User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 92

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ealdgyth. 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 the current talk page.

Archive 85

←

Archive 90

Help requested re Draft:Ascelin de Waterville

Hi Ealdgyth -- I realise this is sledgehammer–nut territory, but if you had a moment could you try to assist Buddicca, a historically inclined newbie who is trying to write about Draft:Ascelin de Waterville, an Anglo-Norman landholder, and has got an off-putting decline at Articles for Creation. I've given them some generic advice but don't edit much in this area. Many thanks for any specific advice you can offer them. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:40, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Biggest issue is that it's a copyright violation - the article is substantially copied from The Victoria County History of Northamton vol 3. Another issue is that the article is unclear who it is about. The Domesday tenant of 1086 is in Domesday People as "Azelin de Walterville" (p. 159) (Azelin is a Latinization of Ascelin), and there is no mention of a possiblity of there being two with that name (this is why the VCH is not the best source ... better to base on more recent scholarship and then flesh out with VCH). Azelin was NOT a tenant-in-chief, nor was he a baron (not in Sanders Feudal Baronies). He's mentioned in Domesday but that's not enough to make him notable by our standards. He was steward to the Abbey of Peterborough and had four sons. There was another Ascelin who held land in Lincolnshire in 1166 (the Cartae Baronum), but the connection to the Domesday tenant is unclear. The CB Ascelin MIGHT be notable, but it's iffy. Unless there is more lurking about ... I'm going to have to say this is likely a minor landholding family that doesn't rise to enough notablity for our purposes. A quick look at the bios of the relevant kings (William I, William II, Henry I, Henry II) shows no mentions of either Ascelin. Nor is either Ascelin mentioned in the "go-tos" for obscure nobility for the Anglo-Norman period - English Sheriffs to 1154, The Anglo-Norman Nobility in the Reign of Henry I, or The Aristocracy of Norman England. Because of the stewardship to Peterborough, I checked Knowles' The Monastic Order in England and nothing. Ealdgyth (talk) 00:15, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Gosh, thanks for this detailed analysis! I've tended to assume the Victoria County History volumes were out of copyright now, but I see the BHO licence precludes re-publication without permission. I'll try to convey the probable lack of notability to Buddicca without damping their enthusiasm. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:50, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 May newsletter

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Nigel Fossard

On 13 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nigel Fossard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nigel Fossard did not mention his wife's name in a charter, but did mention the name of the king and queen of England? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nigel Fossard. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Nigel Fossard), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:03, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of General Duke (horse)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article General Duke (horse) 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of General Duke (horse)

The article General Duke (horse) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:General Duke (horse) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of General Duke (horse)

The article General Duke (horse) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:General Duke (horse) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 14:21, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Battle of Cedar Creek

Thank you for reviewing Battle of Cedar Creek. I will try to get to it later today or tomorrow. I may need more of your opinion on some things. For example, when reading about the battle, I wondered why Sheridan (arrived at 10:30) took so long to counterattack (nearly 4:00 pm). That was the reason for blue box under "Early's fatal halt". Perhaps there is a better way to handle it, such as moving it to under "Union counterattack". I have no problem dropping "fatal" from "Early's fatal halt. However, the term "fatal halt" came from Gordon, and historians such as Wert and Bohannon use the term "fatal halt". Otherwise, cool that you have famous Civil War relatives. I am a direct descendant from a simple cavalry bugler. TwoScars (talk) 16:52, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

They are "cousins" (and distant ones at that) rather than descents. The descents are much much less impressive - mostly privates, one home guard older guy, and a runaway child who wanted to be a drummer boy but never even made it to the recruiting station... heh. Take your time - it's an important article and I am not going to fail it if you are working on it even if it takes more than 7 days. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for all your work on Battle of Cedar Creek. I learned some things, and will try cut way back on using the Official Record. Right now, I am working on a small battle with very little written about it, so I am forced to rely on old sources and the Official Record, but in future endeavors I will try to be more current. Also watching the length of articles. TwoScars (talk) 20:42, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

And to some degree ... length is a editorial judgement. Some folks like a lot of background, some folks think lean-and-mean is best. It's always a balancing act! Ealdgyth (talk) 21:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Peter de Maulay

