User talk:Remsense

July music

story · music · places

The story is today about the first published composition by Arnold Schönberg which I was blessed to hear. Listen, and perhaps read what Alma Mahler (to-be-Mahler at the time, to be precise, who was present at the first performance) said, and yes that was too much for the Main page ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Today's story is about a Bach cantata premiered 300 years ago OTD. - A meeting of two women - the occasion of the cantata - is pictured in our local church. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

3 July is the birthday of Leoš Janáček, and I'm happy I had a meaningful DYK in 2021. It's also the birthday of Franz Kafka, and I uploaded pics from his family's album seen in Berlin. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Libuše Domanínská, the subject of yesterday's story, would have turned 100 today, but I missed that ;) - Overnight, Tamara Milashkina became GA and Lando Bartolini went to the Main page. I made my story about his almost unbelievable career, from Luigi in Il tabarro in Philadelphia in 1968 (with a nod to Liberty) up to Calaf in Turandot in Beijing in 1999 ;) - 4 July is also the birthday of Brian Boulton who was a pioneer of a concise infobox in 2013. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Pictured on the Main page: Brian's Mozart family grand tour, my story today, and Mozart related to all three items of music on my talk: our 2023 concert, an opera in a theatre where a Mozart premiere took place, and those remembered, Martti Wallén, a bass, and Liana Isakadze, a violinist from Georgia (whose article would be better with more details about her music-making). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

My story today is - because of the anniversary of the premiere OTD in 1782 - 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, - so 3 times Mozart again if you click on "music" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for improving article quality in July! - Today's story is about a photographer who took iconic pictures, especially View from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Manhattan, 9/11, yesterday's was a great mezzo, and on Thursday we watched a sublime ballerina. If that's not enough my talk offers chamber music from two amazing concerts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the cherished message on my talk! - I have a Bach cantata and three musicians who died on the Main page, so am busy and thus brief. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Reverting an Edit

Could you please elaborate as to why you reverted my edit? The name of the subject is Ngô Đình Diệm and thus, I changed every instance of 'Diem' to 'Diệm'. GeoGuru32 (talk) 13:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Generally it's best to use the form of a name that is also the corresponding article title. It's a bit of a mess with Vietnamese article titles though, so I don't blame anyone for trying their best. Remsense诉 20:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I see. Alrighty, thank you. GeoGuru32 (talk) 20:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) comment: I am surprised by this view. IMO, GeoGuru32 was correct and their edit should have been allowed to stand. For technical reasons, article titles often dispense with diacritics that need complex combining codes, but know of no policy that says the the body must do likewise. We should not needlessly get orthography wrong. I can't summon up any examples right now but I am certain that there are quite a few cases where necessary errors in the article name are clarified in the body. Remsense, I think you should reconsider. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 07:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Technical reasons are not why Vietnamese articles are (or should be) titled as they are: that would presumably be WP:NC like with any other article. This is an English-language encyclopedia, there are only orthographic errors in the context of English orthography in running text. Remsense诉 14:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@JMF I don't know how to thank on a talk page, so I'll type a message instead.

Thank you very much! GeoGuru32 (talk) 09:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Parameter normalization

Some of the things I noticed:

• When there are multiple authors, this script removes the 1's from the first one and moves the others to the end of the citation. They belong together, and the juxtaposition 1/2/3 is clearer.
• Some editors (including me) find |surname= and |given= easier to keep straight than |last= and |first= when dealing with a mix of Western and East Asian names.
• |postscript= logically belongs at the end.

But most of what it does is impose the script author's stylistic choices, contrary to the usual principle of not switching between acceptable styles. Kanguole 17:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Understood, thanks for making the difference in preference more clear to me. Remsense诉 17:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Here is an example of Citation bot restoring the 1's removed from parameter names by ProveIt. It's a recipe for eternal robot wars. Kanguole 10:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Did you mean: eternal robot wars? Folly Mox (talk) 11:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That sort of thing, yes, though in this case both bots are user-triggered. In theory, the editors triggering them take responsibility for the edits, but in practice they never do. Kanguole 11:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Kanguole sorry for burdening you about silly style stuff repeatedly—I'm trying to be a bit more communicative about this stuff—it seems you strongly prefer the hyphenation of ISBNs as given in the source, right? Just so I know what rule I'm following. Remsense诉 09:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

