This is anarchive of past discussions withUser:Doug Weller.Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on thecurrent talk page.
From the life of Wikidata:with the Wikidata Concepts Monitor we can now begin to discover how our communities use knowledge across the Wikimedia projects, by Goran S. Milovanović
See also:WDCM Journal, several examples of the use of Wikidata on the Wikimedia projects
We are saddened to report that Polish WikimedianKrzysztof Machocki (who was also active on Wikidata)died on 31 January 2018, aged 36, after a couple of weeks of illness. Our condolences to his family and friends.
The call for submissions for Wikimania (Cape Town, July 2018) is now open. Deadline is March 18th. Ideas of submissions related to Wikidata can bediscussed here
Based on community discussions, the ArticlePlaceholder will soon be deployed on Urdu and Estonian Wikipedias.
Statistics
January 2018 brought us 9,770,248 edits, 445,027 new items were created.
The number of users that edited Wikidata per day grewin 2017 from 2439 to 2672 users, 9,6% more compared to 2016. The number of edits by them grew with 18% to 190k edits per day. We also get edited by 542 IP adresses per day, 50% more than in 2016.
In 2017, Wikidata got edited by 46 various bots per day, executing 334k edits per day (63% more than in 2016). Themost active bot in 2017 wasEmijrpbot, who added 18 million edits to Wikidata.
@Keith Jenkins: No time lag, I did revert you, leaving an edit summary which you can see in the history.[1] Sorry for the typing, my keyboard died. Using a cheap replacement until my replacement ergonomic one arrives tomorrow. Only if it was discussed by several sources meetingWP:RS would we mention a patent. If you want more help, try theWP:TEAHOUSEDoug Wellertalk14:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Why are you only going after me for edit warring?
User 39.57.145.242 was also involved with this dispute yet I didn't see any warning on his talk page like I saw on mine. I feel like you're unfairly singling me out on this. I was reverting his edit back to the original because I felt it was a more appropriate title as the subsection didn't focus on the IVC only and talked about the neolithic cultures preceding it and the culture succeeding it.— Precedingunsigned comment added by73.15.114.246 (talk)07:21, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
IronGargoyle (talk) IronGargoyle is deleting inthis sectionI showed the rulenow IronGargoyle is missing ....
Hello IronGargoyle Kindly undo what you deleted on List of Goans please thank you they are both activists in their own rightIronGargoyleif you want further info on themI will give just ask. hereThere are some common exceptions to the typical notability requirement:
If the person is famous for a specific event, the notability requirement need not be met. If a person in a list does not have a Wikipedia article about them, a citation (or link to another article) must be provided to: a) establish their membership in the list's group; and b) to establish their notability on either BLP1E or BIO1E.Decan.reporter (talk)15:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
You can request an article at
Regarding this new article. and thanks for your guidance,as I told you I have got press cutting copies from times of India which are not on internet... so how to use them in this articleThanks for your time Decan.reporter.
The next Weekly Summary (February 19th) will be the 300th edition of the newsletter! To help making it special, you canshareyour favorite Wikidata tool, so the other readers discover nice tools
Greetings! There is some uncertaintyhere about how theWP:NPOV/WP:UNDUE policies work with regard to ethnic groups. As an experienced moderator, could you please explain this on the talkpage? In particular, what exactly those policies mean by "significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources"? Kind Regards--Soupforone (talk)16:58, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Druckmashine
Hello Doug Weller. You've reverted user Druckmashine on an article[2]. After this, an user has created an article with exactly the same content you reverted[3]. Also see this ip edit[4]. Probably they are socks of the same ip user banned by Ymblanter.99.227.27.84 (talk)23:01, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
@NielN: So do I. But I thought that my laptop didn't. I was wrong. What I hate is the consensus required, which means any flake/racist can come along, revert and then unless we can see a consensus on the talk page we have to argue it.Doug Wellertalk16:47, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
The "consensus required" clause is by admin discretion so I don't use it much when applying restrictions. Unfortunately, per policy, another admin can come along and "strengthen" the restrictions without needing to consult me. But flakes/racists do not have a free hand the way I see it. If the material is longstanding (and the definition of longstanding can vary) then the revert needs consensus, not the presence of the material. --NeilNtalk to me17:06, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)If the material is longstanding (and the definition of longstanding can vary) then the revert needs consensus, not the presence of the material. I've seen this play out exactly that way at least a few times in Trump-related articles. So far, the consensus-required clause hasn't been too badin my experience, but it's totally fair to say that my experience may not have been typical.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.17:26, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Of course, doh! And ouch, I seem to have added it also. I need to see if I have to jump through hoops to remove it where I added it.Doug Wellertalk19:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedSerer people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageCn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)
Flatly labeling Fomenko's assertions as "pseudo" assumes the labeler has access to irrefutable information. Obviously, Fomenkomay be dead wrong or even a frank fabulist. Citing a counterargument or discrepancies would be a more honest way of saying Fomenko is pushing bunk. Pointing to the opinion of conventional historians, that his history is 'pseudo', is enough, and appropriate, but stating it as established fact (by label) is coercive (considering the pseudo-authority of this site).And, that there is some other article on this site which calls Fomenko's position "Pseudohistory" and then saying the articles must match as justification for the characterization on the Fomenko page, is circular. It is an error of logic.— Precedingunsigned comment added byHimsAhimsa (talk •contribs)18:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
