User talk:Denis Barthel

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:


 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~ 

Dori | Talk 07:45, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)

Thank you very much Denis, you've been very kind. Your help is much appreciated, maybe you could watch User:Curtis Clark/Inflorescence, feel free to correct my edits as you want. As you can see on my user page, I'm not even a native English speaker! Aelwyn 16:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Pinedrops.jpg
I note that you have moved the image I uploaded, Pinedrops.jpg, to the Commons. The information seems to have transferred correctly, but the name should be changed to Pterospora andromedea. Perhaps you can figure out how to do that. Cstaffa (talk) 03:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

ICN
Hi, we have a bit of a problem. There is already a page called International Code of Nomenclature FOR algae, fungi, and plants. Please see BEN 441; the "for" is correct. I've been meaning to get around to citing that on the relevant pages, but haven't had time yet. To explain why I made a new page without moving the old one: it was rather a mess and this seemed like a good opportunity to start some cleanup. Nadiatalent (talk) 15:19, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Nadia, I got the title from http://www.pensoft.net/journals/phytokeys/article/1850/outcomes-of-the-2011-botanical-nomenclature-section-at-the-xviii-international-botanical-congress and I assumed it to be quite reliable. Seems to be some uncertainty in the title still ...
 * Your explanation for a new start sounds pretty reasonable, the old page is indeed a mess. But as it is now, it seems as if there were two codes and not a single one being renamed only. This seems to me ... strange. Maybe you can find a solution for this? Denis Barthel (talk) 17:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Denis, how marvellous. I'll send email to James Miller and John McNeill ... I was hoping to either delete the old page eventually, or have so much added to the new one that they would become rather different in time. Nadiatalent (talk) 18:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi again, John McNeill sent a response stating that the correct form, as in the Norvell & Funk proposal that was voted on at the IBC reads: International Code of Nomenclature FOR algae, fungi, and plants.


 * Dr McNeill also points out another problem with the phytokeys article that perhaps you are thinking about: it states that the changes with regard to "registration" of fungal names take effect from 1 January 2012, but that is not the case. "This requirement takes effect from 1 January 2013, as stated in the original proposal that was not amended."
 * Many authors, much chaos, as in Wikipedia. Nadiatalent (talk) 19:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, Nadia, for mailing McNeill. So this is cleared now (and I can fix the things in the German article too, where I originally came from). But still open is, if these should be two articles or just one? I'd prefer one as it is basically the same, but I am not to much in en-WP and thus don't want to intervene to much in it. Best regards, Denis Barthel (talk) 09:07, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
- against image filters, sayz former EFF member and former activist: --Emeritus (talk) 14:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Patton
hallo Denis Barthel,

danke vielmals für deine Unterstützung. Jedoch liegt es vollkommen an dir ob du es möchtest oder nicht. Ich fühle mich unwohl nachdem ich mich so ausgedrückt habe, und wenn ich diesen Link zu der Diskussion anklicke, fühle ich mich zutiefst beschämt. Meine E-mail lautet einfallslos: GreatOrangePumpkin@hotmail.com. Viele Grüße.-- ♫GoP♫ T C N 21:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, try googlemail.com instead of hotmail :P. (Thanks for doing this!)-- ♫GoP♫ T C N 20:30, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Browse without images button
Hi Denis,

On Requests for comment/Muhammad images, you opposed the functional hatnote on the grounds of "NOTCENSORED and In an encyclopedia, sensibilities don't count".

I was a little confused by this, because if I had to pick a single policy or value that inspired the functional hatnote, it would be NOTCENSORED. While the functional hatnote looks similar to the alternative hatnote, it's quite different.

In particular, the hatnote is "content-neutral"-- it treats all images identically. The note does not specific WHICH images are upsetting, WHY they're upsetting, or IF they're upsetting. It doesn't mention Muhammad, it isn't specific to Muhammad. It just offers users the chance to view a imageless version of the current page.

In short, I agree 100% that "sensibilities don't count". The best way to protect NOTCENSORED is for our editors be able to point to the "hide images" button any time someone tries to delete controversial images (or make them smaller, or fewer).