The placement of hyphens (if present) is specified by the ISBN standard (see ISBN#Overview). You can get the full data here – select "pdf sorted by prefix". Various conversion tools are available, but it may be simplest to use {{format ISBN}} – this template is supposed to be subst'd, but subst doesn't work inside citation (and other) templates, so you can just use {{format ISBN|9780123456789}} and a bot will do the replacement soon enough. Kanguole 10:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I had absolutely no idea this was the case—thanks for teaching me something as well! Remsense诉 10:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

And thank you for showing me the easy way to fix it...I'm just going to write to e script first because I suddenly have a lot of backtracking to do to remedy my unbeknownst-to-me bad behavior. Live and learn. Remsense诉 10:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Correction: the bug with subst: is only inside <ref>...</ref> tags – it works just fine in a separate list of citations. Kanguole 11:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisting discussions

Hi Remsense! I saw you relisted Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Religion in China Redux, which you nominated. Please be mindful that relisting is supposed to be left to WP:UNINVOLVED editors, which you were quite clearly not in this instance. Just something to be careful of in the future. Best, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Goodness, I feel I'm messing up constantly lately! Thank you, this somehow didn't occur to me. Remsense诉 03:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

A bit of help

Hi Remsense, hope you're having a great day! In June a tragic and deadly stabbing occurred in Suzhou, of a person targetting Japanese national leaving the Japanese School of Suzhou. A Japanese mother and child was injured, saved from almost certain death by a Chinese woman who died protecting them. The whole event made a huge wind of attention in China when it occurred, partially due to the nature of the attack but also the rhetoric by netizens.
I expected an English page to be made soonish after the events, however, that wasn't the case, with no page even now. I feel like this page is very important to have but I don't know if I have the ability or even mental strength to create/translate this page from Chinese. Could you be so kind to translate it, or inform someone who can? Thank you very very much. (here's the page in Chinese btw, or just search up 2024 Suzhou stabbing) Zinderboff(talk) 20:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I will absolutely take a look. Thank you for making me aware of this. Remsense诉 20:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

There should be no shortage of RS for this article. Apart from Chinese and Japanese sources, a quick search shows articles from CNN BBC The Guardian etc.
Again, thank you for this, the whole affair really made me sad and lose hope in humanity a bit more than before. But I really shouldn't be surprised, though, seeing I too was taught since a child that the "Japanese were devils and the pinnacle of evil and destruction". Zinderboff(talk) 21:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I usually don't write about current events at all, but I've got something started at User:Remsense/2024 Suzhou knife attack—feel free to add to it. I'm going to try and suppress my usual perfectionism with my drafting so I can get this published promptly. Remsense诉 22:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm currently polishing the mess that was the translated material I dumped on the draft, along with adding sources. Please check later for further issues, thanks! Zinderboff(talk) 16:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, sorry about further delays—I think this is adequate to publish, lest I spend more time gilding the lily. I've gone ahead and moved it to mainspace. Remsense诉 18:37, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Remsense, Hope you're having a great day! I have no idea for I never looked into DYKs much, but does this article match the requirements for a DYK entry/nomination? A quick look at the rules makes it feels like it does fit the guidelines though I'm not 100% sure, and if it does fulfill the DYK would you like to nominate it? Thanks! Zinderboff(talk) 05:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Just FYI

Hi Remsense, I have seen that you have reached 3RR in Bali. Following good practice, I don't template the regulars, but I'd better mention it (in passing). The actual purpose of my "visit" is to give you an idea who you are dealing with: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/YilevBot. In a few days, we will be able to handle all the mess they produce with WP:BANREVERT and without having to worry about 3RR then :) Keep up the great work you're doing in Wikipedia, seeing your contributions in article and talk space is always a delight. Cheers! Austronesier (talk) 10:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

That really meant a lot, thank you. It's not unique to me, but I find myself not at my best when I feel I'm not contributing my best. Kind remarks like yours really help one refocus on what matters. Remsense诉 12:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

ask

Hello How do I ensure that the photos we upload on Wikicomons are not subject to copyvio? because most of the photos I get come from certain sites, I surrender.. I Kadékk Gilang (talk) 06:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

You have not taken those photos, you do not have the right to rerelease them under a free license for use on Commons. I recommend taking a closer read of what the form on Commons is trying to tell you while you're uploading, and see the pages it links to regarding free media. A helpful page is Commons:Copyright rules. Remsense诉 06:43, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Reversion

Please explain how my edit does not warrant inclusion, who is to say you are the ultimate source of what does or does not warrant inclusion. It is a noteworthy fact and much more obscure adaptations are included in the article. Please consider undoing your edit as I enjoyed writing it and feel you have no reason to discredit it. HagenBradley (talk) 07:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Generally we discuss content on article talk pages, so that all editors interested may have a say. Remsense诉 07:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright man. HagenBradley (talk) 07:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Odoacer dispute