You've misread what I wrote. I said that we should describe his work as pseudohistorical, following the article on his chronology, rather than pseudoscience. But I've decided I was wrong and changed it back. He is creating a pseudohistory using pseudoscientific methods. But this is the wrong page for this discussion, it belongs on the article talk page where other people might see it and participate. .Doug Wellertalk19:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Calendar
Hello Doug,
Is the Bible a realizable source? If not, why not?I am a modern-day expert in the timeline of the Bible.Question, do you consider these Scriptures factual or an opine. Genesis 1 King James Version (KJV)1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Can anyone verify this?Would you agree or disagree if said this was Sunday the first, first month, zero year. [Source KJV Genesis 1:1-5]"One for Jesus" (talk)19:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)"One for Jesus"
You suspected that the thread itself was as such, and I assume it is for propaganda reasons (with a linked opinion piece and one from unclesamsmisguidedchildren.com, a clearly propaganda site) but removing just a reply and retaining the original strengthens the message, surely?86.175.182.129 (talk)20:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Edits to Shi Xing Mi
Hi, just informing you that I reverted some of your edits on the Shi Xing Mi page as they are indeed referenced from multiple independent sources (various Shaolin schools and official associations websites as well as several prominent international newspapers). There are many more sources available - newspapers, magazines and various other media outlets - detailing what is written and therefore I will add more in the coming days, it's just a matter of doing a search for the specific content in english (numerous sources are in Italian, German, Russian and Chinese).— Precedingunsigned comment added by2A02:120B:C3E2:E4B0:FDB7:2BE0:D93:182A (talk)08:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Doug. Just in case you may be interested, and not see it for yourself, inthis edit I think it's fairly clear that you were giving the benefit of the doubt while really not being convinced of the editor's good faith. Inthis edit I did the same. (Note my use of the word "assuming".)Here we have something closer to the truth, though I am still reserving judgement as to whether it's the whole truth.The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk)21:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Following a discussionTalk:List of Arab scientists and scholars with Frasfras17. I was of the understanding Frasfras17 would be adding sources before adding any names to the current list, following my statement, "As per Wikipedia:Verifiability, unless their individual articles state Arab ethnicity(with a source) they should not be listed here. Those names which have reliable sources can be re-added."
Instead Frasfras has been addingArab categories to articles, many of which have no sources to supportArab, and Frasfras' addition of a source,[5] upon further inspection reveals no mention of Arab ethnicity for Jabir b. Aflah. AND, said scholar(Jabir b. Aflah) was just conveniently added to theList of Arab scientists and scholars by user:Nabataeus.[6] I have posted on Frasfras17's talk page about said source misrepresentation.[7] However, said editor believes their opinion/interpretation of a scholar's ethnicity is comparable toWikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue,[8] and does not need to provide sources.
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Welcome to the 300th Weekly Summary!
The weekly newsletter was started byLydia at the very beginning of the Wikidata project, even before the first deployment, to keep the community informed about the developments, the new projects and tools. More than five years later, the newsletter is still there, its content powered by the community, and sent every week all along the years. I wanted to say a warm "thank you!" to each person who helped filling the Weekly Summary <3
Over the past years, as you know, Wikidata has grown a lot. More data, more tools, more editors and reusers, more exciting projects led by the community. The Weekly Summary has evolved with us, and the 300th edition seems a good moment to ask you all your suggestions about the newsletter, how it could continue evolving, and how you would like to improve it.
On that purpose, you can finda feedback page to express all your ideas about the Weekly Summary. We're very interested to know more about your reading habits, the parts you're more or less interested in, the new topics you would like to share with the community. Thanks in advance for filling it.
I stay available anytime to discuss with you, feel free to contact me if you have any question or concern! Cheers,Léa
A selection of cool tools on Wikidata
Here are a few tools that are recommended by some Wikidata community members. External websites, gadgets or scripts, they are very useful for Wikidata editors or users!
QuickStatements is a powerful tool that can edit or add Wikidata itemen masse, via a text editor or importing a spreadsheet. (Éder Porto via Facebook)
Mix'n'match (manual), which helps us to interlink Wikidata with the rest of the web and the world :-) (Spinster, Siobhan via Twitter)
WikiShootMe! allows you to see Wikidata items plotted out on a map and shows you whether they have images or not. (Ham II)
Yair Rand'sWikidataInfo script adds the QID of the equivalent Wikidata item to the page being viewed (on sister projects), along with its Wikidata label and description. (Andy Mabbett)
Recoin measures the degree of completeness of relevant properties of a Wikidata item and suggests any relevant statements that can be added to the item. (Rachmat04)
DuplicateReferences gadget adds a link to copy references and add them to other statements on the same item. (PKM)
checkConstraints gadget adds notifications on the interface to easily notice the violation ofconstraints and help people fixing them (Léa)
Resolve authors lists scientific articles with the property author name string (P2093) and groups them on the basis of co-authors and topic, which helps to distinguish people referred to by identical name strings. (Daniel Mietchen)
TheWiki Loves Monuments map is powered by Wikidata. You can look for a city and find the monuments around. (Stefano Sabatini via Facebook)
Fixed incomplete "Label:", "Description:" and "Statement:" entity usage messages in various places (phab:T178090). Thanks, Matěj!
Improved violation messages for ranges involving the current date (e. g. “should not be in the future”).
Continued work on caching constraint check results.
