User talk:AirshipJungleman29/Archive 4

November 2023
Hello, I'm Gologmine. I noticed that you recently removed content from Khorgo without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Would you stop removing my contents? next time giving you more severe warning'' Gologmine (talk) 13:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I will continue to remove badly written and improperly sourced content, . You should improve the quality of your contributions. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I am keep improving it, until you vandalizing it. Cheers! I will do the same to your article Gologmine (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's your funeral, mate. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

page deletion
hi i wanted to ask please recreate my page. i am editing it and making it encyclopedic. please I have already done a lot of work on it and why did you delete it? kindly do guide me whats wrong in it so that I can correct — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amyhere (talk • contribs) 20:40, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , I am not an administrator and don't have the ability to recreate your page. I nominated it for deletion because it was entirely promotional. Next time, make your page encyclopedic from the start. That way, you won't have to do "a lot of work" for nothing. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * i have seen many such pages on wikipedia and I was trying to copy them Amyhere (talk) 20:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * also, I have seen a message that I should ask you to recover my page since you have deleted it. Amyhere (talk) 20:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Which pages have you seen ? As above, I did not delete your page. You should ask the administrator who deleted it (they will almost certainly say no). AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * ok those were your sign over there and i thought you deleted my page. you nominated it Amyhere (talk) 21:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The link at the end of the message tells you it was . AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Based on this conversation, you may be interested in reading the conversation by the same user at User talk:GoingBatty. GoingBatty (talk) 19:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , well that immediately meets Template:Db-spamuser, and raises further questions about the relationship between and the above user.  AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:15, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * How? When I had even made the paid disclosure on the talk page. Amyhere (talk) 03:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Chucky
Hello, please take a look at the vandalism taking place in the article Chucky (character). A bunch of IP addresses keep vandalizing it and it seems like I’m the only user trying to revert the edits back to the sourced version, although you did help and edit but the page needs to be protected. Thanks. Editsvi (talk) 02:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Abraham Lincoln (Bittinger)
Hello. A request to take another look and hopefully pass 's article on this artwork which hangs in the United States Capitol as its official portrait of Abraham Lincoln. The painting is sourced to the House of Representatives and Capitol collection and also has a Smithsonian source. One gallery or museum source is usually enough to pass a visual artwork, and this page has several. This has become a major painting of Lincoln due to its prominence of being displayed in the Capitol and as part of the Capitol collection (as Lincoln's official portrait). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I stand by thinking none of the sources pass WP:GNG; if the painting was as prominent as you say, I would expect at least one independent, non-trivial source, not two trivial mentions and two non-independent (and incidentally, very closely-paraphrased) sources. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The paraphrasing concern is important, thanks for pointing that out. Once that's fixed then the sources come into play again, and it's pretty standard for Wikipedia artwork articles to accept museum or gallery sourcing for mainspacing the page. In this case the museum/gallery is the U.S. Capitol Building, and sources from there should surfice. But yes, the paraphrasing seems the main priority right now. Thanks for taking another look. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tale of the Moon Cuckoo
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tale of the Moon Cuckoo 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 Geethree -- Geethree (talk) 18:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The article Tale of the Moon Cuckoo you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Tale of the Moon Cuckoo for comments about the article, and Talk:Tale of the Moon Cuckoo/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Geethree -- Geethree (talk) 18:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Proposed clarification
I am sorry about modifications without prior announcement at the talk page, I should have put this to discussion page, I have listed the proposal here: Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations Maxim Masiutin (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , in case you haven't got the message, everyone is thoroughly fed up of dealing with your antics. Go and write some articles, then come back and argue to change a page you didn't bother reading in the first place. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I read that page and I understood it was for finding another reviewer when the review was abandoned, that's why I thought that item did not apply in my case. The language was not clear. You might have familiarity with the process, still, a new person to a matter may find some instances overlooked by people who already know the process. I already made proposals to the other rule pages and those proposal were accepted. Please try to distance from personality and review this proposal isolated from who proposed it, as if it were proposed by somebody else. The fact that I might have committed errors somewhere else does not automatically mean that my proposal is bad. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 13:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * There are four explicit instructions on that page to go to WT:GAN if there are problems, . If you are to be believed, you read sentences like If you are in a situation where you absolutely cannot continue to review the article, please contact the nominator. Consider helping them find a new reviewer. If necessary, leave a note on the GA nominations discussion page. and thought "I think not. The language is not clear. It may not apply in my case. I'll invent a completely new process instead." Why would I forget that you proposed it, knowing that it comes from someone who did not read the page properly in the first place? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. The current edition on the rules is different from my proposal: it encourages the reviewer who retracts to find a new reviewer first without simply returning the article to backlog as I tried to propose, and that is a difference. Sorry, I didn't thought about it in that way, thank you for your patience and time explaining me. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * How can I remove my proposal from the talk page? Can you please delete or revert the thread to not spend people's time? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 13:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In your revert message you wrote I did'n discuss it so I thought it would have been worth otherwise discussing, but it turned out to propose a different process which is a no-go Maxim Masiutin (talk) 14:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Mongolian State Academic Theatre of Opera and Ballet
I just wanted to encourage you to consider expanding our coverage at Mongolian State Academic Theatre of Opera and Ballet. While this New York Times piece may have been wrong about the first Mongolian Opera, it probably does have some quality reporting on other Mongolian operas and the activities of this important theatre that could be used to expand that article and could be used in your article on Mongolian theatre. Best.4meter4 (talk) 14:07, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I intend to at some point . I saw a play titled The Mongol Khan yesterday—absolutely spectacular. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:37, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * turns out that 1) there's now an article on The Mongol Khan I wonder who created it and 2) it started its run at that very same theatre. Speak of the devil, they say... AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 212, December 2023
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:59, 8 December 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)

November thanks
Thank you for your help to making my story today, Canticle I: My beloved is mine and I am his, - the composer, born OTD 110 years ago, didn't want it shorter (but the publisher), more here. I'm back to a good tradition: a Britten composition on his birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

What a story! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

User Talk:Gerda Arendt --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I adore the Requiem, Gerda. The composition of the Confutatis in Amadeus (1984) is one of the greatest scenes in cinema history, in my opinion. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It was exciting! - in memoriam Jerome Kohl who said (In Freundschaft): "and I hope that they have met again in the beyond and are making joyous music together" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:38, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Group 7 element GA Hold
I put it on hold some time ago, and then declined the GAN as nothing was occurring. I probably should have released the hold first. Do you have rights to clean this up, it still shows on the GAN page. Thanks. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit this pls
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luvsannamsrain_Oyun-Erdene

i cant distinguish self promotion and bloats on this article. Also most of the infos on this article is not cited. Gologmine (talk) 14:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

TFA nom?
Hi, you have listed Siege of Bukhara for TFA at pending for February. I have tentatively reserved a date for it, but if you would still like it be considered you will need to nominate it at Today's featured article/requests, which is now open. Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:35, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Baljuna Covenant

 * 1) My edits were marked minor because they do not make any substantive changes - they neither added nor subtracted text.
 * 2) The spelling changes, such as Battle of Khalakhaljid Sands, Uyghurs, Hö'elün, bring the spelling into line with the articles on those topics.
 * 3) Wikipedia is not a dictionary WP:NOTDICT. There is no cause to link words such as "ambush".
 * 4) See WP:OVERLINK. ""the following are usually not linked: ... The names of subjects with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar"
 * "Muslim", "Buddhists", "Central Asia", for example.