The foundation wanted a personal image filter, some people want to delete images, some people want to add a disclaimer. I feel like the alternative we came up-- a simple "hide images" button, is vastly more compatible with our philosophy than any other option. It just gives novices the ability to browse without images-- something every experienced user has always been able to do.

That's my pitch. :) --HectorMoffet (talk) 10:47, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:38, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Wikipedia Stories Project
Hi!

My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Wikipedia community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Wikipedia have so much to share.

I'd very much like the opportunity to interview you to tell your story, with the possibility of using it in our materials, on our community websites, or as part of this year’s fundraiser to encourage others to support Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Wikipedia Stories Project.

Thank you for your time,

Victor Grigas

user:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

Victor Grigas (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Hypothallus
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Lindbladia tubulina
Yngvadottir (talk) 16:06, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Barbeyella minutissima
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Listerelliidae
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC) 08:04, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)
Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:


 * Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasit &#124; c 17:14, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email! If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia). Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:03, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
 * 2) Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code.  Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
 * 3) Create your account by entering the requested information.  (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
 * 4) You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID.  (The account is now active for 1 year).
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
 * Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
 * Show off your Questia access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

JSTOR
Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one.

JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swalling@undefinedwikimedia.org) with...


 * the subject line "JSTOR"
 * your English Wikipedia username
 * your preferred email address for a JSTOR account

The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist.

Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   21:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Selli Engler
Hi, this is just to let you know that I've translated your article Selli Engler from the German Wikipedia. Regards,  Sandstein   08:32, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Sandstein, that's great to hear. I'd appreciate if you would additionally request an import for the completion of page history. Best wishes, Denis Barthel (talk) 09:55, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, I've made the import.  Sandstein   11:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your efforts! Denis Barthel (talk) 11:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Selli Engler
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:47, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:51, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

JSTOR Survey (and an update)
Hi! Just a quick update that while JSTOR and The Wikipedia Library discuss expanding the partnership, they've gone ahead and extended the pilot access again, until May 31st. Thanks, JSTOR!

It would be really helpful for growing the program if you would fill out this short survey about your usage and experience with JSTOR:

SURVEY

Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Please fill out your JSTOR email
As one of the original 100 JSTOR account recipients, please fill out the very short email form you received just recently in order to renew your access. Even though you signed up before with WMF, we need you to sign up again with The Wikipedia Library for privacy reasons and because your prior access expired on July 15th. We do not have your email addresses now; we just used the Special:EmailUser feature, so if you didn't receive an email just contact me directly at jorlowitz@undefinedgmail.com. Thanks, and we're working as quickly as possible to get you your new access! Jake (Ocaasi) 19:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your movie upload
I saw that you effectively cooperated in Quds Day by uploading a movie. Don't stop and add other information such as text, picture and movie to this section. Mhhossein (talk) 07:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways: Sign up now Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
 * Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
 * Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
 * Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
 * Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
 * Research coordinators: run reference services

Kamera lens
Apologies for PRODing the article that you created. None of my searches yielded anything and even your ref quoted in your edit summary failed for me - but that URL did give me access to a reputable source. It did me pause for thought when I reviewed your editing history but even the most emminent scientists (and presumably Wikipedia editors) have fallen for hoaxes in the past. I am not sure that modern taxonomic nomenclature would allow such a name today? Sorry to have caused you angst and additional effort. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk 13:23, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Celeste (band)


The article Celeste (band) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails WP:NBAND"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. heyitsben!! talk 18:25, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Die BIF – Blätter Idealer Frauenfreundschaften
Thanks for this and related articles. I've tried to brush up the translation a bit. Look forward to the DYK. If you are going to continue along these lines, you might like to become a member of Women in Red. Please let me know if you need further assistance with translations.--Ipigott (talk) 11:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your help, Ipigott, your efforts are highly appreciated. Comparing the versions, I can see clearly, how much the article needed this kind of help. Thanks for the invitation too, I'm considering it too. A question: you marked the page as reviewed, but I can't see any review notes on DYK? As I am just an occasional guest at en.wikipedia I might misunderstand something? All the best from Berlin, Denis Barthel (talk) 21:00, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hiya I just reviewed the DYK submission for BIF - what Ipigott did was to review the page itself as a new page, an internal wikiprocedure for all new pages, if that makes sense. Nice one it's an interesting article! Since this looks like being your sixth DYK nom, you'll need to review another nomination as quid pro quo and also i had a few queries which i left on the submission. Feel free to ask if something's not clear. Mujinga (talk) 18:13, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Mujinga, thanks a lot for your explanation and your review. I like your recommendations and changed the proposal accordingly. I will check to find out about the QPQ-guidelines and will make my review. Thanks a lot for your help! Denis Barthel (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Die BIF – Blätter Idealer Frauenfreundschaften
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2423 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The article is still featured on Portal:Germany, and Next time, you can add one yourself ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Die BIF
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Die BIF 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 Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 05:02, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Die BIF
The article Die BIF you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Die BIF for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Buidhe -- Buidhe (talk) 11:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Basler Afrika Bibliographien
Hello, Denis Barthel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Basler Afrika Bibliographien, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:02, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Basler Afrika Bibliographien


