User talk:Hallen01

Byzantine–Venetian war of 1171
Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for creating Byzantine–Venetian war of 1171! Please be advised that copying from a single source can be a copyright violation, if the resulting text is too close to the source, and can result in the entire article being deleted. Also please use page numbers in your inline footnotes. You can find some useful suggestions in WP:CLOP and WP:CITE. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  09:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Iban culture


The article Iban culture has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "This article has no references and no links to other articles. As such, it is impossible for a previously uninformed reader to learn from the article."

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. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:39, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:MyNayme/sandbox


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:MyNayme/sandbox, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  09:35, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Cut and paste splits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia,. Your contributions to history and archaeology-related topics are much appreciated.

However, may I politely suggest that splitting articles is not the best choice of task for a new editor. Our legal obligation to maintain clear attribution for all material means that they can be tricky to carry out correctly. And once done, they're difficult to undo or fix without admin intervention.

In any case when splitting highly visible articles with long edit histories (e.g. Proto-Indo-European homeland) it's best to obtain a consensus on the article's talk page before cut and pasting any content. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 12:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * The article wasn't even split; MyNayme simply removed a lot of information, with a misleading edit-summary...  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:43, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, he did; sorry. Nevertheless, no reason duplicate Kurgan hypothesis.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Byzantine articles
Hi MyNayme! First off, it is a pleasure to see someone new dedicated to writing Byzantine-related articles, and thanks for contributing articles like Siege of Chandax and Byzantine conquest of Cilicia. However, may I note two things: First, when copying over material from other articles, you have to remark this either in the edit summary, or in a note in the talk page, for reasons of copyright attribution. Please read the relevant guideline at Copying within Wikipedia. Second, please take the time to study the field a bit more. It is clear from your articles that you are not very familiar with the subjects or the era, and creating new articles by cut-and-paste from existing ones requires much experience and fine judgment; results are usually problematic when undertaken by a new editor. For instance, the Byzantine conquest of Cilicia usually refers to the phase in 964–965 when Nikephoros II captured Cilicia. Of course the campaigns that came before and after are relevant, but they are not part of this topic as such; neither Antioch nor Cyprus are in Cilicia; Cyprus was not under the Abbasid Caliphate, it was a demilitarized condominium, and the Abbasids never exercised any real control over it; calling the Byzantines "Greeks" at the time is, while usual practice, better avoided, since it is not entirely accurate, as Byzantium was still a rather multinational empire at the time; there was no concept of "reuniting all of Anatolia"; etc etc. I would strongly recommend starting with smaller-scope articles or smaller contributions to already extant articles (e.g. about Nikephoros II) to get a better feel of the subject, the sources, the available scholarly literature, and the terminology and historiographic conventions. Any help you may want, I will be glad to provide. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  09:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)


 * PS some further remarks/tips: please do not use the latinized forms for the names of Byzantine people; the convention in Wikipedia, as well as in modern scholarship, is to use the ODB format (e.g. not "Nicephorus Phocas", but "Nikephoros Phokas"). Also, I see that you rely heavily on Julian Romane; I have not read his work, but AFAIK, he is not a Byzantine scholar, and I would not rely so much on him. If you want a serious, scholarly treatment of the period, I heartily recommend Streams of Gold, Rivers of Blood: The Rise and Fall of Byzantium, 955 A.D. to the First Crusade by Anthony Kaldellis. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  10:03, 24 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Please, please take seriously into account my advice above; Tzimiskes' campaign in 974/975 was not a conquest, and modern scholarship is pretty much certain that it was not intended as such either. Please do not rely solely on a single source, especially not one that comes from a non-expert. Read more about the period, and consult multiple sources. Constantine  ✍  10:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Again, when you copy within Wikipedia, as you did at Siege of Rometta and Abu'l-Qasim Ali ibn al-Hasan al-Kalbi, you should note it in your edit summary or in the talk page; especially when the "new" article consists of nothing but snippets from already existing ones, and when you include referenced sections to whose references you do not have access. It may seem bothersome, but it takes little time and a) it is proper referencing etiquette and b) it allows anyone to follow through your edits and provide both verifiability and traceability. If for instance you copy something from Al-Hasan ibn Ammar, and for whatever reason an error has been made there, then the error thus can also be corrected at Siege of Rometta. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  20:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * PS. I assume you are Greek? You might also be interested in the Greek Wikipedia, coverage on Byzantine subjects there is woefully inadequate. Constantine  ✍  20:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Rebellion of Bardas Phokas the Younger) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Rebellion of Bardas Phokas the Younger, MyNayme!

Wikipedia editor Kudpung just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Please add categories, and the relevant Wikiproject template to the talk page."

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:38, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Keep it up
PS. please don't use Norwich. He is an excellent popular historian, but not really a reliable source when it comes to detailed history. Many of his facts are rather outdated. Constantine  ✍  19:58, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Welcome
 Hello and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: WPMILHIST Announcements.
 * Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
 * If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Cinderella157 (talk) 03:36, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Opinion Polls graphic
Hi, I have seen what great job you did with the graph at Opinion polling for the next Greek legislative election. May I ask what program did you use to generate that graph? Thanks. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 13:23, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Emirate of Aleppo Map (Jan 976).png
Thank you for uploading File:Emirate of Aleppo Map (Jan 976).png. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is [ a list of your uploads].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)