Colonies Chris (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2023 (UTC) And a similar consideration applies to linking the publisher - is the link helpful to the reader? The default is always to not link. We add links when - and only when - they are likely to help a reader understand the article or, in the case of a citation, to help them locate the source. This is a discussion that was settled more thah a decade ago. Colonies Chris (talk) 21:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) WP:Cite book: Publishers should be unlinked unless especially relevant. There is no benefit to linking references to large generalist publishers.
 * Please let me know where you got the "especially" from at WP:Cite book, and what even defines "relevant". WP:NOTDICT has no bearing on linking, and "Muslim, Buddhists, and Central Asia" are all rather relevant concepts to the article. Reviewing WP:MINOR shows that you were correct about your usage, so apologies for that, I have removed some links from the article, while the retained spellings are period-appropriate. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:20, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, terms such as Muslims etc, are relevant to the article (otherwise why would they be there at all?) but that doesn't mean that they should be linked. WP:OVERLINK even has "Islam" " and "Buddhism" as specific examples of what not to link.
 * Don't quibble: try explaining how it's useful to link, for example, Blackwell Publishing. the purpose of a citation is to allow the reader to identify the source of a statement in the article. Linking the publisher (except in rare special cases) does not help with that.
 * What do you mean by "period appropriate"? Other editors have decided that "Khalakhaljid" is the preferred spelling for a battle that took place over 800 years ago. If you disagree with that, take it up over at that article. Colonies Chris (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Clearly WP:OVERLINK has exceptions for when the link is directly relevant, unless you feel the need to empty Special:WhatLinksHere/Islam. "the purpose of a citation is to allow the reader to identify the source of a statement in the article" and a link means that can't happen? See WP:NOTBROKEN. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:57, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There is an important distinction to be made here. The *fact" that the merchants were Muslim is directly relevant. But that fact does not require or justify a wikilink. WP:OVERLINK again: "A good question to ask yourself is whether reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from."
 * "This is a discussion that was settled more thah a decade ago" – well I've done hundreds of WP source reviews, and some people link publishers, others don't You can have an opinion on that matter, but to suggest there is a widely followed norm is complete nonsense. Wikipedia has no strict source formatting rules, so the only thing that matters is consistency for individual pages: all publishers linked, none linked, or only linked for their first mentions. If you are going around enforcing your own preferences on an already consistently formatted page, that is the definition of a WP:CITEVAR violation.  Aza24  (talk)   22:52, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to repeat myself, The question we should always ask when considering whether to link is "Is this link likely to be useful to the reader?". And in the case of publishers in citations, the answer is almost always "no". Look at Cite book#Publisher. It says "Publisher: May be wikilinked if relevant". This statement implies that not linking is the norm. Just being the publisher is not sufficient in itself to justify a link. In my 18 years as a WP editor I've worked on thousands of articles, and I can confirm that not linking publishers is indeed the norm. There was a long and heated debate about overlinking a decade ago, and the upshot was that linking should be selective, only where it is clearly helpful, not scattershot. Colonies Chris (talk) 23:54, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * and I'm deciding it's relevant. Sorry, your implications, confirmations, and vague gestures at decade-old discussions aren't convincing. Now, the question you should always ask when considering whether to change a citation style is "is this a breach of WP:CITEVAR?". And in this case, the answer is "yes". AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:37, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Re "The default is always to not link. We add links ... This is a discussion that was settled more than a decade ago"; I don't recall seeing that anywhere, but if you're changing the established WP:CITEVAR on an article, and the citation style links publishers, that's a problem. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  05:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:CITEVAR is all about citation styles, and makes it clear that this means not changing between, for example, APA style and ASA style. Linking or not linking publisher is not part of a style in that sense - it's a simple matter of whether the link is likely to be useful - the same test that applies to linking in general. Most readers don't look at the refs at all, and those who do are most likely wanting to verify a specific statement that they find surprising or questionable. A publisher link, especially to a large generalist publisher, is not helpful for that purpose. In general, for any possible link, there's always someone who will say that they find it useful, but we don't link on that basis, that would lead to linking everything. That's what the overlinking debate a decade ago was all about: it was definitively resolved on the side of smart linking, not a scattershot approach.

this edit
You might want to have a look at the posts just above that one... --Randykitty (talk) 23:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies ; GAR notifications are handled by an automatic script, so I didn't see. Do you think I should remove the notification? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I suspected as much :-) No apologies needed, I use Twinkle all the time and something like this happens to us all. I wouldn't remove the notification, some page watchers might want to honor him by taking this on. Perhaps you could add a note in this sense. Cheers! --Randykitty (talk) 08:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Altering Physics article assessments?
Hi. I'm wondering why you are altering the Physics article assessments? eg Hilbert space? It seems you are putting them in "limbo", with no assessment. Why? Johnjbarton (talk) 00:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, recent discussions over the use of WikiProject Banner Shell have led to consensus that WikiProject article ratings should be generally standardised; to make this happen, the template has been adapted so that a general rating (the |class=GA in the banner shell) applies to all projects. If you scroll to the bottom, you'll find that the articles are not "in limbo", but belonging to their correct categories (e.g. Hilbert space is present in Category:GA-Class physics articles of High-importance).
 * See WP:PIQA for details. Hope that helps. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok excellent thanks! (Maybe put WP:PIQA in the edit summary?) Johnjbarton (talk) 01:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Statue of Muqali (Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia).jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Statue of Muqali (Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:
 * File:Statue of Bo'orchu in Ulaanbaatar Mongolia.jpg

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Chinese Legalism
Hello, the Chinese Legalism article is under construction (previously I had it constituted of the figures, but the idea was to leave the larger figure articles to their figure articles). I will try to streamline the writing, since you left the tag, let me know if you otherwise have a particular critique. Keeping in mind that it is of course under construction.FourLights (talk) 07:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Given that the page needs more work regardless, I hope you might find time to consider the section Creel's branches of the Fajia, which I have assembled into an introduction, if you find time to comment whether you find it contextual, or otherwise too detailed. Or if the section "the morality of Han Fei" should be left to the Han Feizi page or not at all; I intend to create a Shang Yang related section, whose figure is a stand in (they are intended to be general sections, not figure sections). Thanks. I do appreciate your having visited to provide an updated critique in the form of the tag if nothing else, the previous tag calling for an "expert" would have suggested that I simply have no idea what I am talking about. Suffice to say, while others assist with minor edits, I am it's responsible writer.FourLights (talk) 17:31, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I left a comment at the peer review yesterday. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

