User talk:Elinruby/Archives/2023/May

Do you think it might be helpful to create a Collaboration, etc., Wikiproject ?
Hi, Elin, I was just thinking that with all the overlap and cross-referencing, it might be helpful to create a Wikiproject or Wikigroup for something like "Invasion, Collaboration, Occupation and Resistance during World War II" (a more logical order would be IOCR, but this arrangement could be more euphonisouly acronymised to ICOR) to gather together all those articles like German occupation of Byelorussia during World War II, Collaboration with Imperial Japan, Collaboration with the Axis powers, Vichy France, Chetniks, Partisans, List of World War II puppet states, Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, Azad Hind, Slovak Republic (1939-1945). White Rose, Manchukuo, Vidkun Quisling, Vel' d'Hiv Roundup, Einsatzgruppen. Otto Abetz. etc. (There may already be a Wiki Project on the various resistance movements.)

On the one hand, this might help with overlap and cross-checking; on the other, it might either pretend to become some Universal Law-Giver or else sit around empty, unvisited and unused. There's also a more-distant danger of just coalescing onto one project page all those angry ArbCom-worthy debates on topics such as Jewish collaboration or Comfort women. @Mathglot, @User:Piotrus @User:Marcelus, @User:Scope creep. @User:Volunteer Marek

—— Shakescene (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Morning That is a interesting idea. It would certainly something that could focus the group efforts and we could have a participants lists. Morning  I've been doing research on collaboration and found a book on collaboration, the meaning of Nazi collaboration and the many forms its took depending on the particular country or region, the demographics, the people that were there, economy and so it. It seems to be the defintive book, but is probably one amongst many, but it excellent at describing the various aspects of it and why each country/group decided to go with, particularly the early ones, their motivations and so on.  I found a review and it pointed me to a Italian academic who held the last conference on nazi collaboration for researchers on the subject. I'm going to contact him and see what he says in terms of the lastest sources and see if we can get any pointers. I'm still on the Lister article at the moment, so this is on the back, but I have some direction for the collaboration article.    scope_creep Talk  07:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll probably be low-activity for the next month or so, but I'll watch with interest, and contribute when I can. Mathglot (talk) 09:04, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it's a good idea. I had been wondering if everyone got run off by the current Arb case, and was.thinking of making a post about that. Certainly it would improve the visibility of the effort. As for.attracting the angry, that may be inevitable, whether we start a formal project or not. If it gets too bad we can maybe ask for discretionary sanctions, which this article currently only falls under with respect to Poland. I think that holding fast to verifiability will help a lot with creating something useful that neither blames nor praises. Elinruby (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As I suspected there is already some Resistance stuff falling within the WW2 MilHistory projects.
 * There's also this collapsible category guide (or whatever you call it)
 * P.S. I looked at the Collaboration with Imperial Japan article that I created by splitting off 16 k from Collaboration with the Axis Powers earlier this year, and it's now nearly doubled to 28 k, which is exactly what I was seeking. Most of us know something about Vichy France or Eastern Europe, but nearly nothing (except what we've found in Wikipedia) about modern Asian history — far better to attract those who have a greater interest in and knowledge of modern Asia than to stumble our own way through darkly (and perhaps wrongly).
 * —— Shakescene (talk) 17:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * New projects, even ones you'd think have broad interest, frequently go dark. A subtask of WP:MILHIST may be a good route to consider. MILHIST is a huge project with many task forces for subtopics, and is not going to become inactive. If a new "collaboration" subtask is created and has little input for some time, it won't disappear as long as MILHIST exists. Plus, it may attract crossover interest from members of other MILHIST task forces that wouldn't have noticed it as a standalone project. So that's one thing to consider. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * New projects, even ones you'd think have broad interest, frequently go dark. A subtask of WP:MILHIST may be a good route to consider. MILHIST is a huge project with many task forces for subtopics, and is not going to become inactive. If a new "collaboration" subtask is created and has little input for some time, it won't disappear as long as MILHIST exists. Plus, it may attract crossover interest from members of other MILHIST task forces that wouldn't have noticed it as a standalone project. So that's one thing to consider. