User talk:A. Parrot

Xenophobia
Does the recent addition of AE xenophobia make sense? I guess it does, but I'm not sure. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 10:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)


 * It might not be the way I would have worded a section on ancient Egyptian xenophobia, but it's coherent. And the Egyptians certainly were xenophobic. A. Parrot (talk) 14:32, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I know they were xenophobic, just checking it wasn’t OR  Doug Weller  talk 17:00, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The first citation in the section checks out. I can't check the second because it's in German. The third, to Miriam Lichtheim's Ancient Egyptian Literature, looks like OR, because it's drawing a conclusion from the primary-source text of Ramesses II's account of the Battle of Kadesh. (The notion that Egyptians were supposed to fight "Europeans" doesn't make sense anyway; I'm pretty sure the Egyptians didn't fight any wars against states based in Europe until Ptolemaic times.) A. Parrot (talk) 16:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking into this. I suspected some OR. Doug Weller  talk 18:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Glad to be of help.
 * I know I haven't talked to you much lately; I wanted to express my sympathy about your health problems but didn't really know what to say. But while you're here, I want to express how helpful it's been to know that you were available as backup when dealing with fringe nonsense, and especially how helpful you were in the days when I was a fumbling newbie trying to improve the article on ancient Egyptian religion without really knowing how. (Can you believe it's been 14 years since then?) Anyway, here's hoping you make a full recovery in 2023. A. Parrot (talk) 19:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Wow, that long? How time flies.😀 Thanks for your comments. I should have some idea by the end of next week about what lies ahead. Cancer still in my liver despite the major op and in a lung. I doubt they’ll want to operate so it will be chemo. I’m rebuilding my strength, hampered by calf muscle issues but I have a gym quality treadmill that I use three times a day to walk a mile each time, so not bad for 80! Doug Weller  talk 20:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Once again on northern deities in ancient Egypt
Hello, terribly sorry to bother you again regarding the same topic. I finally finished the overhaul of Resheph I promised a few months ago (save for the Bible section, where I just left most as is because it is not really my forte, as I must admit). I really should've done this earlier, there were leftovers of the weird original research/vandalism spree which happened in August - my bad. I figured I should use this as an opportunity to ask about something that come up while I was gathering sources. Are you aware of any recent publications which would mention a supposed Egyptian deity named Keserty; Izak Cornelius, who is generally credible and pretty meticulous, mentions him in his Resheph/Baal iconography monograph (I've included the reference in the Resheph article, in the iconography section of "Egyptian reception"), and states that he is analogous to Kothar-wa-Khasis, but the figure is virtually absent from scholarship otherwise save for some articles which seem... dated. Jstor gave me 2 results, De Gruyter and Brill nothing, I'm also not seeing anything in dictionaries I have access to. There aren't many publications focused on Kothar but so far I found nothing there either. Supposedly the Kothar claim goes back to a 1972 article, The Smiting God: A Study of a Bronze in the Pomerance Collection in New York, but I have no access to it and it doesn't really seem to be commonly cited.

