links suggest it makes sense to those who do understand :-) I gave it a copyedit but was not confident enough of the topic area to remove the Copyedit tag. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful! Excellent! And some of my errors were worse (Also <> Although) and the only explanation is that some text was edited in a hurry. And i´m german.

I tried to give readers a short lesson in new technologies in image sensors and processing as well as lenses and the related photography science. Although i have been proud to made it easily understandable, a second look showed you are right. Probably the article succeeds in giving a message: This is amazing, groundbreaking technology, showing a new way which is the reason for the groundbreaking results.

You helped not only with this article about a phone quickly being replaced, but i plan to extract the camera content into a new article. Nokia will integrate this camera in new phones, and other companies MUST do a nearly full copy. Probably even two more articles about this new groundbreaking sensor and the lens: so old, so simple, so bad and therefore so rarely used in the last century, that it has no name or nobody remembers it. But pepped up with new technologies, a lot of creativity and knowledge, its awesome because of reasons.

By the way: Have you downloaded the example photos, for example the hill climbing? (First link in References) If you looking at them in a small size or full screen, they are quite "normal". But if you zoooooom in, the amount of details is amazing, especially on a large monitor. Tagremover (talk) 14:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Dearborn Homes

Hello! Your submission of Dearborn Homes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

NB this is my first attempt at a review. Sorry if I've missed anything.  Tigerboy1966  13:05, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK Branch House

Thanks for taking the time to review and improve the Branch House DYK -- the edits were thorough and well-done. 842U (talk) 21:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Abiogenesis Zn-world

Dear Yngvadottir, thanks for putting back the Zn-world paragraph. We appreciate it! Best, Dirk --Lankenau (talk) 07:09, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear Yngvadottir, many thanks again for your help - it is greatly appreciated, also the WP:EXPERT text! Is your name icelandic origin ... ? I prefer to give a few words to you instead of posting them on the article page. I hope, I read most of the discussion, including the scepticism toward "nobel" winners and other scientists who might do "pseudo-scientific" stuff after the prize..... (this statement, and involving me in this appears kind of unfair - I think).

Well, I can assure you that my interests in evolutionary questions are as old as I can think. Thus bringing the various "horizontally organized" fields together (geology, astronomy, lifesciences, medicine, chemistry, physics, philosophy...) into a single conceptional framework is a chief goal I have since childhood ... The philosophy behind Wiki - bridging boundaries of thought - is very similar to that goal. Be assured, my editor-in-chief status with Springer is not giving me any income and only serves this "evolution-aim". During my interim professorship in Heidelberg and my work at the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) (the only timeframe I could be called professional, indeed) I suggested to let graduating students put newly made and published discoveries of their work into some text body within Wikipedia in form of small paragraphs. It was ignored by some faculty. This is what I tested here again with publications of Prof. Mulkidjanian. His work led to lots of public press releases and at least one invitation to him for giving a plenary talk on a major experts-conference. Citation impact cannot be high at the moment for such a matter, as time is needed for the public to become aware of this. My own work welcomed this Zn-world concept because of its enormous power of causal specificity and interconnected data-density. Of course, other models are welcome as well and might be incorporated into the long trajectory I tried to sketch in my recent papers. - I wonder, if Wikipedia could not - after consensus finding-processes took place - invite recognized experts in their field. The major encyclopedias of the world invite experts to write in a given issue of the encyclopedia. (Brockhaus in Germany, Encyclopedia Britannica in GB). This might help to get Scientists more interested in contributing to Wikipedia. - As of me, I now became again a bit reluctant to contribute directly. Perhaps, scientists like me, should ask for the helping hand of a well established, aiding Wiki-editor(-administrator) who is interested in the particular topic. Such an editor(administrator) could then first communicate with the scientist and exchange text-suggestions via e-mail. Only then, the Wiki-editor(administrator) - not the scientist - would post the text - on the respective Wiki-article´s talk forum.....!? An editor(administrator) like you would be perfect for an endevour like the big Wiki Evolutionary Biology project and Geology Project and ..... So much for now - please be patient if I do not answer right away: these days I work 16 hours to give my honey-bee hives and growing bee-volks the best chance for a perfect start into spring. With best regards, Dirk --Lankenau (talk) 11:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Thus, your WP:EXPERT memo hint tells me that

DYK nomination of Julia C. Lathrop Homes

Hello! Your submission of Julia C. Lathrop Homes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ishtar456 (talk) 13:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ida B. Wells Homes

Hello! Your submission of Ida B. Wells Homes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ishtar456 (talk) 19:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC) just a small question

