User talk:Gerda Arendt

to the memory
of the scuttled,
the banned
and those who have just given up

Did you know ...

• ... that Bach set Johann Gramann's hymn "Nun lob, mein Seel, den Herren" in a cantata reflecting the end of the year with praise?
• ... that A Boy was Born (pictured), the first major vocal composition by Benjamin Britten, received its premiere in 1934 as a BBC broadcast?
• ... that the song "Ermutigung" by Wolf Biermann, encouraging people not to become hardened in hard times, was written for Peter Huchel, then under house arrest?

Welcome!

Hello, Gerda Arendt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Graham Waterhouse, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted. ... --> Again, welcome! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Archive of 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013

Go Gerda Girl

You do great work and I love it! Don't let Tony get to you. Ihre Arbeit ist grossartig. Weiter schreiben, eien lange Zeit. PS, I really liked the article about the church the communists blew up. BarkingMoon (talk) 11:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC) Sehr geehrte Gerda, I have a watch on your page since a few weeks ago. I approved and moved 167 to holding for June 24.BarkingMoon (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Keine Problem. Koennen Sie ueberpruefen DYK Noel F. Parrish? Danke. BarkingMoon (talk) 12:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Later, yes, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

See my talk page. Thanks so much! BarkingMoon (talk) 11:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

On 30 December 2011 the article became a GA, thanks to Ched, PumpkinSky and MathewTownsend, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Flowers and sapphires

blushing

Flowers! Wonderful comment For your wonderful comment, cutting right to the heart of the matter! cmadler (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC) For a true gem of a person ... words of reason and trust To quote you: Thank you for speaking up with decency and fairness, treating editors as living people, — Ched :  ?  15:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC) almost forgot one thing The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar For being one of the nicest people I know, on-Wiki or off. 184.59.31.77 (talk) 18:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC) (Khazar) Cherry Impact event barnstar The Cherry Impact Event Award I hereby award Gerda Arendt this Cherry Impact Event Award for the global impact your incredibly delightful sweetness and extraordinary talent brings to all of us! . – Dreadstar † 07:01:00, 4 March 2012 (UTC) Standing Strong When the Ill Winds Blow No Good I saw this image and thought of you and all you've done to help PS and Khazar. You are a bastion of refuge when the storm clouds come in, and I for one would like to thank you. Don't worry about people talking behind your back - as they say, "sticks and stones". Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC) uh, a tree for you Tree award? These have to be "awards"? Hi, Gerda. I was editing Desivojca, and it has this nice tree photo from the "Komani neighborhood", so I figured it should be seen more. Enjoy. Alarbus (talk) 15:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC) I do, I love trees! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC) A barnstar for you! The Teamwork Barnstar Thank you so much for your help fixing up "Move Like This"! Your kindness and expertise is greatly appreciated! 28bytes (talk) 18:06, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Thank you! My pleasure, for a change: „Keep on Knocking“, „Sad Song“, „Free“, „Drag on Forever“, „Just What I Needed“ - just what I needed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:26, 17 March 2012 (UTC) The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence I am pleased to award this MBE to you in recognition of your outstanding work on Wikipedia. Your numerous DYKs have achieved the noble goal of highlighting culture on the Main Page. Your work with other users is exemplary, and you're one of the nicest Wikipedians, always supporting and encouraging other users. Thanks for all of your superb contributions! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC) Thank you! - I was tempted to say "Blushing", but every time I say so the user is gone a week later, I don't want to miss you also ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:19, 28 October 2012 (UTC) ps: I would like to share this award with my br'er Rabbit, the incarnation of selfless service to this project ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Your not saying it seems to have worked – it's been a week and I'm still here! I just finished my latest article (my first in a long time). It's about an artist who was born and raised in Germany and was very interested in music. For some reason, that made me think of you.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC) I didn't say it, as much as I was tempted! - Thanks for staying with me, and for the article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC) Knock on wood, as I blushed as well recently ;) Muggeseggele is still facing extinction while the Mans parking was guided so well to DYK by our fairy maiden - Glückauf Serten (talk) 10:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC) You found #1, I blushed three more times, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC) First ever Wiki Angel Award The Wiki Angel Award Gerda, es macht mich glücklich, dir den ersten Wiki Angel Award geben. Du bist ein true Wiki Angel und feine Dame.PumpkinSky talk 18:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC) This is awesome ... wish I would have thought of it. :) — Ched :  ?  18:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC) Thank you!!! (blushing again, see above) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC) ... I'd make a Wikilove thingy ... ... with a pretty picture, but I'm lazy so instead you'll have to settle for text" Barnstar Hi Gerda, I saw your note on my talk page. Thanks for the kind words, and for being so refreshingly pleasant and un-bitter all the time. An inspiration to us all. I'm sure I'll see you around eventually, but probably won't be for a while yet. Enjoying my time away. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC) I enjoy refreshing apparitions, also I am in a good mood, after singing Bach for more than two hours, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

nice edit notice ;)