If you'd still like a pre-FAC review of Peter de Maulay, I should have time to take a look in the next week or so. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:33, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Sure. Take your time, I'm not in any hurry. Ealdgyth (talk) 21:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
17	994 (talk)	Add sources
194	Via Francigena (talk)	Add sources
2,703	Edmund Ironside (talk)	Add sources
181	South Carolina Declaration of Secession (talk)	Add sources
263	Occupation of Constantinople (talk)	Add sources
7	Thomas Duffus Hardy (talk)	Add sources
9	Ælfric Puttoc (talk)	Cleanup
43	Vermont in the American Civil War (talk)	Cleanup
71	Amratian culture (talk)	Cleanup
133	Glossary of archaeology (talk)	Expand
333	Kanem–Bornu Empire (talk)	Expand
15	Outline of ancient history (talk)	Expand
90	Ethnic violence (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
10	Walter Devereux (born 1173) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
260	Late modern period (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
26	Pagan Federation (talk)	Merge
32	Tuwana (talk)	Merge
161	Hindu Shahis (talk)	Merge
329	History of Mesopotamia (talk)	Wikify
403	Downy woodpecker (talk)	Wikify
15	Neopaganism in Minnesota (talk)	Wikify
2	Alexander Zozulya (talk)	Orphan
3	Amy Catanzano (talk)	Orphan
3	Abby Robinson (talk)	Orphan
3	Scottish Chieftain (horse) (talk)	Stub
12	Ælfsige (talk)	Stub
5	Cyneweard of Glastonbury (talk)	Stub
3	Ealdred (bishop of Cornwall) (talk)	Stub
2	Ælfwold II (bishop of Crediton) (talk)	Stub
2	Peace Chance (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roger de Valognes

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Roger de Valognes 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 15:00, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roger de Valognes

The article Roger de Valognes you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Roger de Valognes for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 17:20, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roger de Valognes

The article Roger de Valognes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Roger de Valognes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 02:21, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

You might want to see these

[1] and [2] as you have edited Horse. Doug Weller talk 18:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Oh, joys. I love how the caveats and quibbles somehow don't transfer to the actual wikipedia edit... Ealdgyth (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Lol. I thought you might like that. Typical of someone trying to push something. Easier to deal with though than ones I’ve been struggling with in articles about Egyptian DNA and populations. I can’t find any commentary on the new dates. Doug Weller talk 19:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Better you than me on Talk:Population history of Egypt... I looked at it and went "Ugh, I'm LOST!" Ealdgyth (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Lol. Although this gives you a better view of the issues perhaps. Doug Weller talk 14:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Middle Ages and FAR

I am hoping there is just a misunderstanding, but could you provide any feedback at Wikipedia talk:Unreviewed featured articles/2020#Thoughts about non-FAR rewrites? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

My apologies for not having clued in to the extent of the situation at Middle Ages and how that must feel for you and Johnbod, as I selfishly focused only on the URFA/FAR issue re other articles, while packing to leave for the wedding ... I failed to do my homework and pay attention to what you were saying. I'm so sorry to see when something like that happens, and am wondering if I could have/would have responded any differently than you ... by walking away. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Rewriting the Holocaust article

Hi Ealdgyth, I was thinking about doing a total rewrite of this article like I did with the Armenian genocide one. Pretty much the entire Holocaust article could stand to be rewritten based on newer and/or better sources. To ensure balanced coverage, I was planning to base the article on well regarded books that give an overview of the topic, such as the following:

Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews (Longerich, 2010)
Histories of the Holocaust (Stone, 2010)
Why?: Explaining the Holocaust (Hayes, 2017)
Germany's War and the Holocaust (Bartov, 2013)
The Oxford Handbook of Holocaust Studies (2012)
A Companion to the Holocaust (2020)

Since I don't enjoy arguing over every edit, I would plan on drafting the new version of the article in my userspace and then replacing the current article when I'm done with the rewrite. Furthermore, since article topic is based on a definable subject not a term, the article's topic would be "genocide of Jews during World War II" as opposed to "all mass killings by Nazi Germany" (a worthy but distinct article topic, covered collectively in a recent book). I think this distinction would be better served by a hatnote than the current article structure. Does this seem like a workable plan to you? (t · c) buidhe 05:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

I wish you luck. I think you’ll get a lot of pushback, especially changing the focus. We already see a lot of discussion about its scope, and it’ll get worse I suspect if you change it, or try to eliminate everyone’s pet theories…I cleaned it up back a few years ago …it was once a lot worse. But all that got me was grief, so I’ve not pushed further.h I strongly suggest bringing this up on the talk page rather than springing it on folks. Ealdgyth (talk) 10:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Rewriting Nazi concentration camps is more safe and without edit warring. 2001:4455:602:B200:3CFE:C861:16B5:DB35 (talk) 11:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of William Ketel

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article William Ketel 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 Legobot, on behalf of Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 01:21, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zan Parr Bar

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zan Parr Bar 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 Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Quick check on a source...