Enabled Lua fine-grained usage tracking for better performance on several more wikis: hywiki, frwiki, svwiki, itwiki, zhwiki, bewiki, nlwiki, glwiki, and Wikimedia Commons (phab:T187265phab:T186714)
Representation and grammatical features of the form can be changed using the UI (WikibaseLexeme) (phab:T173743,phab:T160525)
Blanket revert atIdentitarian movement without any apparent reading of the text or the sources
I've reverted you. Try reading text and sources again. For example, 6 sources are affixed to the label "white nationalist", but none of them actually use that term to describe "identitarians". Neither does the source cited (6) refer to identitarians "believing in the white genocide conspiracy theory". Sources 11-through 14 do not link the movement to "white supremacism", and "various governments" and "civil-rights organizations" are again, not mentioned in the sources.ZinedineZidane98 (talk)05:12, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
You're wrong, and I've responded at the appropriate place. With 5 blocks for disruptive editing, two reverts and then tag bombing isn't a good idea.Doug Wellertalk07:55, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
If it turns into a debate, I will. I get the impression that this editor is fairly canny, and won't push where they know they might end up sanctioned. With pretty much universal opposition so far, I doubt this will turn into a stink, and I'd rather not be the guy who brings up someone's past brushes with sanctions every time they make a suggestion I disagree with, even when it's such a bizarre suggestion as this (which, if you read the OP, is worded as a suggestion that we bolster the sourcing for claiming Jesus is Jewish, not complaining that Jesus might not be Jewish). I just want to make sure I'm not the only one watching in case they do go off the deep end at some point.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.18:16, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Aksum, Eritrea and Ethiopia
You may need to refer better sources as your article on the kingdom of Aksum is inaccurate. The well-known and well-established history is that the Aksumite empire had its base in Northern Ethiopia city of Axum and gradually expanded as far as Meroe and South Yemen. Its main ports are now in the southern Eritrea and present day Somaliland. If you have the intent to add Eritrea, you should also have added Djioubti and Somaliland which also were parts of the Aksumite Empire.— Precedingunsigned comment added byTtimes93 (talk •contribs)14:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
@Ttimes93:I didn't add Eritrea, it was added in 2004. I don't know what your problem is with the Oxford University source that makes you removeTigray region and replace it with an ungrammatical statement "located in the Northern Ethiopia". After all, Aksum is in Tigray.Doug Wellertalk15:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Community ban discussionsmust now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
A change to the administrator inactivity policyhas been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
A change to the banning policyhas been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be consideredde facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.
Technical news
CheckUsersare now able to view private data such as IP addresses from theedit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
The edit filter hasa new featurecontains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.
Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Well, this is what I am dealing with now.New RfC on Rod Laver. I can't even begin to tell you the bias in the synopsis, but I can say I've about had it with this whole thing. I've edited for so many years here and work on so many tennis articles that it's becoming not worth my time to deal with the antics of this editor any longer. Sitting here typing I'm starting to not care what happens to this article in the future. Something is not kosher here. His lies are upsetting me and I have better things to do than worry about what this guy does to the article. I hope you got what you wanted. I could have done this privately but that is not my style. Openness is.Fyunck(click) (talk)01:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
I am more than willing to discuss any changes you would like to make to the article in question. SayingI hope you got what you wanted is not fair toDoug Weller. He has no bias, he was just offering his neutral opinion and it was a very nice gesture for him to look through our discussion and weigh in.Zerilous (talk)02:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Doug, I'm sure we've encountered each other before, thought it's been about two years since I was very active. Do you remember me?
I'm sorry you found my comments at the article talk page "chilling". I wasn't intending to threaten anything. I was leaving the statement vague because I hadn't yet decided what I was going to do. But it seemed only right to inform the community that I wasn't abandoning the issues. Many people these days seem to think that if you don't give a knee-jerk reaction, then you've retreated, and that was an impression I did not want to leave behind. Thanks for listening.Evensteven (talk)16:58, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
HiUser:Evensteven. I'm afraid I don't recall you. And I don't agree that many people think a knee-jerk reaction is required. Thanks for the explanation, but I think you could have made it shorter and clearer. As for the lead issue, I'm surprised if even needs a source given the content of the article. It seems pretty obvious.Doug Wellertalk18:03, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Well, my position is that it is a biased statement, and any non-neutral verbiage requires proper sourcing. I understand the article content is also biased, but I chose to start there. The only thing that's obvious is that it's a widely shared view, but that doesn't mean it isn't opinion. Rewording to make it neutral is an option, but I didn't see a way to do that without introducing weasel qualifications, which complicates and extends the text, and it is the lead, after all.
As for knee-jerking, I do suppose I expected the worst, once I saw the attitude I was confronted with. And indeed, he carried matters farther and much more quickly than I intended to do. But, please count that as my exaggeration. However, I have many times experienced in heated debate where others did not understand or accept a pause of a day or two.
Brevity and clarity, yep. It's always the target. But I'm not a perfect shot any more than anyone, and I agree I missed that mark.Evensteven (talk)21:12, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Asking other editors to harass someone on your behalf tends to get a reaction. And if you had bothered totry to discuss the content instead of immediately assuming that I wouldn't (despite me explicitly saying that you should take it to the article talk page in my edit summary), I'd have happily discussed the content.
You want to be amazed? Copy what you've said about the content here to the article's talk page, and then watch merespond to the content discussion. (The only reason I don't do it here is because I'm sure Doug doesn't want his talk page to host that discussion. Doug, correct me if I'm wrong and I'll say my bit here.) Next time you come into a conflict with someone, don't take anything less that "I'm not going to discuss the content with you" as meaning they won't discuss the content with you.WP:AGF is a policy, and it applies even when you think the other party is misbehaving. In fact, it appliesespecially when you think the other party is misbehaving.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.21:23, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't want to continue litigating this, because I honestly don't care who was at fault, to what extent or why. If you want to discuss the content, go post a new section to the article talk page and I'll be along to respond.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.21:41, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
I strongly feel its Peeta Singh as per his editing behaviour for what PS was topic-banned e.g. removing Indian flag, changing Indian to Punjabi in biographies, marking every edit as minor, creating cats and templates related to Punjab or Punjabi cinema etc. He also recreated few tempaltes and cats earlier created by PS.GSS (talk|c|em)11:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Significantly (on average to 1/4th) reduced the number of changes from Wikidata showing up on the watchlists and recent changes on Wikipedias and the other sister projects. This way changes that do not affect an article should no longer show up. We're still holding off roll-out to Commons, Cebuano, Waray-Waray and Armenian Wikipedia because of scalability concerns.