Hello,

Wanting to move our brief discussion the other day over my attempted edit on Odoacer#King of Italy here- I'm not seeing why listing the de jure and de facto status of Odoacer's polity is necessarily redundant. By that logic, wouldn't everything else in the infobox also be redundant, since these things are already mentioned in the article? Evaporation123 (talk) 05:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Personally I do find manually added de jure / de facto stuff highly tiresome, as if we don't have English phrases that can be employed to the same effect. I agree with Remsense in this case that de facto independent is redundant, since de jure under suzerainty implies independence in practice. If there were another polity that was the one with actual control over the one in the infobox, while lip service was paid to the Eastern Roman Empire, that would be non-obvious to warrant inclusion IMO. Kindly, Folly Mox (talk) 14:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Revert culture

Hey Remsense!

Checking to see if you are still alive and have not choked to death from boredom like I almost did reading about the church controversies in Kaldellis's new history. :-) Related to that, I do appreciate how you keep a close eye on the fly-by edits on the Byzantine Empire page as it's constant!

There was one that you reverted today where someone added that it was an autocracy. We had a similar discussion on the Roman Empire talk recently and several of us agreed autocracy is correct. My goal is we should try to keep these two articles in sync (for obvious reasons), but even if you didn't know that, we should also to strive for clear consensus on all topics when we revert and encourage people to bring it up in Talk if they disagree as it's worth a discussion. Regardless, I agreed with the revert this is more about creating a more positive editing culture by being more explcit. Thank you for your contributions! Biz (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh, alright! My bad, thanks for letting me know. Likewise, thank you for your contributions. I've decided lately to impose a stricter 2RR on myself, or at least talk quicker. :)Remsense诉 21:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Glossary of Taoism

Hello, Remsense. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Glossary of Taoism".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

A heads up

Hi Remsense, hope you're having a great day. Just a heads up that I've nominated the Suzhou knife attack article for DYK. This is my first nom so I have no idea if I messed it up or not. Cheers! Zinderboff(talk) 11:05, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey, cheers! Looks totally fine to me. Truth be told, I feel a teensy bit nervous about having my writing about such a sensitive event be promoted on the Main Page, but I only say that with the trust that it doesn't at all come off like a discouragement or anything like that, I'm glad you went and did it! Remsense诉 12:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I attributed you as the primary author (whatever the thing is called when submitting the DYK nom). Is that alright? Cheers! Zinderboff(talk) 15:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

That's fine! Remsense诉 15:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Dictionary of Chinese Character Variants

Hello, Remsense. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Dictionary of Chinese Character Variants, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Glossary of the Chinese language and writing system

Hello, Remsense. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Glossary of the Chinese language and writing system, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Wars of the Roses revert

Dear Remsense,

I had just made an edit to the sidebar for the Wars of the Roses page, adding a note specifying that the House of Tudor was supported by Yorkists, which was reverted - I know this small clarification might seem unnecessary but I really think it adds very relevant and appropriate clarity. Without the note, it inaccurately makes it seem like Henry Tudor was against the House of York (rather than against one faction of it) and that his victory was just another episode of Lancastrians vs Yorkists - which is very much not the case on close examination of the belligerents.

As historian Rosemary Horrox puts it in Richard III (2020): "the opposition which brought down Richard III was not a reactivation of the Wars of the Roses, although the choice of figurehead might make it seem so. It was more truly a violent splintering of the House of York, which fatally divided the Yorkist polity far beyond any rifts that might have been caused previously by hostility to the family of Edward IV’s queen. Simply put, the former servants of Edward IV rejected his brother’s seizure of power."

Further, A.J. Pollard writes in The Wars of the Roses (1988): "Unlike Edward IV or Richard III, [Henry VII] did not come to the throne at the head of a powerful indigenous affinity. He led an ill-matched coalition of die-hard Lancastrians and excluded Edwardian Yorkists. He was the adopted head of the remnant of Edward IV's household" 92.29.56.96 (talk) 16:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Of course there's no dispute that it's verifiable fact, but the issue is that infoboxes are not meant to contain every nuance of the topic. A rule of thumb is if it needs a footnote, it should probably remain in the prose of the article where it can be properly explained, and not in the infobox, which is for key facts at a glance. Remsense诉 16:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

okay, thank you for your response! 92.29.56.96 (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtfulness! Welcome to Wikipedia. Remsense诉 16:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Zhuangzi filial piety