...is there any indication that this is a reliable source? Related discussion, I am looking to see whether it can be used to source the etymology of Curtis Island (New Zealand) - this one seems reliable but I can't access the critical bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
11	Egidia de Lacy, Lady of Connacht (talk)	Add sources
22	Richard Mór de Burgh, 1st Baron of Connaught (talk)	Add sources
20	Mary of Scotland, Countess of Boulogne (talk)	Add sources
60	Richard Óg de Burgh, 2nd Earl of Ulster (talk)	Add sources
60	De Lacy (talk)	Add sources
8	Isabel de Verdun, Baroness Ferrers of Groby (talk)	Add sources
252	Robert de Brus, 6th Lord of Annandale (talk)	Cleanup
4	Draco Normannicus (talk)	Cleanup
85	Marajoara culture (talk)	Cleanup
7	Vicary Gibbs (St Albans MP) (talk)	Expand
13	LGBT history in Switzerland (talk)	Expand
25	Hermann Langbein (talk)	Expand
13	Sibyl de Neufmarché (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
62	Kvenland (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
353	History of lesbianism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
277	Violence against LGBT people (talk)	Merge
85	Early Buddhism (talk)	Merge
20	Undergrowth (talk)	Merge
9	LGBT history in Kenya (talk)	Wikify
880	Thracians (talk)	Wikify
164	FitzGerald dynasty (talk)	Wikify
9	Humanistic historiography (talk)	Orphan
3	Philippa Mary Hoskin (talk)	Orphan
5	Satan's Harvest Home (talk)	Orphan
9	Ulick Burke, 3rd Earl of Clanricarde (talk)	Stub
6	Lord of Connaught (talk)	Stub
27	Joan of Lancaster (talk)	Stub
5	Richard Burke, 6th Earl of Clanricarde (talk)	Stub
14	ABCB4 (talk)	Stub
4	Richard of Gravesend (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zan Parr Bar

The article Zan Parr Bar you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Zan Parr Bar for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 17:00, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zan Parr Bar

The article Zan Parr Bar you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Zan Parr Bar for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

FA question

Thanks for the GA review of Mary Clarke (letter writer)! I was wondering if an article this short could go to FA, what do you think? I can do a deep dive to make it more comprehensive but it might well already contain all there is about her. Ann Smith (activist) which you also GA reviewed would be another possibility. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

There are shorter FAs - (Miss Meyers, which I wrote, is one) and ones on figures that are obscure (Hygeberht where much of what we know is what we don't know about him... heh), it's a hard jump up from GA-level writing and research to the FA-level. Reviewers look for high quality prose, which I cannot claim to review for. And you need to be up on all the MOS issues and a bunch of other stuff. @Mike Christie and Hog Farm: may have some thoughts or can direct you to someone willing to mentor you if you're interested. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Personally I try not to take anything under 1,000 words to FAC, but that's just my preference, not any kind of rule. Ealdgyth, Mujinga does have one FA under their belt -- Olive Morris. Mujinga, if you want me to do a pre-FAC review I'd be glad to. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

The shortest I've ever taken to FAC is 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which is about twice and long as Clarke. With short articles at FAC, you'll want to make sure that it is absolutely comprehensive, that the prose is very excellent (not my strong suit), and there's much less margin for error. I'm not sure Smith is a good candidate, as a lot of the article seems to be less about Smith herself and more about people who knew Smith, such as the comparatively long discursions about Argyll. Clarke's more likely to pass IMO, but there's not much margin for error in an article with less than 700 words. Hog Farm _Talk 20:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, it's good to know that length itself isn't a barrier and the comments have given me some more to ponder on. Mike Christie I'll prob take you up on that kind offer in future :) Mujinga (talk) 08:24, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Administrator changes

Colin M

David.Monniaux • Fribbler • Grue • Kpjas • West.andrew.g

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversighter changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.

