ArchivesEdit

This user declares his annoyance at browsing through articles initiated by US or UK users which fail to mention that the theme has to do with one of the two countries (arguably because they assume that English language wiki means "English/American wiki").

The return?Edit

Can we say you are at last back from your Commons peregrination? Not much to report from my side, expect to point out a couple of articles that might be of interest: Creangă and Ghenadie. Oh, and this was an exciting episode. At least it did, in fact, backfire, although it ended "without prejudice to reopen if more evidence can be presented at a later date", and the final paragraph of the PCR article remains somewhat degraded. - Biruitorul Talk 15:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The thing about commons is that I could do a lot there printre picături - unfortunately for everyone, I was doing the sort of things in RL that just didn't allow me to concentrate more (but lo! what treasures have I uncovered). I did the occasional "sneak preview log-on" thing over, but it seemed like I kept getting orange bars from Wynona, Annitas and the bots, plus some tangential problems that would really sort themselves out. It's not keeping up with my friends that I regret most.
And then, whoa, I was inactively active, which apparently saved the country. I will never cease to congratulate myself for that, except to say that the anti-USLists would better come up with a better strategy than staying home, say, by December. And they better clean up their own act. The Prigoană defection is a good omen, IMHO.
But enough of that. Seeing I'm not so sure where I'll be by the end of the week, I'd best make good use of the editing and chatting time I still have. No RL stuff, just in-universe fun.
I'm sure you've seen me pulling the Stakhanovite all-nighters on the two important Drăghici redlinks, and I think I know which one you liked best. Somehow, they're both in sync with my love for paradoxes and nuances, like building blocks that meet up just right. Tudor-Păstorel-Drăghici, and you get Romania in a nutshell.
But yes, as you remind me, there are other subjects, and would you believe it, I had actually read both those articles in print, in two of only three Adevărul issues I bought this year. Serendipity? divine mission? or am I being dreamed of in your dream? Since it's about me, it's probably somethting greater and more symbolic than all three combined. [Room for Anittas to insert his reply on the subject here; then delete at my convenience.] Dahn (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review: probably the only time I've gotten three for one article. I'll have a look at some of your pending nominations soon. As a testament to how much work some areas still require, this was in fact our first ever article on a building in Romania's sixth-largest city, one that is perhaps not chock-full of tourist attractions but still has a clutch of old churches and a bunch of other interesting buildings. Much the same could probably be said for a couple dozen other cities. We've barely scratched this surface. Another thing that's been swirling around my mind are the dioceses: Râmnic, Severin, Strehaia, Huşi: there's a lot of history there too. Or the various princely courts, the centuries-old high schools (hello, competent Hungarian editors on en.wiki, if you still exist!, although those of us whose grasp of Hungarian is so tenuous could still write about the Călata Autonomous Republic, maybe in time for December 1st), but I'm probably getting ahead of myself.
Having to guide someone to deletion a second time is tiring, but at least the sockpuppets liven things up. - Biruitorul Talk 18:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Here is what I meant about the sort of diocesan histories we're missing. It could use some polishing, but I'll probably send it to DYK this week. - Biruitorul Talk 05:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
If I may use this space for a bit of a complaint: how to respond to this? Granted, it's not an insurmountable hardship, but still, nearly two weeks of waiting (and still no word on Râmnic!) results in what seems like a series of quibbles. First I'm supposed to either cut out material (it seems relatively pertinent to me, and I don't think I'll do that, at least until Ioan Popasu gets written) or "make things very clear for the average reader", whatever that means. Then the hook is supposedly too long and not detailed enough, and then I'm supposed to "cite" something the text makes abundantly clear (at least to me). Bail me out, Capataz! - Biruitorul Talk 21:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Oh, no need to apologize: I'm sure dozens of people saw the nominations and passed up a chance to review them, for whatever reason. Anyway, your reviews were quite welcome: they gave me a morale push to finish my latest piece (looks like I'm on the ș/ț dark side for the moment). When I do nominate it, I hope things move faster — I think we might even use the tower as a DYK illustration for that batch, having as it does the distinction of being famous in Romania, not so famous outside, but still eye-catching (at least to me). - Biruitorul Talk 04:59, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
PS: picture me rolling my eyes. - Biruitorul Talk 05:04, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Mărgărita Miller VerghyEdit