Hello, I won't object to your removal but do you happen to know a better source discussing filial piety in the Zhuangzi? Even if it doesn't belong in that section, it came to my attention because I was researching it. So it's still relevant for me. If we can come up with better sources, we can make a section on filial piety.FourLights (talk) 12:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I could not tell you off the top of my head: I will investigate my sources the next time I'm actively working on that article. I have been slowly trying to fill out the "themes and analysis" parts so that will certainly have a place, but I've really been dragging my heels since it's nigh impossible for me to figure out how to structure discussion that includes both work done in the context of western philosophy, and work done in a Chinese tradition that simply doesn't work in concepts of "metaphysics" and "epistemology" Remsense诉 12:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Roman military awards

Hello! I noticed you made some reverts with respect to my edits on several pages regarding Roman military awards, specifically for Marcus Agrippa & Crassus.

While I understand your reasoning per your explanation in the edit log of Crassus, would that then apply to the following pages: Julius Caesar, Pompey, Scipio Aemilianus, Gaius Marius, Sulla, Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus, Aulus Atilius Caiatinus, Metellus Pius, Scipio Nasica Corculum, Gaius Duilius, Fabius Maximus, Pompey Strabo, Titus Quinctius Flamininus, Gaius Sosius, & Publius Ventidius. In particular, I noticed you've made recent edits to Pompey and Gaius Marius and did not make the same objections for those pages.

Just asking for further clarification on the matter. Thank you! User:Reviewer1830 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC) Just asking for further clarification on the matter. Thank you! Reviewer1830 (talk)

Hey! I would say those articles have the same issue. Editors get jaded with this stuff very quickly, as many (all?) articles are flawed in a number of ways, and we can't fix or even notice them all, so we often only fix individual things we notice in individual articles, leaving new editors confused at the inconsistency. Cf. WP:OTHERCONTENT. The key is getting a feel for the underlying principles, which we all struggle with at first. Cheers! Remsense诉 13:21, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

DCWC August update

The 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest has now been running for a month, and we've already seen some momentous improvement in the quality of many articles about underrepresented subjects! So far, our top-scoring participants are:

• Magentic Manifestations (submissions) – 338 points, mainly from nine good articles. He's a contender for the "most submissions for a single country" specialty award, with nine submissions for India.
• Arconning (submissions) – 305 points, including from six seasonally-appropriate Olympics-related good articles.
• Generalissima (submissions) – 290 points, the bulk from her featured article about Greenlandic interpreter Qalaherriaq and two China-related good articles.
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) – 245 points, mostly from the achievement of bringing Genghis Khan to featured status.
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) – 144 points from three good articles, including two about Kiribati elections, and four reviews of good article nominees.

Looking for ways to climb up the leaderboard yourself? Help out your fellow participants by answering a few review requests, particularly the older entries. Several more nominations needing attention are listed at eligible reviews, and highlighed entries receive a 1.5× multiplier! The coordinators would like to extend a special thanks to Thebiguglyalien (submissions) for his commitment to keeping these review pages up to date.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 14:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on Thought experiment

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Thought experiment, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Bludgeon

You may also need to read wp:bludgeon, I can hardley tell them and not tell you. Slatersteven (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Certainly. I've said my piece, but it definitely was 5 replies overdue. Remsense诉 14:52, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Soooo

Where do we go from here? As far as i can tell there are still multiple issues that never really got answered.

Closing admin only seemed interested in one of them so that didn't really got anywhere Trade (talk) 21:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

? Trade (talk) 04:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't really know enough about this situation in particular, and no one else seemed much convinced of the utility of a general RfC a la the 2010 one, so I am afraid I don't have much more to contribute to this. Remsense诉 22:21, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit conflicts

I'm done editing my comment regarding "Socio-linguistic register" or whatever.

Sorry for the repeated edit conflicts. Jruderman (talk) 04:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

No problem! Remsense诉 04:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

feedback

I request that you help me consider whether there might not be a better arrangement for the data in my first three sections. At the moment I will try creating a third section. Or send someone you consider even-minded. Thank you.FourLights (talk) 15:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look ASAP. Remsense诉 22:20, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