• http://wikipediocracy.com/
• http://wikipediocracy.com/2012/10/31/tis-the-season-to-be-banning-at-wikipedia/

• Mads Lange

A Halloween present from Wikipediocracy on my eighth anniversary. Best wishes. Mads Lange (talk) 09:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

'tis the season

nice comment, peace maker - I pass free treats today, Reformation, even the Bach cantata got a pumpkin + I like sharing, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

peace GA ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I'm not by there very often, but today I saw the recent kerfluffle at AN/I and thought you could use some sweets. Lest you think this is all selfless, though, I brought a second fork. Care to split it? -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:33, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, sweet of you, - I would share with Andy first if his doctors allow. Day by day I hope the thread autoarchives (havn't looked today), - I am sure his doctors allow no stress ;) . Did you see the list of 18 discussions "drowning" a project? - Everybody who takes an unbiased look is welcome to share the baklava! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Infobox request

Work your magic, if you have a few minutes: A Song for Simeon.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. Did you know that Simeon is among my images? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Infoboxes clarification request archived

Hi Gerda, the infoboxes clarification request in which you were named as a party has been closed and archived. The Committee clarified that acting on behalf of a restricted user to breach a restriction is WP:PROXYING and so is not permitted. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:PROXYING, which is a policy says "Wikipedians in turn are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned editor (sometimes called proxy editing or proxying) unless they are able to show that the changes are either verifiable or productive and they have independent reasons for making such edits" (my emphasis). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jahrhundertring

The DYK project (nominate) 17:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Really glad to see this cultural milestone make it into the encyclopedia and onto the front page too. Well done! Whiteghost.ink (talk) 03:19, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, see my memories :) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

nothing secret here

Hello Gerda, nice to meet you. Are you really the Notorious Infoboxen WikiCriminal that has been terrorizing the music articles?  :-)   As you can see from my first posting on AGK's talkpage, up above the duromac thing, I am *also* a notorious wikiCriminal. Or at least, notoriously silly (AGK blocked me -- then later unblocked me -- when they mistook one of my not-all-that-funny jokes over on the Bishzilla talkpage).

But my actual question for you is this -- I did not really understand your reply to me.

(watching) Simply thank you! (I would use the button, but it doesn't work for IP. Also there's nothing secret here.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, okay, I understood the watchlist part, and the thank-you part. You are surely welcome. <bows>

But what button and what secret thing are you referring to? I do login as an IP, of course (you can call me 74 if you like), but User_talk:Clover1991 has registered a pseudonym; they are the one submitting the article, not me. Maybe the link to the 'secret' thing in my message was was confusing -- it is just a pokemon character, one of many not-very-notable-toys which has a long article in mainspace, badly in need of cleanup, and short on reliable sources. The pokeman-article is not related to the Duromac thing, directly, I was just using it as a metaphorical example of how wimpy our deletionist-standards are when something is 'popular' to some degree in the english-speaking-world. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

74, nice to meet you! (Feels like Lohengrin, no real name ;) - But then I'm a friend of 28bytes, also no real name but heart and reason.) - First: yes, I am the terrorizing witch, only nobody told me so far what that terror is, I see no evidence, hear only echoes of former wars. You enter a battleground: you are a warrior, - easy. Sparrow Mass: after gracing seven Schubert masses with an infobox I continued with Mozart, interesting story followed ;) - Now to your question: between registered users, there's a function where you simply click a button for an edit and have thanked the editor who made it, and it's more or less secret between the two. Sometimes I use it where I would not do it in public ;) - I wanted to thank you for your diligent research and the way to present it, I watch AGK since this, more recently this, - the former was more fun ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Appreciate your thank-you, kind and gracious humanoid. 74 does count as a name of sorts; think of it as a jersey number.  :-)   Since I am an outsider, and have only heard rumors of the Dread Infoboxen Wars, you should take my nutshell explanation with a grain of salt...

infoboxen oh nohz!

