User talk:Elinruby

Pétain's disability

Someone changed "senile" describing Petain's last years at Yeu with the following edit summary:

(→‎Imprisonment: The term 'senile' is an offensive and dismissive way to describe cognitive impairment.)

But I don't think the substitute wording means much to non-experts:

By the end of 1949, Pétain was suffering from severe cognitive impairment, with only occasional moments of lucidity.

I suppose this should go (if it warrants it) to the Pétain talk page, but I wondered if you or Mathglot or another of your lurkers might have a good idea of giving information without giving offence. "Senile" isn't offensive to me in this context (after all, the word is being pretty freely thrown around both candidates for the 2024 U.S. presidential election), but I could see how others might see it as offensive in the context of this article. And on this day, don't forget to remember where Marshal Pétain was on 11 November 1918. —— Shakescene (talk) 23:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

It isn't something I would want to be called or even be ;) But I don't think the word has been declared offensive, although it might be anyway to readers who have family members with the condition and might find it hurtful, I guess, but I'm not aware that it's all that derogatory.

Maybe we should consider rewording though? Because we can?

Some thoughts

• Well. The statement is sourced (apparently) and he's a long-dead public figure, so no BLP concerns.
• I'm pretty sure the statement is true -- I had to check to be sure I didn't write that text, and I know I have previously expressed the opinion that he was a Ronald Reagan and never really was the one running the country, it was all the wrong people for all the wrong reasons....But no. I didn't write it. Pretty sure I have read it though, and I've definitely thought it.
• I didn't check the history, but I don't recognize the source. I don't suppose you have it, eh? but if indeed the statement is true, then he wasn't exactly an obscure figure, and we should be able to verify, using another source if need be. And since the wording has been challenged, we should probably do that regardless, as an exercise in due diligence if nothing else.
• If a source specifies a name for his condition, great, that solves that problem by giving us better vocabulary, but I think it's unlikely he got a specific diagnosis in the late 1940s.
• Alternately, do we lose much information if we do this:

  By May, Pétain required constant nursing care, and often suffered from hallucinations, e.g. that he was commanding armies in battle, or that naked women were dancing around his room.[70] By the end of 1949, Pétain was suffering from severe cognitive impairment, with had only occasional moments of lucidity.

  (?)

What do you think? I usually try not to be dismissive if I can manage that, but I don't think it's like the article had an egregious flaw that we overlooked or anything. But now that someone has pointed out the word maybe we should think about it Elinruby (talk) 02:34, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

apparently it's unquestionable: he was replaced in 1942, but remained in office as a figurehead. [1]

19th-century Montmartre

@Piotrus: Some algorithm or other asked me if I was interested in this: this, probably because, as we discussed a while back, there are some mentions there of the painter you asked me about, the friend of the Polish poet. The mentions weren't real substantive but made me think he probably came up a lot in society pages about the salons. He might make an interesting mention in an article on Montmartre in the late 19th century, or as background for School of Paris or one of the articles about Impressionists. There is probably room for an article like that, or even one about emigres in Paris; the sheer density of artists, writers, playwrights and such is notable, should somebody feel like writing about it. Maybe I should start gathering sources Elinruby (talk) 09:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Good idea. And I still am toying with idea of translating his biography to French Wikipedia - maybe someone there will be able to expand it better. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

PS. Actually, I did so, since it is so short: fr:Charles Pétiniaud-Dubos. As usual, if you'd like to double check my French there, it would be appreciated. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

the proofreading can happen. I actually spent a fair amount of time looking for him and am confident he isn't in the usual databases (BnF, Gallica, Persee, Scholar, etc) beyond the brief mentions discussed above, but there may be an art historian out there who has done a study of the period. French wikipedia is Like That sometimes. I think we would need to look at contemporary periodicals. Would there be anything on Polish wikipedia about artists in Paris? I know at least some of then School of Paris were Polish, but I am not clear on the absolute numbers. There were also Russians, Belarussians and Lithuanians, I know, and I didn't fact-check nationalities; I don't think I quite understood how the borders were then. Maybe still don't. Anyway, sure, I can also start some notes on sources for a broader topic.I am sure there are huge articles on many aspects of the impressionists but School of Paris is probably still start class. That and the emigres may take some digging, as there was antisemitism in the name, which was intended to be derogatory, and the French are still trying to come to terms with World War 2; the earlier homegrown xenophobia would be harder. Maybe track what was going on in those countries, in hmm the turn of the century? If t0hat's confusing don't worry, I am thinking out loud and it will be clearer once I start the timeline. Elinruby (talk) 04:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I thought I answered this. There are no glaring errors in the translation but I would have worded some of it differently. And it seems that Montparnasse was the neighborhood of choice btw. Pinged you to a very rough sandbox list of School of Paris artists. A LOT of them were Polish if that is of interest. Your guy is earlier than that, though. I am trying to tie up some loose ends but will see if I can find more sources by includinf Limousin as a search term and if so me rewrite the article a little Elinruby (talk) 07:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Pétain, encore

Someone added "and statesman" to this lede paragraph:

Henri Philippe Benoni Omer Pétain (/peɪˈtæ̃/, French: [filip petɛ̃]); 24 April 1856 – 23 July 1951) was a French military officer and statesman who commanded the French Army in World War I and became the head of the collaborationist regime of Vichy France, from 1940 to 1944, during World War II.

Philippe Pétain was more than a military officer, but — unless "statesman" is generic and non-judgemental in Wikipedia (is Hitler or Stalin or Mussolini or Idi Amin a "statesman"?) — is there a better-focussed and less-loaded term for his rôle as Chef de l'État Français ? Or is any term needed when the lede sentence ends, "and became the head of the collaborationist regime of Vichy France" ?

@Mathglot: —— Shakescene (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Worthwhile question, but not here. Can you move this to Talk:Philippe Pétain? For the time being, I've reverted it, because whatever the right word is, 'statesman' is certainly not it. Mathglot (talk) 03:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

de facto leader? except see above, he apparently wasn't leading much as of 1942 (side musing: maybe that is why the policy on the black market change that year) The mental health issue is likely undue for the lede though. "Figurehead" is probably truest but still too different from conventional wisdom Elinruby (talk) 08:15, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

"Figurehead" might absolve him from the anti-Semitic laws he signed within three or four months of taking office. —— Shakescene (talk) 15:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I see this went to the talk page. FWIW I took a look at the lede and see no issue with the way it is currently written. Elinruby (talk) 07:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

right. To the extent that my opinion matters I don't think we should, and more importantly I think the mental illness may have only recently entered the historiography. The source I found for this was *medical* remember, even though RS as hell. Pretty sure there would be a huge outcry and the sources wouldn't be accepted. I am not sure there is enough there yet myself. Even if he was stark raving bonkers as of 1942 he still had some power and agency before that and chose to appease the Nazis. But it probably rules out calling him a caudillo, is where I was going, and that's a South and Central American term anyway. I should re-read the lede before opining further, but I am inclined just say nothing atm. Does what is there after Mathglot's revert seem correct to you? All this moral ambiguity might be undue in the lede. By the way, no objection to my comment moving with the thread. Elinruby (talk) 16:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

actually, if people want I will summarize the above on the Pétain talk page later today, might be less awkward Elinruby (talk) 16:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Collaboration lite

Apparently, and not surprisingly really, people in Paris didn't know how to react when occupying German soldiers very courteously would ask them for directions. It troubled Sartre a lot, and there's an interesting short discussion of this in the Jean-Paul Sartre article, in the middle of the § World War II section. This reaction or syndrome seems like a worthy subject of serious study, and I wonder if there has been any. I wonder if there are papers on different "levels" of collaboration, from these incidents at one end, to Pétain, Laval, Lafont, or Vallat at the other. Mathglot (talk) 09:03, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Interested. This is (or overlaps) the stuff I was talking about when I created that historiography section. Current writing about this seems very geared to daily life under the occupiers. According to my reading this approach was preceded by a period characterized by Vichy syndrome that followed the repudiation of the Gaullist narrative. Does that match up with what you have seen? We should probably do a written literature review, because reasons, and getting back to a related matter I've mentioned before, it would *REALLY* be cool if we could at least get the article category tree to distinguish between this and workplace collaboration software for enterprise remote workers. Elinruby (talk) 14:46, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot

I've long been toying with the idea (massive though the resulting work might be) if it wouldn't be better in the relevant articles to talk about Cooperation with occupying powers, rather than Collaboration, which may once have been a neutral, objective term, but has been a term of of moral condemnation since the 1940's.

Cooperation is something that can be described objectively without implying difficult moral judgements: if you give directions, or coordinate train schedules, or translate something (either way), or issue ration cards or remove bombs, you would be cooperating with your occupiers — but we wouldn't have to guess why. There's a whole spectrum ranging roughly from non-opposition to non-resistance to appeasement to acquiescence to acceptance to grudging collaboration to willing collaboration to enthusiastic alliance to exceeding occupier's demands (e.g. sacrificing children when the Germans only ask for adults).

The motives (ranging from fear to joy), on the other hand, are an important question — much raised in trials after the Axis's fall (and later after the fall of East Germany) — that Wikipedia can discuss but about which it need not render judgement.

We've discussed this before in relation to the Baltic states — can a ministerial act be seen as collaboration with Germany or with Stalin, or with both, or with neither?

Of course, this is too big a question for just one User's talk page, but I'm interested in your thoughts. —— Shakescene (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

fwiw I don't know of a better place to discuss this. it doesn't relate to a specific page, and yes, these is a recurrent problem of definition in the topic, plus the issue of someone(s) misusing "collaborationist", the question of conscripts or gang-pressed prisoners, horizontal collaboration, the fact that sources call buying on the black market "collaboration", and editors want to limit its use to countries, as in our old Arbcom friends "Poland never collaborated with the Nazis" and "ok, the Blue Police were Polish but they were recruited at gunpoint", not to mention "anyone who was in a German unit of any type was a collaborationist", recently seem at AE and I could go on. One end of the spectrum would be appeasement as in A thony Eden, and there was also doing business with Nazis (IBM, Hollywood, art looting, Joseph Joanovici (sp?) And the rescue of Danish Jews with the help of Dr.q Best.,.) I started a bibliography in a sandbox, is all I can think to do. surely we aren't the first to notice this; surely some political scientist has attempted a taxonomy? Getting back to Sartre, what about a waiter at one of the five-star Paris restaurants the German officers frequented? Farmers whose crops were seized by Germans? Shakescene note that sources at Black market.in wartime France definitely use "collaboration". Other suggestions welcome. Elinruby (talk) 18:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

For examples of the moral ambiguity of living under force, see Civilian life under the German occupation of the Channel Islands#Collaboration and German occupation of the Channel Islands#Collaboration. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Regency of Algiers article

Hello @Elinruby

First of all thank you for your massive contribution to this article Regency of Algiers, it's much more pleasent to read this way, and regarding your last modifications in the "Soceity" section, i relied pretty much on one arabic secondary source only, as it presented an overview of the Algerian urban soceity, so i had to translate some parts and rewrite other parts, yet my english is still a bit rough, so i think that your contributions are much appreciated and more sources will be added if need in this section.

Best regards. Nourerrahmane (talk) 09:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

It is much better with Arabic sources and ideas than when I worked on it a while back.

What I meant by "vague" is that it is very difficult to find a source for something like--i forget what I took out -- "the city had many amenities" for example, especially in English, and the French felt strongly that they were bringing civilization and in the 18th century were.pretty sure that civilization looked like them.

I really liked the new stuff about the economy and idea the madrasas, except that were the sources for that French? It may be hard to not say they were low-quality because they didn't teach science yet not make them sound by hotbed s of religious zealotry, But go you, I am sure you can do it. I know you said the scholars were in Tlemcen (do I remember that right?) But...

I will talk about this more at the talk page, as I am getting tired and don't have specifics handy. But Muslims not selling alcohol seems unsurprising. Maybe talk about those coffeehouses instead. Were there any poets who hung out there? Or was it a military town only? No, right? The stuff about wheat from Russia was interesting, also the silkworms. What was the music like? All those slaves-- did they sell them? Make them do construction? See where I am going? Also you don't have to listen to me and are free to tell me to piss off, but I think you are better of with a vigorous but friendly edit from someone with a an interest and a little knowledge than an unfriendly edit from someone who is bored by gw topic. I'll take another pass in about a week how is that? I realize it's a work in progress but by the way, if you are using machine translation please don't. Unless there is really no other way. I guessed quite a bit, which is why i want you, who knows what happened, to make sure I didn't guess wrong. If you *can* translate from Arabic by hand, even to French, the results will be much better. But don't put French in the article! If you want go through French, ping me and we'll figure out where to put the French.

Don't worry, be happy and thanks for working on the article ;)

Château de La Ferté-Imbault

Hi,

I've been chiselling away at "Château de La Ferté-Imbault" in a very disorganised way, but I think I'm beginning to see progress. There's still a lot more to do, of course.