Bernhard Kummer

Hey Yngvdottir, I just realized that you were the author of Bernhard Kummer. I commented on some things that the edit introduction was lacking that I've noticed as common practice; i.e. the term "Christianization" avoided in favor of "conversion" and the absence of mention of what those who were Christianized were Christianized from. As I've noticed this as a part of a larger pattern on articles dealing with Christianization, I figure that this word choice was a result of translation on your part—these comments were not directed towards you, as I am aware that you are quite familiar with both Christianization and Germanic paganism. :bloodofox: (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Yup, that's me, documenting another older writer '-) I'll leave your changes, but ... I don't like Christianization. I think it's an unneeded neologism; perhaps it's more common in the US, but I had never seen it until I started reading Wikipedia articles. On saying what they were converted from, and on linking to Germanic peoples ... look down at the section where I lay out his views. He was a prominent Nordicist, so although he was actually writing about the Norsemen, for him that automatically meant the same went for the proto-Germans. (I considered linking to Christianization of Scandinavia but decided to leave it general to fit his broad-brush writing.) And he had a quirky view of the nature of heathenry - like others at the time, he handwaved away the distinction between polytheism and monotheism - so I didn't want to foreground the Germanic paganism in the intro but put it in the context of how he used Midgard and how he later developed his views. What I did consider spelling out at the outset but decided not to was that the missionaries were of course Catholic and that was a focus of his distaste. He's an interesting case; his views on women in heathenry and on the goddesses are refreshingly egalitarian, but unlike, say, Baetke, he doesn't seem to have given much thought to how the religion worked, beyond "natural ethics" and numinosity. So anyway, that was the rationale behind what was linked and what wasn't, and what got explained in the intro and what was laid out later. (Also of course there is a bit of volcano dancing involved here. Committed Nazi, still cited by neo-Nazis, not only had a massive fight with Höfler but supposedly made the accusations against Neckel that led to his being thrown out of Berlin and sent into the purdah of Göttingen. I alluded briefly to that in the Neckel article but left it out of Kummer's. Old academic politics of the worst kind. I felt forced, however, to quote the sneering interpretation of his nickname, which does not seem mocking at all to us now.) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Kummer is a very interesting case. I had not looked into him prior to your article, and I thank you for writing this article. Out of curiosity, why do you dislike the term Christianization? And why do you consider it a neologism? I regularly spot it in 19th century works, and I think more neutrally reflects the process than 'conversion'. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think it may be an Americanism - I honestly don't remember encountering it before, just "conversion" and "conversion to Christianity," and I don't see why another term is needed. --Yes, there are a lot of these older scholars, some of them on the wrong side in the war, who contributed interesting perspectives. This is why I think German is still necessary for work in the field. Either that or people like me have to translate it all! [I'm also making some edits to what I said above for clarity and to get rid of another of my unclosed parentheses.) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ali Forney

Just to let you know that this hook was pulled from the mainpage due to an imbalance in the update, and will be featured on the mainpage again in a couple of updates' time. Gatoclass (talk) 15:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Medal

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		Congratulations for putting so many high quality articles, many of them being fine translations, onto the English Wikipedia Main Page. Well done! Binksternet (talk) 22:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Johanna Mestorf

Thank you for an interesting woman! She is now featured on Portal:Germany. If you have more DYK related to Germany, feel free to place it there yourself. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Klopp Castle