A second question is more loosely related, but I wanted to ask how would you approach the case of Yam when it comes to applying the "Egyptian god" categorization. He's evidently attested in Egypt, Egyptians were aware of his character and even his connections to other deities, but so far I can find little, if any, evidence for his presence in Egypt beyond a single myth, ie. the one from the Astarte papyrus. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 23:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Regarding Keserty, a search of my sources turns up two papers that I collected from JSTOR years ago (presumably the same as the two results you found) and another book by Cornelius. The two papers are "The Winged Reshep" (1979) by Alan R. Schulman in Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt and "An Egyptian Statuette of a Phoenician God" (1952) by William Kelly Simpson in The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin. They seem to be referring to the same stela, which portrays Keserty with a conical crown with a gazelle's head on the brow. Simpson only mentions Keserty in passing, while Schulman dedicates a paragraph to describing the stela. The Cornelius book is The Many Faces of the Goddess, which only mentions Keserty in two footnotes but refers to an old study, "Un nouveau dieu égypto-cananéen" (1948) by J. Leibovitch in Annales du Service des Antiquités de l'Égypte, which I found is freely accessible here.
 * Regarding Yam, I'm not sure. The two accessible reference works on Egyptian deities (Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt by Richard Wilkinson and Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses by George Hart) both have short entries about him. Wilkinson says Yam "was known also in Egypt as a minor foreign god" and "In Canaanite sources [Yam] was defeated by the god Baal, and in Egyptian sources by Seth with whom Baal was identified." But although he makes it sound like there are more sources than just the Astarte papyrus, that papyrus is the only one he refers to specifically. His last sentence is "Unserved by any Egyptian cult, he may nevertheless been a god known and feared by Egyptian seafarers." I can't track down any specifics in any other sources; Tazawa, e.g., doesn't mention Yam at all. Because the sources treat Yam as a deity on the periphery of the Egyptian pantheon, I think he can be categorized as an Egyptian deity, as long as his article makes it clear that he didn't have much of a presence in Egypt. A. Parrot (talk) 00:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. That is about the same conclusion as I reached regarding Yam. I'm 90% sure there is a second direct reference, but the context was similar. If my memory serves me well, it was a passage, probably in a medical papyrus, which recounts the events of the imported Yam vs Baal myth, with similar changes applied as in the Astarte papyrus; I still need to locate it in the prepared bibliography, though. Yam has surprisingly a lot of literature dedicated to him for a deity whose cultic importance even "at home" in Ugarit wasn't that big (~10-15 theophoric names, compared to popular deities' 60-200+, few offerings). I have about as many sources prepared as for Resheph, who has a longer history, broader distribution and was more popular. I guess appearing in myths helps.
 * Seems there is genuinely not much more on Keserty than I was able to find. Evidently his existence is not enough to apply the Egyptian label to Kothar, then, which I will bear in mind when I reach that article. At the moment it does have an unsourced assertion about him having a role in Egypt, which I so far found no evidence for. I assume someone misinterpreted the fact that Ugartic literary texts place him in Memphis (but also Caphtor), which seems to be literary fiction and does not seem to reflect actual distribution of his cult centers.
 * I also wanted to thank you again for the help with the Baalat Gebal situation, I will work on her article this weekend. In her case I do not think the Egyptian deity label warrants discussion, seeing as there is plentiful evidence for Egyptian involvement in her cult from between Old and New Kingdom, both with and without identification with Hathor. Michael J. Stahl in the recent article in the Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions even mentions theophoric names. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 10:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the double message, but I finished Baalat Gebal, and moved on to Yam - I located all the attestations I thought of. According to Noga Ayali-Darshan, there are three references to combat between Yam and either Set or Baal outside Astarte Papyrus (it comes up a few times in this article), but they are all just one sentence allusions. Further attestations I missed are two theophoric names of foreigners. Also, Ayali-Darshan and one more author, Herbert Niehr in the Reallexikon, seem to see the (personified?) sea in Tale of Two Brothers specifically as Yam. I am not really the biggest enthusiast of some of Ayali-Darshan's theories - they tend to border on hyperdiffusionism at times - but I suppose it is evidence, for better or worse.
 * I will be able to finish the Yam article next week most likely, which will leave me only with Ashtart as a major project on the crossroads of my usual ventures and Egyptology still to complete (I do not plan to tackle the Baal article, as it would require researching a lot of topics I have no experience with and no interest in; Qetesh requires some cleanup but I do not think there is all that much to add). Thank you for all the consultations along the way, I didn't really expect I'll actually get that far when I first asked about these matters. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 22:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. It's always good to see another knowledgeable editor working in the field of ancient religion. Good luck with your cleanup efforts, and let me know if there's anything else I can help you with. A. Parrot (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors 2022 Annual Report
Sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Ha
Did it make you tired because you knew you were perpetuating bullsh*t 😂😂😂😂😂 win for us lol 2A00:23EE:1338:63E7:4CCE:4A94:5739:2745 (talk) 14:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)


 * 😂😂😅😘 31.94.37.79 (talk) 14:33, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The Osiris Myth is a dud and they warned you about getting involved with it.
 * No moaning it was unfair then. Have you heart to then 😘😆❤️💪😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 2A00:23EE:1338:63E7:4CCE:4A94:5739:2745 (talk) 14:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If you're going to insult me, you could at least do it coherently. A. Parrot (talk) 12:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Why should I take it to a talk page
if you disagree with a SOURCED FACT then YOU can take your edit to the talk page bully I think tou are bully to! Leave me alone and go somewhere else! 2A00:23EE:1268:92CF:588E:C096:8C1B:5D83 (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)