One issue I've had is with the interlanguage link to fr:Duché d'Aerschot. English Wikipedia actually has a page "Duke of Aarschot" which contains less information than the French page, but when I try to add the French language link to the sidebar of that page, I encounter a problem: the English page is in the Wikidata category Duke of Aarschot, while the French page is in the category Duchy of Aarschot. I'm tempted to merge the categories, but I don't want to break anything. Any suggestions?

Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 22:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

looking ... There is a difference in the category tree. But Let's start here: the original problem is that you want to ILL to fr:Duché d'Aerschot? Because it has the most information? it's weird, on the Fr side the hierarchy is:

• Catégorie:Duc
• Catégorie:Duc d'Aerschot
• Duché d'Aerschot
  • Dans d’autres langues
  • Català
  • Nederlands
  • Русский
  • Українська

But in English

• Category:Dukes of Belgium
• Category:Dukes of Aarschot
  • Links to Catégorie:Duc d'Aerschot
• Duke of Aarschot

This is a worthy thing to fix both are at the same hierarchy level under the Duke, but can't we just display text that isn't "Duke of Aarschot? Or do I still not understand the question?

Apparently I am overthinking again because Duché d'Aerschot works too but won't if you link "Duke of Aarschot" to *Duché d'Aerschot" in the side ar (or someone else does, then the links above will go to Duke of Aarschot, which is what you don't want, right? Let me let the cat in and look at the article history

Elinruby (talk) 23:06, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

My thinking was that since we have an English page "Duke of Aarschot", I should link to that, and anyone looking for more information could follow the link to the French article from the sidebar of that article ... except that the French article wasn't linked from the sidebar. It's not a big deal either way. I haven't any experience of editing Wikidata, and it's getting a bit late for me to start experimenting this evening, but the interlanguage link will do the job for now, and I can always expand "Duke of Aarschot" from "fr:Duché d'Aerschot" in the future.

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 00:14, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I was confused, in part because I edit on a phone a whole lot and forget that sidebar is there on other platforms. But it's a link like any other, I've done those.

Just cautioning you while that linking Duke of Aarschot" from "fr:Duché d'Aerschot wouldn't *break* anything, I don't think, since they each have the Duke as a parent category except it will break your ILL. (but @Mathglot: knows more about categories than I do) but would if you do that you will have to work around the English page you don't like. It might be easiest to expand the English page, but that depends on how much is involved, how much time you have, and how many other associated pages need expansion or creation.

meanwhile: what else is in Duke of Aerschot besides the page? and it trips me out that the french put the Duchy under the Duke. But back to your answer, there isn't a rule that says you "should" link to the English article rather that the French, and a much better or longer French is a good reason to go the other way. But if the link goes in the sidebar the ILL will go the to the English article, and the system people frown on the fr:article title syntax you used above, because while it works it doesn't get tracked. But your call. Feel free to discuss anything else here if you like; always ready how overthink something. I'm just glad you're working on that article. Elinruby (talk) 01:13, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

When the US wanted to take over France

Some interesting stuff in this article in Le Monde Diplomatique (in English) about US plans for France post-war: When the US wanted to take over France. I knew about a lot of the antipathy between FDR and CDG, and I knew it was dicey whether France was going to be considered a 'Western Ally' post-war (and thus to be counted as among the victors, with all that meant, including, for example, getting a piece of Berlin) but I didn't know it went this far; and although I knew about FDR's overtures to Giraud and Darlan in No. Africa, I didn't know about the connection between those meetings and FDR's post-war plans for France, and that he was apparently thinking about it that early. I can think of half a dozen articles where bits of this may be relevant. Anyway, sorry to keep dumping ideas on you, but I'm stuck on a bunch of things, and just wanted to get this written down somewhere before I forget, so don't feel like you have to do anything with it. It's an interesting read, though, so enjoy it. Mathglot (talk) 05:34, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

This totally went over my head; I assumed you were responding to someone else in that comment. This post was merely a link to an article with a bit of the history around the FDR-de Gaulle tension that I thought would interest you, and I hope it does. Mathglot (talk) 10:11, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

It kinda was to someone else, but it two months ago, and it was never deliberately posted let alone to you.

My deepest apologies, because no. you did not deserve that. I was trying to get it our of the phone buffer when I was moving text earlier.

It's about some editor endlessly banging on about what a terrible editor I am, look at that page block, and ooh look at this too, and he was going to have somebody straighten me out unless Igave some respect his admonishments about a purportedly erroneous and/or malicious cn tag from 2020, ffs, on a hot button article, like it would even still be undealt-with in September 2023,

I finally had to template him. Three times before he stopped. It isn't inappropriate for you to object to it now you undeservedly saw it, so I am not going to remove what you said, but I wish you would, or at least the diff, lest it lead to more of that shit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elinruby (talk • contribs) 11:40, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know what this means, who "he" is, and I don't know what you mean by "objecting" to something. I'm mystified, as I'm not objecting to anything, and this discussion is strictly about linking an article from Le Monde diplomatique which I thought might be of interest to you; everything else has gone completley over my head, and I am clueless about what it means. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 11:50, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

((tq|This totally went over my head...etc}) is what I am apologizing for. But fine. I haven't read the article yet but I do have thoughts from past readings. Apparently the question of whether France was an Ally or just got rescued was apparently why de Gaulle was so insistent on joining up with the Alled Army and why he wanted that column to liberate Paris, ie French participation [don't you dare[User:Elinruby|Elinruby]] (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I also seem to remember reading that de Gaulle had a lot to do with the FFI jumping the gun here: Battle of Vercors. Didn't we have a conversation about what an idiot the Allies thought he was back when we were doing Liberation of France? Seems like we did; I was pretty shocked, national mythology getting debunked and all.

Reading now Elinruby (talk) 12:34, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

quite a bit to unpack there - mythologies crashing indeed. I liked:

The US depicted De Gaulle as a rightwing dictator and a puppet of French communists and the USS

• The US depicted De Gaulle as a rightwing dictator and a puppet of French communists and the USSR

LOL

Also who though France would agree to be the same country as Germany?

Elinruby (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

There was certainly a lot of disagreement in the US about how to handle de Gaulle and the role of France post-war, and what with FDR being head of his administration and the executive branch, I guess it makes sense to say "the US depicted <this-or-that>", as long as it's clear that there were major figures on the other side of that debate. Such as, for example, Eisenhower, who the article never mentions and had a more pragmatic view about CDG, which was essentially the prevailing one post-war, not FDR's view. One wonders how things might've turned out for France, had FDR lived another few years, but now were getting into fabulist history. Mathglot (talk) 23:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

French elites supported the idea: they clung to the Vichy regime, which had restored privileges taken away by the pre-war republican government

Do you know what elites and what privileges they are talking about there? It almost sounds like the aristocracy, but surely they didn't have many privileges de jure by the Third Republic? Tax breaks maybe? Elinruby (talk) 07:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Elinruby :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:15, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Legal theory of Italian witch trials

Hi, E., since both you and @Mathglot: have some interest in arcane legal history, one or both of you might be interested in this Ref. Desk question:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Legal_system_of_early,_15th_century_Italy

—— Shakescene (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Russian Volunteer Corps

I've been around here for a long time, and not once has the Random article link in the left sidebar ever led me to anything really interesting, even though I keep trying, every few weeks or so. Until today, that is, when it landed me at Russian Volunteer Corps. I thought you might like to add this to your watchlist. Interesting article; I never heard of them before. So, tell me: what's your most interesting landing page from 'Random'? If you don't use it, try it in the top group of tools under 'Main page', or just click here. I clicked it myself, and it landed me at Jónsi, an Icelandic musician. Each time you click it, it will take you somwhere else; usually, entirely forgettable articles. But Russian Volunteer Corps is worth a read. Mathglot (talk) 10:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

i will look. I am off grid though and will be for the rest of the weekend. Not really in charge of the schedule either. May have time to read that article while eating lunch here. Don't really use Random Article but I was pretty much doing the same thing with WP:PNT until I gave up on it also. I think my reasons were different than yours though. Elinruby (talk) 19:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

interestingly, one of the articles I was thinking of mentioning was Harbin Russians. Elinruby (talk) 19:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

has Bellingcat said anything about this? Elinruby (talk) 15:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I haven't seen them say anything directly about them, but in searching, I did find Bellingcat talking about another group I never heard of, a Russian "esoteric neo-Nazi" or "esoteric Hitlerist" group called "Wotanjugend". There's three mentions of them in Wikipedia articles but we don't have an article about them. Not clear if there's sufficient sourcing out there for them to be notable or not. If you search, you'll find a bunch of music results; that's not a different group, that's related to them. Related searches: 'Alexei Levkin', 'National Socialist Black Metal' (NSBM), 'M8L8TH', Hitler's Hammer. Mathglot (talk) 17:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

My crude impression — from a couple of BBC and/or PBS news accounts way back — is that the Corps' leader does indeed call himself a fascist, but that his force is open to any Russian who's against Putin or for the Ukraine. I suppose that this might be roughly parallel to Vlasov's volunteers who were anti-Stalin but (I think) not necessarily either pro-Hitler or pro-German. See Mark Mazower's "Hitler's Empire" (Penguin).

Historic Russian fascism (such as the Russian Fascist Party and the All-Russian Fascist Organization based in Putnam, Conn.) is a slightly different (though perhaps overlapping) subject; they did support a fascist future for Russia and were organized on fascist lines (with the inevitable bitter clashes between those competing to be Leader).

See Erwin Oberlander's essay on "The All-Russian Fascist Party" in International Fascism 1920-1945 in the Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 1, no.1, edited by Walter Laqueur and George Mosse (reprinted as a Harper Torchbook in 1966. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Welp, originally I was skeptical because I wasn't familiar with the sources, nor was I certain that this was a good enough reason to be skeptical. In no particular order I wondered about false flags and false false flags and the prevalent practice of militias in the area of identifying themselves with a cloth tied around an arm. Some better-known sources have since been added by people I recognize from other articles. I am certain that the meticulousness you two are known for +at least by me) could only benefit the topic area. Interesting that White Russians keep coming up.

I am only in for a minute and apparently my bibliography for the Arbcom request is throwing errors so I gotta fix that. Be aware that you will probably be accused of glorifying Nazis or whitewashing them or whatever if you investigate. Working on the part where doing that should require some relationship in the facts. I did find the sourcing mother lode for collaboration typologies, motivational analysis and the relationship to resistance but my notes are too verbatim to put up yet. Elinruby (talk) 23:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

2023 Bryansk Oblast raid relies heavily on TASS, which is discouraged if not deprecated, just saying. I also see references to Azov, so what I said above goes triple, given the Russian propaganda and the fact that at some point the group did indeed call themselves Nazis. The above refers to Wotanjugend btw, which seems pretty separate from the one that collaborated with the Chinese. It should be noted that from some people anti-communist is synonymous with Nazi and reams and reams and reams have no doubt been written about this, but little of it in English. Those sources that do exist tend to be of the "call your senator and tell him" variety though. Also, if you are going to swim in those waters, the original writing often seems to have consistently been sourced to the first item in a Google search. I had to take the first sentence to RSN three times back in the day. I think the topic has improved a bit since Elinruby (talk) 05:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

However, apart from the people who may have something in the topic watchlisted, there does seem to possibly exist an untold story; for example there is also Iron Wolf (character) and Iron Wolf (organization), which are topic-adjacent...maybe what's needed is a dab page, but even that would be pretty fraught. Elinruby (talk) 05:45, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

[2] Sample hijinks in Russian Volunteer Corps; either of you have time to verifiy this? Elinruby (talk) 06:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Check out My very best wishes fighting the good fight in #Removal of ideology and its sources. He's a native Russian speaker who is probably being polite when he says he can't umderstand it. I could say more but I better not. In my opinon the topic might be notable if real but PoV is being pushed pretty hard either way and MVBW is probably the best person to deal with it.