Hello, Denis Barthel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Basler Afrika Bibliographien".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Sonja (novel)
Just a friendly heads-up that you should familiarize yourself more with WP:Notability requirements at Wikipedia, and beef up the references at Sonja (novel) to demonstrate sufficient significant coverage to merit an article at Wikipedia. After a cursory initial look, it doesn't appear to be notable based on the seven references that are there now. I plan to nominate it for deletion unless you can prevent that by demonstrating that the article topic is notable. How much time do you think you'll need to do that? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your heads-up. Please bear in mind that the extensive contemporary reception of the novel has been reported and summarized in Marti's Hinterlassene Botschaften, a scientific resource, that has been published at Springer Link, spends more than 30 pages on the novel and has been my main source to quote from. The novel's publication in one of the most renowned German publishing houses, it's (for Germany) significant sales, it's nomination for one of the most renowned German literary awards and it's reception by nationwide leading magazines, national TV-stations and journals of both Germany and Switzerland from 1980 to the presence give me trust, that this is a notable topic. Let me know, if you have further doubts on the notability and what you would like me to do. Denis Barthel (talk) 01:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thirty pages on it should definitely be enough to establish notability accompanied by the literary award. Which reference was it that named the award nom, I didn't see that. Along with those two, plus one other writeup in a major magazine or TV stations will be enough; can you add those? Mathglot (talk) 01:36, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not so hard to see, it's right behind the mentioning of the award. The amount of pages was visible too already and the Tageszeitung-ref is already in it too. No offense meant, but it would be less stressful to know, that you gave the text a solid read already. Denis Barthel (talk) 01:55, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The following articles you created also appear to be on non-notable topics, or at least, do not currently demonstrate significant coverage via the sources they have now:
 * Amicus-Briefbund – passing mentions only
 * Das 3. Geschlecht – The Third Sex has one good source (Birkhold); please get two more. (MQH has one paragraph on it; not strong enough, but better than nothing.) By the way, based on Birkhold, this article should probably be renamed The Third Sex (magazine) per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:USEENGLISH, but more investigation on that point is needed.
 * The Quorum (magazine) – nothing demonstrating notability
 * Celeste (band) – only one of the six references is independent (#5); please get at least two more solid ones like that
 * Spook Hunters – passing mention (one sentence) in one source; the other source is dead, and the url for it is "excluded" from the Internet Archive, which is a bad sign. This article is essentially entirely unsourced.
 * I don't see how you can work on all of these at once, and some of them have been around for a while, so they may not be subject to being moved to Draft space at this point, but I have to check on some others, maybe they can be. How do you wish to proceed with this?
 * In my opinion, you should not create any more articles directly in main space; rather, you should be using WP:Draft space for all of your new articles, and when they are ready, submit them via the WP:Afc process to verify that they are ready for main space. Please let me know if you have any questions. If you disagree, you could raise a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability about this, or ask at the WP:Tea house or WP:Help desk. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:13, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your opinion, and I respectfully disagree, I understand my work in general to be good enough to continue. I will take care in my further work to add a sufficient number of good sources though. Best, Denis Barthel (talk) 01:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I almost didn't see your individual responses, because you interleaved them within the lines of my previous comment; please don't do that, it makes it hard to know who is responsible for writing what, as the timestamped signature at the end of a comment is supposed to refer to everything above it, up to the previous timestamped signature. I've boxed up your responses, to set them off as your work, and not mine. See WP:INTERPOLATE. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:53, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, thank you. Denis Barthel (talk) 01:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I just see, that your remark concerning the Spook Hunters is actually somewhat pointless. Even if the URLs are invalid or dead, the journals are fully valid scientific sources, there are even two different ones. I will update the refs now. Denis Barthel (talk) 02:14, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You perhaps misunderstand my intent: I don't wish to see *any* of these deleted if they can be saved (especially not Quorum and Das dritten Geschlecht, which seem to have historic importance). This is a call to action (i.e., find more sources!), not a call to deletion. With respect to Geschlecht, thanks for the additional sources you added to "Further reading"; that helps. (I did not understand this sentence above: "Concerning the name I do not see, that there is a significant "overweight" of translations for the name due to the new sources, but I leave this up to you", if it's important, can you restate that in German (which I presume you speak)? "Spook Hunters" can probably be merged into some article on L.A. gangs, if there is one, and I believe there is a list-article about LGBT publications that could hold some of the content of Quorum if sufficient independent sourcing can't be found to establish it as a standalone article. Mathglot (talk) 02:11, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * "Den Namen des Artikels betreffend: ich denke nicht, das er übersetzt werden sollte. Vor allem angesichts der neuen Quellen scheint mir WP:DONTUSEENGLISH eher zuzutreffen. Aber die Entscheidung überlasse ich dir."
 * I was unable to find further sources for The Quorum and Amicus-Briefbund, that are more than "passing mentions". My mistake was to bring the routines from working in the German WP, where the point of multiple, extensive coverage is not as important as you state it to be the case at EN-WP, else the topic's importance has more weight. As this seems to be different here, I'll have to adapt and the both regrettably have to go. I updated Spook Hunters, as far as I could, but it wasn't a lot.
 * I hope we are fine now with Sonja and Das dritte Geschlecht and I don't want to put more work in Celeste, so I will call it a night now. Best, Denis Barthel (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, now I understand. I think it *probably* should be, but that remains to be seen, with how the majority of sources deal with it. If there isn't enough coverage, then my understanding of WP:USEENGLISH is that we should use the best English translation of the title that we can, based on these parts of WP:Article title policy:
 * On the English Wikipedia, article titles are written using the English language.
 * If there is no established English-language treatment for a name, translate it if this can be done without loss of accuracy and with greater understanding for the English-speaking reader.
 * I don't think there's any question that "The Third Sex/Gender" will be clearer to users here, than the German version, where even the "3." will be interpreted as "Number 3" (because of the period after the '3') by non-German speaking readers here. Your link WP:DONTUSEENGLISH does not apply here, because 1) it's on a guideline page, not a policy page, so in case of a conflict, WP:Article title policy takes precedence; but more importantly, 2) the guideline applies to names only; i.e., it's about whether we say "Gauss" or "Gauß" for the German mathematician (answer: "Gauss", because there are plenty of sources in English, and that's how they spell it) and we say, "Cologne" not "Köln" (same reason); but we also write, "Böðvar Böðvarsson" because nothing much is written about this Icelandic football player in English. So, if there's nothing about the group and we want to write about it here, it should be rendered in English, because it's not a name, like  Köln, or Böðvarsson.
 * I think you hit the nail on the head, with this:
 * Exactly! It's very important to understand and follow en-wiki's policies and guidelines, not the ones from any other Wikipedia that you might be used to. This was a point of concern to me, as I occasionally work on other Wikipedias, so I started to build out something to help me. I didn't go as far as I had planned to (it's a lot of work) but I created a kind of model, or proof of concept, and although it's very far from complete, maybe it will be useful to you anyway. thanks, Mathglot (talk) 03:46, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I am rather sure that translating the title would not be the right decision. According to the Article title policy "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage, e.g. the non-anglicized titles Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard, and Göttingen are used because they predominate in English-language reliable sources, whereas for the same reason the anglicized title forms Nuremberg, delicatessen, and Florence are used (as opposed to Nürnberg, Delikatessen, and Firenze, respectively).
 * As all of the linked English sources (with the exception of MQH) use the current form, the German name with a translation right after the title, I am convinced that we should go with this.
 * If you are in doubt, that this is sufficient to make it an "established usage", the policy says If there are too few reliable English-language sources to constitute an established usage, follow the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject (German for German politicians, Portuguese for Brazilian towns, and so on).