Working on optimizing one of the largest database tables (wb_terms) (phab:T188279)
Fixing a bug on how Wikidata changes are shown on Wikipedia (phab:T189320)
Continued addressing security review issues for Wikibase-Lexeme extension (phab:T186726)
Final note from Léa: thanks to people who participated to thefeedback page! Today's Weekly Summary is already improved thanks to your suggestions. Feel free to add more comments, and feel free toedit the newsletter yourself: all small contributions are welcome :)
hello doug, sorry for the inconvenience. i have an important subject to discuss with you, would love to get your twitter or insta page, i would appreciate it :).— Precedingunsigned comment added byDovahkiiniq (talk •contribs)09:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
may i have your twitter user? i just wanted to talk to you about something really important and i wouldn't take much of your time :).or you can message me on twitter @ehsan_lq Ehsan Ammar.— Precedingunsigned comment added byDovahkiiniq (talk •contribs)04:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I've never said it before because I wanted to avoid the appearance of sucking up to admins, but what the hell: You do good work. And so do you Bish. We're lucky to have the two of you.Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk)15:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Ditto. I suppose it is inevitable, given the publisher, but it irks me that it infers "civil POV" to be an issue solely related to the far-right people etc. It isn't, not by a long way. -Sitush (talk)15:14, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Hiding behind a cloak of civility isn't a behavior that'sexclusive to those editing with a far-right agenda (and the SPLC article doesn't say that it is), but it is one that is adopted by such editors more than frequently enough to be worth noting. Anyway...nice job, Doug.RivertorchFIREWATER15:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Not to be a spoil sport, but that articles makes some good critiques, so instead of patting each other on the back, maybe we should get some work done? Anyone willing to help resolve some of them (I've already started work on others) should head on over toTalk:Race and intelligence and help us figure out if the SPLC is right about the imbalance, and if so, how best to coordinate fixing it.
The property suggestions were updated last week, the last update was in December 2017. The most noticable effect is the higher ranking of "family name" (P734) on items about people.Input about the suggester is still welcome.
George, le deuxième texte (fr), a website querying Wikidata to find French female authors, in order to bring more diversity in the literature school programs
New, configurable download page for Mix’n’match catalogs (example)
I explained on your account's talk page (User:Mohamed Abdellah223 that it was a copyright violation. It was also purely promotional. Our articles are meant to first meet certain notability criteria, egWikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) in the case of a college, and to be based on whatreliable independent sources say about the subject (of course if those don't exist then our criteria for notability won't be met. If you are in any way connected with it you need to declare that. You should usearticles for creation and read what it says very carefullyh.Doug Wellertalk19:34, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Siege of Jerusalem
Its helpful to have similar events listed at top, otherwise the article is pidgeonholed by specific title. -Inowen (talk)21:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
@Inowen: seeTemplate:Other uses which says "Do not use this template on an article with an unambiguous title; for example, a reader who searches specifically for "Paris, Virginia" is not likely to have been looking for an article about a city in France (or anywhere else), so it would no tbe appropriate to add
Wow, I never knew that. I have used it a lot over the years. It's an interesting decision because we don't actually know what the reader was searching for, only where they landed. -Sitush (talk)15:45, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Oh, yes. I agree that it seems rather unnecessary there. I'm just surprised at the potential for a less widespread application of something that could be genuinely useful to the reader even when the article title is unambiguous, such as the Paris example you give. Think of things such as, say, theWhite Mountains when someone lands onWhite Mountains (New Hampshire) - they may not even be aware that there are other places bearing the name and unless they understand our titling guidelines being at the latter article is not a means of informing them otherwise. -Sitush (talk)16:01, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Warning about vandalising and history-censoring of the now 4 year existing Ezidistan autonomous area
Dear Doug,I would please ask you to stop you're highly offensive actions against the now 4 year existing Ezidistan de facto autonomous area in West-Sinjar.Nobody is trying to remove the state you're living from wikipedia. Why are you even considering this doing these kind of vandalism toward other peoples state.
Please show some respect toward the Yezidi people that live and govern the de facto autonomous region in Iraq and do not try to remove an entire currently de facto autonomous region from wikipedia.
This is extra offensive as Daesh tried to whipe out the Yezidi people from history in a genocide recognized by UN.Now they bounced up and created a peacefull autonomous area governed by themeself, you are trying to whipe out any knowledge about this autonomous area.In the procces you removed 25 sources about the area from wikipedia, providing not one source you'reself and in statments only making clear you have no clue whatsowever governing divisions in this region.
You're effort to hide important and essential geographical and geopolitical information is at moment extra problematic,as Erdogan in several news outlets threatend to attack the Ezidistan de facto autonomous area in Iraq, in an effort (just like you) to wipe it of the map.
How would anyone in the world understand such a new war, if one party in the conflict is banned without any logic or reason by you from wikipedia?You also do not remove the existence of Turkey from wikipedia, why do try to remove the existens of autonomous region Yezidis established and maintained for 4 years now?
It is unbelievable that something like this can happen on wikipedia.It is trying to falsify history. Sensoring the existance of a autonomous area, in an highly NPOV-effort to try to let the world forget and ignore this autonomous area.
While all mapmakers on wikipedia are mapping this autonomous area with a seperate colour on all the current maps of the area, you seem to think that you can lift you're personal ignorance about the region,above the +25 provided sources and all mapmaker experts on wikipedia, caring just nothing about the fact you're falsifying history by doing so.