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Except we've been removing military history. Just saying Elinruby (talk) 19:05, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; maybe another project then; WP:POLITICS? Mathglot (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * maybe sociology? seems like there is an important point that the article misses, which is why some people collaborated... thinking about this. I looked at the collaboration with Japan article, btw, and at first thought all the added bytes were for sections that say "this section is empty", but Vietnam and i think another country are definitely more fleshed out than they were.Elinruby (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think what we've been trying to avoid or minimise is purely-military history (the North African campaigns, Operation Anvil, Barbarossa, Overlord, etc.) and lists of volunteers or conscripts in the various Axis armies. Some of the other histories of occupation, complicity, collaboration and resistance are very hard to separate from the initial invasions and/or liberations. One example would be the Armistice Line which separated "Unoccupied France" from Occupied France. Another would be the Einsatzgruppen which closely followed the front lines, but (with their small numbers) relied heavily on local complicity and collaboration. The Resistance and counter-resistance were partly political and partly military. But, basically, as Mathglot suggested, the Military History Wikiproject would be a good place to recruit, organise and motivate knowledgeable and interested editors. Too sleepy to be more coherent.
 * —— Shakescene (talk) 04:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Re: Armistice Line: sure. There is an article about Line of control, so there might even be an dedicated infobox for borders and disputed territories. As to MILHIST, you guys are right of course. If you are going to post over there, I would also like to know if there is a list anywhere of the French Foreign Legion? I could use one for the Red Army also, come to think of it? Also, I think I posted a discussion of collaboration at Sciences Po...That is going to be very close to the best source out there for French political thought on the history. I will bring it over to this thread when I get a chance. Elinruby (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you bringing your discussion to Sciences Po, or are you discussing some wartime collaboration with Germany by or at Sciences Po (which would have been the mirror opposite of the first Resistance by Germaine Tillion and others at the Musée de l'Homme; cf. the atomic research being done at the Collège de France) ? ¶ The Foreign Legion question brought to my mind the key rôle that the Spanish Foreign Legion (los moros) played on Franco's side in defeating the Second Spanish Republic. Were the local emirs in Spanish Morocco puppets of or collaborators with the Rebels? —— Shakescene (talk) 04:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * i should have used bullet points. Somewhere, possibly the Collaboration talk page, I posted a look to what looks like an online project, published by Sciences Po, which would be a gold-star source on current French political thought on totalitarianism and the history of Vichy France. Elinruby (talk) 05:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Armistice Line Demarcation line . Mathglot (talk) 04:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Puppet state
Hi, Elin, I just did a fairly massive reorganization of Puppet state, which suffered from the usual inconsistencies and incoherence from successive edits over time by successive editors. Could you spare the time to look over my work and see or solve any improvements that could be made? In particular, could someone watching your talk page write a line or two about Albania? (I'm not sure if it fits better with European one-time Soviet satellites like Romania, or with Yugoslavia under States under Soviet influence.) @Mathglot @Scope creep @Piotrus @Marcelus @Volunteer Marek —— Shakescene (talk) 03:54, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * only got a couple typos so far and I will be gone all day but the banana republics and all of the British Empire seem to be missing (?) Do I need to re-read the definition or something? But yeah, I've messed around with Croatian folk dance and whatnot as a palate cleanser, time to get back to work. Elinruby (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I personally tend to think this is something that got loose from its original moorings, where representative individual examples have morphed through several editors into a full (or near-full) list.
 * Otherwise this would just be largely a duplication of List of World War II puppet states. And I don't know what the best future resolution might look like, for example, leaving the Puppet State article for just definition and theory, while creating several non-WWII list pages of examples for World War I, the Bolshevik Revolution and Counter-revolution, clients of post-Bourbon France (Batavian Republic, Spain, Mexican Empire, etc.), breakaway states before becoming U.S. territories (Republic of Texas, Republic of Hawaii, etc.), British and French protectorates (e.g. the princely states of India and Malaya), other kinds of satellite and client régimes, etc. @Mathglot @Scope creep, @Marcelus @Volunteer Marek —— Shakescene (talk) 17:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I think Albania had a king just before World War 2 Elinruby (talk) 02:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I also think was