EHRI

Looks authoritative and all [3] until you realize it's quoting Wikipedia. Verbatim and cited all legit, but not a source Elinruby (talk) 21:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

mira tambien [4] Elinruby (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Source Removal

I see you're systemically removing reliable sources with the justification "do not meet sourcing standards", such as [5]. Can you clarify what "standard" you're enforcing here? "Not academic" isn't a sufficient rationale to remove a source in most circumstances. VQuakr (talk) 17:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

VQuakr there's an Arbcom decision about the Holocaust in Poland, several years old. Most editors in the topic area already know about it. I can see why you would question it though; i did the fist time i heard about it Elinruby (talk) 21:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you link the decision please? VQuakr (talk) 21:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes but not right now.Elinruby (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

VQuakr there are seven cases about the Holocaust in Poland; I think the restriction is in [6]; if not it is currently being discussed in a request for amendment that would extend it to Lithuania. Let me know if that doesn't answer your question. Elinruby (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

actually that's the amended current version but should still answer your question Elinruby (talk) 23:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

That's just WP:APLRS. Neither the NBC News nor Gazeta Wyborcza sources should have been removed from articles based on that, as both are reputable institutions generally recognized as reliable. BTW going forward if you're going to cite a standard please do so up front rather than a handwaving at "sourcing standards". VQuakr (talk) 06:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@VQuakr: I believe you are mistaken, since I have previously tried that argument with respect to the Washington Post and the New York Times, which are certainly respectable. Conceivably the people I was talking to at the time were mistaken, but I don't think so. Consumer news publications are excluded; these wiki articles merely predate the decision. I think "respectable institution" -- note it does not say "respectable publication" -- is intended to mean Yad Vashem and the US Holocaust Museum. The intent of excluding news publications is that some editors use their verbatim quotes in an unbalanced manner. As for the second part of your remarks, perhaps, but the topic isn't usually patrolled by people unaware of the sourcing standards. I suggest you read the entire decision if you are unclear about this. As for your erronous reverts, the articles have been unbalanced this long, oh well. Status quo stonewalling is usually not worth fighting. I am giving you a day to read this before I delete. Elinruby (talk) 06:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

You were so vague I couldn't be sure what you were referring to even though I'm familiar with that ruling. NYT and WAPO would be fine as well; can you link to a RSN discussion that said otherwise? Maybe re-read WP:AGF, too. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 06:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@VQuakr: I just linked to a whole Arbcom decision that says otherwise. I tell you what though; I already asked for clarification of "respectable institution" in the modification request I am doing research for. I will reiterate my request that they get explicit about this since someone on my talk page refuses to drop the stick. It would probably be faster to just read the decisions you are misinterpreting though Elinruby (talk) 07:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@VQuakr: Actually some one has just asked about the New York Times and was told BilledMammal academically focused is just as important as reputable publisher. So major universities' presses are examples of what passes. Beyond that I think it unhelpful to clarify in the abstract. Barkeep49 (talk) 08:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC) so on second thought I decline to beat this dead horse at Arbcom on your behalf. You really should self revert, or at a minimum read the decisions, if you want to pursue this. Elsewhere, please, however. I feel I have been very patient about this Elinruby (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh look more needling, how helpful. I'd be curious to know what you think "impatient" looks like if this is your idea of "patient." Yes, I can self-rv. If you dislike follow-up on your talk page, use an adequate edit summary instead of a handwave in the first place. Simple cause and effect there. Happy editing! VQuakr (talk) 17:50, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

You should really read the case. But as far as I am concerned you're somebody else's issue now. I gave you a link to the guy who drafted the last Holocaust in Poland decision, defining exactly the term you are confused about, and don't know what else to tell you if you're not convinced. And btw "go elsewhere" doesn't mean ping me three times with exactly the same question I already answered here. Elinruby (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I am convinced, I self-reverted already and continued discussion as directed by that AE. This is a collaborative project. If you remove sources citing (or in this case thinking of) a standard that states the next step is talk page discussion, it is a reasonable to assume that your participation in that talk page discussion will occur. You are the expert on why you thought those particular sources needed to be challenged. The questions posed on the article talk pages, which are specific to the sources and content being discussed, are different than the one posed here. "Go elsewhere" very much does mean to take it to the article talk page to invite your take there. WP:CIVIL is policy, BTW; not sure what's with the attitude but it would cost you nothing to be more pleasant. VQuakr (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Heh. That was me being unpleasant was it? Ok well. (Clears throat). Elinruby (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@VQuakr: added a convenience link for you since I went over there to check something else. Elinruby (talk) 10:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Good source for French slang

I have my usual go-to sources for unusual, rare, or obsolete French words, but they don't do well with slang and popular expressions, verlan, hip-hop, all that sort of stuff. Well, I just ran into LingQ.com, and based on the words I decided to look up while watching a French film with tons of slang, it does really well. Here are a few:

• taf – work
• pécho – hook up with (have sex)
• Beauvau – Ministry of the Interior (which is on Beavau street)

I understood taf in context, but wouldn't have sworn I knew it. The others, I never heard before. Thought you might be interested. Mathglot (talk) 06:47, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

/me squints: pécho isn't a french spelling, which is not to say that french can't import words, but it doesn't usually. Is that a verb or an action or... ils ont fait pécho? Not really doubting it, but no, not familiar with it. Beauvau is more than plausible. "Taf" could simply be from tache (should be accent circonflexe) esp in the south. If it's a noun. Looking to see if there is an etymology. Elinruby (talk) 07:17, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Pécho is native, not imported (the way toubib and kif-kif are imported). A lot of it (but not all) is from verlan, and lots of words in verlan are not particularly French-spelling archetypes (meuf, keum, relou, zarbi, etc.) I'm almost certain that pécho is double slang: first, from the regular slang word chopé, and then verlanized into pécho. As far as taf, one unreliable source says it's an acronym (from: travail à faire), but that sounds too much like a folk etymology, and I'm not sure I believe it. Mathglot (talk) 08:21, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Maybe I should add French Wiktionary to my list; they also had pécho, and I never thought they would, and it confirmed my theory. Mathglot (talk) 08:24, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I have to admit that I find that impressive also. Not that you need me to, but I can attest that chopé does mean all those things, and verlan seems plausible. I want to finish Henri Lafont, wah, I liked that first narrator. Aziz? Anyway so pécho, this thing is a verb that doesn't conjugate? Invariable? Elinruby (talk) 08:39, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Not sure, yet; only just learned that one in one context, but I'm sure it will come up again. If you have Netflix, you can amuse yourself with some good writing and acting in the Netflix original comedy series "En place" (Represent), while learning tons of slang at the same time; see the YT trailer. Enjoy! Mathglot (talk) 08:49, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

thanks Elinruby (talk) 08:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Morning

Morning @Elinruby: How things. Happy New Year. Whats your plans? Plans within plans. scope_creep^Talk 09:07, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Morning. I found a.bunch of sources on historiography of collaboration but some of them are disputed or contentious. This very second trying to determine the reliability of the Polish IPN, but I fundamentally don't care and i want to get out of the topic before i go from objective to jaded. I want to do something French. Countesses comes to mind, but i had pretty much decided to get at least one of the books. There's still the law project but for something less dry, i really enjoyed the 1940s underworld. Maybe something rhere ? Maybe the escape lines, even the Rednl Orchestra really. Elinruby (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: by the way I like that Complicated Complicity source you sent me; I used it in Lithuania. Trying to disengage from that though; it's a mug's game to try to fix it. I've managed to convey that there is more.than one source on each side, gonna call that a win I guess Elinruby (talk) 03:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Amazon archaeology

[7] Mathglot I think this might have something to do with Montegrande (archaeological site). Elinruby (talk) 14:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I just looked and the Upano Valley sites are about 500 min away but if i am understanding the scale they sound related although not identical. Elinruby (talk) 15:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Wow, exciting find! Look forward to see what research and excavation turns up in the coming years, plenty more discoveries to come, I'm sure. Thanks for sharing, Mathglot (talk) 19:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Dhruv Sharma

Hello, good day could you help me give a more neutral composition and writing to Dhruv Sharma article and achieve compliance with Wikipedia standards? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhruv_Sharma_(singer) 57ntaledane9 (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I've dealt with and left a wee note. scope_creep^Talk 18:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Scope creep. I am up to my ahoulder blades in concentration camps sourced to Jewish Virtual Library and genealogy sites. Are you or Mathglot interested in helping with that? I'm trying to find alternate sources to help keep the inevitable firestorm at bay. I know less than nothing about Indian pop music, and before I started tediously correcting the capitalization I'd want to be certain the singer is notable in the first place. I need to get back to the sources that contradict and disparage one another in the Holocaust in the Baltics articles.Elinruby (talk) 19:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry Elinruby. I missed this. I seem to make a comment and then leave. If your do if your still doing it. I will be more attentive in the future. scope_creep^Talk 19:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: sorry, you do what? Want to help remove Jewish virtual library? Do source verification? You're a brave man if so either way, but there's a huge amount to be done if so; notably articles on the Polish and Lithuanian Holocaust need to use academic sources per Arbcom. We should talk a little before about the background before you get started but for an intro the "On and on and on" is about one such foray and is now part of an AE complaint titled "SMcCandlish". One big problem off the top of my head is the source misrepresentation at Holocaust in Lithuania, see my edit summaries in the history. I stopped there to figure out Wikiblame but while I gotten it installed I haven't read the manual. When I say fallacy of composition I mean that "some antisemitic Lithuanians carried out pogroms" became "Lithuanians participated in the Holocaust" which became "all Lithuanians were Nazi collaborators". It's a lot more granular than that, and depending on how you define collaboration it is also possible to say that all French collaborated or they starved. Shrug. Let me know. Going to be gone until about 9pm my time Elinruby (talk) 23:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: ah you were specifically talking about concentration camps. Most of them were in Poland, but there is plenty of that too. More later Elinruby (talk) 23:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I saw your entry at the Arb motion. I had a conversation with SMcCandlish back in the day, a couple of years after I arrived. I wanted to use European dates and all those MOS cronies wouldn't let me. I told them I was going to ignore it and they said somebody else is coming to talk and it was SMcCandlish. He said you can't do this, and you can't do that. A stern conversation. So I never took up the issue of European dates formats and never got to use them. When I read the initial version of the essay he wrote, it was more of the same. Keep of the Grass. Its all about control. I actually like SMcCandlish as he is forthright and direct, but the MOS control does my head in. He's turning what should be dynamic standard into a static standard. And that whole essay should be deleted. On the other stuff. I've not looked at the Holocaust in Lithuania. I see it is a GA article, done almost 15 years. Standard have changed since them. Ping me on it, when you start planning. It doesn't seem to have a lot of content. The Norwegian article has a ton of well-ref'd content, which may be good. I've been removing the "Jewish virtual library" everywhere I go. Count me in for more removal. If there is lot of articles, as in 10's to 100's it might worth creating a wikiproject or something so we can track it and work away on it and ad-hoc basis. I've got three articles that are ad-hoc. It's impossible to work on complex article all the time, so a nice simple article like this Cothenius Medal is really easy work on. Source verification I don't mind doing. One article at a time. Long and difficult work but over weeks and weeks a bit at a time. The comment above, was just in case you were still working on the Dhruv Sharma article and needed help. scope_creep^Talk 23:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh. No. I never touch pop culture, haven't the patience for edit warriors over whether something is emo or folk or whatever. I have no idea where the editor got my name. Elinruby (talk) 00:16, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Actually I think this was when I was trying to explain the sourcing requirements at RSN, so probably there. Are you working on this? More later. Elinruby (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

just took a look. Drmies is on the case. Elinruby (talk) 04:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, I was. How is that person even notable? Also, Elinruby, it's emo-folk, you know. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

@Drmies: I know, right? I am also pretty certain that despite the urge to scream into my pillow I took the time to politely tell them that names are capitalized in English. Speakers of languages that don't use the Roman alphabet often have trouble with capitalization and punctuation, so I wasn't particularly fussed about this, but since I did take the time to point the error out, it's a bit annoying that the article still says "rapunzel", which is the name of a sing also and even more so should be capitalized, mumble, especially since it's allegedly notable. Elinruby (talk) 05:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Hmm now I feel the need to pull the old Beatsie Boy CD off the shelf: "Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair, / So I can climb up and get into your underwear". Drmies (talk) 14:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Concentration camp in Alsace

Could use a little love, and surely there are collaborators here. Not that France needs more material and strictly speaking this all happened on territory that Germany had annexed, but the skulls wound up at a French school of medicine. Anyway, discuss? Elinruby (talk) 09:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Possibly useful

the Dutch General Intelligence and Security Service is clear from records made public by the Dutch Argus foundation. Elinruby (talk) 08:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

References

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/13/arts/heirs-awarded-nazi-looted-art-are-still-waiting-17-years-later.html https://greekreporter.com/2024/03/13/germany-looted-greek-antiquities-samos/

Brazil

Hello! Since in the last year we've talked a little about the 2023 Brazilian Congress attack, you may like to see this page: Planning for a coup d'état after the 2022 Brazilian presidential elections. Cheers, Erick Soares3 (talk) 18:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

thank you Erick Soares3; @Mathglot: is probably also interested Elinruby (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Elin, thanks for the ping; Erick Soares3, very important topic; thank you for starting this. I've already made a few minor improvements. English is very efficient in its ability to pile up nouns and adjectives without the use of prepositional phrases to connect them as in Romance languages, leading to the much more concise 2022 Brazilian attempted coup plot. I look forward to contributing more to this article. Mathglot (talk) 20:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot @Elinruby Thanks! There's already a proposal to move the original article into “2022-2023 Brazilian attempted coup plot” (Tentativa de golpe de Estado no Brasil em 2022-2023), but I had only seen it after having published the English version. I would be good to check into the non-Portuguese language sources for anything useful for the article. Erick Soares3 (talk) 21:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

And the "Operation Tempus Veritatis" started yesterday brought back this subject into public view - and this page may turn into the main way how the international public will be aware of what is happening. Erick Soares3 (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

fine-tuning some English, feel free to check or correct my work. Elinruby (talk) Elinruby (talk) 21:28, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

• Net tightens on Bolsonaro as police seize passport in coup probe Brazil’s former president Bolsonaro under investigation in probe into attempted coup

• Brazil’s former president Bolsonaro under investigation in probe into attempted coupElinruby (talk) 22:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby and Mathglot: If you guys are interested on Brazil's history, you may like to see the stuff at Template:Government of João Goulart; the biography of Paulo de Mello Bastos (I had to read several old newspapers online to create his bio); and more recently, VLS-1 V01, VLS-1 V02 (I made them in the same way as Bastos's bio) and VLS-1 V03 (this one I had to expand). Since @Mathglot has a good-to-advanced knowledge of German, French and Spanish, those might be some good translation options, at least as stubs (especially in Bastos's case). Cheers, Erick Soares3 (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

And there's the Assassination of Marielle Franco. Erick Soares3 (talk) 10:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Erick Soares3: that should be on List of scandals in Brazil at a minimum and probably also Corruption in Brazil. Deserves more prominence for sure; interesting that one of the suspects lives in the same building as Bolsonaro but I am not sure what conclusion to draw from that.