African language oral literature

You very hastily undid an edit when I was STILL WORKING on the Hausa article. I have several important oral literature references to add, starting with proverbs and also Hausa folktales. I have been adding oral literature sections to African language articles for the past several weeks as you can see on my user page. The point of using PUBLIC DOMAIN sources is so that they can be consulted by others and used for AI language training, etc. The availability of Hausa texts in the public domain is especially important, and the Hausa language article is a logical place to put those references, as I have been doing for Zulu, Swahili, etc. I hope you will please engage in a dialogue with me before you delete the content I added to the Hausa article. I had just prepared the Robinson material when you deleted my work. I restored the work, included the Robinson material, and will now wait until I hear from you; thank you. Laurakgibbs (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC) I see that you again deleted my content without engaging in a dialogue with me. I don't think you are folklorist, and I think you do not understand the importance of orature (proverbs, etc.) in documenting the history of African languages. Please reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurakgibbs (talk • contribs) 23:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't revert your edit a second time. I stated my reasons in the edit summary; if you're still working on material that is in an incomplete state (i.e. pure primary source information and quotes without secondary or tertiary analysis, as is what we provide on an encyclopedia), it's best to do so in your sandbox rather than on the article itself, as other editors may not know you're still working on it. Remsense诉 23:52, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

It's been my practice to do the edits one reference at a time to make dispute resolution easier, but I can certainly do all the references at once and edit the article in one go if that is what editors prefer.

But the main issue is this: your reasons for deleting the content do not make sense in the context of African language studies, for the reasons I explained (and those are just a few of the main reasons; this is a complex and important topic, and I can explain in as much detail as you would like) -- I see the Hausa oral literature section is back; does that mean I can continue to add the oral literature sources that I have collected for Hausa? I will add them all at once if that is the preferred practice.

I hope there will not be any further problems re: oral literature additions to African language articles; if you do have questions, I am glad to answer them.

Thank you. Laurakgibbs (talk) 23:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

We are an encyclopedia, we publish tertiary analysis based on secondary sources. We do not include original research, and our use of primary sources is very limited. Please keep that in mind, as these topics are important but do not require original research. I understand well that oral tradition is inherently distinct from written tradition, but Wikipedia is not capable of communicating the former without it being mediated by the latter, I'm afraid. Remsense诉 00:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

The sources I am citing ARE research, ethnographical research conducted by anthropologists, missionaries, colonial officials, etc. who put the language material IN CONTEXT, providing translations, commentary, etc.

Some of the articles I have edited had random proverbs from random websites, and I have left that content there (although that is the kind of content I think would be eligible for deletion based on your criteria), but the whole point is that I am adding secondary sources which can be consulted online at the Internet Archive. Laurakgibbs (talk) 00:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

The concern is that the research in this particular is over a century old, which is borderline unacceptable for a straightforward analysis without more recent sourcing. Standards and methods of research, as well as the applicability of the information itself change over time. Remsense诉 00:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Since you moved the convo to my user talk page, I have replied there to your more recent comments. I am keeping in mind the tradeoffs here; I appreciate your concern, but I am still confident that this Internet-Archive-based project to systematically add oral literature references to the African language articles will be a step forward in this area of Wikipedia that is very much in need of additional references. Laurakgibbs (talk) 20:49, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

American Left - moved

Could you please reverse your move of American Left to American left which was made on an uncontroversial technical request.

As stated in the Foreign Policy Research Institute style guide, which is based on the University of Chicago Press’s Chicago Manual of Style: "Political groupings other than parties are usually lowercased: independents; right wing; leftist. But: the Right, the Left." Other style guides are consistent with this usage.[1]

Note that MOS:IDEOLOGY, the reason for the move, says that ideologies should be in lower case, but the Left is not an ideology. In any case, it is a guideline not a policy, so editors could determine that other factors apply.

Any move request should have been posted to the article talk page as two previous requests were.

Thanks.

TFD (talk) 20:40, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Totally my bad. Thank you for letting me know. Remsense诉 20:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I greatly appreciate that. TFD (talk) 18:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Jomon people

My edit regarding the affinities between prehistoric Chinese peoples and Jomon and subsequently, descendants of the former, doesn't seem at all objectionable and is backed by recent genetic studies. AngelusVastator3456 (talk) 04:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Then it should be easy to gain consensus for the additions at Talk:Jomon people. Remsense诉 04:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey! A little help on Talk:Colombia

Hey, I have noticed you re pretty active on Wikipedia and have spoken with one of the users who submitted n edit request, I was wondering if you could make the two edit requests on the talk page. Teotzin190 (talk) 04:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Taking a look! Remsense诉 04:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

August music

story · music · places

Today I have two "musicians" on the Main page, one is also the topic of my story, watch and listen, - I like today's especially because you see him at work, hear him talk about his work and the result of his work - rare! - I have a Bach cantata open as GAN, BWV 101, turning 300 on 13 August. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)