If you keep doing this I will report you're offensive actions, as they are completly irresponsable, unethical and 100% against wikipedia's goal of providing reliable, sourced and correct information to the world.--Niele~enwiki (talk)02:47, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Niele~enwiki, the moment you suggest that one of your editors is a genocide artist because they wish to uphold the integrity of our beautiful project is the moment some admins will take a very close look at your work here. To make sure you know I'm serious, I am placing a templated warning on your user talk page. Your accusations are uncalled for, unjust, and unacceptable.Drmies (talk)02:51, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Users that remove autonomous area's like Abchazia, South Ossetia, Rojava, KRG, Nagorno-Karabach,... from wikipedia including +25 sources do not uphold 'the integrety' of this beautiful project but or attacking and damaging it.
I'm also very serious about this, this is higly offensive toward the inhabitants of this autonomous region and '...' history. The action of emptying these pages is called like they are by everybody? --Niele~enwiki (talk)03:12, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
@Niele~enwiki:please stop personalizing disputes and making claims that normal editing activities by respected, experienced editors are "highly offensive" to anyone.Acroterion(talk)03:18, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Beïng 11 years on wikipedia is not giving does not void Doug Wellers lack of any touch with reality in northern Iraq. I'm myself am more then 13 years on wikipedia now and know very well how WP works.
Doug is spreading absurd lies about the Ezidikhan Autonomous Region, pushing his personal unfounded beliefs that are not backed up or even suggested by any ANY source watsoever.
The Ezidikhan autonomous region is anundeniable ground-reality for more then 4 years now.
A now 4 year existing autonomous region, fully controlled and governed by an selfgoverning instituations of the EPC with no outside troops inside and with understanding/agreements with the Iraqi federal goverement.
It is a higly encyclopedical topic.
Moreover very relavent and actual because Turkish goverment has today anounced a operational room with the goal to attack the Ezidikhan Autonomous region in an effort to wipe it of the map
The iraqi government already announced that it will not support Turkey.
What Doug is doing is censorship of non-questionable non-opinionated ground reality and systematicly preventing wikipedia-users of adding sources and adding sourced material based upon his personal completly out of touch beliefs. --Niele~enwiki (talk)09:54, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
@Niele~enwiki:, you may have been around for 11 years but you have less than 2000 edits with less than 500 of them to articles. That isn't enough to make yourself familiar with our policies and guidelines and that's obvious in your editing. I've got about 18o,000 edits, half of them to articles. You also don't seem to care at all aboutWP:Civility orgood faith, having decided that rather than find the sources that 3 Administrators have asked you two you're just going to call me names. I have no stake in whether or not there is an article so long as it meets our polices ofno original research and has independent reliable sources. The fact that you haven't provided any directly discussing such a region but resulted to name-calling suggests that you can't. Of course, if you can source your claim about Turkey, great. The issue for me is not whether such a region has been proclaimed, it clearly has. That doesn't mean it actually exists. At the risk of repeating myself, to show that this is a notable topic, find reliable independent sources directly discussing it by name.Doug Wellertalk11:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I have different account on different language-wiki's. And I edited already on wikipedia in 2003. You simply ignore all provided sources and immidiatly prevent any source from being added.
While you yoursef keep making false claimes without provideing any source whatsoever. You can simply stay dismissing every source provided and preventing any source from beïng added
You do not have one source to back-up that west-Sinjar is not under the control of the 4 Sinjar Alliance groups. While there are many articles even on wikipedia that state it does.
The autonomous region is discussed by severaldouzens of different names in the press and there exist already adouzend different writings of the word 'Ezidikhan'.
The major international press groups will just go on referring to the larger area as Sinjar simplifing things for their audience. Most press don't provide non-audience-symplified long reads.
That offcourse does NOT change the obvious reality about the ground control.
Besides of that a large amount of sources from different news organisation, ARE provided. You just dismisss all larger news organisations located in ther region of North-Iraq and North Syria.
All conflict maps, including all those of Wikipedia, draw the area under the control of Sinjar alliance groups. But you just claim to know it better than all the conflict maps available.
The Federal Iraqi government forces did not enter this West-Sinjar since 2013-2014 when they fled from IS. They did took Sinjar town, and took Sinjar towns militairy base and east-Sinjar from the KRG.
But they made a deal with the Sinjar alliance that controlled west-Sinjar and Sinjar mountain that only seeks 'self governence within Iraq' as alowed in the Iraqi constitution, in a bid to weaken the KRG in east-Sinjar and Sinjar Town after KRG's full independence bid.