FAC requests
Hey there, wanted to reach out to ask if you'd be interested in taking a look at the Israeli citizenship law currently at FAC? Trying to get some movement on it since the review's been sitting around for a while. No pressure either way if you're too busy but thank you again for your support in promoting previous articles. Thanks, Horserice (talk) 03:12, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks so much for promoting my DYK nomination for Jamie Kalven earlier this year. I've just submitted the article for FAC. I'm not sure if you ever review FACs, but I wanted you to be aware. Cheers! Edge3 (talk) 05:09, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

A long time ago, you said the Mars Society article is not up to FAC standards yet. I've made several attempts to polish the prose and ensure text-source integrity, but, unfortunately, the article is still pretty short as it is hard to find additional sources on the topic. What do you think about the article now? (link to article) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:45, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Old Man and the Sea
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Old Man and the Sea 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 Lazman321 -- Lazman321 (talk) 03:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The article The Old Man and the Sea you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Old Man and the Sea and Talk:The Old Man and the Sea/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lazman321 -- Lazman321 (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

List of mines in Australia
Hey there, can you explain moving these articles to draft space? Both articles have references, but the size of them prevents them from displaying correctly. Onetwothreeip (talk) 08:28, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh really? That's very interesting, I didn't know that was a thing. Nevertheless, if that's what happening, I think it's definitely still not ready for mainspace per WP:DRAFTIFY, if a normal reader can't verify the information adequately. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The content can be verified by the external link at the bottom of the article. You should also notify the author of the content that this has occurred (I am not the author). Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I informed them when I draftified the pages . AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

RFA comments
You should probably add an explanation to your comment before a bunch of people notice it. It's best practice, and it avoids a bunch of people having to ask for more details. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 06:15, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll be honest, there isn't much explanation beyond "I'm neutral" at the moment AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 06:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I mean.. I would just say that then. Remember, RFA is not a vote; it's a discussion. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 07:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:OF probably applies more to RfA than any other process. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 07:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Milan Tepić
You made claims on the Milan Tepić talk page without reading the sources, so can you point out to me where those six of them are in the article? As you claim hey are very clearly verifiable—all that is required is reading them, but nothing like that exist. So can you copy paste parts of article that says that? Kanikosen (talk) 22:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , "while in Croatia he is perceived as a war criminal", "The soldier, Major Milan Tepic, is seen by the Croatian side as a criminal," etc. I see on the talk page that you think the word "significant" is used in the article, which is incorrect, and that you think only two people made a fuss—clearly disproven by this source, which outlines the response of the Croatian Foreign Ministry, Croatian media, and Bosnian media. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So why did you write about 6 sources? To quote Since you seem unfamiliar with WP:NPOV, let me cite directly from it: "Avoid the temptation to rephrase biased or opinion statements with weasel words, for example, "Many people think John Doe is the best baseball player." Which people? How many? ("Most people think" is acceptable only when supported by at least one published survey.)"
 * In your own source Many Croatian media, but also some in neighbouring Bosnia and Herzegovina, condemned the installation of the Tepic statue. What media? Did you read any source in Croatian, yes or no?
 * And In article In Croatia he is considered a war criminal stated as a fact. Not a single source you claim we need to read mention that. Kanikosen (talk) 22:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That's quite funny, . The first of my quotes above reads "while in Croatia he is perceived as a war criminal"; now you say "not a single source you claim we need to read mentions that In Croatia he is considered a war criminal". Perhaps you are having difficulty with the words "considered" and "perceived"? It may interest you to learn that they are synonyms—two words that mean the same thing!
 * I don't think you quite understand my English—perhaps this is my fault, and if so I apologise. This is the a quote from a reliable source, not from me. Lastly, your quote from WP:NPOV isn't really relevant, since we have the Croatian Foreign Ministry stating it for us. If you have a problem, please consult the NPOV noticeboard. Hope that helps, AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:47, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * In other words you didn't read single source in Croatian you claim is reliable? I understand. And Croatian Foreign Ministry represents opinion of entire Croatian population? That is new, you have reliable source for that? Kanikosen (talk) 03:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you,.
 * It's not very new, even in Croatia—it's called democracy. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So in democracy Stier represented every single Croatian in Croatia, and his opinion was opinion of every Croat? Are you joking? Kanikosen (talk) 15:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No, he represented Croatia . You seem obsessed by this idea that every Croat must have the same viewpoint, for whatever reason. The article does not say that, I have not said that, you are the only one who has said that, and you focus all your words on attacking this imaginary strawman.  AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No, that is what you wrote. To quote what you defending  In Croatia he is considered a war criminal  . So why are you doing that? Kanikosen (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, it is now very clear you do not understand the English language. First you say "In Croatia he is considered a war criminal" is not the same as "In Croatia he is perceived as a war criminal." Now you say "In Croatia he is considered a war criminal" means "every inhabitant of Croatia considers him a war criminal." We are approaching clear WP:CIR territory, so I would advise you to WP:DROPTHESTICK before you get blocked from more than one page. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:35, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Could you sustain from WP:NPA? You didn't read what is written in article or in 6 sources you claimed to read?
 * You made a claim  There are six of them in the article. They are very clearly verifiable—all that is required is reading them, which you have clearly not done, as you think "there is only one reference presented". If what you think is that a survey of the Croatian populace would disprove them, you can wait until such a survey is done. 
 * So point me in those 6 of them in article. You claiming WP:DROPTHESTICK, i claim you didn't read single source in Croatian. Kanikosen (talk) 16:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Pointless. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello AirshipJungleman29: Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Patient Zerotalk 06:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message Patient Zerotalk 06:16, 8 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, AirshipJungleman29! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

December 2023
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Gologmine. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. ''You appear to hounding another user "Gologmine". That would a violation agains community rules WP:HOUND. Next time it would be brought to admin discussion. Thank you.'' Gologmine (talk) 02:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Feel free ; just remember no WP:CANVASSing that time. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * Thanks, and the same to you! AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays!