By the way, is this a good source? [8] If this is true, I am making popcorn. Elinruby (talk) 23:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes! That's a good source. That's going to happen in the 22th, and Moraes even denied Bolsonaro's attempt to change his subpoema date. Erick Soares3 (talk) 14:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

For the historical stuff, there's the VASP Flight 375 (zero sources and is easier to translate it from scratch), that even became a movie. Erick Soares3 (talk) 14:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Magpie River - Legal Personhood

Hi Elinruby, the CBC has done a documentary about legal personhood and the Magpie River. Don’t know if you could access it by a streaming service or YouTube? Here’s a link to a CBC article about the documentary: https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7100728 Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I am interested and will look into it Elinruby (talk) 14:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Konrad Henlein

That was a lot of edits to article Konrad Henlein, so I suppose that errors naturally crept in?

In this edit you changed:

"Czechoslovakia had attracted little attention in Britain before 1938, but the few who watched"

into

"Few in Britain had paid attention to Britain before 1938, but the few who did"

Nearby there is a strangeness from 2017

"would then split up into various factions that could then be more easily handed"

which I'd think would be 'handled'.

Seeing these puzzlers, I'd love to see the text closely re-read by a subject matter specialist such as you, looking for any other oddities. I think the article would be improved. Shenme (talk) 02:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Shenme::

Oh.

It took me three reads to see that I didn't change the second "Britain" to "Czechoslovakia" as I intended. I'll fix that. Or you can, if you are already there and would like to. I did a big push to clean up some horrendous WW2 stuff about that time and apparently was moving too fast there.

The 2017 thing would not have been me but I suspect you are right about that. I don't mind revisiting this article, as I have been meaning to use this man elsewhere as an example of an ambitious nationalist; thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'll see what I can do about handed/handled and whatever else.

Possibly Scope creep could be convinced to lend a hand also.

I remember the article now; I am sure it can be further improved, because it was terrible. Does it still go on at enormous length about gymnastics? User:Elinruby|Elinruby]] (talk) 03:40, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Stuff Norwegians say

Hello, did you mean to create Stuff Norwegians say in a sandbox? Thanks, Wikishovel (talk) 07:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Wikishovel: yes, is there a problem with that title? It's a machine translation (attributed) from the Norwegian Wikipedia. Since it's a highly sensitive topic (and certified CT) I wanted to examine the sourcing and otherwise work on it a bit to see if it is worth adding to the English article, which doesn't cover these aspects. Elinruby (talk) 07:29, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Wikishovel: I am not adamant about the title; it can be renamed if need be. It's just what came to mind. LMK Elinruby (talk) 07:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

It's in main article space at the moment, but is not ready for publication yet. Would you like to move that to Draft:Stuff Norwegians say, or perhaps to User:Elinruby/Stuff Norwegians say? Wikishovel (talk) 07:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Wikishovel: ah I now understand why you are asking. I meant to put it in my own sandbox. My mistake; it's been several months since I did this. Fixing that now.Elinruby (talk) 07:44, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikishovel I have confused myself; please check to see whether it is in the right place now? It looks to me like it is, but you're right, it isn't an article (and wasn't intended to be one) and should be in a sandbox. Thanks Elinruby (talk) 07:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I've moved it from User:Stuff Norwegians say to User:Elinruby/Stuff Norwegians say, thanks. Looks like the beginnings of an interesting article. Wikishovel (talk) 08:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Wikishovel: Thanks, that is why I asked. I tried to do that, but got an error message. But I guess by the time I checked the page you had already fixed. Note to self: remember spaces.

Anyway, yeah, It's from the Norwegian Holocaust in Lithuania but there may be enough stuff for a subarticle; someone pointed out on the talk page that the Norwegian article was a lot more extensive (and the current en-wiki article shamefully doesn't say much about the Jewish experience of the Holocaust!) Anyway, thus the desire to take examine the sourcing in chunks and be sure this is the content I want to have a DUE argument over. Appreciate the help with my brain bubble Elinruby (talk) 08:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Moved it to User:Elinruby/The Holocaust in Lithuania (from no-wiki) to avoid confusion with an article about colloquialisms in Norway, which is what I thought it was about until I looked at it. Feel free to move it again as you have a lot of latitude in your user space, but under the old name there was no connection at all with Holocaust issues and you might even forget what it was about under the old title if you switch to something else for a few months. Mathglot (talk) 20:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Jenina Palace

The Djenina spelling led to an image on Commons, which we are using at Regency of Algiers, and to fr:Palais de la Jénina, which has an Arabic version of similar length. I find a number of mentions in books, a few sentences each; Google is mostly showing me writing from an aesthetic point of view, deploring the mistreatment of the building including the "bourgeois" colonial structures surrounding it, but that may be a response to my past reading interests. It was badly damaged in the 1716 earthquake; that ref also indicates there may be sources for Dar al Sultan. And that makes me wonder about Commons:Category:Dey Palace in Algiers. Have at it :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 01:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much Yngvadottir Elinruby (talk) 01:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Our Palace of the Dey article appears correct in stating that that was the successor palace, so someone should probably group the couple of images of Jenina Palace in their own Commons subcategory. I found the new URL for El Watan and note multiple usable articles on the restoration projects, but nothing indexed on the lost palace. You're welcome; this has been a lot more fun than checking AN for new brickbats. Now off to use the last daylight. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Yngvadottir: copying this to a section I opened at Talk:Regency of Algiers, which I am trying to help through a GA nomination. If you are so moved you would be welcome as fresh eyes. There are a couple of subject matter experts involved, but the primary author reads English better than he writes it so I am trying to help with that part. One or the other of them is probably the most likely to do something constructive with this; one suggested that it would be better to have one article about the whole complex. Just an invitation if you are interested Elinruby (talk) 05:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Unable to help

Hi. Unfortunately I'm not able to help you at this time and may or may not be in a position to help you any time soon. As such I suggest you seek assistance from someone else. Sorry, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: Since I was given permission to talk about it I think that question has been resolved, but thank you for the answer. I hope all is well with you. I did see the notice on your page but you came to mind as someone I trust. Elinruby (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Editor introduction, and maybe some language help, too

Hi, Elinruby. I recently have had occasion to interact with editor Blindlynx at a completely unrelated topic, and they appear to have some really interesting background and interests in E. European subjects, including such topics as Maidan Revolution, for example. Blindlynx appears to be a really good editor, and on top of that, is a native speaker of Ukrainian. Elinruby, meet Blindlynx. Blindlynx, meet Elinruby. You guys will have plenty to talk about, I'm sure! Mathglot (talk) 00:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Seen the name. Thinking. Oh. Talk: Occupation of the Baltic States. Which I am trying to get back to. I didn't know you spoke Ukrainian. Do you mind being pinged for language questions? Please let me know if I can help you with anything. Have you met Manyareasexpert? Or My very best wishes? Elinruby (talk) 02:37, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello!, thanks for the introduction! I'd be happy to help with language questions, though ironically I've been busy with translation so haven't been editing as much the last few weeks. What areas have you had uki language questions in? —blindlynx 15:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Usually source verification. Most recently Revolution of Dignity, because when they had it on the front page (on this day) they said the shooters were unknown. But it was in the article and even in the lede. Elinruby (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

cool! let me know —blindlynx 20:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Just bumping this thread as a reminder, because I think there will be synergy here. Just a reminder; no need to respond if there's nothing active now. Mathglot (talk) 09:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC) Thanks. Currently trying to get done with Feudal land use in Algiers before somebody picks that article.for its review. I agree that this sounds interesting. Elinruby (talk) 09:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Pinging

Hi. Per WP:MENTION, pings do not work if the edit alters "[..] any text outside your own comment". It needs to be a new comment entirely.
Thought you might like to know. – 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 20:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85: Yes, that is quite pertinent, thank you. I thought that it was the signature that fired the template? Troutman thanked me so I guess he must have been subscribed, then, but since I can't type to save my soul, this will no doubt arise again. Thank you. And thanks also for your other pertinent comments in that thread. 20:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85: Elinruby (talk) 20:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Unless the documentation is misleading (as in, maybe altering doesn't include deleting lines?). Also supposedly successful mentions show somewhere? (WP:MENTION#Successful_mentions).

Honestly none of this is something I can even check as an IP (we don't get notified). So, sorry if it was wrong, I thought that was how it worked.

– 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I could test, by replacing WP:Sandbox with [[User:Elinruby]], if you'd permit me (also sorry for the slow response I walked away for a bit). – 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 20:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to test but there is half-finished work in the main sandbox, gimme a sec. I will post here once I move it. Elinruby (talk) 20:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Actually it's harder to test than I thought. I'm pretty sure it needs to be under a section, and to replicate what you did I would have to make the system not recognize my signature as moved (yours wasn't) - but I think my signature is too big for that. Sorry. – 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 20:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Had a better, idea. Did it work? – 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 20:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll have to be away for another hour, but the test ping I did was <this one> (at WT:Sandbox, I mispoke), which seems to have been a "deleted line added line" edit, like yours.

– 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm slightly confused about what this tells us. The link works but I was not notified. Does that tell us anything? Elinruby (talk) 21:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I guess you are looking at a log? If it would provide information I guess I could ping Mathglot or vice versa but I would like to have his opinion of that first. Take your time, I need to get to something else also. Elinruby (talk) 21:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, if you weren't pinged then the documentation is correct. It doesn't ping when you alter any existing text (which includes deleting other text).