Hello Dahn. Thanks for your comments at Talk:Mărgărita Miller Verghy. I would like to invite you back to comment on a follow-up proposal. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 22:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

  • I made a stub at ro.wp yesterday. Feel free to edit/move/change/correct as appropriate, you did a great job on the en.wp article and the ro.wp one is small tribute. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Sandu TudorEdit

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Fondane Fundoianu.jpg)Edit

  Thanks for uploading File:Fondane Fundoianu.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

Thanks for your DYK review of Synagogues of Gibraltar. Anne (talk) 23:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for writing a very valuable article. Dahn (talk) 23:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Viorel ChivrigaEdit

I strongly appreciate your willingness to write good articles. But, since when an article is discussed not based on arguments? Can you please explain that to me. In case you can prove that the article is not reliable, it doesn't meet any wikipedia standards, I will ask for deletion myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breaking Good (talkcontribs) 12:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:POLITICIAN, WP:BIO. These are the wikipedia standards. And it's not reliability we're discussing over there, but notability. Is Chivriga notable by wikipedia standards. No, he is not. Moving on, if you please. Dahn (talk) 12:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Delete it then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.201.44.243 (talk) 16:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Nicolae IorgaEdit

Salut, țin să te felicit pentru articolul Nicolae Iorga pe care într-un viitor mai apropiat sau îndepărtat îl voi propune la AB (poate se vor plânge unii că ar fi prea lung și trebuie împărțit în sub-articole). Oricum, m-am apucat să-l traduc în română (sper că nu te superi :) și pe pagina de discuții au apărut deja întrebări. Vreau să-mi spui, dacă îți mai amintești, titlul cărții lui Iova. Mulțumesc anticipat.Ionutzmovie (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK credit for Păstorel TeodoreanuEdit

Yngvadottir (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

EnglezaEdit

"Eu stiu engleza, o simt in mine, o mai repet putin, cam o luna, si gata." -- Gigi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cei Trei (talkcontribs) 12:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Să trăiască nea Gigi! Dahn (talk) 10:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Elena BacalogluEdit

The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Henric StreitmanEdit

The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

iMago RomaniaeEdit

Not sure if you know about this great source of images. Best --Codrin.B (talk) 20:40, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Excellent! Thanks. Dahn (talk) 06:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

IorgaEdit

Aruncă o privire la commons:Nicolae Iorga, am populat categoria cu imagini pe care poți să le introduci și în articol.Ionutzmovie (talk) 20:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Freedom of speech = New WikiProjectEdit

Hi there, I'm notifying you as I noticed your impressive work on the GA Quality article, Alexandru Bogdan-Pitești. I've recently gone ahead and created WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

  1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
  2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
  3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
  4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
  5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 22:04, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

A touch of potpourriEdit

This might be of interest. (Get the potpourri/Popery pun?) Anyway, there's a new figure (p.12) for the number of Romanists in Romania (869,246), so Roman Catholicism in Romania should be modified at some point.

Did you see this? One thing that struck me: Ştefania Mărăcineanu, Ana Ipătescu, Alexandrina Cantacuzino, Aurora Gruescu, Elisa Leonida Zamfirescu and Cecilia Cuţescu-Storck are all redlinks. I'd opt for an "Elena" theme: Ceauşescu in the middle, flanked by Băsescu and Udrea. Or, barring that, Ecaterina Teodoroiu: a pretty straightforward character, and plus there have been no Oltenians since these were withdrawn.