– robertsky (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message. – robertsky (talk) 06:52, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

December music
Today's story is about Maria Callas, on her centenary, - she had no DYK of her own, so I combined two that mentioned her ;) - It would anyway be impossible to write something to the point in one sentence. - Aaron Copland died OTD, and Jerome Kohl (mentioned in November) said something wise on Copland's talk. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Today's story is about the opera director whose work you saw, because it's his birthday today ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

... and today, to Paris (29 Nov) with a visit to the Palais Garnier, - to match the story of Medea Amiranashvili, - don't miss listening to her expressive voice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

My story today is about Michael Robinson, - it's an honour to have known him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:38, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you today for Tolui, introduced: "Three million deaths in two sieges in two and a bit months; the mass rape of an enemy army; extraordinary military achievements; dying in a shamanic ritual to appease the curses of angered spirits; his wife and sons eventually ruling a continent... all these things were (allegedly) in a life and death's work for Tolui, the youngest son of Genghis Khan."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Today, I have a special story to tell, of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I heard from several people that they never heard of this composer. He was portrayed by Gainsborough which would give him notability. Please consider showing that image for DYK. Today, we have the image of Bach that everyone knows already ;) The other one is much better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:07, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The trouble is it's an extremely dull hook—it basically says the same thing twice and follows it up with a fairly mediocre fact. The current picture slot in that prep is also not very interesting, but it doesn't make me fall asleep.
 * By contrast, the Wie liegt die Stadt so wüst hook is pretty much the opposite—it is so very interesting and evocative to everyone, that I am seriously considering ignoring the fact it violates WP:DYKIMG and putting it in the picture slot... AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The hook was based on the image creating the attention: great painter, great dog. - The man was - together with Bach's son - the concert organizer in London, a celebrity, and then forgotten. Can we help him to some attention around his 300th birthday? What hook would you suggest? Should we name the more than 100 newly found compositions? - The one promoted ran on the German Wikipedia, 5k+ views, with the image. Of course the "Wie liegt die Stadt so wüst" is stronger, but do we have to mention a war to be "interesting"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * We are helping him to some attention, although I doubt he'll care very much. Some articles just don't make strong hooks, and I see no problem with that. The "Wie liegt die Stadt so wüst" hook isn't interesting because of the Dresden mention, but because of what it says. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, it's way past midnight here, and I feel that I can't express well what I mean: the hook is not about the composer but about the catalogue which is an outstanding work of research and diligence. It helps to establish the notability of the book's subject, and the painting does that better than the anniversary which is past anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * If you mean the repetition of his name: I couldn't think of an elegant way to avoid it, but perhaps you could? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I slept and can hopefully think more clearly:
 * ALT2a: ... that the new Catalogue of Works of Carl Friedrich Abel, describing now 420 compositions of the viol virtuoso (pictured), was introduced at a festival for his tercentenary?
 * trying to avoid the repititions
 * trying to say that it's not just a list of works but with detailed descriptions
 * mention that he was a virtuoso on the viol - he was the last, btw. - at least the rare instrument could be gathered from the image if it was taken
 * I'm still on my knees begging to take the image, because:
 * It provides the information that he was famous enough to be portrayed by a leading artist of the period.
 * It shows him as a player as well as a composer.
 * It adds that the center of life of this German musician was London.
 * It is a great image, worth showing to our curious readers.
 * I love the little dog, - it adds so much about the person. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , I don't have the authority to unilaterally approve and promote a new hook. It is simply a sad fact that not all hooks nominated with images can be promoted with them, because there isn't the space. If you want to take this further, please make a request at WT:DYK. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * What do think of unpromoting the article, and perhaps say in the nom why the hook made you feel sleepy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The process would not be sustainable if every potential image hook that didn't run with an image got to be depromoted indefinitely because their nominators asked . Please make a request at WT:DYK for uninvolved opinions. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think you understood that I just tried to keep things simpler. Sorry if I wasn't clear. Now, after the holidays, I have to deal with three articles of people who recently died, - more important than someone whose birthday was 300 years ago. I thought it would be so easy to have the great image of Abel on the Main page for his birthday, and asked OTD. No, I was told, we don't do blurbs for birthdays, and we don't do images for OTD without blurb. So I tried DYK. Missed the chance as discussed. I tried to explain that this isn't "every potential image" but one that I saw as I chance that will perhaps not return in my lifetime. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sure you can get Carl Friedrich Abel to GA status in the very near future . AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the compliment, but I know my limits better ;) - For 2024, my focus will be the chorale cantatas by Bach and the St John Passion - 300 years many times - on top of the RD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I nominated the first of the three, and will take our topic to WT:DYK now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

ps: I also would have two hooks in prep4, both about classical music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That's true. I'll swap the Kihwan Sim one. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Old Man and the Sea
The article The Old Man and the Sea you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:The Old Man and the Sea for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Lazman321 -- Lazman321 (talk) 03:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Question from Silo34 (20:21, 19 December 2023)
How to create my user page? --Silo34 (talk) 20:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , simply go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Silo34 and click the link that says "Start the User:Silo34 page." AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Genghis Khan
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Genghis Khan 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 Borsoka -- Borsoka (talk) 06:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The article Genghis Khan you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Genghis Khan for comments about the article, and Talk:Genghis Khan/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Borsoka -- Borsoka (talk) 06:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Good job. Queen   of   Hearts ❤️  (she/they 🎄 🏳️‍⚧️) 03:42, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Islamic Revival in British India
Hello, AirshipJungleman29. I've nominated this article for DYK, and we need to promptly address the tags you added. Please either edit them yourself or provide suggestions on how we can resolve this issue. Thank you.–Owais Al Qarni (talk) 16:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , please try to address the overuse of elegant variation, MOS:PUFFERY, MOS:SAID, and other academic boosterism. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

De-promote Nomination
Please do not de-promote the hooks based on WP:DYKBOTTOMPREP: it is only a guideline. Occasionally I or others will fill certain hook-slots in the last prep set as appropriate hooks are found and reviewed. We have room to move hooks within sets by filling other slots and there are were three empty spots in the last set. Thanks for considering and Happy holidays! Bruxton (talk) 18:17, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , it's your funeral: I have been warned not to do that in the past. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand the concerns about the last prep. My greater point is that it is abrupt to revert someone's work without discussion. Prior to promoting a hook I do quite a bit of checking, and with an image I have to check for license and FOP. I also see how many queue spots are available so that an admin can promote a set to queue to make and free up a new empty set. It is an unpleasant surprise to me when I am reverted without any message or ping. I only noticed this revert because the nominator pinged me to discuss question about the word "Filipino". I think the best practice is to discuss with the editor. I am glad to work with you and glad to know you. Your work in DYK is much appreciated. Bruxton (talk) 18:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I'll make sure to ping you in DYK-related matters in the future. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Siege of Bukhara scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 10 February 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Today's featured article/February 10, 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work! Gog the Mild (talk) 21:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, AirshipJungleman29!