I guess Troutman was subscribed like you said (or just saw the post). Sorry for overcomplicating things. – 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 22:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Always happy to help someone nerd out on something ;) Did you delete the stuff in the sandbox? Elinruby (talk) 22:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Yep. Thanks. – 2804:F14:80C6:A301:D4DC:46FF:5933:EF85 (talk) 22:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Feel free to chime in any time. Elinruby (talk) 22:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Black market France

Are you the one who asked for the undelete of Draft:Black market in wartime France/translation in progress? Because it's just been brought back, and if you didn't ask for it, then I don't know who would've. Mathglot (talk) 07:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, it hit its six months. I think this is something a confused NPPer did at one point but I wanted to see what it was. I can stick it in a sandbox if it's in your way somehow.Elinruby (talk) 07:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh hey while I have your attention I found an extensive open-access discussion of land tenure and OUP and put the link in the Agriculture section of the talk page Elinruby (talk) 07:16, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Link to Brazilian translator

I pinged you from the discussion, but just so you can find them again if and when you want to, the link to this prolific, fairly new editor translating Brazilian topics is User talk:Racnela21. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot: consider this person also Elinruby (talk) 23:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Link? Mathglot (talk) 23:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

(patiently) @Mathglot:you need help with a Brazilian topic, right? In this section right here you recommend an editor for Brazilian topics. Elinruby (talk) 01:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thought you meant someone else I hadn't heard of, and forgot to tell me who. Sure, there's, Racnela21, and there's also the IPv6 from Parana state on my Talk page at #Helpful IP 2804:F14::/32. Thanks for the reminder. Mathglot (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

{Sticking this here temporarily) in view of the constitutional postulates of procedural typicality and strict legality, the adoption, to the detriment of the person being investigated, the accused or the defendant, of unnamed or atypical precautionary measures is prohibited. [HC 186.490, rel. min. Celso de Mello, j. 10-10-2020, 2nd Panel, DJE of 22-10-2020.]

see

http://char.txa.cornell.edu/influences.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7TIO5AGUa4

Turkish folk dress

Tupip frenzy

Just FYI that page exists at Tulip mania! Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Horse Eye's Back Thanks for trying ;P But by the time I saw your valiant attempt to prevent that particular mental short-circuit from being immortalized, they already had a template up saying close in progress, don't touch. I was pretty sure they thought we were ALL idiots, and that this would not be the thread to try to explain to admins who don't know me that I had been trying to remember the phrase "feeding frenzy" and wound up typng the word "frenzy" three times in one sentence. LOL. I really really do appreciate the effort though. Feel free to try to stop me from doing dumb stuff whenever you think this might be the case. I may wind up disagreeing with you, but I will always at least listen and appreciate the thought. Lol. And kudos for even recognizing that term out of context, actually. I am quietly impressed ~~

Work notice:End of shift

Hi @Elinruby: I noticed the WP:NPP sprint is starting in May, which I intend to take part in, so i've only got a couple of weeks on Regency of Algiers before I bail out. I do plan to work on a couple of my own articles I'm developing so it won't be the full two weeks. I intend to spend the full month on the NPP sprint, so i'll only be showing face occasionally. I've finished reviewing up to architecture, which is fine section. I want to try to get those section I've checked, reviwed. I'm hoping they have been updated. Lastly, remember to sign your comments!!! scope_creep^Talk 18:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: you have definitely done way more than you signed up to do, and thank you. Probably would not have gotten this far without you. I have all sorts of things I need to be doing myself. I will leave off the coffeehouse problem for now and see how we are doing on the checklist. I am uncollapsing it because that works better for me. Go ahead and re-collapse it when you are back if you feel the need. I was planning on going to town tomorrow but maybe I will just put things off one more time (!) and do another marathon. But this is not sustainable. It has taken me several days to recover from the last one. I guess I have one last big push in me. Elinruby (talk) 04:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Morning @Elinruby: I know what you mean. Its been a ton of work getting done. And I don't intend to disappear, I'll be in everyday. Its close to the weekend. I would take a break if you need it. I know you mentioned going away for a day and a night. Its progressing really well. I'll start checking trans titles tags today. I have the next three days off, so can dodge along. scope_creep^Talk 08:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

yeah it is 1:30 Friday morning here. I fell back asleep after posting that. I will save you some trouble -- French trans titles are not all done. N seems to have done all the Arabic though. I set out to fix that once and lost a bunch of unsaved work. I think I have been at what you called death of brain strength the last couple days. Gonna try for an hour or two more sleep. Elinruby (talk) 08:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Don't check in on my behalf. I am done trying to prevent the next GA fail. Elinruby (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Uppsala Conflict Data Program

Do you know about the Uppsala Conflict Data Program? I didn't, until I just ran into it, expanding Draft:List of criminal gangs in Brazil to add an entry for Terceiro Comando, a Brazilian criminal organization, and up popped the Uppsala CDP. It's basically a world conflict database, and the scope is everything and everybody that isn't a state actor, so prison gangs, mafias, private militias, and so on (but not militaries, state militias, etc.). Terceiro Comando's page is here. They also have "dyads", so Terceiro Comando's interactions with the Comando Vermelho gang is here. The country page for Ukraine is here, and there a dozens of links you can try on that page (but not Azov, as they are out-of-scope as a state actor). Anyway thought this could be a really useful resource for you on a lot of the stuff you do, either as general background and research, or to cite. Here's a sfn-style link and full citation you can copy to save reinventing the wheel:

Terceiro Comando are bad dudes from Brazil, and so are Família do Norte.

References

Works cited

• Schützer, Karolina, ed. (2024), Uppsala Conflict Data Program (v2.01 ed.)

Hope this helps. Mathglot (talk) 03:31, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Elinruby (talk) 04:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

It's somewhat reminiscent of InsightCrime, which I think you may have told me about, but a bit more database and search-oriented, and seems pretty complete. Still discovering its features. P.S. The Draft has been released, and is now at List of criminal gangs in Brazil. That was just a side-track that I needed to complete, before continuing with Draft:Brazilian criminal justice, which can now move forward again. Mathglot (talk) 10:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

shiny object ;) Elinruby (talk) 10:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

I am quite interested in that draft and will probably move there next. I stumbled across somebody's orphaned labor of love at Edgar Haynes and after formatting the references a bit better have been amusing myself with categorizing it:

• Category: Confidence trickster
• Category: Congregationalist minister
• Category: American newspaper executive

etc. ;) Not going to do a deep dive though, even if the man does seem to have been a piece of work. Needs an incoming link however and I am pretty sure if I do it from Congregationalism there will be howls of protest. LOL. Elinruby (talk) 10:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Edmonton and the lt gov Elinruby (talk) 01:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Great work on your improvements to Angelita C. et al. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you provide some information on this link?

Elinruby, you added a peacock link to Jordan Peterson's BLP [9]. Can you comment on the problem? Springee (talk) 03:18, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I thought it was obvious. I guess you are here to tell me it's not? I'll go over there and do some more specific tagging if so. Probably tomorrow night PST. Possibly a little this evening, but I have something RL I should really be working on Elinruby (talk) 04:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Springee: the syntax of the parameters on the templates is a little mangled but the specifics you are looking for may be there. I have have enough of a chance to look at this to remember that it was the self-authoring suite that struck me most when I first placed the template. I see some other problems with rs and undue and failed verifications, but I think there are enough other specific problems highlighted there for now. I will however mention that Rachel Notley seems undue, and that some of the other claims are not exactly cited to the best sources.(Oprah? Sure, it's RS, but...) You might also want to investigate the move to deprecate the Telegraph on transgender issues. I have not dug deeply into that, but it's out there, at RSN I believe. I believe the RS tags are self-explanatory, and to be clear, when I say ABOUTSELF I am not complaining about the use of Facebook for the place of birth, although I suspect there is a better source that that available. Ping me from the talk page if you want to discuss this some more, please. I use this page as a running to-do and while I don't mind talking to you about this, it's not a primary focus, and it looks like there may be editing restrictions on the page so any conversation could be lengthy. Elinruby (talk) 09:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Springee: someone has objected to the parameters and reverted me; apparently it is controversial to explain one's tags. So the second template is now in the section rather than at the top of the article where I was trying to put it, since it is about "the article" not "the section", but there you go. Such is Wikipedia. Let's take this to article talk page so I don't get more well-intentioned patrollers lecturing me on collaboration. PS I just did a couple of copy edits that I can't imaging being controversial, and added a failed verification tag Elinruby (talk) 10:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I saw you posted an awareness thing on Trakking 's page. Do you have an awareness tag on your own home page (see the top of my talk page for an example)? Springee (talk) 13:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I was under the impression he was new at the time. i am on my phone right now. I think but am not certain that I marked myself aware of GENSEX, but feel free if you are so moved. Hell give me ALL the templates. Yum yum. They're just to keep newbies from doing stupid stuff but I am not going to get upset. Pretty sure I missed Azerbaijan, COVID and GMO, if it helps. Elinruby (talk) 13:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Elinruby, regarding this sps tag [10], it's common to cite the original source/primary source in cases where the notability etc has been established by RSs. For example, if an article includes "Elon Musk tweeted [stupid thing here]" it's common to link to both the RS as well as the original tweet. Another example would be citing a RS talking about the interpretation of some part of a fiction book then also citing the book itself. That appears to be the case here as well. Springee (talk) 14:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

@Springee: I am assuming good faith as to your whitewashing of mass murder but please do not push it by patronizing me about policies you clearly do not understand. Please get off my talk page, it is not your bitch, and I have already asked you nicely not to initiate discussions here that should be on the article talk page. 14:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, it's hard to assume good faith when you accuse me of whitewashing mass murder again. You already showed that you didn't understand 1RR policies and your use of tags suggests you also do not understand there use either. Springee (talk) 14:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

What did I just say? Get off my talk page. Go re-read what you said and then educate yourself. As for my tagging, it has nothing to do with 1RR. Go re-read that too while you are at it. Elinruby (talk) 14:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Re Black Medicine

I saw your post over on WPO about this article, and it brought back memories. Right when I started editing here, there was a guy on a mission to create an article about every damn Arkham House book that ever existed. This was one of them, and most or all of them remain in basically the same condition—cf., for example, Kecksies and Other Twilight Tales (which is, by the way, an excellent book). There are some people out there who aim to be completists in collecting AH books, so the article may be of some niche interest; but I agree that the book's of dubious notability. (In the "Critical appraisal" section of Arthur J. Burks, there's a quotation from E. F. Bleiler about the book, that could be added to the article, I guess.) Deor (talk) 22:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

thanks!Elinruby (talk) 22:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Appreciation

I just wanted to express how much I appreciate you, and your dedication and determination to ensure the reputability of information on Wikipedia, and the appropriate care and respect to articles about deeply important topics. So, thank you! Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 10:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

thank you very much. You have no idea how much that means to me coming from you.Elinruby (talk) 10:17, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hello Elin, welcome back, and i'm back too btw i was absent because i had a lot of RL work, i thaught i read that you were injured, hopefully you're fine and i pray for your quick recovery.

I checked your additions in TP and i will see what could be added. Nourerrahmane (talk) 07:56, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I fell, there was a small cut, it got infected and since I fell hard enough to expect swelling it was a couple of weeks before I realized that it was infected also. It is under control; I just felt a need to make sure it was healing right and didn't need more antibiotics. I just wrote an answer about images. Want me to upload the palace ones that get rid of the discoloration to the talk page? I have a couple of hours at the moment probably.

• hey Nour for the Trade section I have a source talking about Mizab pastoralists trading with the Tell, and trade routes circa 1839, which is of course out of scope. But I wonder if there is any reason to think those trade route weren't in existence well before that, even though they were observed a little after the in-scope period? Or can you possibly confirm those trade routes with Arabic sources?

  Goods flowing east and west followed three main routes. Luxury goods arriving from Europe via Morocco or Tunisia and transported in merchant caravans made up the bulk of this commerce. The Mizab region lay on the southernmost of these routes and merchants from the Mizab were very active in this trade. In addition,there were two diagonal currents of trade, one extending from El Oued through Biskra to Algiers and the other from the Mizab through Laghouat to Constantine and Tunis. Caravans taking these routes specialized in woven goods, slaves, and gold-dust heading north, with European cottons, olive oil, Kabyle woven goods, and silks and perfumes flowing south.

Trade routes of the Algerian Sahara in the XlXth Century. Donald.C Holsinger Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée Année 1980 30 pp. 57-70 (Persee) [11]

Also: At the end of summer the nomads migrated southward, arriving at their "home" settlements just before date harvest time. If they owned palm gardens, they would oversee the date harvest and prepare the fruit for storage or exchange. During this season Saharan markets were extremely active as products from the Tell - wheat, barley, raw wool, hardware, luxury items - were exchanged for dates, woven goods, and other products. Once these operations were terminated, the pastoralists spread out again over the desert expanse to recommence the cycle." Elinruby (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@Nourerrahmane:

todo

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Canadian_Indian_residential_school_gravesites&diff=next&oldid=1224422434

todo

This user has been called an idiot
on Wikipediocracy,

Something you may be interested in

I don't know much about the particulars of the content dispute you are currently engaged in but if you're interested in Indigenous topics, disc number could probably be improved substantially. Sometimes it can be a good idea to focus on something else for awhile so I figured I'd at least offer this as an option. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

It isn't a content dispute, but your suggestion is noted. Never hurts to make suggestions and perhaps one of the talk page stalkers will pick it up. As it is, my hands are pretty full trying to undo the damage done by Riposte97 before he was topic banned and I literally have work that specifically requires me that is stacking up waiting for me. I have also said I am not accepting new projects. Elinruby (talk) 03:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Apologies for bothering you then. I have my hands full on stuff I'm working on myself so I understand why you wouldn't want to accept new projects. Hopefully a talk page watcher will find it interesting enough. It really is a shocking part of Canadian history – like seriously, tagging people with numbers? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 04:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: You are not bothering me. Some of the very stiff responses you may see me give some other people come after weeks of trying to discuss. I completely agree that it is shocking, but the children at the residential schools were also referred to by numbers so I am less freshly shocked, is all. Your suggestion would be a good one if this was in fact a content dispute over something like a disagreement about whether chicken broth should be used in New Mexican green chile. I have made similar suggestions myself to other people. The schools also did not bother to mark the graves of children who died there, or to notify their families of their deaths, btw. Let me know if you are interested in helping. There is a lot of source verification that needs to be done.Elinruby (talk) 04:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not in your shoes so I can't say I completely understand. I always hated it when I was a kid and people would say they understand when they don't. I'm sympathetic to the idea that this situation would be incredibly frustrating. To me, from the outside looking in, your question to another editor about whether or not they're Catholic seems inappropriate. However, I'm not opposed to the idea of working in source verification if there's something you think I could help with on that front. The residential school system is horrifying in its own right and I've heard plenty about it. My concern with the aforementioned article was that less people have heard of it and it's another part of Canadian history that might be underlooked. I can't promise anything but I can certainly try to be helpful. I don't want to accidentally drown out other people who might have more expertise, I'm really just a random 21 year old that people listen to for some reason. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 04:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

There are things about that that I can't talk about because I did not find them out on Wikpedia (or Wikipediocracy, for that matter, before someone leaps to that conclusion). Put it this way -- the threads I mentioned that I said might be good examples? I did not ask *those* editors their religion. There is a behavioral pattern of using sources that portray the Catholic church as under attack that really imho requires an explanation or intervention. Which I had already put in the Committee's hands. There are other parts of this that I can't talk about because saying that on Wikipedia would require proof, and the proof is private. I didn't need to ask him if he was Catholic. There is a userbox on his page that says so. I'm freaking Catholic. The issue is adamant undue weight and flouncing off angrily when his commands are not obeyed. I gave him the opportunity to declare his COI, and he angrily refused, is what happened.