Speaking of women, I need a bit of moral support. Did I have a point here, or was I totally off? Let's hope this goes a little better. - Biruitorul Talk 03:29, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah, yes, in due time - unless you want to jump in first. I was also pondering adding to that: I chanced upon a recent issue of Magazin Istoric, with a Totok article about the Bucharest Archbishopric locum who was a Securitate informant...
Yes, and it's a waste of taxpayers' money. If equality is what's needed, they should just renounce all portraits - the very principle of a republican nation represented by its "best and brightest" on its bills (in the crudest form of interaction between people) is farcical; and it's only as a republic that we started doing it. They should just have abstract designs or faceless groups, or bridges, if I were to have a say. Plus, this feminist travesty is, as I understand it, a reflection of the fact that Romanian women are underrepresented in Romanian culture; and they are. That might just be a historical fact, so what does their artificial overrepresentation achieve? I mean, those links are still red because, well, the women in question are relatively obscure, even by Romanian standards. Our provincial culture was held up by provincial men - if we have to have portraits that represent that culture, then we might as well stick to the fact.
Yes, you did, and yes, let's hope so. If it might take me a while to throw in my 2 cents, it's because I'm fed up with some of the keep voters' arguments. Dahn (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Merī Kurisumasu, and I certainly hope that, having survived the end of the world, we'll see a renewed burst of activity from you come 2013. - Biruitorul Talk 22:21, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Hallo, it looks as though you're back. I want to start off on a lighthearted note: Ceauşescu in Peru. It's quite funny; I just hope "those" people don't see it. They'd surely miss the irony about "intensification of dialogue" and consider the "accord for promoting investments" on a par with the Potsdam Treaty.
In case you missed it, there's a handy new feature that allows you to see all recent changes to pages linked from a particular page. For example. You can see up to 500 changes over a month. It also works for categories.
As I predicted, János Scheffler degenerated into the sort of pettiness I loathe. He's now "Hungarian-born"; we can't mention the state of which he was a citizen for most of his adult life, because that would "confuse readers" who "never click links" into seeing him as an ethnic Romanian; and we can't mention Austria-Hungary either, because "there was no such thing as Austro-Hungarian citizenship". We also invent the idea that he took Romanian citizenship after Trianon, when in all likelihood he did so after the Romanian Army took Satu Mare in April 1919. But hey, at least we now use the word Szatmár five times.
Now here's a situation. A fellow maintains his own biography and that of his deceased wife; they look awful. I come in and pare things down, but now those versions are probably about to go because that fellow and another fellow start shouting COPYVIO!!! Really, though, does this look like a copyvio to you? Does this? I don't really care about this situation anymore, but it's discouraging.
Finally, Latin peoples? - Biruitorul Talk 17:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

As I (patiently) await any comments you may have, permit me to express my extreme ire at a certain situation. Some months ago, Category:Freemasons was revived, which is good news. The bad news is that a certain user has done all in his power to whittle away at the category. First he tried getting it deleted; didn't work. Then he put up that rather pompous warning. And finally, he's been consistently removing the category based on his esoteric POV.
With regard to Category:Romanian Freemasons, we had about 40 and are down to a handful. Some were removed because they're unsourced in the article, e.g. him. I can sort of buy that, even though they're all sourced at List of Freemasons and it feels rather odd to stick in "[X] was a Freemason" in isolation simply to justify the category. But what I find intolerable is something like this - for someone like Cuza (and all the other '48ers), their Freemasonry is most assuredly a notable characteristic, in spite of this user's POV. In fact, quite a bit more notable than his Orthodoxy, but I see he leaves that category untouched.
Speaking of which, if the Freemasonry category is to function somewhat like the religion categories (and it should), the removals appear even more absurd. Category:Romanian Orthodox Christians includes figures like Theodor Stolojan, Petre Roman, Adrian Năstase, Relu Fenechiu or Victor Ponta even though their Orthodoxy is in no way a notable characteristic of theirs. I mean, when I think of Fenechiu, his religion is not the first or the second or probably the tenth thing that comes to mind, but it still seems logical to have him in the category. But somehow we can't have Bălcescu when, in fact, his Freemasonry was quite important? I don't like what's happening.
Ah, and I have an RM going on. - Biruitorul Talk 18:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to touch the Freemasons with a pole, not yet at least. The way I see it, what they're doing is exactly as moronic as the alt text experiment. Whatever "solution" they think they're enforcing over there, and whatever sort of Americana spillover these "rules" are, I'm willing to bet consensus will change over and over again until the two sides figure out for themselves that nobody outside the US cares about what "exposure" might do to the historical Freemasons. (Incidentally, what I don't get is how on earth they even picture that the Grand Masters" subcat in category is a good substitute for "Freemasonry in Romania" - are all Grand Masters from Romania?) Dahn (talk) 19:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
And I'm sorry, ten times sorry, for all the stuff I left hanging. But was it worth the wait? Dahn (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh, absolutely. But I'm learning new things every day: apparently, you can say stuff in an AfD and have it count as evidence of notability! And this from an administrator... - Biruitorul Talk 05:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
This crap all over again. I suspect the notability standards in some areas are intentionally lowered just because many editors would also like to see themselves/their families meet the criterion. Take a deep breath, live to fight another day, that article will simply survive as a virtual shrine until the larger problem is addressed. Or forever... Dahn (talk) 13:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Well, we shall see. But now that I have your ear, Mihai grunfeld is also up, as is Stefan Ramniceanu (may or may not be notable, but we shouldn't be using his autobiography, even if he gave us permission). I note that Codrin Țapu also has a page. Cezar Lăzărescu is by his daughter, but he does seem to have a claim to fame. All right, so let me ask about a few more. There's Nicole Valéry Grossu: looks like a bit of a memorial to me. Then Arise Gheorghe, Arise Ioan!, which cropped up around the time of the Mihail Neamțu flap. What about Laura Poantă? Cristina Trăilă? (Keep in mind she was not elected to Parliament.) And finally, what about Dobrujans? Is this like Oltenians or Muntenians? - Biruitorul Talk 15:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