Technical news

The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.

Arbitration

Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of John Crakehall

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Crakehall 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 13:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of John Crakehall

The article John Crakehall you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:John Crakehall for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of John Crakehall

The article John Crakehall you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Crakehall for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 17:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Asaturn editor reported

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov reported by User:Doug Weller (Result: ) Doug Weller talk 20:24, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Galtung (noble family)

Hey, I saw you reverted an IP on Rollo making unsourced family claims. Because of the unsourced edit I checked their edit history and found the article I linked in the subject headline, and they seem to have been adding the same original research, only more substantional as it has gone unchecked for months. In fact there appears to be several IP editors there doing the same thing. I reverted their most recent unsourced edits, and will be taking a look at it more later once I have time, and since you are likely more knowledgeable about the subject than me I was wondering if you wanted to help by taking a look assuming you are able and have the time. On first glance I can see the same claims made about Rollo on the article, unsourced which will be my first step to remove. The issue is that there seems to be way more than that which is either incorrect or original research. The article likely needs a bit of cleanup, if not full reversal to a earlier state. Cheers.

I am not an expert or even very conversant with the various issues of Scandinavian medieval history - the only reason I have Rollo on my watchlist is because of my interest in Anglo-Norman history - I'm not even that interested in pure Norman history. Maybe a TPS can weigh in? @Srnec and Dudley Miles:? Ealdgyth (talk) 16:51, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, this is outside my field. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

That is fair enough, it is a pretty specific article, being limited to one old Norwegian family so I was just kind of trying a shot in the dark asking you. I appreciate you asking some others though, I might be able to find someone who can help in some of the more Scandinavian specific projects. Thanks anyway. TylerBurden (talk) 18:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, out of my wheelhouse too. Srnec (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Working Woman's Barnstar
	For reviewing at least 7 points worth of articles during the January 2022 GAN Backlog Drive, I hereby present you with this barnstar in my capacity as coordinator. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:54, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
1,352	Eadwig (talk)	Add sources
74	Áed mac Cináeda (talk)	Add sources
29	Elias I, Count of Maine (talk)	Add sources
155	Robert M. Price (talk)	Add sources
7	Hugh of Amiens (talk)	Add sources
12	Cultural depictions of William the Conqueror (talk)	Add sources
6	Glasgow Fire Service (talk)	Cleanup
47	Piracy in the Atlantic World (talk)	Cleanup
7	Wold Newton, Lincolnshire (talk)	Cleanup
12	Ottir (talk)	Expand
27	Counties of Iceland (talk)	Expand
11,629	Belgium (talk)	Expand
174	Pan Am Railways (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
35	Visby lenses (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
147	The Lost Vikings (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
195	White Tower (Tower of London) (talk)	Merge
2	Cybistrini (talk)	Merge
32	.zr (talk)	Merge
4	Stevenson Macadam (talk)	Wikify
252	Lamellar armour (talk)	Wikify
64	Trade during the Viking Age (talk)	Wikify
3	Rolandmühle (talk)	Orphan
2	Paramonov Mill (talk)	Orphan
4	Cornelius Vijn (talk)	Orphan
18	Eremburga of Maine (talk)	Stub
465	House of Normandy (talk)	Stub
26	Odo II, Duke of Burgundy (talk)	Stub
7	Hakon Sweynson (talk)	Stub
5	Henry Wingham (talk)	Stub
19	Wilton Castle (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Peter de Maulay pre-FAC review pass done

I've done a pass. No hurry -- I'll be in the UK for three weeks starting the middle of next week, so I won't be able to respond reliably till late June, though I will have my iPad and may have time to edit. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll be busy after the early part of June .. probably. Garden, horses, stepdaughter visiting... summer fun! Enjoy your trip! Ealdgyth (talk) 16:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Cleveland Bay