 * And a girl just blocked you because of it she thought your ego and looks together were repulsive enough to not even bat another eyelid at you. 2A00:23EE:1268:92CF:588E:C096:8C1B:5D83 (talk) 00:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not doing this out of any desire to bully you. It's always unpleasant to be told you're mistaken—goodness knows I've been told that enough times—but I'm afraid you are mistaken in this case, and lashing out with personal attacks isn't going to help.
 * I can supply multiple sources saying that "Hor-Wer" simply means "Horus the Elder". As you have been told more than once, the source that you're using does not meet Wikipedia's standards of reliability. The passage in the source that talks about "Wer" was probably copied from the Wikipedia article itself, where the claim about Wer was originally added without any source at all. If Wikipedia used sources like this, any misinformation that made its way into a Wikipedia article could perpetuate itself forever. That's why our sourcing standards exist, and if you can't adapt to those standards, you'd be better off spending your time and energy elsewhere. A. Parrot (talk) 01:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No you are wrong Wer in Egyptian is great as in Wadj-Wer 2A00:23EE:1268:92CF:588E:C096:8C1B:5D83 (talk) 02:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello, A. Parrot! I am not sure if we have formally met, but I am Unlimitedlead. I am currently working on Early life of Cleopatra alongside PericlesofAthens, with the end goal of getting it to FA status. As you are one of the leading experts on Ancient Egypt on this site, may I request some quick feedback about the current state of the article and what I can do to improve it? Thank you kindly, Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:51, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Four sons of Horus
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Four sons of Horus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Four sons of Horus
The article Four sons of Horus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Four sons of Horus for comments about the article, and Talk:Four sons of Horus/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ancient Egyptian deities, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Four sons of Horus
Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2023 Newsletter
Sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!
Just wanted to drop by and say a wholehearted thank you for taking the time to give such a thorough review of TT8. I'm a big fan of your work and aspire to achieve the same quality in my editing. Your review and feedback were exactly as precise and thoughtful as I expected. Having someone with your experience and knowledge look over the page was so refreshing for my eyes that couldn't see the forest for the trees! Thanks again :) Merytat3n (talk) 09:28, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Source review for Merenre I
Dear Parrot, I am writing you about Merenre Nemtyemsaf I which is [at FAC] since April 16th. The article has received 3 extensive reviews with supports and has passed the image review but is still lacking a source review. I was wondering if you would consider sparing some time to do this review ? I believe that such a review would not be too demanding as most (if not all) sources I used are either taken from other FA pharaoh articles or directly from JSTOR. Note that I perfectly understand if you cannot or do not want to do the review.Iry-Hor (talk) 15:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Minor dieties: Suroh
I think I misread Σούροχ as Suroh, and as referring to a god. But it may have been just talking about a person in context of something else. My apologies. YochanonBenMat (talk) 20:40, 13 June 2023 (UTC)


 * No problem. We all make mistakes. A. Parrot (talk) 20:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Nyarlathotep66
Hello Parrot, I couldn't find any other way of contacting you directly as I'm new to this platform.

Can we exchange email accounts or perhaps some other means of communication that your comfortable with, as I would like to discuss my disagreement with some of the associations you've made of a few gods you've published online. Nyarlathotep66 (talk) 01:25, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * If you have concerns about the contents of articles, the best place to discuss those concerns is usually on Wikipedia itself. If your concerns are limited to one particular article, the place to discuss them would be on that article's talk page. If you think there are systemic problems with my edits, I suppose this page would be the best place. (Please note that I moved your comment to a new section of the page, as it didn't seem to be relevant to the section where you originally put it. I hope you don't mind; it just makes the conversation easier to follow.) A. Parrot (talk) 02:11, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Potatín5 (talk) 23:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

History of Christianity
Okay, so almost exactly a year ago you failed my GAN of Bible for making one mistake - out of ignorance and not carelessness - on one reference. It has made me more extremely careful ever since, so thank you. I have now completed a redo of History of Christianity, and while another friend is going to work at putting all the references in Harvard form, I wondered if you would do a peer review of the content. I ask specifically because I have found those who hold contrary views to mine are more likely to see flaws, and I want those found. I would like this article's class to reflect its importance, and for that I need your help. Please come and be as excessively critical as you can be! I will be grateful as in the end it will improve the article, and that's the goal. Please help. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:52, 31 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I apologize for not replying sooner. I'm having a busy month, but I will take a look at the article next week. A. Parrot (talk) 19:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Bless you. I am in the process of making sure the refs are all perfect, so I had another friend who only does reference fixes go through it as well. He found some without page numbers, so I am fixing those. He had one that referenced a back cover of a book, and because of you, I now know that's allowed so long as it is referenced that way. I would not have known that before you! This is not the first time I have had cause to think grateful thoughts at you.