Happy New Year! AirshipJungleman29, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Abishe (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2024 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are:, , and. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Henry C. Berghoff
I noticed that you rated Henry C. Berghoff as C-class. I was wondering, what about it needs editing? I realize it’s not the best article, and I’d like to refine it. I’m just not certain what specifically makes it in need of editing. Henry Berghoff (talk) 05:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , a few paragraphs remain uncited, and there are quite a number of citations to deprecated sources (findagrave.com) or ones from a century or more ago. Hope that helps, AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Should the paragraphs in the lead have citation? Also, is it okay if I put a citation for multiple sentences at the end of a paragraph? Henry Berghoff (talk) 00:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, I don’t understand why sources from a hundred years ago could not be used, since they provide good documentation of Berghoff and his life. Henry Berghoff (talk) 00:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Mongol Khan
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Mongol Khan 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 Frzzl -- Frzzl (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The article The Mongol Khan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Mongol Khan and Talk:The Mongol Khan/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed.  Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Frzzl -- Frzzl (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The article The Mongol Khan you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:The Mongol Khan for comments about the article, and Talk:The Mongol Khan/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Frzzl -- Frzzl (talk) 20:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Wali Mohammad Itoo
Thank you so much for your vast improvements to Wali Mohammad Itoo. Your work did not go unnoticed! Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 23:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2024
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 213, January 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

204
The one you just promoted at DYK is 204 characters, so needs to be under 200. that while state senator George C. Brownell played no part in the Oregon land fraud scandal, a published cartoon (pictured) showed him as the "Pretty Moth" that flew too close to the land fraud limelight? Lightburst (talk) 18:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was intending to trim it anyway because it was a bit wordy. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The word "pictured" was also in the 204 character count. I just checked in our DYKCRIT it says: The eleven characters in a (pictured) tag does not count, but any modifying text does. so this was my mistake! Thanks, I think the trim is ok too. Lightburst (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

History of Christianity
Hello! I want very much to take you up on your offer of help taking this article to FA. What should I do first? Recheck sources? Please don't say cut it down! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:21, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, you may know me too well. I do suspect some concision would be useful, but I would also consult others. You should open up a page at WP:PR; I will try to get some experienced editors, in addition to me, to offer you advice. Be warned: achieving FA will be difficult, especially as the article is very broad and you are (I believe) a first time nominator, and so the sources will have to be in tip-top condition. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There is also, helpfully, an article in the recent Signpost (below section) by RoySmith on a first-time FA nom, which you might want to check out. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:31, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * So I went and read the article at the signpost, and it was helpful. I am doing what he says and have now requested a formal peer review aimed at taking this article to FA status.


 * I know the article is long, but it is a big topic. It already not only summarizes whole centuries, it outright skips all kinds of things - and they are not unimportant. It's very frustrating. More details could no doubt be excluded, but it is already impacting the comprehensiveness of the article imo. If you see something you think could be communicated equally well with less, please, please tell me! I think I get blind after awhile... Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * So do you have any input on a DYK? Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * , perhaps something like "...that the growth of Christianity in 20th-century Africa has been termed "the fourth great age of Christian expansion"? Have a look at WP:DYKCRIT, and see if you can find anything that matches the criteria. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I like that one! Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Siege of Baghdad (1258)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Siege of Baghdad (1258) 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 Sawyer-mcdonell -- Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 18:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The article Siege of Baghdad (1258) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Siege of Baghdad (1258) for comments about the article, and Talk:Siege of Baghdad (1258)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", 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 at 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 Sawyer-mcdonell -- Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 02:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Request your inputs at an FAC
Hi, I have nominated the article Sam Manekshaw for FA (link to nom) and would love to get your inputs. Your comments on the GA review for Rajiv Malhotra were very valuable, I'm halfway through those suggestions. I would love to get similar feedback from you on this latest nom and you can also shore up some sweet WikiCup points. Thanks in advance. Matarisvan (talk) 12:34, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Oversection
Hello gain AirshipJungleman29, I am not a fan of turning articles into one paragraph stubs with an interpretation of WP:OVERSECTION. I prefer that unrelated ideas and paragraphs are in appropriate sections. They make the separate ideas easier to find. Bruxton (talk) 03:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * , I am interested in how hard you find it to read through three paragraphs to find "separate ideas". As it stands, more than half of the "Legend" section is not in fact deficated to any legend, and a large part of the "description" section, which you might expect to be describing the stone itself, is actually describing a trail.
 * I would thus suggest to make "separate ideas easier to find", creating the sections "Tourism" and "Weather", and transferring information appropriately.
 * In any case, if it looks like a stub without sections, then I am sorry to say that it is a stub, and trying to hide that fact does a disservice to the article, your integrity, and readers' intelligence. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:19, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I am saddened that my integrity is questioned by a colleague over this sectioning issue. A stub is an article too short and incomplete to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject. A stub also does not qualify for DYK. But I do not think Hanging Stone is incomplete and I think sections are helpful for our readers. I can see that you often invoke oversection like on this other DYK article: Phyllis Boyens but the sections were restored by an admin. I helped with the Boyens article so I saw this. We all have different styles so I thank you for considering and I hope that we can always discuss changes in the future. Bruxton (talk) 14:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Columbia Mall (Grand Forks) source
I removed a YT source because it is unreliable, the "Meet Me At Columbia Mall." source. WP:YOUTUBE and WP:NOTYOUTUBE. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 03:03, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Also WP:RSPYT. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 03:03, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Uncited articles drive
Thank you for joining the drive, especially because there's so many conflict and military-related articles that are not cited at all. I guess that 100 articles cited is a breeze for you then :-) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