The Expert BarnstarEdit

  The Expert Barnstar
I hereby award you the Expert Barnstar for your outstanding contributions to Romania-related topics. This award is given to a few people who are regarded experts in one or several particular fields. Congrats and keep up your excellent work :)!--Tomcat (7) 14:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Kewl, thanks! Dahn (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

MomentEdit

Hi. Do you have any data/info to add to Moment (Bucharest)? I can't find anything. --Soman (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. --Soman (talk) 18:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Lingura de aurEdit

"Mie îmi place luxul. Am nobleţe în sânge. Asta nu înseamnă că nu mănânc şi cu mâna, dacă nu am furculiţă, nu dorm şi pe o cârpă, dacă este nevoie. (..) Mie îmi place să mănânc cu lingura de aur. Am cumpărat linguri şi furculiţe de aur. Am dat 30.000. Mama şi familia nu vor. Dar eu ce am observat? Ia o lingură de aur şi bag-o într-un ceai. Să vezi cum moleculele transmit căldura mai bine şi simţi căldura, temperatura după cum pui mâna pe lingură." --Cei Trei (talk) 18:22, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Great. Now, do Căcărău. Dahn (talk) 19:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
I had to google that. I don't have to do the Cacarau. You're working for Him, remember? It's that time of year again, when he's begging for money in order to afford traveling and paying off his whores. --Cei Trei (talk) 14:40, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
You mean God? Wasn't He dead? Get with the program, dude, do Căcărău. Dahn (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
If you mean to say that the co-founder of this site is god ... eh. But yeah, I can see where what I wrote above can apply to organized religion. There are some similarities between the two. --Cei Trei (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Mircea FlorianEdit

Hi, I see you changed "Hungary" to "Germany". I have the booklet in front of me, and on the cover it says: "conflux, Pont Publisher, Budapesta 1998"; on the inside of the front cover it says: "Drepturile acestei ediții aparțin editurii Pont, Budapesta; H 1300 Budapesta, Kiskorona u. 2, tel/fax +361.368. 80 58 ... Editor: Szávai Ilona" etc. Best regards,--Mycomp (talk) 09:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Panait CernaEdit

It's been quite a while since you've edited this article, but since you're its lead author, I wanted to make sure you're aware that it's undergoing a GA review. Cheers, Homunculus (duihua) 08:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Richard DawkinsEdit

I'm too tired to instigate, so I'll just throw you these two titles: The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype. In the first book, Dawkins introduces the idea of the meme (which is superior to Popper's World 3 nonsense by actually being scientific). I remember you using that word in a message to Bir, and I got this feeling that you haven't read the book, just by the way you used it. I could be wrong, though. Anyhow, it's a great book and it certainly makes you look at the world from a whole different perspective. There were many times that Dawkins left me breathless; and I had to throw away the book for days so to avoid a nervous breakdown (others are said to have contemplated committing suicide). It's such a tragedy that our country can't produce scientist like Dawkins. Instead we got ... meh. Oh, I almost trolled there! Almost! See, I'm getting better. Maybe one day I'll be an outstanding citizen like you and Bir. :) Later! --Cei Trei (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

bai ... ba ... uai! eu cu cini (sic) vorbesc, uai'? --Cei Trei (talk) 12:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Lolz, I think that user used google translate to have that line translated. And it translated "bai" as bathrooms. hahaha!