If you are willing to attempt this, there is a lot of synth at 2021 Canadian church burnings. If you aren't familiar with the issues you probably won't catch all of it but it would be good if some of it was caught by fresh eyes. Basically, look at the source and the sentence it is sourcing, and address any discrepancies. If you aren't willing to live quite that exciting a life -- I am pretty sure that would be exciting -- take a look at Canadian Indian residential school gravesites. There are several lists, which I am trying to move away from, but before we get to the big picture one big issue, not so much with Pbritti, is that the hoaxers claim that no bodies were ever found and for whatever reason a couple of editors went through the article and removed discussions of bodies being found. So for each list item, the idea is to update and improve sourcing, if possible using peer-reviewed sources. Are you familiar with the recent discussions at RSN about sourcing for this? No big deal if not, and journals will definitely not be a problem, but in a straight Google search your top hits will be deprecated. LMK if you need a summary of that. I am on Kootenay right now and moving down at the moment. This was a more or less random starting place. So far some of the items I have worked on, others not. Elinruby (talk) 05:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you familiar with the recent discussions at RSN about sourcing for this? I am not. Is it possible you could link them? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 05:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

There are half a dozen current RSN threads[12][13][14][15] [16][17][18][19][20][21], an NPOV thread,[22]], an RfC [23] covers most of them. [24]]. There are a lot of local newspapers that are imho RS. The short version of that is that if the name of a small town is in the name of the publication and the publisher is Black Press Media, imho it is RS, and Castanet looks like a blog but is in fact a pretty good online newspaper. Ask questions if need be. If you are seriously going to help your questions would be my top priority. But we are trying for journals, remember. A lot of these have had papers written about them. Or if you want you can write up some of the sources for RSN. Main reason I say LMK is to avoid edit conflicts. I will try to be in a different section is all. I am also fixing the main pages for each school as I go. If you find egregious IP vandalism on any of the subpages Daniel Case knows about these pages and has been ec-protecting them. Elinruby (talk) 05:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Wow, that's a lot of background reading. You really do have your hands full. It might take me awhile to adequately grasp the context here. I'll get back to you if I do manage to actually do that. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 06:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Just saw this ... am in the middle of a busy holiday weekend where I cannot yet guarantee that I will have long stretches of time online. But I haven't forgotten. Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Case Yeah, I really should of nopinged you. The situation continues as before, just with fewer Ips and thank you for that. It is the never-ending story. it will be here when you get to it. Elinruby (talk) 09:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I think the really egregious stuff is mostly removed. I think. Don't worry about all the discussions about why -- just don't use Dorchester Review as a reference, for example. That is why I said the best way you could help is by clicking the links and determining if the specific CBC link or whatever actually says what the text claims it supposedly says. Because since the rewrite they mostly don't. Sometimes the discrepancies are minor (these people are not Native American, for example) and sometimes they are leftovers from being written based on an article in True North. a rabidly racist hoax-pushing publication. But you are of course a volunteer. I could however use your help whether you have read those links or not. I sent them to you as a list of names, not required reading, lol. The most important of the hoaxes I keep referring to is that the government is giving these indigenous people money and there are no bodies in the first place. Maybe read the articles and look for that? Maybe just read the articles period and ask questions. I need to know what parts of it people are not understanding. Elinruby (talk) 06:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

In general, I try not to wade into things where I might do harm out of ignorance. That's why I would want to do all that background reading if I delved into this. It's also why I've been hesitant to make any broad generalizations about you or the underlying content issues since Horse's Eye Back discussed it on my talk page/added you and other people as parties to my clarification request. General text source integrity isn't beyond me, though. Double checking to see if a source actually supports a statement is doable. You're right that I am a volunteer... sometimes it's a bit difficult to find the motivation to do difficult things. There's other stuff I'd like to focus on for now but if you still think this will be an issue two weeks from now, I'll try to a do a little at a time. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Clovermossl a little at a time is a little at a time getting done. As far as I aware the most important current outstanding issue is the repeated assertion that "no bodies have been found", when in fact bodies have been found, just not by archaeologists, or it was a jawbone that was found not a body, or they didn't "find" the bodies, the bodies washed into the river after a flood, etc, but please flag anything that seems wrong. Even if you are mistaken it would be an indication that the text should be clearer and be helpful on that level. And if I myself make a mistake I want to fix it (although I am being really careful and don't think I am making mistakes, but that is true of most people who have made a mistake, lol) Elinruby (talk) 09:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Clovermoss also, if you find the talk page intimidating (and who could blame you) just ask me about whatever issues you find here, and I will either fix them, explain them to you, or bring them up on the talk page myself. I am, as it happens. a great believer in the value of fresh eyes. But for now, go eat hot dogs if you want; I realize it's the 4th of July weekend. Elinruby (talk) 23:07, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll comment on the talk page when I'm ready. I appreciate the offer, though. Hopefully a fresh set of eyes on this will help everyone involved. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I skimmed the discussions posted above (at least the ones with working links, some don't work). I'll work on that table now. Also regarding [25] I'd suggest raising the issue on another venue if you think that's necessary because my clarification request is mostly limited to whether a principle ArbCom wrote for a case more than a decade ago is still applicable so I doubt they will comment on your situation specifically. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I think I pinged you at Talk:2021 Canadian church burnings#Text source integrity analysis but I'm not sure I ever explicitly told you that I finished the table (awhile ago). Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I did see it and I apologize for not answering. Since a administrator (mistakenly in my opinion) blocked me over that article I have been trying to finish up a long-term project before going back to it. And there have been a lot of issues with source integrity and cross-cultural communication. I have just given my counterpart over there a pep talk about let's get this GA done and submitted on Monday so hopefully all the flailing and starting over is done. I am absolutely coming back to that and apologize for not coordinating better. I just keep thinking I am hours away from finishing Regency of Algiers, which is a very important article whose sources are mostly in French. When I got blocked over saying there was a genocide (I think) there was concern that GA would therefore not happen.

But I should have said something one of the times that I realized I was going to have to start over. It was rude not to, and I am sorry. Elinruby (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not too worried about it, I just remember you caring a lot about possible OR issues and I was a bit confused about why you weren't commenting at all once I got around to analyzing that. Things make more sense now that I have an explanation. I figured I'd check in because it occurred to me that maybe you didn't even realize that I had finished that and that's why you hadn't commented. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I do care a lot. I live in the BC interior. I will probably have quite a few questions. Let me say here that I really appreciate you doing that. I was a classic use case for third opinion.I don't think I should review what you had to say before commenting on whether there was or was not OR at work. But maybe it will also help if I explain that the reason I am asking is that it is my impression that there was zero coverage of these fires at the time since there were hundreds of square miles on fire at the time, and he qualified that statement as "bizarre". I am interested, by the way, in how much coverage the then-state of emergency over the fires, the floods, the rock slides and resulting coverage got in Ontario. The other editor clearly had no idea at all about any of that. (You may recall that the United States waived passport requirements for Canadian motorists trying to get across British Columbia since all of the roads were out of service for example). Obviously I was deeply concerned about this since the food supply chain was disrupted and they were sending in groceries by helicopter. Equally obviously this was a much bigger news story than random unrelated structure fires (or red paint) but I am not sure how to weigh that. And my editing buddy has new rewrites and still can't spell "constitutional". I hope to be able to discuss this soon. Elinruby (talk) 21:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Autonym

I was looking for this before Elinruby (talk) 13:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Editing others' comments on discussion pages and general talk page editing stuff

Hello Elinruby,

I hope all is well. In several of your recent edits, you have added comments to discussion pages in ways that disconnect others' comments from their original context or otherwise , including this edit on 02:03, 11 July 2024 (which cut off Moxy's comment from the root it was responding to) and this edit on 19:30, 11 July 2024‎ (cutting my comment into parts, and making it unclear who wrote what). For posterity's sake, it's important that we keep talk pages clean and easy to read for when it is archived. Going forward, please try not to cut into the middle of others' comments or disconnect comments from the root where they were responding to.

Thank you,

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:11, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Just for some other examples, stuff like this and this can be confusing, it makes the page harder to read, and it's less accessible. I can tell in each instance who you mean to respond to by using context clues, but it breaks the standard for formatting and threading. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

((ec)) Please let me know when you are done talking. Are you acting as an administrator at the moment, please? You were very angry and making heinous accusations an hour ago, so I question why you have chosen this time to share your thoughts on the problems with threaded discussions. I will read what you said, above, mind you, but you're clearly involved here for some reason that isn't clear to me, and for the third time, I am sorry you don't like my comments in the Request for Comment at RSN, but I am not interested in arguing about that them with you. Have a nice day. Elinruby (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

ok maybe I can get a word in edgewise these. As you have already been told, I undid an edit to my own comment. You told me nuh uh other people can edit my commenta all they want, I told you I thought you were wrong but it was too hot to argue with you, and yet here you are over here today. Elinruby (talk) 20:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

No, I'm acting as a fellow editor. This isn't a particularly angry statement, so I'm unsure what very angry and making heinous accusations an hour ago is referring to. Would you please link to it, at your leisure? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Sigh. It's in your own diff. I really don't have time for this. I've spent too much time on Wikipedia already today. Elinruby (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC) PS if you don't want to give people the impression you are angry, maybe don't accuse them of stuff, in bold font yet, forsooth, meanwhile (edit conflict) I was trying to say this;

OK I see I did cut your comment. I apologize for that as it was not deliberate and apparently there was even more after the ridiculous accusation that I would misrepresent anything anywhere. You accused me of pretty much the worst thing an editor can do, based pretty much on your own confirmation bias, as far as I can tell. I will read the rest of the wild accusations later, and take a good look at what you are trying to say here as well. I have to say that right now it does not feel like a dispassionate administrative suggestion, and I have stuff to do, Elinruby (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Some planning

What is the plan now I'm back for the article? scope_creep^Talk 13:55, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

See Nourerrahmane's talk page. He re-wrote it some more. As soon as I can stand to do so I will start over again, but I am still finding sources that fail verification, and well, see Nour's talk page. Possibly I got through to him this time. Maybe. I still have to figure about about 6-8 language strangenesses and whatever he just did. I just went through and added a location to all of the new references. Which, yes, you had done before the rewrites, I know. This is about the 7th iteration of this since I said fuck it, not going to fight the man over taking his article to featured. Maybe it needs to fail again for him to get it. I don't think he realizes.

Sigh. Talk to me about this later today. I already have enough people telling me I am mean right now. Elinruby (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Proposal for a new, "Propaganda" WikiProject

Hi, Elinruby. I know you're busy with RoA and other stuff, but just thought I'd bring this to your attention, as I think you might be interested. There is call out to create a new, "Propaganda" WikiProject, and I think it might be a good idea, if they can attract enough interested volunteers. Have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Propaganda in your copious free time, and see what you think. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Regency of Algiers is winding up but I will be extremely preoccupied with it for several more days. I don't know if you caught the stone-cold propaganda I found about residential schools though? Yes, I am interested. I suggest that Fluorescent Jellyfish may all be interested in taking a look meanwhile. I will give the matter of other editors some thought Elinruby (talk) 09:24, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to Honduran folklore, would you be interested in a taskforce on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 14:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC) @Koal2701: I am not certain I am available but I would be interested in receiving updates about such a project, yes Elinruby (talk)

History of French bureaucracy

Hi, Elinruby. Scope creep, this is for you, too. I thought you might be interested in the promising Draft:History of French bureaucracy, which needs assistance. It has been around for a while, and has had a checkered past. It started out with a (valid) WP:Afc decline in 2021 for lack of sources/lack of Notability. It was deleted at least twice since then as a stale draft, and then restored again after other editors asked for a WP:REFUND. In its most recent incarnation, The Star Baron worked on it a bit last week, but they are an infrequent contributor (20 edits ago for them was June 2023) and I'm not sure what their plans are, or if we'll ever see them again.