 * Anything you find, anything at all, check whatever, all that you can stand as long as you can stand it. I will be grateful for any and all input of any kind. This is a very long article even though it only hits the expected things, and in no real depth, but still - 2000 years you know? Thank you again, and sorry for the redo here Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:00, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think I'll have to work my way through it a bit at a time. Do you want it to be a formal peer review, or just me posting my thoughts on the talk page? If the former, you should probably open the peer review yourself and notify me when it's open. A. Parrot (talk) 03:13, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the delay. Here I am asking you a favor and don't get back to you for a week - but I have good excuses!   I have actually been out of town and working on an article that I thought was GA ready that turns out it wasn't and demanded immediate attention. At any rate, here, I would like to begin with your informal input first if that's okay with you. I will be grateful for whatever time you have. Thanx up front! Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * YAY! Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm writing up a list of points that came to mind as I skimmed the article. I will probably post them over the weekend. A. Parrot (talk) 17:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You are so amazing, and all your comments are good, and I am so grateful it hardly seems like 'thank you' is adequate. But thank you. I will get back there - soon I hope.
 * I have been working on and off for two years on the article Christianization. I thought I was pretty much done and put it up for GA and they failed it, so I redid it the entire thing all over again trying to comply with all their criticisms. Then I put it up for peer review saying I was interested in FA. She suggested I should approach FA by redoing the daughter articles first, and then use them in Christianization. Three times this editor "suggested" I go look at Conversion to Christianity. Well, I made the mistake of cooperating, and Holy Toledo Batman, it was not good!  So I am two sections (confirmation and the lead) away from finishing that content, (haven't done all the rest that FA requires yet), but for the life of me, I cannot see how I can use any of it in Christianization - the definition of conversion is it, I think. So here I am spending time on this one, when I really want to work on history.
 * I know, I know, it will help me understand better what actually qualifies as FA, so it's not time wasted, and even if it doesn't go FA, I have improved the encyclopedia by getting that particular article redone in a more encyclopedic manner. (Don't go look just in case you want to weigh in if I nominate it!) I do want you to know I have checked and rechecked every ref in that article! It's certainly easier in short articles. It's also good that I have become more focused and more careful about that, and that's because of you.
 * So, anyway, thank you for everything you do here - for listening to me ramble - and all you have done for me and for others here and for the encyclopedia itself. I'm glad to know you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:11, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to have been of help. I know I can be a tough critic, but I have a lot of respect for your efforts in tackling the topics. Editors who have both the subject-matter expertise and the gumption to fix up articles on broad topics are rare. Wikipedia needs editors like you, whether or not their efforts receive the official approval of an FA star or GA green circle.
 * Reviewing for the FA and GA processes always intimidates me a bit, because I feel like I should be going over everything in an article before issuing a "yea" verdict. I won't be doing much reviewing of that kind in the next year and a half, because I have about three off-wiki projects that I'm hoping to get done before the end of 2024, which are reducing my WP activity quite a lot. But if you need more informal pointers, like for History of Christianity, don't hesitate to ask for them. That kind of reviewing is a lot easier. A. Parrot (talk) 23:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * A, Parrot Hello friend, just wanted to let you know History of Christianity has passed the first wicket and is now a GA article. I thought you would be glad, since your persistence in dealing with me in the face of my kicking and screaming 'no, leave it all in', and your advice on building an enhanced narrative, and separating out detail, is part of what did it. I listened to what you said, I did what you advised, it improved the article and has made me a better WP writer. It's so opposite to academic writing! I am learning with every article I work on and from every friend that helps me. I am in your debt forever. If you ever need anything, just ask. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I'm glad my comments were of help. A. Parrot (talk) 07:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I put it up for peer review in preparation for FAC, and one reviewer said it didn't deserve GA, so I put it up for reassessment. You've been involved from early on, so if you could take a look at the current article and make a comment, it would be greatly appreciated. Good article reassessment/History of Christianity/1 Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Tatenen-Ptah
There is no ancient art on it, this is my own art. Netjerudua (talk) 16:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