Yes, I know you work on other Wikipedias, but our policies and guidelines are much stricter than most of not all. And they've gotten stricter over time. Your original research is interpreting your sources, something we should never do. You've been told Wikipedia's maps aren't reliable sources. I repeat, you've been told by 3 Admins that if you can provide sources that actually talk directly about an Ezidkhan autonomous region, not Sinjar alliance etc (which is where you are doing original research), then it will possibly show that you meet our notability requirements. Why can't you find quotations doing that? I don't need sources proving that something doesn't exist, why would I?Doug Wellertalk12:18, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Weighing scale
This[12] doesn't actually help the Encyclopedia; if you have a specific suggestion for how to improve the article -- well, you know how article talk pages work.NE Ent 00:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)@NE Ent: yes, I'm pretty sure I know how to use talk pages. But you're right and I don't know epsht I did that. I definitely should have clarified my reasons.Doug Wellertalk18:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I added a piece in about Sun Tzu and his comment on all warfare being about Deception. A critical element of deception is Fake News or propaganda or Information Operations...It was used during many conflicts - one of the most famous being operation Fortitude during WW2, the Russians have it as a doctrine (маскировка (maskirovka)) - So can you please tell me why my edit was removed - it met all of Wikipedias rules. Thank you.— Precedingunsigned comment added byPhilipIngram65 (talk •contribs)14:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
@PhilipIngram65: actually it doesn't meet one element of basic policy,WP:VERIFY. You would need sources meetingWP:RS stating thatThe Art of War is an example of fake news. You're interpreting it, and that's against policy, seeno original research. As editors we should not be deciding what is or is not fake news. Minor point, "6th century" is ambiguous. 15:44, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Phoenicia Intro
I have listed Lebanon first on thePhoenicia page so as to avoid confusion, putting aside the fact that I'm Lebanese. Phoenicia existed along the entire coast of Lebanon, and -some- parts of the coasts of Syria and Israel. Grammatically it makes sense to list Lebanon first, and then the "extension" of the Phoenician empire (heartland first, and then boundaries). Furthermore the most prominent cities of the Phoenician empire existed in modern Lebanon. To write it any other way is misleading, and confusing for the reader. I added this to my edit, and discussed this on the talk page.LebaneseBebe (talk)21:34, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Edit summary
This:"(Allred is not a scholar, he is Director of Parking and Transportation Services at the University of Utah. and has only a BA in History.)" has got to be one of my favorite recent edit summaries.Beyond My Ken (talk)15:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
I did not attack anyone. I posted something and was responded back with bigotry and discrimination. Creating a new definition for an Arabic word is akin to using the Spanish word for black “negro” and adapting that to indicate something derogatory. This is the only example that can be isolated or identified, what you’re doing now is repeating that sort of monumental slur, you’re repeating that process of creating slur by corrupting the established meaning of the word. And as an administrator your job is to be impartial and unbiased, and aren’t you supposed to be bound by the Wikipedia guideline, including those referencing racism and bigotry. The climate that is developing because of this isn’t something I want to take part in. Please stop harassing me for the simple reason of me not wanting discrimination to be applied towards me and my people. Do not attack me for defending myself from racist definitions. Are you going to block me for not sitting at the back of the bus? Oh, you’re the guy who had an issue with me listing Lebanon first on the Phoenicia page (my reasoning was due to coastal areas covered), you wanted Israel and Syria to be listed first. Nice to see that you are all friends. There are guidelines on Wikipedia regarding civility as well, and not misusing your editing administrative “authority”. These things are good for the project itself.LebaneseBebe (talk)22:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
I see you've been blocked for disruptive editing. My only issue with you was that I didn't know why you did it, I didn't care about the order, but given the lack of an explanation and your username it looked suspicious. Your explanation seemed reasonable so I left it. And you definitely made a personal attack.Doug Wellertalk06:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Dear Doug Weller
Hello Doug,
How are you ? This is not an Arbitrationmessage or discussion. Just wanting to sayhello and if you need any assistance onthe Norse settlements or Viking settlementslocated at Canada or USA. I will behappy to help during the discussions.
Upcoming:EuropeanaTech and Wikidata Workshop Day for GLAMs, Rotterdam (NL), Monday 14 May. A day of GLAM-related workshops around Wikidata and Structured Commons, for beginners and advanced users.
Newsearch code for Wikidata merged. You may notice the improvement in the search results output for Wikidata item. However, new code for search is not enabled, only new results format. The search code will be enabled next week.
Improving formatting of language and lexical category in diff for Lexemes (phab:T189679)
My goal in posting what I did on the Alex Jones page was simply to ask that the neutrality of that article to be looked at. If Wikipedia wishes to become the next Encyclopedia Brittanica, they can't allow liberal partisans to paint public citizens in a negative light simply because they can. That you reverted my edit when that was my only issue demonstrates to me that Wikipedia is extremely liberal and rigid in ideology.Jamdud22 (talk)16:38, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jamdud22: I haven't edited his page for months. I've simply warned you about our editwarring policy. You've been told what to do if you want to add a pov tag.Doug Wellertalk16:54, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
@SarekOfVulcan: no need to apologise. Not nearly as bad when I chastised an Admin for posting at AE in the uninvolved Admin section somehow confusing them with a non-admin. I now have a script that highlights Admin sigs. Very useful. As does the script that strikes through the named of blocked editors.Doug Wellertalk19:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
@GSS-1987: Where there's been multiple socking I've protected, the others seem controllable fairly easily. That's the only way to deal with this IP socking.
Diplomats join Wikipedia for International Women's Day, the perfect "Human", how fringe theories are sustained, and perennial plagiarism from our pages.