The story seems to be, that some editors who are very particular about *appearances* (the visual layout of the article and the style of how wikipedia appears to the readership) ended up annoyed at infoboxen *generally* as too data-oriented or too formal or too something, long before your arrival. So, when you came along with your wikithusiasm for spreading tightly-summarized knowledge, these visually-oriented editors mistook your love of the readership, with a crime of passion! <gasp> Personally, I never read the infoboxen, except in articles about chemicals, in which case I often *only* read the infobox-data. There is a new project, called WikiData, that has the potential to satisfy both yourself (e.g. there can be wikidata that the composer was born in YYYY that is easily accessible to readers *without* necessarily changing the page-layout) and the visually-oriented style-conscious editors; it is still in beta phase, and seeing the shape of what it will become is difficult at this point, but I have high hopes.   Anyways, what it boils down to, is an *artistic* argument about aesthetics: does the page LOOK COOLER without the infoboxen, or with the infoboxen? As with any argument about looking fashionable, there is always going to be more heat than light, more noise than signal, and so on. The arbcom decision to make infoboxen illegal, and you a notorious wikiCriminal, was a deeply flawed pragmatically-motivated attempt to keep talkpage decorum, to end the endless aesthetically-motivated edit-wars, and in general decide the fashion-question by fiat. The problem is that they ended up compromising our deepest principle, the encyclopedia anyone can edit, which boils down to Liberty. (The second, unstated, half of the principle was also run over with a tank: Liberty and wikiJustice for all.)

You can see the same kind of respect-my-authoritah problems elsewhere, with the ever-growing list of Arbitrarily Enforced Discretionary Sanction topics (which will soon cover half of mainspace), the ever-growing list of semi-protected pages (the encyclopedia only Real Contributors can edit), and in so many other ways. The rising authoritarianism is deadly[1] to wikipedia... growth in active editor-count ceased years ago,[2] and has been steadily declining since. WMF has proven they are unable to help us,[3] so we have to solve this one ourselves.[4] Part of the *motivation* for draconian pragmatic arbcom decisions that violate the-encyclopedia-anyone-can-edit, is purely and simply that no arbcom member, no admin, and few semi-admins-using-twinkle-huggle-stiki-reviewer-rollbacker-etc can spare the time to follow the five pillars. They are busy-busy, rushing from fire to fire, and there are no reinforcements coming, whilst the readership grows and grows and grows.

retention oh yehz!

This busy-busy crap leads to brusqueness, template-spam on user talkpages, ban-hammer first then let somebody else sort out the bodies, and most damagingly to aristocratic cliques and an us-versus-them caste-system wikiCulture. Worst of all, it is a vicious cycle where we shoot ourselves in the foot, every single day: nobody spares the time to be nice to beginners, so they leave, wikipedia is no damn fun. That means we'll *never* get reinforcements, we'll *never* be less busy-busy, we'll *always* suffer from steadily declining WP:RETENTION.   Okay, enough whining: I am quite sure the problems can be fixed. We need to have a vast influx of new blood, and the only way to do that is by making wikipedia fun again. I am forming a not-a-cabal, which will rule the wikiverse with the iron fist of friendlyism, and force wikipedians to enjoy themselves here whether they like it or not. You are cordially invited to join.  :-)   The not-a-cabal runs on a shoestring at the moment, holding brief meetings in the back alleys of the wikiverse on various user-talkpages, plus some of our agents have infiltrated the staid and prestigious halls of the WT:WER... but with any luck soon the not-a-cabal agents (colloquially known as WP:NICE nazis) will be everywhere.   Our goal is simple: steady inexorable growth of editors that contribute at least 5+edits/month, from the current 31k-and-falling figure today, to one million for enWiki. The trick is to make sure they are 99% Good Eggs, which means we have to assume that at least 1% of humanity is basically good -- enWiki has a couple-few hundred million uniques per month in terms of readership, at the moment. My core assertion, and key assumption, is simply that way more than 31k of those people are Real Contributors; if we want them to stay, all we have to do, is simply to keep from driving them away.

