User talk:Teatroge

Your submission at Articles for creation: Teatro Nazionale di Genova (January 1)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Teatro Nazionale di Genova and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Teatro Nazionale di Genova, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Teatro_Nazionale_di_Genova Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DGG&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Teatro_Nazionale_di_Genova reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 DGG ( talk ) 09:26, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Teatro Nazionale di Genova


Hello, Teatroge. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Teatro Nazionale di Genova".

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 by following the instructions at this link. 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! 05:44, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Cleanup of Marcello Sparzo
Hi great work on Marcello Sparzo! I have made some minor changes to the style of the article. You'll notice some minor changes to the prose, and I have collected all the images of his works to a gallery. I was going to continue making some minor changes to this article, I think it has great potential.

Something I wanted to flag for your attention was the guideline from MOS:LEAD that everything in the lead should be covered in the body of the article, and that generally there is no need for citations. This article is very close, but there are a few statements that should be moved (with their citations) to the appropriate spots in the article, and then summarised in the lead (if you feel it still important).

I'm going to continue with some cleanup, but eventually I think this article would make a great candidate for WP:GAN. Best, microbiology Marcus (petri dish) 23:49, 24 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi again Marcus! Thanks for your edits, I liked them very much (and it's something that obviously doesn't always happen when you see one of your "little child" modified, eheheh :-) ). Thank you also for your comments because, even though I had already read the guidelines, having a hands-on and practical comments on them is much more helpful. I also have to say that there are subtle differences compared to those in use in the Italian-language Wikipedia. For instance, I have a question: is it appropriate, in here, to have all those images in the middle of the article? I personally appreciate very much how they are contextualized and look, but I also remember to myself how doing so in it.wiki wouldn't be seen as correct. ;-)
 * Regarding your statement that "everything in the lead should be covered in the body of the article, and generally there is no need for citations", I find it very interesting. I am accustomed to reading longer lead sections here on en.wiki. Having short lead sections is something I really like about it.wiki. There, we usually write very brief lead sections, almost all of them must be something like:
 * [first name] [last name] ([birth place] [birth date] - [death place] [death date]) is a [nationality] [profession]."
 * Followed by a " ==Biography== " tag, period. Nothing less, nothing more. Exceptions are necessary/accepted when encyclopedic relevance needs to be clarified right from the start, without further reading. Therefore, I see your suggestion as an opportunity to 'trim down' the main section as I incidentally like too. Later tonight, I'll figure out the best way to do it. In the meantime, please continue editing if you wish (or stop if you prefer not to, needless to say): you've definitely made it onto my 'trusted list,' lol. Thanks again for the edits and suggestions! Best, teatroge  ( dm ) 15:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi great questions! About the images, I boldly made them smaller and collected them; that is something that you will see a lot in articles about different artists of all mediums, here's an example from English painter . However, you are more than welcome to revert my changes—remember, I don't own this article any more than you do! Personally, I thought a collection of his works in a gallery would be beneficial, and then I left the palace photo as an inline image but moved it to the  where I felt it was fitting for the context. I will make a comment that sometimes a lot of images strung along the right side of the text can really compress the screen width available for text on a smaller screen, something to consider for the readers of the article—a reason a lot of editors like the value of the gallery template. If it is the smaller size you are concerned about, feel free to try different height and width parameters in the gallery template I used.
 * About the lead, yes, the lead does a pretty good job on en.wiki about summarizing the article, when it works well. You'll notice on today's featured article that a lot of the information a person might want from a summary of the article is featured in the lead without citations, as the expectations are that the lead summarizes the body, and there is more information about facts mentioned in the lead later in the article, with their appropriate citations inline at that location. I wouldn't even say the lead here needs to be trimmed down, personally I quite enjoy the article; instead my suggestion would be to expand on the facts mentioned in the lead at appropriate spots in the article, and then move those citations to the appropriate spot. I think it's nearly there, only some of the citations need to be moved as they aren't used in the remainder of the article—the ones that are cited again can simply be removed as it is information cited elsewhere.
 * Thank you for your dedication to the en project, Wikipedia values the work that editors and translators do to expand the accessible knowledge base of the entire community! All the best, microbiology Marcus (petri dish) 14:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Physicians from the Republic of Genoa