Hi Doug, would you mind helping me. I am in the early stages of a revert war and would like to stop it early. Could you check that I am acting appropriately and within the guidelines.The page isChoy_Li_Fut#King_Mui_Choy_Li_Fut and I have reverted some vandalism and tried to compromise with the user in question. Thank you for your time.Mielhoney (talk)07:24, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Hey Doug. I noticed you posted on the talk page ofUser:Staringeyes so I'm reaching out to you. I blocked them recently for their edits, all the reasons of which are listed on their talk page, but chief being the editing of pages to impose an Irish nationalist slant and the fact that every single one of their edits has been reverted. I gave them a warning that if their continue their editing pattern when they return they would be blocked indefinitely. They have just returned andthis was their first article edit since returning. This edit shows a lack of reading the article, a really biased slant and ignorance of simple history of Ireland. I am concerned I could be considered involved with this, so I'm looking for another admin to do what they think needs to be done here. Let me know. Cheers.Canterbury Tailtalk14:58, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
@Canterbury Tail: I would if I could but I'm involved, see the discussion on the bottom of their talk page. Sorry about that. It's completely unacceptable of course. However, previous Admin actions themselves don't make you involved. That's been discussed in a number of places. Even we Arbs don't need to recuse if we've blocked a party.Doug Wellertalk15:12, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Article about creativity religion on wikipedia and also on non english language editions is mostly written by members of violent sects of creativity named creativity movement and creativity alliance.most of their members are criminals like william christopher gibbs and allen goff and 90% of true creators are not linked to those criminal organisations.they spammed whole internet with their lies and when you google "creativity religion" you get on pages of those madmen campbel , logsdon ' costello , ... creativity is not creativity movement.ben klassen woild never be their member if now alive. Please correct this.— Precedingunsigned comment added by83.131.189.170 (talk)12:36, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
I've set the article to pending changes because of members of Creativity trying to promote a Creativity website under the guise of denouncing the other sects.Ian.thomson (talk)15:20, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
I believe that you should recuse from this appeal. When I was notifying Sandstein, I had accidentally left the message where you were having a discussion with him,[13] and I followed those discussions on his talk page. Sandstein told an editor that "if you can convince Doug Weller that there are now adequate sources for this topic, I'll restore the article",[14] that means he was relying on your judgement there. That's why you need to recuse, since you will more likely also endorse his judgement because he endorsed your actions wrt the article that you were editing as an editor.[15]
The Plantagenet Ancestry of King Edward III and Queen Philippa of Hainault, George Andrews Moriarty, Mormon Pioneer Genealogy Society, 1985. --Kansas Bear (talk)16:53, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Ok. Well, I removed it and the journal article. The Moriarty source had no page number and the journal article simply listed the entire article(ie. no specific page). --Kansas Bear (talk)18:58, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Barnstar award for improving List of Chinese inventions
The Editor's Barnstar
I award thee, Doug Weller, for your tireless contributions in improving the quality ofList of Chinese inventions, a featured list article that has recently seen a growing number of entries from questionable and unacceptable sources by other users. You have taken the time to investigate sources and excised the worst material from the article. For that you should be highly commended.Pericles of AthensTalk18:01, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivityare now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, arenow automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
There will soon be acalendar widget atSpecial:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.
Arbitration
The Arbitration Committeeis considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community atWP:AE orWP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee atWP:ARCA.
Miscellaneous
Adiscussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required toenable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released theInteraction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
I am the person who added some ancient cities to Iran's list and I have some comments for you.
Hello,I wanted to say that these cities that I add, some of them still exist today and they are considered villages, because of their low population.But some of them had a lot of inhabitants in past of thousands of people which makes it to be a village now but it was a city in ancient times.Some of these cities are from prehistoric times which is the period before writing and they date back to 8000-3600 B.C.E.I check these cities before I put them in. Jiroft is also a city other than a ziggurat and excavations in it shows that.— Precedingunsigned comment added by2601:45:401:3598:D105:D837:4053:7CCB (talk)18:05, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
The articles on them do not say they are cities. Even the sources were calling them villages. You'd need archaeological sources saying they were cities, and for the ones that have articles those should be in the articles first. Jiroft is of course a city, but I see no indication that the area where the Ziggurat was built was Jiroft at the time. Ancientorigins.net is not a suitable source, we need genuine archaeological sources. I've raised this atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology#List of cities of the ancient Near East to get more input.Doug Wellertalk18:35, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
I can prove it to you that Jiroft is a city.
Hello,There is a video on youtube which is old and was created a little bit after Jiroft was discovered in the 2000s and it shows a lot of graves in 3 nearby cemeteries of Jiroft which tomb robbers had taken all the pieces inside them out.There is also a ziggurat with the base of 400 meters on each side. There are also homes discovered in two mounds with many pieces of art.Jiroft is suggested as the capital of a lost kingdom (Aratta) which is also mentioned in Sumerian texts.There is also evidence of trade with Indus Valley civilization and Mesopotamian civilization.Jiroft is even older than those two civilizations that are traditionally considered as the cradle of civilization.There are also writings found in a palace in Jiroft."The only ancient inscriptions known to experts before the Jiroft discovery were cuneiform and hieroglyph," said Majidzadeh, adding that," The new-found inscription is formed by geometric shapes and no linguist around the world has been able to decipher it yet." Some mythical stories such as Gilgamesh and Etana that are later found in Sumer are originated here and this can be found from pieces found here.Gilgamesh is a man with a tail like a scorpion that is found a lot in these pieces but is only found once is Sumer and Etana is a story of a snake who wants to take revenge from an eagle which is also found a lot on these artifacts.The proposition of grouping these sites as an "independent Bronze Age civilization with its own architecture and language", intermediate between Elam to the west and the Indus Valley Civilization to the east, is due to Yusef Majidzadeh, head of the archaeological excavation team in Jiroft. He speculates they may be the remains of the lost Aratta Kingdom, but his conclusions have met with skepticism from some reviewers. The team uncovered more than two square kilometers of remains from a city dating back to at least the late 3rd millennium BC. The data Madjidzadeh's team has gathered demonstrates that Jiroft's heyday was from 2500 BC to 2200 BC.But the discoveries are not finished yet and there is evidence that dates Jiroft back to 7000 years old, but it may be even older.You are right, it wasn't called Jiroft at the time, but we don't know its name at its time and its writings are not deciphered, so this ancient city is also called Jiroft right now.Sasan Sedighi (talk)20:16, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Why can't we have red links, should I leave it black?Some of this cities don't have an English page on Wikipedia and are available in other languages.Sasan Sedighi (talk)20:31, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
@Sasan Sedighi: We don't normally use YouTube as a source, we really need something "reliably published" perWP:VERIFY andWP:RS. Blue linked cities will hve articles which must have sources stating that they are ancient cities. Red linked won't have articles, so they would need sources to be in the list. That would be fine.Doug Wellertalk10:47, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #306
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
@MarnetteD: Thanks very much, I hadn't seen it, trying to buy a new printer as mine suddenly stopped printing black!. It gets frustrating dealing with some new editors at times.Doug Wellertalk19:15, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
You are welcome. I just got home from running errands and see that things have gone the way I thought they might. I hope the printer situation works itself out as well. Cheers.MarnetteD|Talk20:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.