 * This policy, the guideline and the fact, that this is common practice in non-english periodical articles should make clear, that this is the right thing to do. Best, Denis Barthel (talk) 09:36, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, you're quoting the wrong guideline—that's the one that goes with names, like Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard, and Göttingen, not words, like The + Third + Sex/Gender, none of which are names. I already pointed this out to you above that it "applies to names only", and you even quoted the relevant part yourself just now: "German for German politicians, Portuguese for Brazilian towns", politicians and towns are both names of people or places, and yes, if there is nothing in English about them, then we follow local usage (but not if the name is in a non-Latin script—there's a guideline for that, too). The guiding policy for an article title is WP:Article title, and when the article title is not the name of somebody or someplace, then WP:USEENGLISH applies. Please follow English Wikipedia policies and guidelines when developing new articles, not the guidelines from any other Wikipedia. I realize these guidelines can be complex—they have evolved over many years—and if you're not sure, you can ask someone for help. Please don't just go off doing it your own way or the way you think it ought to be; by and large these policies boil down to common sense, and the policy about translating "word" titles into English but not rewriting "name" titles when there is no model in English sources makes perfect sense, if you think about it. We have to consider the fact that many readers of English Wikipedia are monolingual native speakers, and many other readers are Japanese, or Finnish, or Indonesian, with varying levels of English, but very likely no facility in German at all. For all of these readers, the current policy on translating "word" titles is indeed the best one. When there *is* plenty of usage in English, we follow it: so in English Wikipedia we say, Mein Kampf and Das Kapital, because that is what *English* sources say, but we say The Tin Drum, All Quiet on the Western Front, and The Neverending Story, because *that* is what English sources say. When English sources don't say anything, we translate into English. You could think of it this way: in every case, whether very common or unheard of, we choose the title that English speakers are going to understand best, so which will they understand better: Die Blechtrommel or The Tin Drum? Well, that one is obvious, but how about this one: My Struggle or MK? In fact, nobody in English will recognize the term "My Struggle" or know who wrote it or what it is about, so we choose the German title, because that is what English readers will understand best. Finally, for Das 3. Geschlecht—what will English readers understand best? The answer should be obvious. Alles klar jetzt? mfG, Mathglot (talk) 17:19, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Please answer just one question to me: if all this is true, why am I unable to find even a single magazine name that has been translated in Category:Magazines published in France, Category:Magazines published in Albania, Category:Magazines published in the Netherlands or especially in Category:Magazines published in Germany (I did not go through all other categories, but I am 99% sure that the same goes for all other categories of Category:Periodicals by country)?
 * Personally I think that the policy has a broader understanding of the term "name" than expressed above. The term is used there in the sense of the topic name and article name, not restricted to names of persons or places. And as such a periodical/magazine/journal has a name, which is not supposed to be translated as the article name.
 * Concerning this case, I additionally want to point out, that almost all "reliable English-language sources" use the German name, followed by a translation in parentheses, as the article does. Let's not forget the weight of these sources discussing your proposal. Denis Barthel (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If there is coverage in English sources and they use the German name, then that's your answer: the German name should be used. Mathglot (talk) 20:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I already mentioned that before and it was clearly visible in the linked sources too. May I suggest to prepare your proposals better before you start unnecessary discussions? Thank you, Denis Barthel (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding "The term is used there in the sense of the topic name and article name, not restricted to names of persons or places." I understand your belief, but that is not the case. (For one thing, if that were true, then it would be in direct conflict with WP:USEENGLISH policy.) As a demonstration: if you look at any of the approximately twenty examples given on the page, you will see that they are all names of people or places, and no example is of anything else but that. However, I agree that it is not phrased very well, and can fairly easily be misunderstood, and other users are likely to be led astray in the same way, so for that, I am sorry. I will see what I can do to get that page fixed, so it doesn't create further problems like this one. Probably clearer language at that one page could've forestalled the need for this entire conversation. Happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 02:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, you're quoting the wrong guideline—that's the one that goes with names, like Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard, and Göttingen, not words, like The + Third + Sex/Gender, none of which are names. I already pointed this out to you above that it "applies to names only", and you even quoted the relevant part yourself just now: "German for German politicians, Portuguese for Brazilian towns", politicians and towns are both names of people or places, and yes, if there is nothing in English about them, then we follow local usage (but not if the name is in a non-Latin script—there's a guideline for that, too). The guiding policy for an article title is WP:Article title, and when the article title is not the name of somebody or someplace, then WP:USEENGLISH