User talk:Emigré55

Welcome!

A cup of hot tea to welcome you!

Hello, Emigré55, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The Wikipedia Adventure (a fun interactive editing tutorial that takes about an hour)
• Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• How to add those all-important references
• Simplified Manual of Style
• The Signpost, our newspaper.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Sm8900 (talk) 22:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC) Sm8900 (talk) 22:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

• to Sm8900, Thanks! working on it....Emigré55 (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marwan Lahoud has been accepted

Marwan Lahoud, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 02:08, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• to CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}: Thank you! Emigré55 (talk) 02:26, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Emigré55

Thank you for creating Marwan Lahoud.

User:Scope creep, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Don't use external links in the body. Use External Links to link to external websites.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Scope creep}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

scope_creep^Talk 08:42, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Scope creep:

Good afternoon Scope creep,

Thank you for your editing of this article.

Not sure why you deleted this §...:

N.B.: Complete versions of the 3 agreements signed can be found here: Martine Orange et Yann Philippin, «Airbus paye 3,6 milliards d’euros pour solder douze ans de «corruption massive», on Mediapart.

It is in my opinion useful (although a primary source) to give all unbiased info to the reader.

Should it be as a footnote?

Can you please tell me?

Also, is the article now marked as "reviewed"?

cheers,

--Emigré55 (talk) 09:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Good article. External links in the body of the article is illegal. This: Mediapart is an external link the body of the article. Put it in the "External links" section and refer to there as something [Reference External links], or create a reference out of of it, and use something similar to this: <ref name="mediapart">blah blah blah</ref> to reference it in the body, use <ref name="mediapart"/> It has been reviewed. Hope that helps!! scope_creep^Talk 10:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Scope creep:

It sure helps!

thank you very much!

and thanks for the compliment!

--Emigré55 (talk) 10:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Portrait of a Noble Young Lady (Pourbus) has been accepted

Portrait of a Noble Young Lady (Pourbus), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Hoary (talk) 23:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I am amazed (and impressed) to learn from here that you are the infrared photographer of this work. I imagine that you have a wealth of knowledge of the painting. Remember, though, that Wikipedia can only use published material.

Note that the article doesn't yet provide such expected information as dimensions, condition, significant "restoration" work, or even location. (I mean, it has been shown at Museum Gouda, but where is it now?)

The painting probably never had a title, and now it doesn't seem to have one either. Instead, it has nonce titles, for convenience. I retained your title, because I had no good reason not to, and then found "the" (in reality, a) Dutch-language title from a source you provided. Even I, who know no Dutch, can see that the latter means "Portrait of an unknown lady". I think that the article should briefly list whatever titles of convenience have been used to a significant degree, saying who has used which. (A more comprehensive list should appear in the Wikidata entry for the painting.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:07, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd overlooked the dimensions, which are provided (but unsourced). The French article says that the painting is in private collection, but gives no source for this statement. ¶ How/where was the painting "discovered" in 2006? -- Hoary (talk) 04:33, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words and nice editing of this article. As to your comments and questions, I will continue to add to this article, in as much as I can give all references needed.--Emigré55 (talk) 06:25, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Pieter Pourbus

Thanks for your expansion here. I've removed the excess categories (see WP:OCAT). Two points: at the moment the lead is far too short, and there are too many one line paragraphs, making it read rather like notes. Johnbod (talk) 11:39, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Anna van Egmont

Your recent editing history at Anna van Egmont shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. The Banner talk 14:13, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm The Banner. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to User talk:The Banner. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. The Banner talk 18:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@The Banner: Hereunder, copy of the message left on your talk page:

Extended content

Although Wikipedia is not a source, as you should know, you have aggressively/bluntly demanded to check the German and French version of this article as the only justification for your deletion of the title, and better-known name, of Anna van Buren. In so doing, you only prove to be wrong again, unfortunately for you : The German version is beginning with these words, which you either have chosen to ignore or probably did not even read : "Anna von Egmond (niederländisch: Anna van Buren....)..." https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_von_Egmond, which means that Anna van Buren is her name in the Netherlands language. If you had only read the French version, you would have first noticed that I am the main contributor/author of this page, which contains numerous sources for the information I added. You would have then also noticed that I wrote in the article « Anna succède alors à Maximiliaan en tant que comtesse van Buren », which translates as follows in English « Anna then succeeds Maximiliaan as Countess van Buren ». And what is proved by her father’s biography, and numerous sources, but which you did not bother to check either. All this evidences that your blunt assertion that “She was not Anna van Buren but became countess of Buren by marriage”, as a justification to your previous deletion, is based on nothing, and hence a pure invention on your part. And indeed, that is how she is even called in the Netherlands, Anna van Buren, or Anna van Bueren, as many secondary sources prove it : https://historiek.net/anna-van-buren-1533-1558/1209/ Huygens database author also notes that she is «better know as Anna van Buren»: « ANNA van EGMONT, vooral bekend als Anna gravin van Buren .... » (First sentence in : http://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/vrouwenlexicon/lemmata/data/AnnavanBuren) https://marccouwenbergh.nl/anna-van-bueren-versus-de-mona-lisa-van-pieter-pourbus-meester-schilder-uit-gouda/ As you are a Dutchman yourself, judging from your personal page, it is puzzling why you don’t even know this and/or want to ignore this fact. So please, acknowledge your “error”, and revert your abusive deletion yourself. Or I will do it, based on the numerous sources I showed you. Finally, I would like to add that this new deletion from you shows unfortunately also that you persist in ONLY deleting information in this article (Unless I am mistaken, you haven’t brought a single addition, or positive information, to this biography). Which begins, at this point, to be a disorganisation of the encyclopaedia and could even be characterised as vandalism. As you are not an art historian, and not even interested in art, as your personal page shows, I advise/urge you to stay now away from this page. Your skills are certainly better at expanding Michelin stars. You can/should also consider that there are 6,915,321 other articles on the English Wikipedia to improve and discuss.

--Emigré55 (talk) 07:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Nice try to hide your battleground behaviour and the fact that you simple do not have a clue. The Banner talk 10:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Message left on TheBanner talk page (04:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)):
 ::* WP:PERSONALATTACKS: Again a personal attack. 
 ::* And a new fault against WP:GOODFAITH: in saying you are "suspecting" me of being Marc Couwenbergh. My personal page says that my mother language is French, and does not say I speak Nederlands. Check it out before accusing me. --Emigré55 (talk) 04:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:The Banner. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Being aggressive is not the way.Template:Z187 The Banner talk 08:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Paragraphs removed by TheBanner from his talk page (08:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)):
 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Banner&diff=975397820&oldid=975372172

Ow, you really want to show off your harassment of other editors? Great show...

You are really the only one I know that is will to advertise his own harassment.The Banner talk 17:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Marc Couwenbergh

See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Marc_Couwenbergh where I have started a discussion about the reliability of the two Marc Couwenbergh sources. The Banner talk 16:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I am afraid you do not look for the right sources in Google on this author. Or want to deliberately ignore them?? Just read, for instance, here: "Marc Couwenbergh, Journalist specializing in art - Marc Couwenbergh - Biography : Marc Couwenbergh (1958) is a political scientist and writes about art, culture and history as a journalist. Marc has written several books on these topics." (translated into English from the Dutch page). Of course this information is also posted where you started this discussion. --Emigré55 (talk) 16:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It means that you are reading badly, as it states nowhere that he is an art historian. Even his Linkedin-account does not state that. But the "reliable sources noticeboard" can help with this. The Banner talk 16:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)