User talk:Milowent/Archive13

Likely hoax
Hi Milowent: Long time no see. Hey, if you're still into documenting hoaxes, check out Articles for deletion/Cralosophus. Cheers, North America1000 15:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ha, North America, thanks for thinking of me! It is already deleted, how long was it up?  I will dig around.  I still love a good hoax!--Milowent • hasspoken  15:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Howdy. The article was created on 6 February 2021 and was deleted on 14 February 2021. North America1000 07:08, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, NA! Alas it did not last long.--Milowent • hasspoken  13:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Aye. Yeah, I had you in mind in case you're still documenting these things on whatever page(s) they are on. North America1000 18:25, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion
An article you created or have significantly contributed to has been nominated for deletion. The article is being discussed at the deletion discussion, located here. North America1000 11:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nomanland.png
Thanks for uploading File:Nomanland.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Poplar, Iowa
Hey Milowent,

GREAT work on the research with Poplar, Iowa! Bravo! I personally would slide Reference 10 over because the cited reference only verifies the first half of the sentence, but this is otherwise wonderful work. Thanks for your efforts! In fact, if you've got time, I could use some help with Viola Center, Iowa, also nominated for deletion around the same time, and of course some other Iowa communities nominated this week. Again, thank you! Firsfron of Ronchester 05:26, 26 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Greetings, Firsfron! Looks like Viola Center is safe for now, so I jumped into Articles for deletion/Amund, Iowa and then Articles for deletion/Oakfield, Iowa where I got slightly agitated.  I know we have lots of questionable geography stubs, but I hate when notable ones frequently get caught in the crosshairs.--Milowent • hasspoken  19:12, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Nice work! I've weighed in on several of these articles, and also added a 1903 map for Amund. Firsfron of Ronchester  22:52, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Regarding a list
Hi @Milowent.

I have created a list "Newspaper endorsements in the 1992 United States presidential election". As you have created and contributed to lists of same kind, can you suggest me any changes in the list, or any source where I can get more information. I definitely have plans of expanding the lead section and adding sections like "Background", "Analysis and effects". Appreciate any feedback.

Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I fully agreed
I fully agreed. I saw the article delete page afterward and the one comment about not understanding struck me as being off. A wiki is a collection of information hint why the pages should not be deleted but it not how some feels that wiki should be endorsing. I only noticed the deletion because I am currently working on an academic project with a friend about playmates and other women who do porn/nude pictures and I was reading up on the playmates. But the morning I found all of the pages are gone.Allenknott3 (talk) 15:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)Allen Knott

Playboy lists
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Hi Milowent. As you saw from my comment to CaptainEek, I'm not sure how to best move this forward, but comments like yours here and your edit summary here should not be happening at all. Please refactor what you can and be more careful with your edit summaries. --Hipal (talk) 19:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hipal, i find your reversions of my work highly uncivil. this mass redirect of playmate year articles based in a single AFD, when there are many prior AFDs of year articles to the contrary, is shocking to the conscience.--Milowent • hasspoken  19:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * However, that being said, I am stopping any reversions now, that's fair.--Milowent • hasspoken 19:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but the incivility is all yours. Please refactor your comments.
 * As you saw from my comment, I think more discussion is needed.
 * It would help to find all past discussions on the topic.
 * Thanks for ending the reverting. I'll do the same. --Hipal (talk) 19:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Hipal, I'm glad we have some common ground. I will be intrigued to see how the discussions go.  After about 15 years around here, its always interesting to see the same things come up in waves.  Back in 2010 there was a semi-coup to delete about 20K? BLPs, it led me to start a project to add citations to every uncited BLP, of course that is far more work than mass redirects.--Milowent • hasspoken  19:20, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Please retract and remember to WP:FOC. --Hipal (talk) 15:31, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * hey, Hipal, i will not retract it unless the editor edits out his original comment. I am tired of women being denigrated and mistreated on this project, regardless of profession or station.  I do not tolerate it.   Playmates pose without clothes; calling them prostitutes is intended to besmirch them and belittle them and is toxic.--Milowent • hasspoken  16:50, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Please reconsider. Addressing an editor's behavior should start on their talk page. Anywhere else can be disruptive. --Hipal (talk) 18:15, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Playboy Playmates of 1966, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lisa Baker.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Playmate of the Month
I see that they closed the debate on the Playmate of the Month discussion page with the decision to redirect them. I cannot say I am surprised because in my opinion that was going to happens regardless.Allenknott3 (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Top 25
Thanks for the heads up (didn't know anything about the Korean show either!). Yeah, I got surprised when I beat Serendipodous for the top spot, even if I keep returning to ensure the Report keeps running. You're always welcome to show up and help with at least some write-ups, specially to break those weeks when I think someone will help and it ends up not the case, and the update is only done by Thursday. igordebraga ≠ 19:59, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * igordebraga, thanks for the invite -- I have thought about returning to do a random week sometime just for fun! But my schedule is tougher so I would want to make sure I can deliver on time and with adequate time to research the "whys" of the entries!--Milowent • hasspoken 21:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Birds Aren't Real
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2021 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

My new book on Vanderpoole's fake news
Hi Milowent. I hope you are doing well and wish you a happy time for the end of the year.

I am about to publish in french (with a press kit mostly in english) a book about Lew Vanderpoole. The title is "Les impostures littéraires de Lew Vanderpoole : George Sand et Louis II de Bavière". In one or two days I will send it to be print on demand. It will be aswell available in ebook. I will of course mention your 2018 Wikipedia article and your contribution to the research on Wikipedia. Should I mention you as "Milowent" or do you want to appear on your real name, which I do'nt of course know ? Thx for giving a rapid answer to that question :) The contents of the book, after an introduction, is a biographical essay on Vanderpoole, then a chapter dedicated to the history of the Ludwig's article in Germany and France, followed by all the texts mostly of the american press about the fakes produced by Vanderpoole and how he tried to invent a false biography of himself. The book has 236 pages. Last august, I was interviewed by Carola Zinner, journalist at the bavarian radio. The broadcast "Der Märchenkönig und der Journalist Oder: Die Welt will betrogen sein" (in the serie Land und Leute) just came out on the 24th of december. Here is it in podcast and with a presentation text : https://www.br.de/radio/bayern2/der-maerchenkoenig-und-der-journalist-100.html

Hope to receive soon a return from you( a short one on my question about the mention of your name or nickname would be fine)

Happy new year and with my kindest regards

Luc RogerLucHenriLouis (talk) 16:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)