applies. Please follow English Wikipedia policies and guidelines when developing new articles, not the guidelines from any other Wikipedia. I realize these guidelines can be complex—they have evolved over many years—and if you're not sure, you can ask someone for help. Please don't just go off doing it your own way or the way you think it ought to be; by and large these policies boil down to common sense, and the policy about translating "word" titles into English but not rewriting "name" titles when there is no model in English sources makes perfect sense, if you think about it. We have to consider the fact that many readers of English Wikipedia are monolingual native speakers, and many other readers are Japanese, or Finnish, or Indonesian, with varying levels of English, but very likely no facility in German at all. For all of these readers, the current policy on translating "word" titles is indeed the best one. When there *is* plenty of usage in English, we follow it: so in English Wikipedia we say, Mein Kampf and Das Kapital, because that is what *English* sources say, but we say The Tin Drum, All Quiet on the Western Front, and The Neverending Story, because *that* is what English sources say. When English sources don't say anything, we translate into English. You could think of it this way: in every case, whether very common or unheard of, we choose the title that English speakers are going to understand best, so which will they understand better: Die Blechtrommel or The Tin Drum? Well, that one is obvious, but how about this one: My Struggle or MK? In fact, nobody in English will recognize the term "My Struggle" or know who wrote it or what it is about, so we choose the German title, because that is what English readers will understand best. Finally, for Das 3. Geschlecht—what will English readers understand best? The answer should be obvious. Alles klar jetzt? mfG, Mathglot (talk) 17:19, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Please answer just one question to me: if all this is true, why am I unable to find even a single magazine name that has been translated in Category:Magazines published in France, Category:Magazines published in Albania, Category:Magazines published in the Netherlands or especially in Category:Magazines published in Germany (I did not go through all other categories, but I am 99% sure that the same goes for all other categories of Category:Periodicals by country)?
 * Personally I think that the policy has a broader understanding of the term "name" than expressed above. The term is used there in the sense of the topic name and article name, not restricted to names of persons or places. And as such a periodical/magazine/journal has a name, which is not supposed to be translated as the article name.
 * Concerning this case, I additionally want to point out, that almost all "reliable English-language sources" use the German name, followed by a translation in parentheses, as the article does. Let's not forget the weight of these sources discussing your proposal. Denis Barthel (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If there is coverage in English sources and they use the German name, then that's your answer: the German name should be used. Mathglot (talk) 20:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I already mentioned that before and it was clearly visible in the linked sources too. May I suggest to prepare your proposals better before you start unnecessary discussions? Thank you, Denis Barthel (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding "The term is used there in the sense of the topic name and article name, not restricted to names of persons or places." I understand your belief, but that is not the case. (For one thing, if that were true, then it would be in direct conflict with WP:USEENGLISH policy.) As a demonstration: if you look at any of the approximately twenty examples given on the page, you will see that they are all names of people or places, and no example is of anything else but that. However, I agree that it is not phrased very well, and can fairly easily be misunderstood, and other users are likely to be led astray in the same way, so for that, I am sorry. I will see what I can do to get that page fixed, so it doesn't create further problems like this one. Probably clearer language at that one page could've forestalled the need for this entire conversation. Happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 02:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of LGBT periodicals, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hlas. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ligue de Defense de la Race Nègre
Hello! Your submission of Ligue de Defense de la Race Nègre at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 07:09, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ligue de défense de la race nègre
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ligue de défense de la race nègre 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 A455bcd9 -- A455bcd9 (talk) 10:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ligue de défense de la race nègre
The article Ligue de défense de la race nègre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ligue de défense de la race nègre for comments about the article, and Talk:Ligue de défense de la race nègre/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 A455bcd9 -- A455bcd9 (talk) 09:21, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Ligue de défense de la race nègre
Z1720 (talk) 00:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)