I am quite certain that this is a notable topic, but it was true that it didn't have the citations to prove it. So I challenged myself to find some, and contributed a § Further reading section with eight solid references (so far) that can be used as citations. One of them is a 613-page book that could be the basis of a detailed article about the History of French bureaucracy all by itself (full text available online). Finding them all took a while, and this is about as far as I can go with it for now, as I'm swamped elsewhere. If you have any time and interest, this would make a great article for the encyclopedia, if you could whip it into shape, and above all, insert some inline citations to get past the notability/more citations issue. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Fits with administrative law so yes, interested. Elinruby (talk) 05:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Black market

https://read.dukeupress.edu/french-historical-studies/article-abstract/47/2/289/387227/The-Algerian-Enemy-WithinPolicing-the-Black-Market?redirectedFrom=fulltext Elinruby (talk) 05:19, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Brazilian criminal justice

I finally released the Draft; it is now in mainspace at Brazilian criminal justice. Feel free to link to it, improve it, whatever. Redirect from Brazilian criminal law, so you can use that link, also. Mathglot (talk) 11:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

More South American archaeology

Apropos of § Amazon archaeology above, and Montegrande (archaeological site) which we worked on earlier, now there's this: La Otra Banda in Peru, and 3,500 years before Machu Picchu. Quite amazing. A very recent find, not *that* much written about it yet, but enough to be notable, so I wrote a stub and published it. No doubt it will grow over time. Plus, I never heard of the Zaña Valley archaeological site. Thought you might be interested. Mathglot (talk) 23:35, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I am, although it is unclear to me whether this is a different new an previously unknown civilization than Montegrande. I think it may also be unclear to other people as well, mind you. Note to self to disambiguate from Otra Banda in the Dominican Republic. I forget the syntax for that hatnote though, and eventually this may well become the primary topic. Also, the archaeologist is a postdoc but has a lot of hits at Google Scholar. Many of them about the Moche, which is definitely a different culture, but probably can put some academic references in a bibliography and keep an eye out for the results of the carbon dating. Elinruby (talk) 19:54, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Added distinguishing hatnotes to both; thanks for the heads-up. Mathglot (talk) 04:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Elinruby! I wanted to write a note to thank you for your participation at my AN/I case thread. You didn't need to step in and you did, and you were able to make a meaningful impact where others (me, too!) were not. Most participants didn't seem to examine things as earnestly as you did, and I very much appreciate your effort. You also made some kind comments in a couple different places, and I found them warming. And so: thank you for those, too. -- mikeblas (talk) 20:53, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mikeblas: nothing but the truth ;) Elinruby (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

El C

But do you know what is unmeasured? Making up false health claims about the admin who most recently blocked you. No, I did not have a heart attack, I am in fine health, as I've always been. Also, I doubt Elinruby even knows what country I am in at this very moment. Absolutely wild and bizarre for them to make something like that up. El_C 01:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

@El C: You sure *sound* uninvolved! Why in the world would I care what country you are in? It hadn't occurred to me to wonder. Elinruby (talk) 17:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, it came across as a quasi WP:OUTING attempt, so irrespectively to my fulfilling the policy as prescribed (only dealt with you in an admin capacity), that colours my response. It's a bad look, though, I argue, for you to say that you have a diff but that it's a not-for-today diff. The point is that you do not know who I am, where I am, what I do outside Wikipedia, etc., but it appeared to others (who alarted me) that you had some special insights into my personal circumstances. Which is, of course, false. El_C 18:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

You said it. You equally know nothing of *my* circumstances. Free advice: give thought to the motives of those "alerting" you. I may think that you and your admin actions are full of beans -- they definitely seem quite emotional -- and if I live to tell the tale. here they are definitely getting reviewed, but the root of that state ment was concern for you and Doug. Would it refresh your memory at all if I said it had to do with GizzyCatBella and being accused of a supervote? If that still doesn't help, I will send you the diff when I locate it for the Wikipediocracy person, but so will still have RL eruptions for a few more hours here. PS: if you feel need to reply, please start your own section, ok? Elinruby (talk) 01:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

While I don't question your concern was genuine, it generally comes across poorly when an editor suggests treating other editors different because of the other editors acknowledged medical issues especially if they've never said anything suggesting they might need such special consideration. But also, with Doug's case, at least he's been fairly open about the problems for a while and just recently mentioned more treatment so perhaps it's not such a big deal to mention it. With El C's case, it sounds like you're going by one comment which you've evidently misunderstood or misremembered which given how difficult it is to find I'm guessing was made quite a while ago. Even if you had been right and El C did have a heart attack, there's a fair chance that one comment which you can't easily find should not have been taken to mean they wanted other editors to bring it up let alone suggest care in dealing with them because of it perhaps months or years later. Nil Einne (talk) 22:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Again, I'm pleased to report that I never had a heart attack, nor do I exhibit even anything close to related comorbidities. The reason I know that is because I'm me. El_C 23:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Blatant OR. EEng 02:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Nil Einne it isn't so much that I am having trouble finding it as that I am easily exhausted and am having trouble staying awake to find it. Also, El C, weren't talking to me at the time so it isn't showing up in the editor interaction analyser. I am right now paging back through your contributions and got slightly distracted by the diff for something else that somebody else also says never happened. A lot of that going around. Here is the deal though, El C: if you wanted that forgotten I have no objection to you having it revdeled since the motivation, believe it or not, was concern for you. However since you've called me a liar at Arbcom I am strongly motivated to prove that yea verily you *did* say that. Since apparently you object to this being public knowledge I am sympathetic still, despite your hateful post. I have after all invoked privacy for my own very sudden and very severe health issue, which I have not yet even discussed with Wikifriends. I will say that I submitted as late as I did because I hoped someone else would point out the issues I did, and I wouldn't have to. And also that if I had gotten the news before then, policy matters or not, the news would have taken priority. So I will send it as an fyi in email to Arbs, and let the rest of Wikipedia (to the extent that anyone cares) think I flaked out. Perhaps Nil Einne is right and it was a mistake to think this was publicly known just because you said it oncer a while back. But we are where we are and that is what I can do about it. I know you probably don't want advice from me but the Barbara Streisand effect does apply however. Scope creep, sorry your thread got hacked; I will be in touch shortly. Elinruby (talk) 01:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

You can call it "hateful," but I feel like, objectively, it is you who are the one who made the false claim about me. Maybe I said that in response to, I dunno, repeated exposures to something shocking? A joke? Seems doubtful, but I suppose that's within the realm of possibility. But there's no possible way I said anything like that seriously on parity with Doug—as you've presented without distinction—whose health problems are known (and whom I've emailed before with my best wishes for his health). Think of it from my perspective: people are emailing me concerned for my health and I'm, like, wtf is this? Then you have no evidence and instead of showing contrition, you double down on the attack. You initiated this, not me. But I hope your own health improves and will take your repeated though somewhat incoherent disparagements against me with that context in mind. But please stop continuing to question the state of my own health. It's fine as it's always been. No, I don't fear the Streisand effect because, again, it's utterly false. I've not revdel'd anything of the sort and did not want anything like that "forgotten." I've never even been to a cardiologist, not even for a consult. So, yes, please do find that diff (when your health situation permits), and make it public, just so it's clear it was me who said it and that you didn't conflate me with a different person. And best wishes for a speedy recovery. Yours, El_C 02:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) ElinRuby unless you find a diff, I suggest you drop this now. El C has said they didn't make the comment. I'm sure if they had and it was something they later regretted saying they wouldn't be handling it in this way, instead they'd have emailed you or approached you here and asked you not to talk about it again. As I implied in my first reply, what I expect happened here is you're misremembering or misinterpreting what you read whether the editor who made that comment or they didn't say it like you thought they did. It happens, but it would be a lot less of a deal if you weren't insisting you were right. (There have been plenty of cases when I thought an editor said something and when I finally found what they said, realised I'd remembered it sort of wrong. Note this is a reason why it's always important editors provide diffs when making accusations, even with no malice editors can easily make mistakes and especially when it's been a while)

I should perhaps clarify my earlier comment. In some cases e.g. when the editor is currently inactive or less active because of something it might be reasonable to mention it if editors might be unaware, likewise if it's something very recent. While looking in to this, I was reminded of another editor who did have a heart attack around the time of an RfA. I did come across editors mentioning it around the time it just became public to those unfamiliar. All those I saw, I had no problem with, they came across as genuine attempts to help explain the situation to other editors and to get them to take something they might not know into consideration when it was reasonable that they should. Likewise there is a chance I've mentioned Doug's medical problems before in explaining why they might be less active to some editor (I have the vague idea I might have done something like this for someone) and if not I can see plenty of cases where it's fine to mention.

I can't say this applies to what you wrote for either editor given various details including how you mentioned it and the context. In the case of El C, even if you had been right, it seems like happened long enough ago that it's not likely to be relevant point blank. (For clarity I'm only mentioning this both here and the first time to make the point that even if they had remembered completely right and El C had confirmed rather than denied their statement. I don't doubt El C's statement in any way.) While heart attacks are nasty, I'd say after a month or two unless the editor has asked for some special consideration it's going to be a very rare case it's something that is worth mentioning for something current. Note that the statement you said they made sounds like a generalised way of expressing frustration. I don't think it's reasonable to understand these to be a request that editors don't ping them. While looking in to this, I found a number of editors who said "I nearly had a heart attack" or "if I get a heart attack" similar which were surely intended in a similar vein or in some cases to express extreme surprise.

In Doug's case while I wouldn't say they medical problems are completely irrelevant, it just comes across as poor form for you to be chiding an editor you're in substantial dispute with for asking these editors to consider if they have any relevant to say out of concern over the pinged editors wellbeing. I'd note that when looking further into this just to make sure I understood the context properly, I noticed that the ping happened only hours after Doug's latest news. Unfortunate but it's unsurprising that most would be unaware of what they said. But even if Gitz being aware might have made them consider more carefully whether it's worth bringing Doug into it; the ping had already happened. There had been further request for these editors to participate, no evidence that I saw that Gitz was annoyed that they hadn't said anything. So do you really think you bringing it up 6 days later was ever likely to help anything?

To be clear, I don't doubt you were genuinely concerned over their wellbeing, but I do think your judgment on the usefulness of what you were doing was severely clouded by the fact it involved an editor you were in substantial dispute with. I'm hoping if you step back more you'll understand why what you said was never likely to be helpful no matter the truth of what you said about the editor's medical conditions.

Nil Einne (talk) 02:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Preciate the concern. However I *will* find it; the question is how long it will take. I spent the day arranging a followup visit to my discharge from the CCU and while I am always sorry to upset anybody, I absolutely refuse to risk my life because somebody is mad on the internet. I can't comment on why he denied it, but I would have struck it if had asked. I think I was called enough names already in that case and I have already apologized for expressing concern for his health. Since he insists on going all ABF and making an issue of it, so be it, I am finding other stuff that will be useful. And no, it wasn't yesterday; I didn't say it was. But he out and out claims I made it up. And the hallmark of this whole period has been not having even time and what time I have being wasted by people trying to convince me I remember wrong. While I have occasionally done that, this is not one of those cases. I decided not to appeal the warning because he said this, and hey it was a warning. It was also fact-free mind you and I am tired of AGFing people who are ABFing. In any event the question of involvement needs to be settled. I appreciate your attempt to meditate this, but now is not the time. Elinruby (talk) 06:24, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Elinruby, I didn't ask for you to risk your life. I didn't know about your health crisis until my latest comment above. How could I? For my part, take all the time you need. I won't press you on this further for the foreseeable. But I also don't think it's ABF for me, esp. in the context of how you originally made the claim, to insist the diff be provided eventually. And I still think it was questionable to say I had a "heart attack" as a present factor and in the same breath as Doug's health problems. Regardless, now being privy to your health crisis, I consider it far from urgent. Also, I suppose you could, in the course of reviewing my many contributions as you search for that diff, go on to compile a list of my errors and missteps, to shame or expose me or whatever. I'm sure there are many simply by virtue of the sheer volume of contributions. But the fact is that I've not engaged with you, including that ping, since blocking you for a week on May 18. Until you said that out-the-blue "furthermore the man has had a heart attack," I intended on ignoring it entirely. I suspect the ping was due to that block, though who knows. As for involvement, you appealed my block, which was declined, first by 331dot, then by Floquenbeam, who opened with: "Battleground behavior continues while blocked. If it continues even more, talk page access will be removed" (permalink). Take care. El_C 08:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

sigh. I wanted to be able to point out that what another editor was saying was completely false. But the pitchforks were already out at this point. Are we going to litigate this here? I actually see quite a bit of good page protection work. Since some courtesy has crept into the conversation I'll repeat my offer to handle this privately when I find it. And yes. I don't want to get into the details but after I was already in the case there was an incidental finding in routine lab work that led to a week in a critical care unit, a boatload of beta blockers and a warning to take the whole thing seriously because I was at imminent risk of cardiac arrest, ok? Not a heart attack, just...the heart stops beating and can perhaps be resuscitated. I've been discharged and thought that that was the end of it but there have daily contacts with medical people since. I appreciate the courtesy you are showing now, but that is in fact what is at stake, and I have already pulled an all-nighter or two trying to keep up with the accusations that I am somehow making a personal attack by making substantiated claims, while this allegation of harassment against me is based on zero evidence and not a shred has yet been provided despite my requests that some be provided. See? Good thing it's not a heart attack I am at risk of. So meanwhile real quick, maybe we can come a meeting of the minds here. It wasn't real recent if that is your objection, I grant you that. But I did not make up the fact that you did say that you did not want another heart attack. (This thread will be deleted in 24 hours and I do not object to it being revdeled.) My point was that the thread was already ugly and sick people did not need to be dragged into it; I at least was not dragged in. And yes, I am capable of worrying about people even if I have disagreed with them. If you have completely recovered and wanted that incident forgotten, I am sorry for my error and what amends I can make is to take the rest of this private. Unless you want to withdraw the accusation that I made it up. I will not hold a grudge if you do not. I do not hold grudges. The warning and block are still getting reviewed in good time but I will do my best to fair in the complaint.