"Regulamentele nu sunt la fel. Nu ştii că leul... peştele mare îl înghite pe cel mic? Tigru-i tigru, leu-i leu, elefantul e elefant. Steaua este elefant." Gigi. --Cei Trei (talk) 21:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Plasă (plural plăși)Edit

Domnule Dahn, am nevoie de erudiția dumneavoastră dovedită. Puteți găsi surse bibliografice care să confirme pluralul plăși pentru singularul plasă, ca unitate administrativă subdivizionară de ordin doi a României Mari? Există tot felul de utilizatori de tip Toma Necredinciosu' pe ro.wiki. care contestă pluralul, care (conform opiniei mele) este o problemă simplă de bun simț românesc. Wars (talk) 21:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:11, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!Edit

Merry Christmas, Dahn! I'll be traveling to Lanzarote in a few days so I can just as well wish you a Happy New Year! since I won't be checking on Wikipedia so often. Yeah, I'll be climbing some mountains, go on a cycle tour, jogging, sunbathing, maybe go for a swim. You know, relaxing and having fun! You should try it some time. It's not all about visiting death camps and the home of dead poets that no one cares to know about! Oh, I should tell you about this book that I'm reading! It's called Moneyball and it's about a bunch of guys who uses statistical analyses in baseball while applying a psychology factor to their formula. It's great! Their ways have impacted the world of sports and it's now creeping into some business models. Here's a citation from Chapter 5:

"When you think of intellectuals influencing the course of human affairs you think of physics, or political theory, or economics. You think of John Maynard Keynes's condescending line about men of action--how they believe themselves guided by their own ideas rven when they are unwittingly in the thrall of some dead economist. You don't think of baseball, because of don't think of baseball as having an intellectual underpinning. But it does; it had just never been seriously observed and closely questioned, in a writing style sufficiently compelling to catch the attention of the people who actually played baseball."

...and this: <<"When the numbers acquire the significance of language," he later wrote, " they acquire the power to do all of the things which language can do: to become fiction and drama and poetry.">> (The Field of Ignorance)

Okay, so the point that I'm trying to make here is that a bunch of mathematicians and scientists, instead of going to work for Wall Street, where the real dough was to be found, instead followed their passion and did what they loved the most; and in the process, left a legacy. That's what it's all about, Dahn! Not to do pompous things and look down at what you see as trivial (sports, for instance). Well, this was my Christmas wish for you (lolz). Take care, Dahn! :) --Cei Trei (talk) 07:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

TalkbackEdit

Hello, Dahn. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bot requests.
Message added 19:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vacation9 19:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