helping with Albania on the Collaboration article, they might be able to do that off the top of their head. Elinruby (talk) 04:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * When i was messing around after posting earlier, waiting for the shuttle, I noticed that at least one of the lists is sourced to Wikipedia, so that's got to go. I just got back in --- a feature of where I live is that it's quite a journey to the grocery store, although the scenery is spectacular --- but I can commit to making sure all that is covered elsewhere, and at least make a start at referencing anything that isn't. But it does eem to me that United Fruit should be mentioned. Is it on list of puppet states at least? Elinruby (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Er. I have 27 more notifications, all from the AC case. It looks like G&K is still stirring the pot and people are getting testy because the case won't stay closed, lol. Sounds like an excellent opportunity to stay out of the strife, but I should go make sure that it's still the case that nobody thinks I am part of the problem....I will do the above but probably not fot a couple hours. Elinruby (talk) 22:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * myeah, staying out of that. None of it seems to concern me or my evidence and nobody is arguing with the point I made a couple days ago. Going to take a look at puppet state and start with the stuff in that list. Elinruby (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm Your Puppet.
 * Relax and enjoy yourself, ER: all of this is long-range stuff, and no one is going to die from fatal errors about the events and phenomena of 80 years ago. No pogrom, pandemic or race war (irrespective of of ArbCom's proceedings) will start because we can't strike the right balance or find the right Reliable Sources for Enver Hoxha, Josef Tiso, Vidkun Quisling, François Darlan, Subhas Chandra Bose, Jean Luchaire, Park Chung-hee, Gringoire, Matyas Rakosi, La S.T.O., Joseph Bonaparte, Bao Dai or Lord Haw Haw. —— Shakescene (talk) 00:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * so...princely states as a group are probably more notable than West Florida, just saying? And with all due respect were those actually Americans in Texas? I'll grant you Daniel Boone, but I am unclear on whether this is General Santa Ana's campaign. Really, it would just be better to call them Texans. Elinruby (talk) 02:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * maybe even Texians Elinruby (talk) 03:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the Republic of Texas, West Florida or the California Republic really qualify as puppet states. While I don't know the detailed history, they were locally originated and not directed, so far as I can tell, by another government. The Hawaiian Republic might be a different matter, although I think it was established and run by the local sugar kings (after overthrowing the monarchy) more than by by the U.S. (Are we counting governments that are the puppets of specific internal groups or classes? That would require us to write up every regime that has ever relied on an upper class, i.e., most political history. Just preceding a merger with another country later does not always make you that country's puppet. —— Shakescene (talk) 03:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, well. That is part of the problem with the article as it stands: definitions of collaboration vs appeasement vs big bidness vs corporatism/technocrats, crony capitalism, oligarchy, caudillos and dictators, and of course monarchy and feudalism, mercantilism, privateers, Manifest Destiny, Trail of Tears, Louis Riel, British Raj, Rush for Africa, United Fruit, colonialism, kleptocracy, forced labour and totalitarianism, with a side order of dystopia and disinformation? Right? Elinruby (talk) 04:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * How could you forget the United Empire Loyalists ;-) —— Shakescene (talk) 04:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * hehehe you mean the loyalist refugees from American tyranny? Elinruby (talk) 04:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, we all know that the so-called "independent" United States were but a puppet of late-Bourbon France and then a tool of Boney (like Bonapartist Spain). And as for those Jeffersonians who screamed for Liberty but were nothing more than enthusiastic cat's paws of Robespierre and the Red Paris Directory..... —— Shakescene (talk) —— Shakescene (talk) 05:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Lol yup France the model republic voluntarily became a dictatorship at least twice. Elinruby (talk) 05:07, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