Noticing this only now, I am quite surprised that the template of the castles has about 2/3 German names and the rest English. Do you know why?? - Anyway, I am going to take it to the Portal:Germany, please do it yourself for other DYK related to Germany. I overlooked it completely because of the English name. The fireworks were great last year! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:21, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. I had recalled your invite and thought of doing so but was too modest. Castles are another of those areas where en.wikipedia has astoundingly poor coverage - lots of redlinks, some not even that. As to the naming, there's ongoing confusion and disagreement about whether to use foreign names for foreign people, let alone buildings. In many cases there is no single Common Name (in some areas, such as Old Norse, there are differences in usage depending on the writer's native language and between scholarly and popular) and there are strong partisans on en.wikipedia for both the foreign-language version and anglicization. (And for Old Norse, the strongest party historically has been the partisans of Swedish, Danish, and Norwegian spellings, in about that order, because of who started most of the articles way back when!) For Klopp Castle I followed the model of Stahleck Castle, which I had expanded first. In the case of castles I'm more concerned about our terrible coverage, including the miserable stubs and bad translatese, than about naming - providing a redirect is always an option. In the case of people I'm less happy with the jumble we currently have, and not sure there's a good solution. Once you go back even into the mid-19th century, royals and many lesser nobles actually spoke a different language at home because of where their family was actually from or out of some feeling it was more cultured, and I moved Edward Fortunatus to that version of his name rather than a Swedish or a German one of his name because he was actually named by Elisabeth I of England, presumably in Latin to communicate with his Swedish princess mother and because that was the cultivated language. (He's referred to in English-language sources in a hodgepodge of ways, like the castles). Also, if one counts what comes up in a search one finds a huge number of out and out misspellings of foreign names, of both places and people. English-speakers are very cavalier about that, including in print. I've recently had to point out in a footnote to Lichtburg (you saw that one, right?) that Lichtberg is a misreading; Miami University has changed Rudolf Fränkel's first name to Rudolph in the award they named after him; and it's not even only foreign-language stuff: the Ossulston Estate is misspelled Ossulton about half the time! Yngvadottir (talk) 18:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts! In this case, though, I vote for Burg, because it suggest more than "castle" that it is a fortified structure rather than a Schloss. Also, it's a known word, Hamburger, smile. I suggest we let a few days pass, like after Easter, and call then call a Burg a Burg consistently, also in that template. What do you think? - And please don't be too modest! You are not showcasing yourself but a Burg, adding colour to the Portal DYK which sometimes looks like music only, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:44, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Rhein in Flammen: the tourists travel from one German destination to the next, signs and announcements in German, right? - Sudden English in this specific sentence sounds strange to me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Earlier in the article. First mentions of Burg Ehrenfels and the Mäuseturm (the ones that are linked - they're unlinked in the Rhein in Flammen section because they've been previously mentioned) look like this in edit mode: "Together with [[Burg Ehrenfels (Hessen)|Ehrenfels Castle]] on the opposite side of the Rhine and later the [[Mouse Tower]], it enabled the [[Archbishopric of Mainz]] to exact [[Tariff|toll]]s on river trade." The Mäuseturm article is at Mouse Tower. I piped Burg Ehrenfels (Hessen) to Ehrenfels Castle to match that and the fact I put the article at Klopp Castle. If the whole article gets moved to the German name, and especially if Mouse Tower gets moved to the German name, then it makes full sense to consistently refer to them by their German names. But the reader shouldn't have to know that Mouse Tower = Mäuseturm, and I'd chosen to use the English word for the title of the article. Actually I disagree with you that English speakers know the word Burg - in American English it's slang for a city, and there are 19th-century references to Klopp as a Schloss, ridiculous though that is. And Palas is on my mental list of articles to write; the different distribution of functions in a continental castle is explained at Bergfried, but both of those terms are mystifying to non-expert English speakers, who rarely know many words in German. I see your point about consistency, but each article needs to be made as clear as possible. So anyway, that was my rationale - if that bit at the end is changed, the earlier mentions of the 2 other castles need to be changed too. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:13, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

repeating: "Also, it's a known word, Hamburger, smile", stress on smile, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ehrenbürg

Congratulations on such an interesting article, and one that interested so many people. Sharktopus ^talk 07:11, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I really liked bringing articles to DYK—partly because it was usually because suddenly, wham! there was something weird in the info I turned up. And it's also been fun seeing what gets the clicks—mine generally do fairly well, but the best performers aren't the ones I would have expected, for the most part. (And Techno Viking had a second bounce in late May that I have been unable to explain.) However, I'm out of it for now. I'll do a few of the expansions and new creations that I'd intended to do and just won't submit them even if there's a hooky fact. And there's at least one I doubt has 1500 characters of RS in it anyway. I'll see how the damned politics goes down. I hope someone will let me know if DYK starts getting short of articles, as has historically happened in the later stages of the WikiCup and after it wraps up, and as is always something of a danger when something purely optional like DYK gets attacked or made harder. Otherwise—I'm one of a multitude, many of whom don't even keep count of their DYKs, or nominate other people's articles. --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

It's now on Portal:Germany DYK, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

No I didn't, thanks! For one reason or another I have been doing a lot of Germany-related articles recently; this one was one of two expansions of one-line stubs that I noted I should do when I was improving Bavarian State Archaeological Collection—that stuff was not yet back on exhibition the last time I was in Munich, but a mutual internet acquaintance brought it to my friend's attention when the friend was recently travelling in Germany for the first time, so of course I had to improve that miserable little en.wikipedia article, and that brought to my attention that we have only exiguous stubs on many of the locations of finds. And improving the Ehrenbürg article plopped an obvious hook candidate in my lap. But I really should get back to Scandinavian stuff soon, before people start to think of me as a specialist '-) --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sugar Museum (Berlin)

