User talk:AirshipJungleman29

Your GA nomination of Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SnowFire -- SnowFire (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

The article Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj for comments about the article, and Talk:Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SnowFire -- SnowFire (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

July music

story · music · places

I support the recognition! - My story is today about the first published composition by Arnold Schönberg which I was blessed to hear. Listen ;) - I recommend others to perhaps read what Alma Mahler (to-be-Mahler at the time, to be precise, who was present at the first performance) said, and agree that yes that was too much for the Main page ;) - However, continuing our conversation from above, we'll have readers who never heard Schönberg's name, and we have others - let's say 5% - who know him rather well as the founder of the (rather brain-driven) 12-tone system and who might be as surprised as I was that he began his career with such an emotional expressionist piece. My math: those could profit from a real surprise specific to this piece, while most of the other group would probably not be interested anyway (so not click or click but not read), and some might click and read even if we say something more than that the audience was hostile (which is so true for so many pieces that it's almost not worth mentioning). - Could you offer a hook for the Gerhard Klingenberg nom, perhaps? Some compromise knowing that I'd like to do justice to a specific subject, be it a piece of music or a biography, and not say something that could be said about others as well? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

You say 5%, I say 0.01%. On Gerhard, I like that his direction at the Burgtheater focused on a divided Europe after he was himself compelled to leave East Berlin after it was divided by the Berlin Wall. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Could you word precisely that this Austrian was invited to East Berlin by Brecht, and then ... - as you said? Highly unusual! While "divided Europe" is a broad concept, no? - Would you agree that "Danton's Death" sounds like a title raising interest, even of people who don't know who Danton was? - For the Schönberg math: Twelve-tone technique has a reader steady readership of more than 200 per day and shows his pic, - that's not like Mozart but also not like 5 views per day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to see your effort at wording it for the non-specialist readers. For me "Danton's Death" falls under WP:DYKFICTION—you can name a fiction anything you want. Those who read twelve-tone technique are likely to know something about music composition—you can assume exactly the opposite for the readers of the main page. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Danton's Death is based on Georges Danton's real death, not pure fiction but a place in European French revolution history, on top of literature. I think that is interesting to non-specialist readers. There are links to help those who don't know yet, - why should the little space we have in hooks go into explanations? When I wrote the original hook for Klingenburg I did try to mix general interest in: stepping in early, a great house in the world, a dramatic title. - When we write about chemistry, or politics, we may miss readers not interested, but reach others. Why should that be different for music and theatre? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Today's story is about a Bach cantata premiered 300 years ago OTD. - Two thoughts: if you like the Klingenberg divided Europe hook you can approve it. I think that Danton's Death is more interesting but who cares what I find interesting. - I introduced 5 composers banned by the Nazis with the Liviu Holender hook, and they found interest then, check out Schoenberg and Zemlinski. The Nazis banned these people, - should we do the same, arguing that readers don't know them? I believe they should be known, not only as composers but as people with a history, - Schoenberg went to California, changing his name. People don't know that, so can we please change this ignorance? The Nazis ridiculed Schoenberg's music as degenerate: I believe we might say that it isn't, that it is interesting, instead of only saying that the audience reacted with hostility. 2ct. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

You seem to have forgotten that you nominated an article on a piece of music, not on Schoenberg himself. DYK is to showcase new and newly improved articles, so we focus on them, not whether the subjects of related article went to California or were banned by the Nazis or whatever (neither of which were discussed in your hooks). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

When I create new content I usually have a story in mind, according to "Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the DYKTALK." I hear a concert, with 10 fascinating songs that I believe deserve an article, and pick two of them, Schoenberg's Op. 1, because it's his anniversary year, and his first published work, interesting, no! I wanted to "focus on them", but all that was left in the hook about the fascinating songs is that they were met with hostility. I was happy with the hook about the concert. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

But you didn't focus on the songs, you focused (as you tend to do) on the performances and the people you find interesting. You could have focused on the reversal of the "thanks"-"farewell" order, and what it means—that would be interesting. You could have done some delicate writing on the "metaphorical transformation of the lyric"—would be a higher tier, but probably still interesting.

But no, as always, you go through your routine inventory of what to include: 1) place 2) year 3) musician/actor 4) random superficial critic quote. As a result, dull, dull, dull, boring. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The thanks-farewell order wasn't yet in the article when I worded the hook, - had to word because of the 7 days limit. Farewell. Thanks. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

3 July is the birthday of Leoš Janáček, and I'm happy I had a meaningful DYK in 2021 (there was none for him, or any of his operas, - I didn't look further). It's also the birthday of Franz Kafka, and I uploaded pics from his family's album seen in Berlin. - I am happy to have received an award for the Women in Green drive that you recommended, but didn't they see they'd wait for reviews to be completed? (One is still open.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean: you nominated two articles as part of WiG, and both now have the GA icons. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I see now that I forgot to nominate Tamara Milashkina, - nevermind, I don't expand for awards ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Overnight, Milashkina became GA and Lando Bartolini went to the Main page. I made my story about his almost unbelievable career, and for me, that rings with music. I guess that no music would be left in a DYK hook ;) - I felt understood here, though. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

ps: Libuše Domanínská - yesterday's story - would have turned 100 today, but I missed that ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

My story today is - because of the anniversary of the premiere OTD in 1782, at the Burgtheater - about Die Entführung aus dem Serail, opera by Mozart, while yesterday's was - because of the TFA - about Les contes d'Hoffmann, opera by Offenbach. - Thank you for promoting the Burgtheater director for DYK! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

My story today is about Marina Kondratyeva, - what would you suggest for a DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

... and today's about Ruth Hesse - pic in the article only, sadly. Five years ago, we had the DYK for her, the first that I remember where a critic's saying was finally accepted. I don't normally care about what critics say, but once that happened, I tried it for compromise. Can we agree on treating each nom on its own instead of "always the same"? The Kondratyeva nom is open, - your chance for a hook, and I promised myself not to comment ;) - 21k+ looked already at her article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Today's story is about a photographer who took iconic pictures, especially View from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Manhattan, 9/11. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Yasuke archives

Hi there,

Sorry about that, I thought your script glitched and somehow moved the messages to a new archive page instead of Talk:Yasuke/Archive 1 where there was still plenty of space.