2024


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht Happy New Year 2024

-- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

As you know, the 2023 picture is from the Abel Fest in Köthen, celebrating the tercentenary of Carl Friedrich Abel, a viol virtuoso, composer and concert organiser in London (together with Bach's youngest son), born on 22 December 1723 in Köthen, where the new catalogue of his works was introduced, - my story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I have a DYK on the Main page as you better than anybody else, but my story would be different, about Figaro, - this Figaro. The conductor described it as entertaining, - please check, singer and conductor can be seen commenting and in action. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks . I still do believe that the current hook is superior: it shows the subject's determination and exemplifies a strong character. Many of my words yesterday, however, were intemperate and rude; I have struck them on WT:DYK, and I sincerely apologise for crossing the line. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the striking. - As you may know I was determined at the beginning of 2023 to leave DYK at all, because its arguments had become a drain on my limited time. I sort of returned because I noticed that topics I want people to know about had too little presence on the Main page (90 entries for 2023 in DYK Germany, vs. 204 in 2022, for example). I have no time to argue right now - with a GA review waiting for my expansions of the article - but beg you to consider that coming from Korea to a lead role at a leading house in Europe also shows determination and character strength, and adds by a few words (Mozart's Figaro) how his voice sounds like, which is desirable from my point of view, while "bass-baritone performer" is vague, almost misleading (as explained earlier) and no professional wording, - opera people just say "bass-baritone". I searched on the English Wikipedia for "baritone performer", and found 2 occurrences, one being the Main page. - DYK that about the best advice I ever received was ignore ignore ignore? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Immigrating succesfully to a different country is certainly a praiseworthy act—my family knows that very well. If you wanted to get that from the hook, however, you had to look at it sideways. DYK does not have the time to be subtle. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Back from rehearsal, little time: I don't "want to get" something from hooks, - I want to tell something, and am aware that it may mean something to some and nothing to others, and readership is so mixed that trying to find something that will mean something to all limits way to much what can be told, thus being in the way of variety which is a written goal of DYK. Wie liegt die Stadt so wüst was written in memory of our performance bringing a century of violence to a close, sung by Belgians and Germans in reconciliation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The variety at DYK come from the articles, not from the hooks (WP:DYKAIM: "the variety of information on Wikipedia... the range of material that Wikipedia covers". Any hook that is intentionally meaningless to some is explicitly contrary to DYK's guidelines (WP:DYKINT, emphasis not mine: "The hook should be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest."), and you have my assurance that I will never approve or promote such a hook. In the case of this article, we found something that could be interesting to all. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * We will have to disagree about variety then, because I still believe that the better hooks are those reflecting the focus of an article, and they would lead to greater variety of what we say, leading to more knowledge, which I still think is the key of Did you know? - Thank you for promoting three of my hooks today if I counted right. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * New day: I think there's a difference between "intentionally meaningless" and the insight that we can't help that things will mean different things to different people. I also think that - up to a certain point - I have been open to finding something more interesting together, and I offer to start right here in the future, discussing possibilities before even nominating, I mean. - On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * ps: you put two of "my" hooks in prep 3 - can you please move one? - Of the positive reactions to Fritzsch yesterday, the two users who actually listened touched me most (Storye book and Carlstak). For me, better two people listen than 2000 click and return. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The two hooks are now in queue 3: can you do something about separating them? I try to tell one story per day, not two ;) - I like today's, with the wedding pun. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If you really want to change it, you'll have to ask an admin, but I think it's fine currently—they don't overlap, and there's no rule saying it has to be only one hook per editor per set. I know I've promoted two from the same editor before. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not going by rulez much, as you may know ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Tamara Milashkina
Soprano Tamara Milashkina is on the Main page, and I summarised in today's story. The RD appearance will get her a 5-digit viewcount over the days, I guess. I have to decide if I'll put more effort into it (length or GA) to make it DYK also. I would if I knew that any from the story would be acceptable, but not if in the end we say that she was a librarian before she became a singer, - not fair to her very specific achievements, and a waste of my lifetime. Thoughts? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * , perhaps something on how a Soviet soprano performed alongside her husband in New York in 1975? There are two interesting "subhooks" there: 1) obviously there is the unusual idea of performing alongside your spouse, and 2) there is also the Cold War undertone, which most will be familiar with. What do you think? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for thinking! You can propose an alt, - I expanded, thinking that today was the day that people would look, and it was long enough sooner than I thought. I arrived at the same 1975 performances but without the husband ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I tried to include the husband, but ...
 * The image is only of her.
 * The other image - of one of the operas performed, which I like - shows her with a man she loves (in the opera) but that's not her husband. This image is featured in Tchaikowsky's biography, btw. It doesn't show well in stamp size.
 * The public liked her husband better.
 * I'd like to pass the information on the side that there was a large-scale exchange between the companies, not just individual singers, - 3 productions, husband and wife performing in 2 of those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Personally, I don't think that reasoning is very convincing, but we'll see what the reviewer and promoter thinks. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I was trained (here) to say New York City if I don't mean the State. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Benin Altar Tusk DYK
Hello there, how are you doing today? This Template:Did you know nominations/Benin Altar Tusk, I would love to have the image displayed, but it doesn't appear so on the prep area, please can you reconsider? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 04:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, DYK receives two to three image nominations for every slot available, meaning that around 55% of nominations have to be promoted without an image. Sadly, this is a judgement call by promoters. I hope you understand. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @AirshipJungleman29 Okay, thanks! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment/Ford Falcon (BA)/1
This may need to be re-opened or explained. Hog Farm Talk 22:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Lonnie R. Bristow
Why do we need compulsory in the hook? All he said was that telling who was black was a problem of mass testing. He did not say it was a problem of compulsory testing specifically. This change has made the hook worse and put a different spin on his words that was not there before. Please change it back. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

GA review
Hello AirshipJungleman29, I hope you're well! WikiEditor1234567123 and I recently expanded the article Nazran okrug and nominated it to become a GA. I was wondering if you'd be interested in reviewing it, as a reviewer of one of my previous GA's which is similar. Thank you! Best, – Olympian</b> <b style="color:#a3a0a0">loquere</b> 07:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, sadly I don't think I'll be able to get to this one, sorry. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No worries. All the best! – <b style="color:#fcc203">Ol</b><b style="color:#fcba03">ym</b><b style="color:#fcb103">pi</b><b style="color:#fca903">an</b> <b style="color:#a3a0a0">loquere</b> 06:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Email?
I sent a reply to a recent email from you a few days ago-- wondering if you saw it? Thanks, Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 21:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Vector space
You have nominated tis article for good article review recently. I want to help this article can keep its status, but am very busy with off-wiki things. When is the deadline for the review? Thanks, Jakob.scholbach (talk) 15:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, the review can be kept open for as long as three months as long as you intend to improve it. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks, this sounds doable -- I will try to allocate some time to it here and then. The content substance of the article is, I'm convinced, still at GA level, and the reference requests are in principle easy to implement. I may consider some other minor reorganizational edits in the process. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 18:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Many thanks . AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

January music
I remember Ewa Podleś on the Main page, and have - as you know - two musical DYK, almost too sweet. Shalom chaverim. On vacation (took an airship), with something for your sweet tooth --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Today: the performance of Anna Nekhames --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Today a friend's birthday, with related music and a few new vacation pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

GAR delist
Hi AirshipJungleman, in line with Hog Farm's comment in Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/Archive 30, I believe it would be appropriate to leave Good article reassessment/Great Salt Lake/1 open until a week after my notifications. A bit procedural perhaps, but procedure that leans towards the goal of hopefully attracting article improvement. Best, CMD (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, I should have noticed that. My mistake, . AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No problem, it's all trying to cleanup an unusual situation. CMD (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2024
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Pioneer helmet
Hey there, thanks for your edits to Pioneer helmet. I just wanted to explain my reversion, as your edits were understandable and well intentioned. The uncited sources were used in a previous section, which was unfortunately removed. I've been meaning to add that section back, though have been distracted by other work. I'll try to get to this on the sooner side, lest any similar confusion arise. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Motion proposed to suspend the Mzajac case
Arbitrators have proposed a motion to suspend the Mzajac case for three months at the proposed decision page. During this period, Mzajac will be temporarily desysopped, see Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac/Proposed decision for further information. Comments are welcome at the proposed decision talk page. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 214, February 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Sengoku-lord vandalism/increased page protection
could you plz block Sengoku-lord IP from continiously vandalizing/removing whole sourced sections w/out explanation and increase page protection level/add someone to monitor this article for new duplicate accounts created to do the same 2603:7000:3600:C1A9:21DD:25DB:A8F0:19F4 (talk) 06:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

OTD
Countering your point of "main page is based on article quality not relevance": yes, I mentioned that. The article for the Battle of Stalingrad is pretty well written. Countering your point of "we need diversity in article topic": There isn't a single battle listed on the February 2nd OTD, I fail to see how that would be a problem. KommanderChicken (talk) 03:07, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Many articles on Wikipedia are well-written, . Few regularly receive over 5,000 page views a day—more than Export–Import Bank of the United States actually got when it was on the Main Page yesterday. And yes, there was a military-related hook on OTD yesterday. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

A basic introduction
Hello, I am afraid I only just noticed your comment in a peer review done on the Chinese Legalism page. While I've retracted some work to the sandbox, and I would not suggest more work is not needed in general to streamline and simplify, you mentioned the encyclopedia britannica, which contains a basic three elements view. I have put together a basic three elements view myself, which I admit is not basic but instead a completely comprehensive overview including it's broader academic history. It is only presently lacking in that it does not include every example of it to ever occur. If you would like to provide feedback, then thanks.