TL;DR The topic needs to be narrowed, or maybe indexed. Do we have established categories? Surely we ust, right?Elinruby (talk) 04:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Language barrier
"Typically, language barriers are concluded from dialects and brain disabilities." Elinruby (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Spectacularly bad referencing
Look at the history section: the Bund Deutscher Jugend Elinruby (talk) 08:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Advice and maybe help, if you have time
First seen May 7 in EU press, not yet in US press AFAIK, about Russian intel-managed running fake protestors -- here's a quick summary, in English, from Denmark. Le Monde wrote it up in French, SZ in German, etc. I am gathering some sources in my sandbox. Very amateur work -- they use the same guy to be a Ukrainian giving Nazi salutes at one venue, and holding up a sign saying Nato should stop bombing Donetsk at another. I'd like to create an article but wondering what to call it. Any suggestions, or sources to suggest? Hope all is well with you, and thanks again for your kind message on my talk page a while ago. HouseOfChange (talk) 23:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Bellingcat? as for advice, be very sure of your sources. Stay out of arguments ;) You are welcome.Elinruby (talk) 23:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, I am unfamiliar with some of those sources, but SZ are the people who brought us the Panama Papers, you know, so I would take whatever they say that Le Monde agrees with pretty seriously. I looked at Bellingcat; nothing there on this at the moment. I will have to read deeper to get some search terms. I suppose this is outsourced to the usual suspects. Elinruby (talk) 23:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * DW and some other solid RS are also saying this now. I was taking a link over to your sandbox but got distracted. Elinruby (talk) 06:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * - definite RS, in case you havent been following Ukrainian RSN 00:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Also that DW in case you missed it
 * Elinruby (talk) 02:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Item for discussion: Kosovo
Is it worth pointing out the npov flags: Due to very high birth rates, the proportion of Albanians increased from 75% to over 90%. In contrast, the number of Serbs barely increased, and in fact dropped from 15% to 8% of the total population, since many Serbs departed from Kosovo as a response to the tight economic climate and increased incidents with their Albanian neighbours. While there was tension, charges of "genocide" and planned harassment have been debunked as an excuse to revoke Kosovo's autonomy. For example, in 1986 the Serbian Orthodox Church published an official claim that Kosovo Serbs were being subjected to an Albanian program of 'genocide'.[93]

Even though they were disproved by police statistics,[93][page needed] they received wide attention in the Serbian press and that led to further ethnic problems and eventual removal of Kosovo's status.

worth=have a positive effect Elinruby (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I am pretty sure the sentence I just bolded is not what we want to say in wikivoice about any genocide allegation. Elinruby (talk) 08:00, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

List of massacres in Kosovo Elinruby (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

note to self
.

Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland closed
An arbitration case, Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland, has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:


 * The Arbitration Committee formally requests that the Wikimedia Foundation develop and promulgate a white paper on the best practices for researchers and authors when writing about Wikipedians. The Committee requests that the white paper convey to researchers the principles of our movement and give specific recommendation for researchers on how to study and write about Wikipedians and their personal information in a way that respects our principles. Upon completion, we request that the white paper be distributed through the Foundation's research networks including email newsletters, social media accounts, and web publications such as the Diff blog.This request will be sent by the Arbitration Committee to Maggie Dennis, Vice President of Community Resilience & Sustainability with the understanding that the task may be delegated as appropriate.
 * Remedy 5 of Antisemitism in Poland is superseded by the following restriction: All articles and edits in the topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland are subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction. When a source that is not an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution is removed from an article, no editor may reinstate the source without first obtaining consensus on the talk page of the article in question or consensus about the reliability of the source in a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Administrators may enforce this restriction with page protections, topic bans, or blocks; enforcement decisions should consider not merely the severity of the violation but the general disciplinary record of the editor in violation.
 * is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * Based on their disruptive attempts to defend Piotrus and Volunteer Marek, My very best wishes is subject to a 1-way interaction ban with Piotrus and a 1-way interaction ban with Volunteer Marek, subject to the usual exceptions. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * is limited to 1 revert per page and may not revert a second time with-out a consensus for the revert, except for edits in his userspace or obvious vandalism. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * and are prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, posts and comments made by each other, subject to the normal exceptions. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * The Arbitration Committee assumes and makes indefinite the temporary interaction ban between and . This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
 * is reminded that while off-wiki communication is allowed in most circumstances, he has previously used off-wiki communication disruptively. He is reminded to be cautious about how and when to use off-wiki contact in the future, and to avoid future conflict, he should prioritize on-wiki communication.
 * The Arbitration Committee affirms its January 2022 motion allowing editors to file for Arbitration enforcement at ARCA or Arbitration enforcement noticeboards. In recognition of the overlap of editor interest and activity between this topic area and Eastern Europe, the committee extends this provision to that topic area. It does so by adding the following text in Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe: As an alternative to Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, editors may make enforcement requests directly to the Arbitration Committee at Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
 * The Arbitration Committee separately rescinds the part of the January 2022 motion allowing transfer of a case from Arbitration Enforcement to ARCA, in recognition of the now-standard provision in . It does so by striking the following text in its entirety in item number 7: In addition to the usual processes, a consensus of administrators at AE may refer complex or intractable issues to the Arbitration Committee for resolution at ARCA, at which point the committee may resolve the request by motion or open a case to examine the issue. &#91;archive / log&#93;
 * When considering sanctions against editors in the Eastern Europe topic area, uninvolved administrators should consider past sanctions and the findings of fact and remedies issued in this case.
 * The Arbitration Committee separately rescinds the part of the January 2022 motion allowing transfer of a case from Arbitration Enforcement to ARCA, in recognition of the now-standard provision in . It does so by striking the following text in its entirety in item number 7: In addition to the usual processes, a consensus of administrators at AE may refer complex or intractable issues to the Arbitration Committee for resolution at ARCA, at which point the committee may resolve the request by motion or open a case to examine the issue. &#91;archive / log&#93;
 * When considering sanctions against editors in the Eastern Europe topic area, uninvolved administrators should consider past sanctions and the findings of fact and remedies issued in this case.