Thankyou for your comment on the Physicians from the Republic of Genoa category. I think we need to be much more clear in some category names in linking people to the specific polity they lived in and not other things that used the same name. I wish I could figure out a good place to advance this argument.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi John. I agree. It's a complex topic and it also involves historical expertise, which is not easy even for locals. Moreover, we always need to be very careful not to fall into one of the many Systemic bias. And, as we well know, on these topics there is always a lot of parochialism, which should be avoided like the plague. :-) Certainly, categorizing biographies by profession and administrative unit of origin can be useful and encyclopedically/archivistically valuable. On the other hand, I understand that a single page and a single category are not ideal... Perhaps a solution could be to create a broader set of categories of the same type and populate some of them... provided, of course, there is no risk of deletion :-) teatroge  ( dm ) 20:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I am beginning to think that the best approach is to just add people to administrative unit cats until the cat is fairly large, and then once I have done that focus on sub-dividing the administrative unit cat. My main method is also going backward through birth categories. Right now I am 1850. I have added a few to Kingdom of the Two Sicilies people and Grand Duchy of Tuscany people. However since they were still minors when Italy was reunfied, at least as it applied to where they lived, I have not yet thought it was appropriate to add them to occupation sub-cats. I will hold off on doing that until I am sure I can create at least 5 articles in any given sub-cat. I think something like Artists from the Grand Duchy of Tuscany is a justified category, but I want to make sure I have enough articles before even trying to create it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Very nice suggestion! I applied it and found a second name for the category in question. :-) I will do it in the future, and if you need help leave me a line.
 * In general, I completely agree with your approach: creating a category for a single article is probably very much excessive, but in this specific case, since it has been done, I wonder if it really makes sense to delete a category that can facilitate the work of others.
 * BTW, broadly speaking, the real problem is that there is still an avalanche of articles to be translated from it.wiki; that's why many categories are almost empty. I started translating some, but it's not an easy task, especially because the conventions and templates aren't entirely overlapping (it.wiki/en.wiki). ;-) It would be great to have a tempalte converter automatic tool. -- teatroge ( dm ) 01:46, 26 October 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) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Category:Theologians from Genoa has been nominated for merging
Category:Theologians from Genoa has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Theologians from Milan has been nominated for merging
Category:Theologians from Milan has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:06, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Italian theologians by city has been nominated for merging
Category:Italian theologians by city has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:06, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Theologians from Rome has been nominated for merging
Category:Theologians from Rome has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Theologians from Venice has been nominated for merging
Category:Theologians from Venice has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Bare URLS and unsourced content
Hi, thank you for your additions to 1975 in Switzerland. However, please do not add references to articles as bare urls as it can result in link rot. As you've added a substantial amount of bare links I have added a tag to the article to alert readers and other Wikipedia editors to the issue. I'm currently in the process of turning them into full citations, if you could help that would be great. If you need any help with refencing, please see HELP:REFB. I'm also in the process of finding references for the unsourced information you added and removing anything that I'm unable to find references for. Other Wikipedia sites aren't reliable sources of information as per WP:CIRCULAR and the WP:BURDEN is on the editor adding the information to provide reliable sources. Suonii180 (talk) 20:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Suonii180, you are right, and I didn't intend to leave the references like that (in fact, I never have). :-) Let me briefly explain the situation: I intended to translate the French article and those related to other missing years. While working, I realized that the same article (the most extensive and complete currently available) actually had a serious lack of sources (which, in this type of articles, are generally directly mentionend in the article that they link). So what did I do? I searched for at least one specific source for each and every piece of information: an extremely complex and technical job, considering the rather distant year (1975) and the restricted territory (the Swiss Confederation). I want to emphasize another very important point: before adding the links, I added ALL of them, one by one, to Wayback Machine, so it's just impossible for WP:ROT to occur and thus for the links to be broken. In practice, we went from having a small and uninformative article on en.wiki to having the best currently available article on Wikipedia, with dozen of previously missing sourced. At the same time (as per WP:ATT and WP:BOLD), it's much better to insert a link, even if not fully formatted, rather than not insert it at all (and then possibly lose it). ;-) Thank you very much for your help with formatting, anyway. Finally, if you are indeed " removing anything that I'm unable to find references for", that's a pretty unhelpful attitude. The lack of a source is not the sole and exclusive reason to remove material, especially if it is recently added material and the user is reachable. Thank you. -- teatroge ( dm ) 22:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * (@Suonii180) I'm checking you edit, did you remove the notation regarding the national elections that were held? All the elements that you removed had their respective articles and references. I would certainly understand removing specific numbers lacking sources, but removing the indication that a national election was held in that year, or that a person died, when the information is verifiable in less than three seconds in the relative article with lots of references, is not reasonable, and rater a pretty damaging approach. I'm sorry, but if this is the attitude, what results is frustrating users' participation. Especially because such an action is contrary to WP:COMMON and WP:ASSUME. Please also read carefully: WP:WHEN. I am going to help you by citing it:
 * Any editor has the right to challenge unsourced material by opening a discussion on the talk page or by tagging it. Material that should be removed without discussion includes unsourced contentious material about a living person, clear examples of original research, and anything that is ludicrous or damaging to the project. Editors making a challenge should have reason to believe the material is contentious, false, or otherwise inappropriate. Unless the material falls into the class that should be removed without discussion, the challenger should await a timely response prior to removing.
 * So please don't do it again, thank you in advance. -- teatroge ( dm ) 23:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)