Kingdom of East Anglia has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.Z1720 (talk)20:38, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

story ·music ·places

Mozartmusic for today! --Gerda Arendt (talk)19:54, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

20 January is the 100th birthday ofDavid Tudor (see my story) and the 300th birthday of Bach's cantataMeine Seufzer, meine Tränen, BWV 13, if we go by date instead of occasion as he would have thought, so see my story for last Sunday, and celebrate ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk)20:40, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! We discussed editingFile:Combined map - British and Mongol Empires.svg a while back atTalk:List of largest empires#Map, specifically adjusting the Mongol Empire's borders to matchthis map and citing the book it's from. Do you think you could help with this?I would do it myself if I had the know-how.TompaDompa (talk)21:06, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you give me the information I need, I can adjust the map accordingly and amend the accompanying text.. Regards,Amitchell125 (talk)21:08, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The map to use can be found at the following link:https://ia801600.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?zip=/25/items/ost-geography-atlasworldhistory/AtlasWorldHistory_jp2.zip&file=AtlasWorldHistory_jp2/AtlasWorldHistory_0097.jp2&id=ost-geography-atlasworldhistory&scale=2&rotate=0. The source isO'Brien, Patrick K., ed. (2007)."The Mongol Empire 1206–1405".Philip's Atlas of World History (Concise ed.).Institute of Historical Research,University of London. p. 98.ISBN 978-0-540-08867-6.TompaDompa (talk)21:20, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A tricky map to use! The projection used make the job 10 times more difficult than it should be, so can I suggest the maphere?Amitchell125 (talk)15:41, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That works for me. The objection that was raised was that the map was unsourced, so as long as it is possible to cite a reliable source we should be good.TompaDompa (talk)15:51, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for improving this article that I've created. I noticed that you've now twice removed information about Velyki and Mali Kuchuhury, calling it "off-topic" in your reasoning. These are major landforms in the area, which were especially prominent during the reservoir's existence, and are also covered by theGrand Meadow National Nature Park, so I believe they deserve a mention in the geography section. Could you explain why you consider this to be off-topic? Thanks.Shwabb1⟨taco⟩17:40, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Shwabb1: I intend to ensure that recent events and aspects of the area are discussed in the article, but the Great Meadow as a lowland area was lost in the 1950s, and the article needs to ensure readers understand this. Please bear with me, as I am currently restructuring the article.Amitchell125 (talk)17:48, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Though I don't have any good sources for this at the moment, it may also be helpful to mention that these areas existed even before the 1950s as sand dunes (kuchuhury) that contrasted with the surrounding lowland (the elevation difference also being the reason why they did not get inundated).Shwabb1⟨taco⟩17:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Shwabb1: Many thanks for the heads up! I have time on my hands as I am recovering from surgery at home, so please feel free to pass on any resources you find.Amitchell125 (talk)17:59, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just foundthis paper on the Great Meadow published in 1917 byAdrian Kashchenko. There's lots of information there that could be useful, including about Kuchuhury, specifically the section starting from "... але найбільше цікавого уявляє з себе у сій частині Великого Лугу урочище «Кучугури»" [... but the most interesting feature in this part of the Great Meadow is the "Kuchuhury" tract]. Parts of this source are primary but I think certain sections could still be used; tell me if this works for you. Also I don't mind translating sections if something's not clear (machine translations may be flawed, especially when it comes to old texts with occasional archaisms).Shwabb1⟨taco⟩18:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I nominatedNile River for GA status today. I noticed that theDnieper reservoir cascade article is also nominated and has a similar dam/river/waterfall theme. Are you interested in doing a review of each others' article? The GA process permits a pair of nominators to review each others articles, provided they perform objective reviews without any "quid pro quo" arrangements or promises. I've done this a few times in the past: it works well provided both editors are experienced with the GA process. I'm planning on taking the Nile article toWP:FA eventually, so I would welcome a strong, thorough GA review. Are you interested?Noleander (talk)20:04, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Noleander: I'm honoured by your offer, I haven't reviewed a GAN for a little while, and this one would be a big one, and might take a while. I might have to attempt it in stages if I accepted it. I'll confirm yes or no early next week.Amitchell125 (talk)13:16, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a big article. No worries if you don't feel like doing it.Noleander (talk)13:21, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Noleander: I'm in, but I am working on another Ukrainian article at present, and need time to read what the Nile article says and what the article's references are like. I'll start the review in earnest in a week's time. Regards,Amitchell125 (talk)10:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I'll start the Dnieper cascade soon. If you change your mind and decide you don't have time to do the Nile River, no big deal... just let me know. I don't want you to be stressed out in real life.Noleander (talk)11:48, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Until you start the review, I may continue making small changes to the Nile article. Any changes would be relatively small (wording, pic captions, MOS, cites). I believe the article meets GA requirements now, but I'm looking ahead to the FA criteria. If ongoing small changes bother you, let me know and I can pause the polishing.Noleander (talk)12:28, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Noleander: Feel free to amend, I haven't made a start yet, and won't for a few days.Amitchell125 (talk)12:31, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yourgood article nomination of the articleDnieper reservoir cascade isunder review. Seethe review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have.Message delivered byChristieBot, on behalf ofNoleander --Noleander (talk)13:02, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]