The essence of it is simply that I think I am entitled to know what the hell you were on about. Several possibilities occur to me but I am not in your head and since only one of the can be right...As for the warning, the reason am so sure you did say it is that I decided not to appeal that warning in large part because of it. If you want to go into this further would you *please* start your own section? I actually don't hold that warning against you--I probably *was* being annoying. But you gave two different reasons for it and neither of them was "annoying". And one of those wordings, while not at all what I do, has come up repeatedly since. So I don't know, what you see as misbehaviour is not in fact a minor matter. And I should at a minimum know what it is. I acknowledge errors when they are explained to me. In the dispute where you warned me I had a legitimate gripe -- the sources were getting laughed off the board at RSN and my posts saying so were getting removed from the article talk page. Ok, that was not the way to bring it up. But your closing statement on the block definitely would have been a personal attack in any other context, and contained zero examples. Those are the reasons I am going to ask for a review. But since you are telling me that I can take my time, I am going to AGF and take you at your word. Because I am getting tired and that *is* something I need to be avoiding. Good night. Elinruby (talk) 09:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep it private or public, dealer's choice (you know my preference, but it's whatever). Sure, I'll retract that you made it up, because as mentioned, it is within the realm of possibility that I said something of the sort as an exclamation. As for what was in my head: people alarmed about my health for naught. But, again, please stop questioning my story with different variations of "if you have completely recovered and wanted that incident forgotten." Because I keep telling you that is not the case, and that I'm not making up that I never had heart complications, never been to a cardiologist even for for a consult, etc. At some point, you need to take me at my word, too. Rest and recuperate well, and I hope you don't worry about any of this until you made a full recovery. Best wishes, El_C 09:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

P.S. If you think a revdel of this thread (my addition to it) will help with your recovery, please let me know and I will do it for you. El_C 10:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Elinruby, you mentioned GizzyCatBella and it suddenly dawned on me. I think you might have conflated (misremembered) me with another admin. I don't want to make them relive that, so I've emailed you the diffs. Please, there's no urgency, I'm just wondering if it rings a bell. Yours, El_C 12:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Well you seem to be complaining that I mentioned. I prefer public of course. You accused me of lying in a public high-profile venue after all. I am taking that to mean no. You do not want it revdeled. Since I find your position on this baffling I will refrain from further comment this morning except to say that what I need to recover -- and they do tell me that I will recover if I follow the really strict instructions -- is not the point. I am prioritizing it, is all. And maybe I have a little more distance and care a little less about someone is lying on the internet. I don't mean you btw.

But I think you and Nil Einne are missing a fundamental point. I did not ping you, someone else did. And I reproved him for it. Apparently he imputed a great deal of malice that is simply not there. It is true that we haven't spoken since May, and apart from have to be "gentle, concern that is precisely the point. Why ping you at all, regardless of whether you did or did not have a heart attack at some point? Similarly, dragging Doug into all the mudslinging was uncool, but I didn't do that, Gitz did, and somebody needed to rebuke him for it and not only for dragging him in, but for completely misrepresenting the conversation, which I provided in full on the evidence talk page. It went on from there on Doug's talk page and became an amiable conversation about the side effects of chemo. Doug did *not* "warn" me and in fact came to the conclusion that Gitz was indeed repeatedly violating BLP. For which Valeree page-blocked him. I have things to do other than repeat myself though; I still have to arrange transportation from way out here in the woods to the cardiologist's office. I guess it is not your fault that you believed what someone told you, but maybe next time someone tried to use you in furtherance of an old grudge you will do some more verification than you apparently did. Elinruby (talk) 20:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Did you look at the diffs in the email? Do you think they are it and that maybe you misremembered? Of course, I want it public, but I don't want to tax your health. I don't object to you publicly reproducing the email I sent you, I just didn't want to cause distress to the admin I think you mistook me for. I tried to be gentle after learning about your health crisis, and I still am, but as Vig notes (unrelatedly) Hitchens's razor still is what it is, and it is you who are on the side of its burden, not me. If you choose to use quotation marks, choose to invoke a purported past medical emergency about someone (me), then it's on you to ensure you have the source for that beforehand, so you can see the quote is accurate. This is all quite basic. Feel free to take all the time you need, but realize that I've got a more pointed focus here: to understand the basis for why you alarmed people who thought I was in a precarious medical state. El_C 20:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I've stricken the unfounded claim, since ER appears to ill too do so themselves (I hope they get better asap). If a clerk slaps my wrist for doing this on an arbcom page, then I suggest El C ask a clerk to do it themselves. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: you jumped the gun just a little, as my current stance on this is trust but verify. But herm, you are right, I am currently walking and talking but just barely, and have lost nine pounds this week because I cannot eat or lie down to sleep. However I could, in that period, conceivably have confused the two admins, but as explained to EL C, have only today had the time to verify that I did, which I am still trying to do. I don't protest the action though; we can revisit it if necessary, and if it makes El C more comfortable, by all means, that is fine for the next couple of days until that particular point is resolved.

I also greatly appreciate your followup question to Gitz, as is completely on-point and AFAICT nobody else has noted that no evidence whatsoever has been given for his contention that I harass him. He appears to believe that it is somehow harassment to do source verification. I disagree.Or perhaps he is talking about my attempt to keep Wikipediocracy out of his vendetta (his word, evidence of that went to Committee because that is apparently what one does with offwiki evidence) against the Italian steward. I sent Arbcom evidence about that, but of course you and SilverLocust are unaware of that, as apparently are two of the arbs. Tough to say, and he has refused to clarify this point, despite being repeatedly asked. Instead we have the novel interpretation that it is a personal attack to claim that he might be kind to animals, sigh, or possibly women if they behave.

@El C: erm, who is Vig? You do have mail, btw. It is not a *past* emergency as it continues to be getting both better and worse in that there is now a working theory of what is happening exactly, and therefore the long-term prognosis is better, and worse in that will probably be incapacitated for several months at least. It is not currently an emergency, which has been defined for me as chest pain lasting more than five minutes or arrhythmia lasting more than three. If that were currently the case I would be writing this from an ambulance. It may be the case later, who knows. I have spent the past week setting up appointments with half a dozen specialists and making arrangements for chemotherapy, surgery and radiation therapy courses of treatment. All of this is 150 km and two to three hours away on mountain roads in winter. Arbcom has been offered documentation of what you scoffingly call a past emergency. As previously noted you do not have to be "gentle". Cardiac arrest is not the same thing as a heart attack. While a heart attack can cause cardiac arrest, I do not have high blood pressure and do not have to avoid being stressed; the issue is that I get very very tired very very fast. Writing this answer for example has been exhausting. But not stressful. It's basic, you say. Nod. True. So is being able to identify a reason for blocking someone other than a years-old warning for reasons you don't quite recall and that I recall as contradictory at best. Let's take this back offline shall we? I agree that it would be much better not to distress that other admin, for a start.

Draft of interest on a French topic

A user wrote a good draft, and then disappeared. You might be interested in the topic; see WT:FRANCE#Foster parents needed for Draft:History of French bureaucracy. Scope_creep, you, too perhaps? Mathglot (talk) 03:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

yeah, you were talking to me about it back in August. I was interested but Regency; now I am interested but about to go through some medical stuff that came up in the middle of an Arbcom case. I will send you an email shortly, and try to at least take a look. What does it need besides a copy edit? validation and verification? trying to tie off the knots in the Yasuke thinke. Will do my best to at least look later today. Elinruby (talk) 14:37, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot: I went over there last night and took a pretty good long look. It might lure me back into administrative law, indeed. I do agree with you and the other editor that it's a decent stub that needs some fleshing out, still a bit light for the very huge topic. I pointed out that the Napoleonic Code is just barely mentioned, and there is a lot of history in the colonies and possessions (though I do not know whether Viet Nam for instance is still a civil law legal system, and DR Congo afaik is afaik still a kleptocracy. In Algeria, btw, there was a two-tiered legal system after 1830, one for the colonists and one for les indigenes; that much is certainly worth a mention, and so too are any regulators of the slave trade, for example.

Oh and that mention of Germany was interesting; I hadn't noticed that, and there is also what @Piotrus and Volunteer Marek: had to say about Napoleon's influence in the Duchy of Warsaw. Poland still has a hybrid civil law system, I think.

Quebec is a little different since the land records for example were set up on the Ancien Regime model; colonization there started way back in the 16th century, but Mr Sargeant Buzfuzz (sp?) said that at the federal level the legal system is a hybrid adaptation of the civil law system. I *think* but cannot swear that he said it was a common law system until the repatriation of the constitution (ie Canada wrote its own constitution to replace the British North America Act, an act of the British Parliament that sort of lingered on after Confederation until relatively recently. Within my lifetime, certainly, although I am a bad citizen and do not remember the that very important date. Also the Bastion de France bought the concession to export wheat and coral from the Regency of Algiers to Marseilles. I think the sub-Saharan caravan routes went to Morocco and Tunisia, but there would also have been French bureaucracy there, no? Pretty sure, although there was some stiff competition in Morocco from Spain, but the Bastion de France was quite early, 17th or maybe even 16th century. My proposal was that for now I grab one of your sources and start reading. I am most interested in the Ancien Regime, but most of the regulatory agents like tax collectors and toll collectors either bought their positions or were given them like party favors by the royals. Not sure how much of that is DUE, but I think we should probably at least go into it enough to point out how sharp a break with tradition Napoleon actually brought on. Anyway, here is a brain dump; I will try to send that email a little later today. But I am glad the article has a shepherd, because it looks like I will be very very tied up for at least a couple of months. Elinruby (talk) 00:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this. It's odd that it was declined in 2021, and then not deleted after that; drafts often are after six months, but I am wondering if having an Afc submission draft, even a declined one, on top of the page protects it from the draft deletion bot. If so, I am going to start placing declined draft templates on all my drafts, so I don't have to move them to my userspace to save them, like we had to do with Glossary of French administrative law.

As far as releasing as a legitimate, notable, stub I don't think it needs much. The Further reading section clearly establishes WP:Notability of the topic, but I haven't checked if the citations actually used to verify the content demonstrate that the current content is verified by sources that have WP:SIGCOV, so it's mostly a matter, I think, of running down the nine citations to see if they are significant, and if not, add some of the Further reading ones into the body as citations. Once it is released, it will probably get picked up by who knows whom, and grow organically from a stub to something decent.

No worries on the timing; I also have various things stacked up, which is why I haven't replied at Template talk:Talk header as I should have, but I will eventually. Mathglot (talk) 02:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that it was declined because someone questioned notability, which to me says that they Just Don't Know -- the regulatory environment of any country would be notable, probably, although I could see questioning that for a place like --idk--Prince Edward Island, maybe. But I have an article in the GA queue about pesticide regulation in California, for example, and to me "bureaucracy" means "admin law" and French doesn't mean just France -- it's most of the countries in the world. But fine. We are where we are. This is something that *mostly* doesn't require a huge of coffee or concentration from me and can be done in short breaks from tedious and/or annoying tasks. I did a superfical pass on parts of Joseph lister earlier for exactly that reason. I will pick out one of the books later tonight maybe. Right now I am seeing the light at the end of the tunnel on the annoying task. And yeah the English is a bit um passive, but it is colloquial and correct, probably written by an english speaker, I think. Did we find out how his French is? Not that that is really a problem either way Elinruby (talk) 02:40, 28 October 2024 (UTC)