About to come off of wikibreak within another day or two - I see this horse article (a 2009 FA promotion) had been tagged as disputed. Without asking you to get into any drama, does this one need to be added to the potential FAR list? Hog Farm _Talk 15:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Probably want to ask @Justlettersandnumbers: who placed the tag. He's still around... Ealdgyth (talk) 16:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ealdgyth, thanks for the ping! As far as I recall, Hog Farm, my reason for adding that tag without starting any talk-page discussion was the claim that it is "It is the oldest established horse breed in England", already challenged twice on the talk-page, in 2011 and 2013. However, the page probably needs a fairly comprehensive overhaul. For example, a statement that "the breed has experienced a resurgence in popularity since the 1970s" does not really chime with a total reported population world-wide of 43. Regards to both, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Tamworth

Could you contribute at Talk:Tamworth, Staffordshire#Vikings sacked Tamworth? Dudley Miles (talk) 22:33, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

FA sources

Hi! I am planning to take Louis H. Bean, a short biography of a pollster, to FAC sometime in future. I have probably used most of the scholarly sources available. One of the source I use is this, an interview of Bean by Jerry N. Hess. It does have lot of information on his career, but I have not used it extensively as it is after all an interview. I don't want the article to be "Louis H. Bean by Louis H. Bean". Would that be an issue for comprehensiveness and/or sourcing during the FAC? Do you have any other suggestion on sourcing or anything? Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

At a very quick glance, nothing looks horrid there. I'm eye-ball deep into the Core Contest, so I don't have a lot of time to spend looking at it - and frankly, New Deal isn't exactly my topic area .. heh. It's not screaming "horridly sourced" at me at least... sorry for the brevity. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Walter de Gray

Hello! I'm pleased to tell you that I've begun reviewing the article Walter de Gray you nominated for GA-status, according to the criteria. This process may take up to seven days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I've left a handful of exceedingly small points on the review page. Tim riley talk 12:29, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I saw but it's Saturday morning here which is "take the trash to the dumpster" morning so it'll be a couple of hours... Ealdgyth (talk) 12:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, the old boy has waited eight hundred years, and another couple of hours won't hurt him. Tim riley talk 13:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sigeric (archbishop)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sigeric (archbishop) 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 Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 13:00, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sigeric (archbishop)

The article Sigeric (archbishop) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sigeric (archbishop) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Walter de Gray

The article Walter de Gray you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Walter de Gray for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Congrats in person. I too have a Lord Chancellor up for GAN, but he wasn't also Archbishop of York, but Lord High Executioner and a modern major-general. We shall see how he fares in comparison with Walter. Would you be comfortable with my reviewing Sigeric and/or Robert of Bridlington, or would that seem too many reviews by one reviewer of a fellow editor's GANs? Tim riley talk 18:22, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't have issues with your reviewing more of mine. I often review articles from the same person... after a while, it's hard to avoid. Ealdgyth (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Good. But after Sigeric I really think I'd better leave Robert of Bridlington to another reviewer. Tim riley talk 20:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Ealdgyth/Archive 92,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:40, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| June 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
23	Henryk Mandelbaum (talk)	Add sources
122	Transnistria Governorate (talk)	Add sources
92	Miklós Nyiszli (talk)	Add sources
18	Roza Robota (talk)	Add sources
114	The Holocaust in Hungary (talk)	Add sources
46	Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation (talk)	Add sources
122	Proto-Indo-European society (talk)	Cleanup
17	History of the English fiscal system (talk)	Cleanup
79	Antisemitism and the New Testament (talk)	Cleanup
17	Reichsuniversität Straßburg (talk)	Expand
105	Indian maritime history (talk)	Expand
285	Zahi Hawass (talk)	Expand
64	Thunderstone (folklore) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
9	De donis conditionalibus (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
195	Evidence and documentation for the Holocaust (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
322	Occupation of Poland (1939–1945) (talk)	Merge
318	Kapo (talk)	Merge
24	Prisoner functionary (talk)	Merge
101	Battle of Largs (talk)	Wikify
249	Race and sexuality (talk)	Wikify
363	Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service (talk)	Wikify
5	Ka-Nefer-Nefer (talk)	Orphan
3	Bridge County (talk)	Orphan
1	Asahel Thomson (talk)	Orphan
9	We Wept Without Tears (talk)	Stub
30	Kars dog (talk)	Stub
7	Rose Meth (talk)	Stub
31	The Drowned and the Saved (talk)	Stub
22	Brzezinka (talk)	Stub
5	Jack Fischel (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rohese Giffard

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rohese Giffard 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 Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 09:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)