We get literally 1000 new editors every month! Problem is, we lose 1050 editors, every month; that *must* stop. Thanks for listening, and thanks for improving wikipedia. p.s. Upgrades,[5] unofficial tutorial,[6] and the 'official' helpdocs,[7] too. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing elucidation! The infobox story goes back to 2005, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:39, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Infobox

Thank you for your cogent arguments on infoboxes for all biographies, so the "look and feel" of Wikipedia extends to all people. The arguments against them for certain classes of people is just silly. I love the way you have collected their specious arguments. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, it's nice to feel understood ;) - did you vote? - here's another collection of arguments, the candidates speaking for themselves, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

tale of the ironing lady

Gerda, apropos of Mark Williams-Thomas, why don't you simply add the parameter needs-infobox = yes to the {{WikiProject Biography}} template on the talk page? It will put it directly into a category, where many more editors will see it, and it is more, shall we say, "straightforward" than this sort of tactic. Voceditenore (talk) 19:03, 8 December 2013 (UTC) I tried straightforward, here and here, - and your way might get someone in trouble without a warning, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:27, 8 December 2013 (UTC) ps: the most straightforward story of where helping can get you is here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Placing an article in Category:Biography articles without infoboxes is not, in my view, requesting proxy editing on your behalf (or more specifically Andy Mabbett's behalf in this case). It is simply stating a fact, "this article has no infobox". Any editor can act on it (or not) without "getting into trouble" after evaluating the article and without reference to the specific editor who added the article to the category. That is much more in keeping with both the spirit and the letter of your ArbCom restriction and subsequent clarification than going to an individual editor's page, giving them a "Precious Award", and then following it up by informing them that you are looking for someone to make a proxy edit for you if they are "unafraid of arbcom sanctions". Voceditenore (talk) 11:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Thank you for pointing out the possibility of the talk page request which I didn't know. I would like to use it a lot, but who am I to say "needs an infobox", ever? I was told again and again that it's a content decision by the "principal author". I didn't mark the straightforward approach you mention above as humour, sorry, I thought it was obvious, - my only weapon in the battle against absurdity ;) - Who created Victor Bruns? The one who formatted a machine translation? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC) "I would like to use it a lot, but who am I to say 'needs an infobox', ever?" I'm not following your reasoning at all, Gerda. Or perhaps you meant that humourously? Every time you suggest an infobox on an article talk page complete with a fully filled-in model for someone else to add (as you did at Talk:Mark Williams-Thomas, Talk:Grange Court, Talk:Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig, BWV 26, Talk:Wilfred Byng Kenrick, etc. etc.) you are saying the article needs an infobox. There's no difference between that and simply adding the "needs-infobox" parameter to a project banner instead. As for who created Victor Bruns, it was the person who made the red link turn blue by adding, formatting, and referencing a machine translation of the equivalent German Wikipedia article, i.e. Dr. Blofeld. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:39, 9 December 2013 (UTC) No. Possibly I have a language difficulty. "Needs" means - at least for me - a different thing than "I suggest". I believe that every article would we be better with an infobox, but to my (admittedly failing) memory I never said that an article needs one. - Failing memory: I remembered working on the Bruns article so well that I failed to check the history. - I stopped pointing out my restrictions on article talk pages: what would our readers think? - I suggested infoboxes for Andy more than for myself because I believe that his restriction - not to add infoboxes to his own articles as if he was in conflict with himself - is absurd. - On a hike, I thought that humour also helps a bit to cope with loss, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC) The clear implication to the reader of someone "suggesting" the addition of an infobox to an article and pasting a complete mock-up of it on the talk page is that in their view the article should have it. Otherwise, why on earth would they suggest one? On the other hand, the needs-infobox = yes parameter actually displays on the talk page as: '"An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article." [my bolding] There is no essential difference between the two in terms of their implicature or in terms of the speech act they encode, i.e. an indirect request for action. Trust me, I wrote a textbook for beginners on pragmatics . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Voceditenore, thank you for clarifying and teaching! I would not have imagined that a parameter "needs an infobox" would translate to "may need to be added", which is more careful. But it's still not what I would say. No article "needs" an infobox. I show by an infobox on the talk page that in my view an article would be better with one, and I spare another user the time to design it. - I will try your approach on Gabriele Schnaut, but first need to add substance to the article, - and I need to learn this language better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:32, 11 December 2013 (UTC) Listeners/readers don't simply translate words into their literal meaning when interpreting language and acting on it. They make inferences as to what the speaker/writer intended by their utterance. Scenario: You walk into the kitchen where Signora Voceditenore is doing the weekly ironing. You have a wrinkled shirt in your hand and you'd like her to iron it for you because your landlord has forbidden you to use an iron yourself. You could say any of the following (in descending degrees of politeness/indirectness), but they would all be interpreted by the Signora as you basically requesting her to iron the shirt: I think this shirt would look better if it were ironed. I'm looking for someone to iron this shirt. I suggest ironing this shirt. This shirt needs to be ironed. Iron this shirt! The Signora will do one of two things. She will either iron the shirt or refuse to iron it, but she won't have misinterpreted your intention. There will be several factors which will influence her decision to comply. How you phrased the request is probably the least of them. Signora Voceditenore (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2013 (UTC) Nice scene! I play the role of the Signora now: I would iron the shirt if the request addressed me personally: "Can you please iron this shirt? I would do it myself but I am not allowed to ... You could help me.", and I might be quite deaf to the above ;) - Unfortunately, the parallel doesn't work, because on an article talk, I don't like to talk about my shameful "not allowed" (now it says even "ban"), and I can't address someone personally. When I say "I am looking for someone", I don't mean a specific person. - Please check the singer, there's more now. I will look for better sourcing for the recordings, copied from the Spanish Wikipedia. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again!