Sorry. I did change the wording some, but it was a short sentence (with a reference), and I was wanting their basic description of themselves. I will be more careful when writing descriptions in the future. Also, I didn't see the sentence you referred to at the time, but I don't think it's a good idea to label, unless all--in this case--news websites/magazine--are labeled. That's why I deleted "conservative." It was an opinion with no reference. 04:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)Liz Sterling (talk)
Are ancient yeminite kingdoms considered arab kingdoms by scholars (historians, archaologists)? The sources that I have read do not consider them as such. I'm asking you this because I removed thesefive kingdoms from this Template (Historical Arab states and dynasties). I want your opinion. Regards -Aṭlas (talk)20:22, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
@Aṭlas: I found this: "South Arabian differs from the Arabic spoken by most Arabs. It descends directly from the Arabic of the ancient Yemeni kingdoms and is a major influence on the Semitic and Cushitic languages of the Horn of Africa."[27] The author seems an expert in the field.[28] OUr articleAncient history of Yemen certainly calls itSouth Arabia and the language spokenSouth Arabian.Doug Wellertalk13:55, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure removing the section was in order. There's a fundamental lack of discussion on something that is obviously a cornerstone of Thelma and other Wiccan derivatives. And the 999 vs 666 discussion was useful to maybe ENCOURAGE others to seek out information, and eventually add and expand to the article page. Which; was my intention. I may not be in a place to do such changes myself, but the talk pages are there for discussion the article; and a minor prod DID get the very interest I had hoped for, though not the response I expected. What ELSE it did was add other thoughts that I had not, personally, considered. Those could ALSO be woven into the article at some point down the line. I kindly request you restore the section at hand.Lostinlodos (talk)20:47, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
@Lostinlodos: the page seems to be a forum magnet. If you are correct there will be reliable sources that you can suggest on the talk page. I really don't see the problem. Either what you are talking about is significant and thus sourced, or it isn't and doesn't belong.Doug Wellertalk14:25, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes - Issue 27
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes Issue 27, February – March 2018
#1Lib1Ref
New collections
Alexander Street (expansion)
Cambridge University Press (expansion)
User Group
Global branches update
Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
Bytes in brief
Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta! Read the full newsletter
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.
SeeMOS:CITELEAD. Doug, that book is interesting. Greenwood is usually reputable, but that particular entry is so full of jingoism and jubilation that I wonder whether it slipped in after the final revision. I think it would be a good idea for some experts to look into that article before we accept that at face value--every now and then you run into these sources and wonder what the author, editor, managing editor, and publisher were thinking.Drmies (talk)13:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
@Drmies: Yes, I read that while working on something else (ISIR), and was just amazed at the partisan nature of his comments. The book has other dubious statements if I recall correctly. I'm not sure what to do about it.
WikiWorkshop, a forum bringing together researchers exploring all aspects the Wikimedia projects, in Lyon, April 24th. Seven papers related to Wikidata will be presented.
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.
Following Kudpung's op-ed "Death knell sounding for The Signpost?" in the 29 March issue, user comments encouraged a burst of enthusiasm to keep the newspaper in print.
How to revive and evolveThe Signpost? Big blue-sky proposals and small concrete proposals from the community and from two regularSignpost contributors.
A recent Community Health Initiative survey found only 27% of respondents are happy with the way reports of conflicts between Editors are handled on the Administrators' Incident Noticeboard (ANI).
Wikipedia's myth of the clean Wehrmacht and what you can do about it. Or, how not to be one of "the worst distributors of pro-Nazi perspectives and the Wehrmacht myth".
What should we do about Portals? Keep them, delete them, or mark them as historical? Or should they be more closely connected with their WikiProject(s)?
Thanks for thanking me. Whenever any user does it, new or old, it always motivates me to keep moving forward as an editor. As you are a long-time administrator, it really does mean a lot to me in this case. Rock on.UnsungKing123 (talk)11:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Reliable source?
James Falkner,The War of the Spanish Succession 1701-1714. Pen & Sword.
Per Amazon.com;
"James Falkner is a leading writer on seventeenth- and eighteenth-century warfare James Falkner is a leading writer on seventeenth- and eighteenth-century warfare and he has made a special study of the War of the Spanish Succession and the military exploits of the 1st Duke of Marlborough. His book, Great and Glorious Days: Marlborough's Battles 1704-1709, is one of the outstanding studies of the subject. His books include Blenheim 1704, Ramillies 1706, Marlborough Goes to War: Eyewitness Accounts 1702-1713, Marlborough's Sieges, Marlborough's Battlefields, Fire Over the Rock: The Great Siege of Gibraltar 1779-1783, Marshal Vauban and the Defence of Louis XIV's France and Marlborough's War Machine." --Kansas Bear (talk)22:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
I think Bear is asking about Faulkner’s book. Pen & Sword is generally reliabe, although there are likely academic sources in plenty on that conflict. But P&S would be generally reliable for most stuff. Faulkner sounds like a decent authority, although again, there are likely academics who study the period also.Ealdgyth -Talk23:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
@Serial Number 54129: sure. I've blocked the editor indefinitely also. I don't mind another Admin unblocking him if he can convincingly guarantee that won't happen again, but no one should have to put up with that.Doug Wellertalk11:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Administrator changes
Lourdes†
AngelOfSadness •Bhadani •Chris 73 •Coren •Friday •Midom •Mike V
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Miscellaneous
Obituaries
Thank you –GSS (talk|c|em)16:08, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Arbitration
The Wikipedia Library