 * In that case, it is original research; see No original research. Our job is to reflect how the ancient Egyptians portrayed their deities. At times, it can be frustratingly difficult to find a high-quality, copyright-free photo of an ancient image of a deity, which I expect is why User:Jeff Dahl created his SVG artwork depicting the key traits of each deity's iconography. But he always made an effort to base those images on genuine ancient artwork (primarily the tombs of Horemheb, Ramesses I, and Nefertari, where the artwork is high quality but copyright-free photos are hard to come by). If you're not basing your work on an ancient example, you shouldn't be inserting it in articles. A. Parrot (talk) 16:25, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Septermber GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Napoleon's expedition graffiti
Dear A., I found a beautiful photo of yours of a graffiti done by the french scholars. I would like to use the image for research on graffiti 18 & 19th century. Just would like to double check if I am allowed to use the image, also what would you like me to write in the credit line.

not using question marks :-)

Thank you SiennaMillerWalker (talk) 16:10, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello! I'm glad to hear that you found my photo useful. I assume you're referring to File:Graffiti from the Napoleonic expedition at Philae.jpg. I released it into the public domain (as it is merely a reproduction of Castex's graffiti), so there are no restrictions at all on its use. If you want, you can give credit to "A. Parrot at Wikimedia Commons". A. Parrot (talk) 18:36, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2023 Newsletter
Message sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!==

 Merry Christmas! ''Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten! ¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua! God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus! Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce! Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством! শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스! สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส!'' ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành! Весела Коледа! ~ Meri Kirihimete! Hello, A. Parrot! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}} ==

Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism?
What do you mean vandalism shouldn’t be included in Deleted articles with freaky titles? Seriously like 90% of the articles in the list were deleted as vandalism. Most articles in the list were joke articles. Creating a joke article is vandalism. Your edits haven’t been reverted though as I don’t want to lead to an edit war.—2605:59C8:22F4:8910:580E:38B5:ABC0:1EDB (talk) 21:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)


 * A sizable proportion of DAFT actually comes from articles that were either created in good faith, or so context-free that it was hard to even tell why they were created. A lot of the really old titles listed there were vandalism, yes, but adding new ones is discouraged for reasons based in the page's history.
 * In this old discussion, I said: "I started strictly enforcing the non-vandalism rule for new additions to the page because somebody seemed to be creating vandal articles just so he or she could add them here (see the four preceding sections on this page). That person seems to be gone, but I don't want to give an opening to him or her, or somebody else with a similar mindset. Most of the preexisting vandal titles have been here for years, and the people who created them probably moved on years ago, so I don't think those titles are such a problem."
 * DAFT is really a relic of an early era of Wikipedian history, when behind-the-scenes clowning around was much more widespread and accepted. A lot of that extraneous tomfoolery has fallen by the wayside or been deleted for its irrelevance to the goals of the project. DAFT has survived because it generally doesn't cause trouble. I think it best to try to keep it that way. A. Parrot (talk) 07:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

A source that you have
Hello, I stumbled across your source list and I noticed that you are in possess of this: I've been interested in this since I read the Amum-Her-Khepesh-Ef article and I'm wondering of you could email me page 36, which is cited in the article but following the link it appears unavailable. Thanks in advance, Lone-078 (talk) 18:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Certainly. Unfortunately, the Wikipedia email system doesn't allow attachments, so for me to send you the page will require one more step than it should. You'll have to send me an email via the Wikipedia system, so that my email account will receive the message from your email address. Then I can reply to that email and attach the page to the reply. A. Parrot (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Got it, I've just sent you a hook mail. Thanks! Lone-078 (talk) 16:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Sent. Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with. A. Parrot (talk) 19:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks again! Lone-078 (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hall of Records
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hall of Records you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ffranc -- Ffranc (talk) 14:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hall of Records
The article Hall of Records you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hall of Records for comments about the article, and Talk:Hall of Records/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ffranc -- Ffranc (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

GA Review Request.
Greetings, you evaluated the article Harut and Marut a while ago and allowed me to write you in case I improve the article. I have not worked on the article much again, but have another one I spend a lot of time with. I am in good faith, this one is doing muhc better. If you have time and interest, I would be glad to receive a review. The article is this one: Iblis. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 19:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I have a lot on my plate in March, but if it's still awaiting review in April, I may be able to get to it then. A. Parrot (talk) 21:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Signups open for The Core Contest 2024
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is GB£300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. –  Aza24  (talk)   02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

History of Christianity yet again
After extensive rewrites, I am here to humbly ask (beg) for you to please give this article another look - especially the Middle Ages sections - with an eye toward FA standards. I need your know-how. Thank you for all you have done. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I have off-wiki commitments that I'm dealing with right now, such that I had to effectively suspend a GA review I was doing. I may be able to get to it once both those things are done, but not until June. A. Parrot (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)