Sweet! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank Sharktopus: he told me about the place and then jumped in and vigorously co-wrote the article to make sure it wouldn't take longer than 5 days, finding all sorts of English-language sources too :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I thanked him, sure, even first. Thanks for re-stringing the fiddle! The other day I searched for a word, perhaps should have asked you: for Unionskirche, Idstein I looked for Hexenverfolgung and found only witch-hunt, which is Hexenjagd, not quite the same. Witch persecution? It's so much nicer to comment a DYK sweetly than scream. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I should have maybe asked you about the fiddle :-) There are 2 problems in translating that: English uses the same word for the verb as the noun, "string," and "string with other strings" is clearly not good. One normally just says "string" rather than "mount a string" or "put a string on." The other is that English uses "another string to one's bow" (referring presumably to archery bows) to mean having an additional option, usually another job or career possibility," and I wasn't sure whether the meaning of the German phrase referred, as in that case, to addition, or to exchange, but was pretty sure the connotations were different so I wanted to avoid triggering thoughts of the English metaphor. Thanks for the pointer! In the case of Hexenverfolgung, it could be either witch-hunt or persecution of witches. The former has been so generalised that it is a bit of a dead metaphor, so I would have gone with the latter to make it clear that actual witches are meant. (In Wicca and some other neo-pagan contexts, a third possibility is more common: the Burning Times. Our DAB page points to an article called Early Modern witch-hunts - one could also pipe to that. As you know, the German states were more impacted by that than anywhere else, so some English-speaking readers are unaware of the phenomenon.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the Witch trials in the Early Modern period, fit perfectly! Did you see that I took four of the pics? And did you see which persecution (pun intended) made me scream? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jan Buijs

• Ha! I'm pleased to see that you added 'your' Jan Buijs to 'my' De Arbeiderspers. Great work. Drmies (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 March newsletter

We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well! Grapple X (submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's Cwmhiraeth (submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in marine biology and herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's Casliber (submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including ornithology and botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.

Congratulations to Matthewedwards (submissions), whose impressive File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to 12george1 (submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as recent statistics from Miyagawa (submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!

It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Run for Admin

Right, 330k is a bit much in a talk page. If you want a bot to archive it, put this at the very top of your page:

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=User talk:Yngvadottir/Archive
|format= %%i
|age=336
|index=no
|maxarchsize=250000
|numberstart=1
|archivebox=yes
}}

336 = sections are archived after 14 days, 250000 = archive pages will get 250k large before a new one is started.
Cheers, Amalthea 20:13, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Since many people do share this concern, I started creating a thematic archive of my DYKs, to be finished soon. Then I'll see whether I also need to archive earlier parts of what's left or whether that's made it manageable. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:48, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Christa Reinig

What a great day. Thank you Victuallers (talk) 08:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

She is featured also (as you know) on Portal:Germany, for a little longer. Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

And thanks to you and the others for copyediting! --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Remember that I was also worried about an article then? See top of my talk, and discussion which makes maroons vs. Maroons politics, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

FYI

I noticed that you just said that someone is "attempting to get you drafted". Does this mean that you do not want to run for adminship? If so, you can just decline the nomination wish no poor reflections on you. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :-) It was a hard decision and I will take revenge. But if the community wants me, why not; I could probably do some good if I avoid doing stuff where I might break the wiki. I'll be working this into at least one of my answers to the supplementary questions; it's an issue that needs clarifying since I am extremely non-ambitious.--Yngvadottir (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Techno Viking

I found "relevant" discussions/logs about 'Techno Viking' at:

• logs for Techno Viking
• logs for Techno viking
• logs for Techno-viking
• Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-11-12#Techno_Viking; an old WP:AFC draft

and all through this search (the logs were simply guessed, might be more) mabdul 13:17, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! That adds to what I know from "what links here". I'm a bit puzzled by this AN discussion and suspect that the unsalting and resalting may have hidden more past versions; but in any case I just tried again, since that was so recent, and typing the not unreasonable Techno viking into the search box does take one to Techno Viking, so I don't need to ask permission to create a redirect. I suspect it may also have been created at TechnoViking and possibly Technoviking at some point, but AFC request and one of the deleted versions appear to have been identical and don't offer new information, and at least one was clearly an in-universe joke. Still, the hits recorded for the title prior to my making an article out of teh Techno Viking redirect are amazing. Much searched term. (And of course there is a YouTube video entirely about Wikipedia not having that page. A friend found it for me after I had remedied that :-) ) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Milko Bambič

Done. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:01, 4 April 2012 (UTC)