PhilippicsEdit

I'm reading Cicero's Philippics against Marcus Antonius. That was some major trolling from Cicero's part (if we use Wikipedia's definition for trolling). It's amazing 'cause while you read it, you realize how alike people were in their reasoning, when they went to criticize and provoke others, even if it happened some 2055 years ago. You know, the thought process and all. It follows similar lines. I recognized myself in many of his comments, you would too, I'm sure. Yeah, maybe you're right, I should first finish the book and acquire a better understanding about the art of provocation before bugging you, 'cause you're like this lizard that keeps adapting to my bite and it's such a pain! Right, so what's new with you? All good in the hood? Heard the bad news? The mass of the Higgins particle is fucked by a few percents, so our universe is gonna die out in like some tens of billion of years from now ... unless we go from type 0 to type 5, or something. Umm, yeah, what else should I tell you. Meh, I'm reading this book, The Actor and the Target. It's alright. After that I'm gonna check on Last Ape Standing. Maybe you should, too. Yeah, what else ... let me think. Oh, I emailed Jmabel and he's well. Yeah, I'm telling you this because I know you care. You come from that part of the world where people have big hearts. Like our guy who's gonna donate a million Euro to Mount Athos. Smell you l8r. --Cei Trei (talk) 15:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Forgot to tell you that I sent in a sample of my saliva to 23andme.com to have my DNA mapped and they found out that I'm between 0.7 to 1.4% Ashkenazi Jew (I can never get the name right so I just call them, or me I should say, Ack!). I informed Jmabel of this, hoping we'd connect and stuff (him being a Jew, also), and suggested he'd map his DNA, too, but he said he don't care about any of this stuff (between you and I, I don't think he likes Jews very much). Anyhow, is this why you ignore me, 'cause I'm Jewish? But Dahn, us Jews are people, too! Yeah, there's more to say about this, but I think I'll save it for another time. I hope you won't view me any different now. I'm still the same guy, Dahn! Just try to look beyond the labels that others put on people! --Cei Trei (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
That's gotta be the explanation of why I don't dislike you as much! What can I say but mazel tov. Dahn (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Shatner said it first! --Cei Trei (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

You and Beer should have a look at this article. If it doesn't piss you off, there's no more hope for you. Dry lectures ... that sounds familiar. --Cei Trei (talk) 19:09, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

bro, go to scribd and download for free The Extended Phenotype. cmon, i aint trolling now. pls just do it. u can also join Richard Dawkins foundation. why u gotta be like that, turning ur back to this stuff. u know it aint right. this is the kind of stuff u should be paying attention to, not the shit ur writing about. ok, sry, im sure that what u write about has its merit (insert laughter here), but this is the real deal, u know? cmon, it wont hurt, go to scribd, download and read the first chapter. u got nothing to lose. and i know u havent read it, cause if u had, u wouldve seen things differently, u know. i wouldve seen it in u. --Cei Trei (talk) 12:47, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

this is a good song to listen to while reading my posts. Drive by REM. ok, peace out! --Cei Trei (talk) 12:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

ok, dar hai sa facem o lista:

bourceanu (c) - galati

chiriches - bacau

pintilii - iasi

rapa - galati


deci vezi.... --Cei Trei (talk) 22:20, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Arbore, Z.jpg)Edit

  Thanks for uploading File:Arbore, Z.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Crusade of RomanianismEdit

The DYK project (nominate) 01:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Precious againEdit

Romanian topics
Thank you for the broad and profound coverage of Romanian themes and people, sharpening our perspective - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 57th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. I miss the photographer, again, and put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

untitledEdit

I gotta admit, Dahn, you surprised me. Is this the way you act, walking in the library and setting the books you don't fancy on fire? Dahn the Censor ... that's your new title. You remind me of Octavian who burned his uncle's poems because he was jealous of his genius. Then he named the month of August after his title, stripped February of a day so that August would match his uncle's month of July. WELL, OKAY, DAHN! It's all fine and dandy, if you feel like burning my poetry, go ahead and do it! You made your point, no need to change the name of March, even though I'm sure it would gain consensus on Wikipedia. January, February ... Danus! All would vote in favor of that, the only one voting against it would be you, of course. Yeah, you're a real Cincinnatus, you! Retreat to your little farm, just you and the lady with the elephant heart, or something. Oh, what? You got elephants on your farm? Well, sure, after all the name of Caesar is believed to mean elephant killer, and you're a killer, alright! Dahn the Elephant Killer, or just Dahn Caesar. Oh, I proclaim you king, Dahn! But Dahn humbly replies, "I am Caesar." Ok bud, you're Caesar. --Cei Trei (talk) 23:06, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Why can't you be better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cei Trei (talkcontribs) 09:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

A Good PostEdit

Two movies that you would enjoy watching: The Words; The Intouchables (this movie is reminiscent of our relationship ... I'm the black guy in that movie). --Cei Trei (talk) 19:11, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:54, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