I could certainly streamline it more later but will require significant work and sources seeing as it's broader examples merely crib the Oxford with it's past references.FourLights (talk) 17:36, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

FourLights (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * https://www.britannica.com/topic/Legalism
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalism_(Chinese_philosophy)#Basic_three_elements_view
 * I have responded on the talk page, . I would appreciate it if you could read what was written this time. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Re: In appreciation
Thank you so much for the barnstar, which was unexpected... :-) Thanks again... :-) Regards. --LukeWiller (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC).

Assessment
Hi AirshipJungleman29, thanks for the B-class assessment at Charlemagne! It's been a labor of love for over two months now (article before I started), so you don't know how much even that little gesture of taking the time to look at the article means! Seltaeb Eht (talk) 05:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)


 * And just saw your note at my talk - double thanks! My first barnstar, I really hit the big leagues now! Thanks again and cheers, Seltaeb Eht (talk) 05:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter
The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer, who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:


 * , with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
 * , with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
 * , with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
 * , with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
 * , with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
 * and, both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. 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 WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, 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 (,, and ) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the drive!
Welcome, welcome, welcome AirshipJungleman29! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles. CactiStaccingCrane (talk)14:57, 2 February 2024 UTC //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AirshipJungleman29&action=purge refresh via JWB and Geardona (talk to me?)

The Signpost: 13 February 2024
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Timelines of sovereign states
I noticed you AfDed the Europe article, are you planning to AfD Timeline of sovereign states in North America and Timeline of sovereign states in Oceania as well? I don't see how any stands without the others. CMD (talk) 19:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Delisting good articles
Hi there. Would it be possible, when delisting a good article, to change the assessment to B-class rather than leaving it completely unassessed? For example, here. You seem to be using a script to make these edits, so I will also notify @User:Novem Linguae. Best wishes &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * A lot of delisted GAs won't be B-class, and having them re-assessed, rather than automatically classified as B-class would be more appropriate. In fact, in the linked example, I would not say that article is B-class, as there are a lot of unsupported claims, which in my view would make it C-class at best. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 11:53, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You are of course welcome to re-assess these as you think appropriate. But B-class is one level down from GA, so I think this should be the default for a delisted GA. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Whereas I think the default should be as was done: it should be left blank, pending reassessment. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 11:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Well perhaps we should discuss this somewhere more visible? I strongly disagree. The onus is on the editor removing an assessment to add a new assessment, otherwise you are just creating a maintenance task for other editors and polluting valuable tracking data for WikiProjects. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * , I normally re-rate delisted good articles afterwards, but sometimes I forget, so my apologies for that. To address your question, I agree with ; many delisted GAs are not B-class, but C or even start-class. There should be no such thing as a "default" fallback, just as how delisted FAs are not considered GAs even if they previously passed the latter process. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Where does it say that? Why would you one assume that a delisted FA is not a GA? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That is not an assumption, that is how the assessment process works. See e.g. the bottom of WP:GACR, or for a recent practical example, Richard Hakluyt, a 2007 GA and FA recently delisted to B-class. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry I didn't mean to say "you" personally &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, no worries. The same reasoning as above: there is no reason to believe that an article delisted from a formal assessment process will meet the one just below it. There have been both FAs and GAs of so low quality that people haven't even bothered with reassessment and gone straight to AfD (I did that once). &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Surely reverting to its previous state when it was listed as GA/FA would be a better course of action than deleting?? I'm not saying these cases do not exist, I'm just suggesting that the default position should be one class lower unless an editor actively chooses to demote further. Removing the whole assessment seems unhelpful &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:22, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I wasn't around at the time, but I've poked around a little and found what seems to be the most recent discussion: Wikipedia talk:Good articles/Archive 15. Hope that helps. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * And in the cases of the ones that went to AfD, the issue wasn't that their quality was low, but that they didn't meet WP:NOT and WP:GNG. The GA and FA criteria do not demand notability—they presume it. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with the folks here that no rating is better than an incorrect rating. With the current workflow, the articles end up in one of the Category:Unassessed articles subcategories, then gnomes can fix the ratings at their convenience, which seems reasonable to me. – Novem Linguae (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Hö'elün
Congratulations to that achievement! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Today I am happy about a singer on the Main page (at least for the first hours), after TFA the same day last year. - Best wishes for what's happening in RL! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you today for Siege of Bukhara, introduced: "This is an incident during the Mongol invasion of Khwarazmia, where Genghis Khan spectacularly bypassed a static defensive strategy, forced one of Asia's greatest cities to surrender in a week, burnt the place down, enslaved most of the inhabitants, delivered a surprisingly theological speech, and naffed off to do more killing, burning, and enslaving. Very Genghis."! - Wish you joy on TFA day and on your Wikijourney! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

... and forgot to mention the exquisite matching DYK the same day. When I made today's story I was sure Alfred Grosser would appear on RD today, which may happen or not but I go to bed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