Should any user subject to a restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be blocked for up to 1 year. Administrators placing blocks should take into account an editor's overall conduct and Arbitration history and seriously consider increasing the duration of blocks. Any block 3 months or longer should be reported for automatic review either (1) at ARCA or (2) to an arbitrator or clerk who will open a review at ARCA. The committee will consider presented evidence and statements before deciding by motion what, if any, actions are necessary, up to and including a site ban.

For the Arbitration Committee, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Discuss this at: 

Just noticed your ping
Hi, I don't know if you remember me from months ago, but I was a new editor tearing my hair out over the Firehose of falsehood article, and you appeared in Talk:Firehose of falsehood and really helped me out, I dropped in to say thanks, and as I've been away from WP for a few months, I just saw your response now. I think if it weren't for your intervention, I would've been so disillusioned that I would never have come back at all. With editors like yourself around, this place retains a chance of proper neutrality, and I remain hopeful. I just wanted you to know that. Also, I'm glad my original thanks came at a good time and helped you feel better. I'm going to have another shot at making the page more neutral because I'm a masochist, and while I was away, it was reverted to the POV US/RAND version with the edit summary "revert to last stable version" with nothing on the talk page. I'm sure it'll be a fun time! I'm gonna be chill and stick as closely to consensus policy as possible. Thank you for your advice back then. It really did help. ShabbyHoose (talk) 13:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Hmm don't know that editor except that they have been around for a long time. However from what I see in the edit summaries I strongly suggest that you take this to the dispute resolution noticeboard. I actually don't consider RAND the font of all evil, but I read the article when you were done with it and thought it was neutral. Do not under any circumstances get into tit-for-tat reverts with that guy because he is going to know the system better than you. The advantage of going to DRN *now* is that you will have the moral high ground as the person refraining from bickering, whereas I really think that that looks like an edit war shaping up, in which case you as the newcomer will likely lose. And if you truly are a masochist, I have some nice Holocaust in Yugoslavia and Russian disinformation articles that you can work on, lol. Ironically, you reappear just as I am considering quitting.Elinruby (talk) 01:09, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Mr Serjeant Buzfuz is a very good editor, listen to what he says. Also Booku. Neutral on the others. My current advice is to proceed in smaller bites and if necessary go to DRN. I'd explain my aversion to RfCs but it would only give you nightmares. Pinged someone with whom I have discussed disinformation to the article but he may not be all that available if it turns into an edit war. Elinruby (talk) 00:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Armenian quote
Replying here since you asked, but for now I'll just say I'd need to do more research, b/c although I've heard of this topic, I am not very familiar with the details. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok. It is in no way urgent; I am curious as to your thoughts is all. However after I pinged you I realized that I was inviting you something that can only be described as ugly. I knew of the Armenian genocide because I met some Armenians in Paris, but hadn't considered a causal connection. In any event, I plan to wrap that article up in the next day or so either way. I'd have been done a long time ago if Buidhe weren't constantly reverting, shrug. So the question is merely from academics curiosity. Speaking of which, mister sociologist, do you think that the organizational life cycle applies to Wikipedia. Elinruby (talk) 10:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Share Your Feedback: Leadership Development Plan
Hi,