HealthEdit

Dahn, are you ok? You haven't been around for some 3 weeks and I'm getting worried. I can imagine that at your advanced age, your engine is not what it used to be, but I hope spring will show mercy on your old bones. In the words of Robin Williams, "spring is nature's way of saying, 'let's party!'" :))) --Cei Trei (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated. Dahn (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Glad to hear that. Fun stuff! Have a fine Easter, and, er, see you at the club. - Biruitorul Talk 05:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Râpa RoșieEdit

Can you kindly look at this article? I found a reference in the Rumanian language translation of which into English is poor. I have made use of only in sentence in the lead with this reference Academician Alexandru Borza about Rapa Rosie from Transylvania. May I request you to look into this article and also add more from the Roamanian sources.--Nvvchar. 00:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you assist with this article Dahn? Hope you are well.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

WowEdit

Okay, I never expected you to be in your thirties. If something in your behavior suggested that, then I really am a dumbass for thinking you as an old man. Over the years I created this image of you and in my mind you look like Mr Burns, drive like Mr Bean and talk like Stephen Hawkins. My bad! It's funny, really, because just now you felt very real and full of vitality. Before, you had no character to me, you were sort of empty, full of dark matter, and I had to 'recreate' you. This got me thinking about this really interesting book called The Mating Ming: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution by Geoffrey Miller. Miller explains how the brain is like an entertainment system that some potential sexual partners find it interesting, how its different qualities find compatibility with some and reject others, etc. What I'm trying to say here is that I think you're my Platonic love. --Cei Trei (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Tough love. But yeah, you'd be right about my driving skills. Dahn (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry-ass attempts at outing, btw. Dahn (talk) 07:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
That name I will never forget. I remember that name from a certain forum, after a certain user handed his forum account to me after losing a bet ... and he forgot to change his addy. To paraphrase 'you', 'face parte din farmecul vietii'. A game well played, but perhaps a bit bitter for my taste. --Cei Trei (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating that map for me. It was a nice gesture, which I took for granted. Hope you are well. --Cei Trei (talk) 09:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:24, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

RE: Felix AdercaEdit

Hi, Dahn:

Nu vreau să aibă o relație proastă. Să lucrăm împreună pentru a face un articol mai bună enciclopedie. Eu sunt deschis la compromisuri.

Al tău, Robert. Quis separabit? 19:21, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator electionEdit

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 17:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Moving romanian social democracy article?Edit

Hi. Hope you are doing well. I posted a comment at Talk:Romanian Social Democratic Party (defunct). How would you feel about having that as a general overview article on the socialist movement in the country, and with links to individual parties? It's difficult to argue that the 1910 PSD is the same as the 1927 PSD, and likewise PS, PSU, PSDI etc needs articles of their own. --Soman (talk) 04:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hm. It would require some pruning and a lot of changes in related articles/categories. If you are willing to take care of that task as well (and I am willing to help you carry it through), I have no real objection.
But please, could you sandbox it before applying the changes? I feel that would cut some corners and show exactly what parts you mean to change and what parts will be left as is. Dahn (talk) 07:23, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Ok, good. I'll work on it at User:Soman/temp in the coming days. --Soman (talk) 12:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

ShestovEdit

hello, mister dahn, thanks for the wonderfull article about shestov. I have a question. I'm writing a novel about two friends. About how they become friends, how the friendship ends after a big incident and afterwards how the friendship starts again. And in the end, the friend dies. (sorry for my very poor english, the words are right but i don't control it enough to really tell what the story is about) But the thing is, i would like to use some fragments of shestov in the book. And also, i like the article you wrote about him, and i would like to use also a fragment of it. Is this possible ? greetings johan petit from Belgium this is my email adres jowanpetit@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.198.85.95 (talk) 19:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi. I did not write the article on Shestov. Do you mean Fondane, perhaps? Dahn (talk) 07:26, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:47, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

You're invited to join WikiProject Women artists!Edit

Hello Dahn! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women artists. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women artists, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women artists on Wikipedia.

If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women artists page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement!

SarahStierch (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:21, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anton_Bacalba%C8%99a&oldid=595122961&diff=prevEdit

Hi Dahn, I noticed your revert. I do not quite understand your comment ("i note the old war on redlinks is back. also, for some reason, now we don't like pictures that are any bigger than postage stamps?")