Thanks much, Gerda, for the reprise of your award. It's refreshing and encouraging to encounter some kindness amidst the bellicosity, irrationality, and bigotry that I frequently encounter. TimidGuy (talk) 12:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Patrice Chéreau

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Patrice Chéreau 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 Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey.

Appreciative gesture; gratitude. DS (talk) 14:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Many Thanks

I want to thank you for the kind Precious award dealie you left in August. (Alas, I've not been on the site much at all lately. This has been a rough week for me as a writer, and I can't tell you how lovely it was to find your considerate words waiting for me here. Kudos for being so thoughtful and positive. Scartol • Tok 19:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Lovely, considerate, thoughtful, positive: that's you, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:38, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Nun lob, mein Seel, den Herren

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Blwyddyn Newydd Dda

Jolly New Year!! Gerda. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:34, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, needed ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

From me too, but ... "all praise, and then this happened, - even more we need good wishes," — just elected (highest vote) — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 09:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you know that he helped me in a seemingly hopeless case in 2011, and again in 2012. (Look for my name in his well organized archive if not.) Who's going to help me now, in this seemingly hopeless case? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

ps: I went to the Swedish Wikipedia to find out who wrote the excellent article 'tis the season' shown above, - he did, some don't like that, for me it was a revelation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:24, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

But why now? — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 19:18, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

You look at his last two archives, mostly of one day, matters of COI and outing, - he - integrity in person - didn't want to serve on arbcom with the slightest bit of doubt. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

I have just finished wading through the two archives and as far as I can tell it all boils down to something referred to as "WO", whatever that is: is it Wikipedia:WikiOverload? I cannot find out, and some chinless wonder. The mind boggles.
I feel angry now. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 21:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

WO is Wikipediocracy. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:32, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Gerda!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you (but I confess that "Nazi" bothered me, - nothing compared to the above but enough to stay silent) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh! Thank you Nikki Maria, although I fail to see why it relates to WO — and why it should present such a hoo-haa. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:11, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Last year my present was an enlightening article titled "'tis the season" (shown above under the popcorn, and discussed here), - I looked for the author, no result, and found out now (to my delight) that it was 28bytes, - only others were less delighted, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Emailed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

clarified, thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Help

Hi Gerda, sorry to bother you and i hope you don't mind but Wehwalt sent me in your direction. Im looking for someone to write or help in writing the critical reception section for Rocky the Musical. The main issue is whilst i have a couple of sources in the article i struggle to translate from German (Google translate is terrible and i don't speak German) on top of that i have difficulty in finding other German sources for the opening night reviews as there are so many German sources on sites and some seem to talk about openings and others just in general but i struggle working out which are which.Blethering Scot 19:11, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

If you have time. See my user, closed for the season, - traveling and sad, see above, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

ok, well thanks. If you ever do have the time or the feeling takes you it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time.Blethering Scot 00:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year

	Happy New Year, 2014
	From Amandajm (talk) 09:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC) The Epiphany Window, St Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney, by John Hardman & Co. of Birmingham

Thank you for the epiphany, much needed ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you very much for the "Precious" acknowledgement that you made on my talk page back in December. I can honestly say that it made my day when I discovered it. I sadly no longer have time to contribute to the project, but it is very gratifying to know that my contributions back then are still appreciated.

I am very curious to know how you managed to stumble upon my contributions, though? It's been so long now since I was a regular editor here and I assumed that my work had been forgotten! Cheers, Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 22:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I look every day, at today's featured article first, where I found you ;) - I remember the feeling when it happened to me in 2010, see my user page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

It's a very nice gesture. Keep up the good work! Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 23:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)