The Leadership Development Working Group (LDWG) invites you to give feedback on the Leadership Development Plan, a practical resource for emerging and existing leaders across the Wikimedia movement who want to develop themselves and others. Your feedback is important to make this resource relevant and useful. We look forward to your general reactions, constructive feedback and ideas for improvement. You can give feedback through the survey, MS Forum, LDWG talk page or email at leadershipworkinggroup@wikimedia.org.

The review period closes on Sunday May 28, 2023.

Thank you!

Best, CCasares (WMF) (talk) 21:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * thank you for this koan wrapped in a riddle wrapped in a conundrum. In no particular order:


 * 1) what is an MS forum?
 * 2) what survey?
 * 3) presumably the LDWG working group is at meta but I am not finding any LDP there
 * 4) this leads to the question of why are you asking me?
 * 5) and the next one: are you really sure you want my feedback? offhand, anything I would have to say would probably not be what the group wants to hear.

Having said all that please send me a link if you actually want feedback on something. Please be aware that coming from me this mostly consists of uncomfortable questions. Elinruby (talk) 00:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi there!
 * I apologize for not seeing that I did not link anything when I posted this message to your talk page!!
 * I am reaching out to you specifically on behalf of the Leadership Development Working Group (LDWG) who recently published the Leadership Development Plan, a practical resource for emerging and existing leaders across the Wikimedia movement who want to develop themselves and others. Any opinions, feedback or ideas that you share would be appreciated. You can give feedback through the short survey, MS Forum, talk page or email at [mailto:leadershipworkinggroup@wikimedia.org leadershipworkinggroup@wikimedia.org].
 * The review period closes on Sunday May 28, 2023.
 * Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
 * Kind regards, CCasares (WMF) (talk) 05:26, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Elinruby (talk) 05:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I answered the survey last night but yes, it asks all the wrong questions. If you -- you being whoever's project this is -- if you are recruiting self-selected Leaders with a VisionTM then you are doing nothing but creating headaches for the admins who will have to deal with the resultant suicide missions. The negative reinforcement structure of Wikipedia is unlikely to have a sense of humor about such "leaders". Unless you are looking for fundraisers, of course, in which case, have at it; you are doing great. An infinitely exponential trajectory of successful fundraising campaigns awaits you. The donors will love it, seriously. I recommend a pilot project as part of a rural development initiative leveraging Wikipedia's core competencies to empower the development of language preservation initiatives and the codification of traditional knowledge systems. Third-world communities with multiple underserved stakeholders would be ideal, whose community decision-making processes could further refine the target democraphic. Yada yada. But if the goal is community-building, however, cough, you don't need Joan of Arc, you need Saul Alinsky. Since you asked: You defined the entire question wrong. Aren't you glad you asked? Have a nice day. HtH


 * Kudos however for providing a variety of formats in which to participate in this exciting koan-guessing challenge, though. Whoever did that has a faint glimmer of something like the right idea Elinruby (talk) 09:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

British Empire collaborators
Hi, Elion, if you look at my User:Shakescene/Collaboration page, you can see my solution to the Somaliland Question. I eliminated Br. Somaliland, adding the Italian invasion to the general hatrote for Beyond Europe. Then, if you look at the India subsection, you can see it's just a list of military volunteer units (generally ex-PoW's) for Germany, Italy and (irrelevantly) Japan. So I moved that paragraph down to the Foreign military volunteer section, and erased both India & the British Empire. Azad Hind, the INA ant the Bose bros. belong in the Collab with Imp Japan article anyway. There is the question of the British mandate of Palestine, which we haven't yet even begun to address (the Grand Mufti, the Stern Gang et al.), but for the moment (since they seem closely related) I added Palestine to "Egypt and the Palestine Mandate". —— Shakescene (talk) 13:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)