User talk:Aciram/Archives/2008/December

Biographies submitted to Assessment
Hi. Thanks for all your good work so far in creating historical biographies from the Scandinavian countries. I have wikified and English-grammaticised many of them before giving them a classification, but I am here asking if you could develop them as fully as possible yourself before you submit them for assessment, as it takes me a deal of time to bring them up to standard before I (or any of us at Biography) can honestly assess them while complying with Wikipedia guidelines/policies. For now, I have tagged the latest batch with wikification templates, hoping that this will attract someone who can find the time to do this. When they are up to standard, we will be able to give them a classification. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 20:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again. No, please do not stop submitting them for assessment. If you cannot develop them, consider adding the following as your first line in the edit source:
 * adding the current month where it says Month and the current year where it says Year.
 * adding the current month where it says Month and the current year where it says Year.


 * Could you also make sure that your sources are contained in a section called References, as, along with Notes, that is the only source section heading allowed under the manual of style.


 * Finally, to indicate yourself that your articles are Stubs, please put the following above or below the categories at the bottom of the edit source:
 * That will add a stub template into the article, thus guiding assessors.
 * That will add a stub template into the article, thus guiding assessors.


 * Thanks for your understanding. When I get time I will have a look at some of your articles to see if I can bring them up a bit. For now, keep up the good work. Best wishes. Ref (chew) (do) 21:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Polish witch trials
Witch trials in Poland were not common due to above average religious tolerance (see Warsaw confederation), but there were some, and the subject is notable. I could point you to some reliable Polish sources (authors: 1) Małgorzata Pilaszek from 1990s-2000s, ex. Procesy czarownic w Polsce XVI-XVIII wieku doctoral thesis, article in popular history magazine, another article follow up to her article 2) Bohdan Baranowski from 1950s-1960s, ex. Procesy czarownic w Polsce w XVII i XVII wieku (book) 3) Szymon Wrzesiński, ''Wspólniczki szatana. Czarownice na ziemiach polskich'' (book) 2006. ) 3) Piotr Byczkowski's master thesis on witch trials in Poland, ]) 4) Joanna Żak-Bucholc Czary i stosy w Polsce. 5) Here is an academic work with a para on bibliography of the subject: W. Korcz, Procesy czarownic w Zielonej Górze w XVII w., Rocznik Lubelski 1959, t. I; B. Baranowski, Najdawniejsze procesy o czary w Kaliszu, Archiwum Etnograficzne, t. 2, Lublin 1951; tenże, Procesy czarownic w Polsce w XVII i XVIII w., Łódź 1952; tenże, Pożegnanie z diabłem i czarownicą, Łódź 1965; J. Rosenblatt, Czarownica powołana, Warszawa 1883; K. Kaczmarczyk, Procesy o czarostwo w r. 1688 i 1689, Lud VII, 1908; tenże, Przyczynek do procesów o czary oraz Dwa procesy o czary z 1684 r.. Lud XXIV, 1925; K. Koranyi, Beczka czarownic, Lud XXVII, 1928; tenże, Czary w postępowaniu sądowym, Lud XXV, 1925; J. Tazbir, Procesy o czary, Odrodzenie i Reformacja w Polsce, t. 23, 1978; M. Pilaszek, Procesy czarownic w Polsce w XVI – XVIII w. Nowe aspekty. Uwagi na marginesie pracy B. Baranowskiego, Odrodzenie i Reformacja w Polsce, t. 42, 1998; J. Rabianin, Jeszcze o czrach i gusłach w dawnym Lublinie, Lublin 1936. Out of those I'd recommend work by Janusz Tazbir, he is one of the best Polish historians of the era. Oh, and of course there is a little at Polish wikipedia. In other words, there is a lot of material; usually I'd stub it myself but I am a bit busy now so there may be some delay. Unless you know Polish language and can use the above sources for yourse, you could request the article at WP:PWNB or wait till I find time and will to do it. PS. I also assume you have tried this and this. PSS. Try WP:RD and ask Clio if you need a stub, her answers usually are pretty good :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Is there a template/category for which trials by country? Could you give us (at PWNB) some examples of related existing articles? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

References needed for the Lovisa Årberg article
Thanks for starting this article. However, the article is badly sourced and there is a risk that it will be deleted if notability can't be established. If you have any direct literature reference it would be great if you could add that. Thanks. MaxPont (talk) 05:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Note on Swedish biographies
Hej, Aciram. When creating your articles, please don't forget to put in a Wiki Category too. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 13:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Hans the Werewolf
An article that you have been involved in editing, Hans the Werewolf, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Hans the Werewolf. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ecoleetage (talk) 02:33, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Madame de Pompadour‎
Following is a msg I left on Mme de Pompadour's talk page:

Aciram: Thank you for the above comment. I do not agree with English language wikipedia as to its 17th century-19th century judgment of women. In France, the 17th & 18th centuries (except for the years Mme de Maintenon reigned over the morals at Versailles), and the beginning of the 19th were not a time of puritanism. The morals at Court & in higher classes of society were rather loose & women having romantic affairs with men other than their husband were not considered to be *prostitutes*! From the bourgeoisie on up to the royal family (even in lower class families where parents wanted their daughter to "faire un bon mariage", i.e. marry someone rich), marriages were pre-arranged *business deals* from which love was excluded. This was bound to lead to latter *love affairs* when two persons happened to meet & fall in love. One day when I have have time, I am going to remove many names from that ghetto-like Category:French courtesans and prostitutes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:French_courtesans_and_prostitutes. Frania W. (talk) 19:02, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand. I agree with you in what you say about the weiv on sexuality in 18th century France. I was in fact also talking about the matter in general, the view on this in Europe in general; also, for example, an 19th century English actress, who had affairs, could be considered to be a prostitute, even if she was not: she could be described as such by her time, and therefore categorized as such in wikipedia, when the article is based upon such sources and tradition. I wish you good luck in adjusting this, and hope that you will also remove such wrongful labels from women of all nationalities as you find them, as I have done myself. I am glad if this puritanical wiev could be corrected toward a more neutral point of view. -Aciram (talk) 19:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Aciram: Merci beaucoup for returning to me. I am happy that I am not the only one with this non-puritanical point of view. Fortunately, we can bring changes to wikipedia and, with some luck, convince others that their way of thinking does not always relate to the standards of 17th & 18th century Europe, of every country of Europe, as there was quite a difference between Sweden & Spain, Spain & France, France & Austria, Austria & England, etc. We have to know & understand how people thought at the time & not judge them by our way of thinking.

Meilleurs vœux pour 2009! Frania W. (talk) 22:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)