--Thibaut (talk) 10:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

ChristieBot being odd

Definitely a bug. The root cause was the removal of the status parameter weeks ago. ChristieBot didn't get upset till the new subpage was created; I'll have to look at the code this evening and figure out how to stop it from repeating the nominator information, though it should be complaining about the missing status parameter. I could have it add back in a status parameter if one doesn't exist, I suppose .... Anyway, thanks for fixing it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I fixed it by having it check for the "Nominator:" line before adding it. That way it will continue to post the errors in the errors section of GAN, which is better than trying to guess which status it's supposed to have. If you spot this happening again please give me a nudge. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:30, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

GA-related discussion

Just wanted to make sure you get a heads up about the discussion over at talk:human history#Periodization. I'm not involving myself with the GA process itself, but I just want to make sure you're not blindsided by anything. Peter ^Isotalo 11:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you should reconsider your approach to human history. You've been a GA reviewer for some time and now you're actively involving yourself in a content dispute discussion, including a very personal comment about a minor disagreement over some rather ungenerous comments from you back in October 2023.[1] You had the chance to comment on my question in the GA but you chose not to.

Rather than threatening me with an ANI thread over perceived slights, I think you'd better off simply taking me seriously. Your interaction with me so far has, in my view, mostly just been sarcastic and irritable. In other words, very ungenerous. Peter ^Isotalo 18:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Kalmyks

Hello, I'm coming to your talk page with a little review request. I've kind of stumbled upon the long sock story surrounding User:Lurk shirk, but it is a rather confusing case. However, what I've gathered is that they used to just copy-paste big chunks of one and the same text across multiple articles and that they were particularly focused on certain topics such as interracial marriage and genetics. Iirc, I've seen your name in the SPI on that user and I've seen you reverting some edits by this user on the Kalmyks page [2], so I thought that you might be familiar with their usual copy-pasted texts and am asking for your judgment on an edit from an IP that was added some time after the Lurk shirk was closed: [3]. Does this look like something that Lurk shirk + alter egos would copy-paste into articles? The content looks kind of odd to me. It certainly looks copied because it obviously contains "raw" text with reference numbers that lack the underlying wiki syntax (e.g. [3] — without hyperlinking). The content is still in the article and I don't want to simply revert it based on a suspicion given that I'm not really familiar with the SPI case. Could you check it, please? Nakonana (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I might just be paranoid, I'm not even sure what made me think that those two users could be connected, there doesn't really seem an overlap in topics of interest. I guess it's just the fact that the text was likely just copied from somewhere. Sorry, if it's an absolute false flag :> Nakonana (talk) 20:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

AN

Someone opened an AN thread concerning you here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jonharojjashi (talk) 14:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft talk:List of petitions calling for Israel to be banned from sports

How do I reply to the question you asked on the talk page? Tried to do so but was unable. MaskedSinger (talk) 17:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I am unsure what question you refer to MaskedSinger. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I had comments re the article and had so just posted them here Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Israel MaskedSinger (talk) 18:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

I wanted to thank you for all the encouragement and well wishes, wish I've noticed for a long time. I've had a wickedly rough year IRL, and haven't always responded, but I've always noticed and appreciated the support. Kinds words are salve on wounds during rough times. Thanks so much, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Oghul Qaimish

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Oghul Qaimish you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

• Discussion report: Internet users flock to Wikipedia to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo

• News and notes: Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification

• News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation Board resolution and vote on the proposed Movement Charter

• Essay: Reflections on editing and obsession

• In the media: What's on Putin's fork, the court's docket, and in Harrison's book?

• Obituary: JamesR

• Crossword: Vaguely bird-shaped crossword

• Humour: Joe Biden withdraws RfA, Donald Trump selects co-nom

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

de'anyers / daniell page

hello, I was wondering if you had a chance yet to contribute towards the discussion re your nomination for deletion. I have had a look through the source list comprehensivley and would very much like to discuss this and see if we can reach a consensus.? several main sources used for the article are all impartial and well known genealogical publications - Burkes, Ormerods, ect. The Battle Abbey Role by the Duchess of Cleveland published I believe in the 1890s covering the families on the scroll, also a book on a biography of the family. Other verified wikipedia pages exist for 3 members of the family listed on the page as well as others not mentioned (artists William Daniell and Thomas Daniell, and Thomas Daniel)

The issue is perhaps the interchangable use of De'Anyers and Daniell between sources however this I have found to be the historical case.. in looking to upload several Van Dyck portraits (Peter Daniell MP) and his sister and aunt I have found them to be listed as De'Anyers however it is the same family.

I am happy to explore and make any edits you may suggest ? (I wondered if perhaps some paragraphs could be slimmed down slightly). However based on pages existing for other identical landed families in Cheshire (several of whom intermarried and are included in the Daniell article) and based on historical significance, and the other reasons mentioned It has its place on wiki, and just needs fleshing out being comparativley newer, which I was activley working on :).

look forward to your advice/reply. Starktoncollosal (talk) 13:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)