... and today a woman and her views --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Stephen Gould
You promoted the article to prep, and replaced precise date and location by "a festival". Please self-revert. I am not permitted. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Do you have a reason why I should self-revert ? &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Do you need more reason than removal of a precise date and location by an unspecific "a festival"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes . The DYK guidelines state "a lot of people who submit hooks tend to overestimate the amount of information that is required, but the end result is a hook that has too much information and is difficult to process." I see no reason why a precise date and location would help, same as for the first, seventh, and eighth hooks in that set. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) So it was not enough reason. Sigh. I don't think it is "required", but that it helps people. If someone is a prime minister, would you say "a polititian" instead, thinking precision is not required? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Taking a second look, I've trimmed the "an American heldentenor" bit, as it adds nothing to the hook and less than 0.1% of readers probably know what "heldentenor" means. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * (after edit conflict) I don't mind that. (I will never understand, however, why people are not expected to be curious enough to follow a link if they don't know a term.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * As I am curious, I looked at the interest for our article heldentenor which has constant mild interest every day, and spikes into four-digit range. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If it is necessary for the hook, I would call them a "prime minister". If it isn't, I would call them "[their name]". I would not, however, call them "Prime Minister of New Zealand, 1975–1984", despite the fact that is indubitably more precise in terms of location and date.
 * The Bayreuth Festival is top of its line which to mention is not "neccessary" but gives his achievement a glamour that "a festival" doesn't carry. Why not? That this achievement was recent, not decades ago, adds to interest (I think), and that it happened the year before he died may add further interest (I think). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:21, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If people don't know a term, they are simply less likely to be interested in clicking on a link, especially if it has nothing to do with the thing that drew their eye in the first place. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not only counting clicks for the bold article, but for all expansion of knowledge. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:21, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Based on this discussion, I think it uncontroversial to state that your definition of interest is very different from many others, as are your thoughts on what DYK is for. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm back home. Today is the birthday of Michael Herrmann. He founded a festival. The header in the paper names the festival. - If I - as a hook reader - would see an unspecific general "festival" I'd assume that it was some irrelevant no-name festival. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That's wonderful, Gerda. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:28, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Another 80th birthday remembered today, with a DYK OTD in 2020. I wonder if that (hook) would have been possible in 2024, - please teach me. (Side note: the article was written when I went over the legacy of Jerome Kohl, and there was this red link ...) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * What do you think of my 2010 hook? - Please let me know when you have time to discuss how different views on "interesting" could lead to a broader range of facts. (I thought you were busy.) - Having to deal with Alfred Grosser who worked towards friendship between former enemies, via better understanding of the others' position. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Actually fairly good; would've trimmed off the name of the festival, though. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Last time your festival trimming was not accepted, DYK? Schwetzingen Festival - even without a click - serves information that
 * it was at some festival, making it more special than some municipal opera house
 * it was in Germany (or Austria or Switzerland)
 * it was not one of the giant festivals, Salzburg and Bayreuth
 * so: why discard? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't feel like discussing the pros and cons of a 14-year-hook with someone who has and will never change her mind. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I try to learn, and it's not about the 14-years-old, but general. I will not change my mind about liking music for musicians, and I will not change my mind about liking to mention in four words something transporting essential information. We have now in prep 2 a hook about a passionate singer, and mention two nationalities, a completely superflous city, her husband, and no music. I find it sad but have to deal with Seiji Ozawa and Helga Paris. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I made the theatre my story for Valentine's Day because they played Elegy for Young Lovers there for the first time. Enjoy! (That was DYK in 2011.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Campbell's Soup Cans
Did you notice the 05:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC) comment on this nomination? It seems like this is being rushed into the queue for some reason when it really should be delayed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * , this is a rather bewildering comment. What gave you the impression this was "being rushed into the queue", and why should one of the oldest approved DYK nominations be delayed further? &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * By rushed, I mean that it was put in a queue 71 minutes after it was approved. It is probably more common for an article to sit in approved status 71 days than it is for it to be promoted within 71 minutes of being approved. In this case, there are two similarly themed (Campbell's Soup Cans series) articles that have been on the main page in recent months. I was thinking (05:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC) comment) it should be delayed until March or April (plus because of the WP:CUP, I would rather it be delayed. I believe I entered the cup after making this nomination so the suggestion was not related to my current preference.) and stated that it should be held until March or April. Note that one of the prior articles was similar enough to require a 5x-related character count adjustment for similarity. Plus 6 weeks is not that old for a DYK nomination.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Your assumptions are not correct, . You are vastly overestimating your own nominations' importance—that two hooks ran in 2023 is irrelevant. We have had four hooks on Pulitzer-Prize winning photographs in the last month, and six hooks on the paintings of Amrita Sher-Gil since November. You are also incorrect in assuming that six weeks is "not that old" and that nominations sit approved for 71 days or more; in reality, nominations are routinely rejected when they are more than two months old, as this one would be. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * User:AirshipJungleman29 you are talking to me like I haven't submitted nearly 1000 nominations and reviewed hundreds. I know almost precisely how common it is for nominations to take much longer than 6 weeks and for a an approval to be promoted in 71 minutes. Regarding the former, I need go no further than Template:Did you know nominations/Campbell's Soup Cans II which was nominated September 23 and ran on December 23. I am not talking about assumptions. I may have had 1 or 2 nominations be rejected for age, but only because there were other difficulties with the nomination. Of my nearly 1000 nominations, none with an easily approved subject/article and hook has ever been rejected. Same for reviews. When you are dealing with six similarly themed nominations that are nominated closely, this will happen. I've had tightly bunched basketball, football and Lichtenstein articles. But when you have only 3 articles and the freedom to space them, why not do it?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I would be surprised indeed if your previous nominations were rejected because of age, as consensus to take that course formed early this year. We have the freedom to space your nominations—they are two months apart. I still fail to see why you think a gap containing 70 sets and 560 hooks is not sufficient. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * My perception was that Template:Did you know nominations/Campbell's Soup Cans II was delayed as long as was reasonable to space it from Template:Did you know nominations/Campbell's Soup I (hence the 3 full month waiting period till DYK main page publication). I am of course unaware of any new consensus regarding stale nominations. I just felt that a December 29 nomination could reasonably be delayed 10 weeks for spacing. When WP:DYKNA has many older nominations than 12/29 many of which were approved, I thought a similar maximal spacing delay was in order for Template:Did you know nominations/Campbell's Soup Cans. If it also ran three months after it was nominated that would be March 29. I think even early March is appropriate spacing. I think it is likely to get more views the more it is spaced. It is not that big a deal, but a 71-minute promotion was totally shocking to me. I am sure you are doing your part to keep this ship running, but I just think more spacing on this topic is better since there is nothing else in the DYK pipeline on this subject.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I count three assumptions.
 * 1) WP:DYKNA did not have any older non-biographical approved nomination with no issues at the time of promotion. I needed a non-biographical hook for WP:DYKVAR, so I chose the oldest one.
 * 2) As the person who promoted nom2, I can say that a desire to space nominations played absolutely no part in the delay to promote. I regret to tell you that we DYK volunteers do not in fact have an encyclopedic memory of all the hooks that have been promoted in the three prior months.
 * 3) this is statistically unprovable, but in my opinion, it is much more likely precisely the opposite. Recently we had two picture hooks on mid-century Pulitzer-prize winning photographs, run less than 48 hours apart. According to you we would expect a large drop in the view statistics of the second hook, but in fact it was almost identical to the first. Of course, you could argue that the second hook was more interesting than the first and should have received more views, but I don't think that very likely.
 * I would advise you to let go this obsession on "spacing" . If you disagree, please take it to WT:DYK. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Although, I have never put a set together, I am vaguely aware of diversity pursuit on the main page and within DYK. If you were short non-bio noms, then I understand the need. That is a kind of situation that could easily result in a nom of moderate age being promoted abnormally soon after approval. My main issue was with the abnormally short promotion in the face of the expressed suggestion for delay. In terms of non-bio subjects, this is an important one and if it was the absolute oldest, it was a good choice. I understand your reasoning and have no reason to appeal further. Thanks for your efforts to promote diverse presentation on the main page. It is an important pursuit. 8 weeks between Campbell's Soup Can appearances is surely sufficient in the face of the disparity you describe.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)