  1. I am not aware of any old war on redlinks.
  2. The Rules of thumb and Size --> indicate: ...As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). If an exception to the general rule is warranted, forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding..
Hence my edit, just wanted to inform you.   Lotje (talk) 11:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Concerning the first objection: you turned several redlinks into redirects toward corresponding articles on Romanian wikipedia. This, I propose, is a bad move - the readers of English wikipedia are not going to learn anything from articles written in languages they do not understand. Moreover, the redirects removed the redlinks, thereby discouraging the creation of new articles from them, and making it exceptionally hard for someone to work back on reintroducing those articles as links into this article, as they are created (it would require manually resetting the links to their original form, whereas once filled, a redlink is filled throughout wikipedia).
The other objection: precisely, in this case it was warranted, and it had a paramter in the image coding that you removed. For instance, at 220 it is impossible to pick out Bacalbaşa from the the Sotir picture, and expects the reader to click the picture just to see it at all. Dahn (talk) 10:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

The return?Edit

It's sure looking that way, so let me welcome you back! I don't want to overwhelm you with stuff, so let me keep the list down to a minimum.

  • Marcel Janco: lead once again mutilated.
  • Iosif Jumanca: I know he's the kind of guy you like (and I myself find much to admire in him); I'm confident you can touch this up.
  • Not really something that requires attention, but as far as pedantry goes: heh.
  • My latest DYK has run into some headwinds. Is there a way you could either:
    • Return a different verdict, or
    • Edit the problem out of existence? Any assistance would be appreciated. And I hope you do stay around on a more durable basis this time. - Biruitorul Talk 04:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
It is good to be back, but I can't promise constancy, alas. I'll just address the last one, because it's quite urgent: I think you could easily revamp it to read like looser paraphrasing, that should solve it in a minute. Dahn (talk) 10:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
You were never gone. --Cei Trei (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Well… the site of the Deva library happened to go down today, so I can't look at the original source just now, but am I getting anywhere? - Biruitorul Talk 20:56, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
My sincere thanks for alleviating my worries. And I know you're busy with other things, but I can just sense that the pithy comment you'll have to make about Claudiu Teohari (and perhaps Angela Hondru) will be a memorable put-down. - Biruitorul Talk 17:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I just caught the Bassarabescu expansion: nice! I knew there was more to be said about the man, and it's great you were able to say it. You think "I. A. Bassarabescu" would be more fitting as a title? I don't have a problem with a move.

And something that popped up: this. I opined behind the "Copy of speedy nomination", although I may do so again, on principle. - Biruitorul Talk 20:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Biru. I'm sorry I'm still elusive these days, but I thought of coming back with a bang, before anything else.
From my side, I could not have gathered momentum to write the Bassarabescu article where it not for your fine sketch -- I still enjoy expanding on your writing more than anybody else's (mainly, because I know there is very little to change). So you have my thanks for that one as well, and, yes, I'm glad you enjoyed it. The name: it's either way; while "I. A." is slightly more common, and carries the advantage of not making us pick between "Ion" and "Ioan", both are just as good -- in these situations, I tend to favor the random norm of "we used this before that". I will honor your choice.
I have glanced over the debate you mention and, obviously, you're right -- as you remember me, I still cannot fathom why they had to change the name, not why they "have to" have the categories consistent with that name, even at the expense of other anachronisms. I am still laissez-faire in my approach on that one, but people seem to only want to get their feet in their mouth at all cost. I will comment there once I ponder the options.
My main annoyance for now is the son-to-father redirect, which reminds me of the terrible shape the father article is in. If you should want to stub or housekeep either of these over the next few days, as you did with Bassarabescu, you would be doing a lot for my planned workload. (The prospect of reading through the same sources twice in such a short time is a turnoff at the moment.) Incidentally... what happened here? Dahn (talk) 14:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
They haven't yet deleted Dobrujans?! Dahn (talk) 14:30, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Cantacuzino: great job on the wife; the husband now ready to go. You didn't find this useful?
No idea about Stamatiade: I may have to appeal to the village pump wizards.
Not only did they not delete it, we now have Category:Transylvanian Romanians - not sure quite how that relates to Category:Romanian Austro-Hungarians and Category:Romanians in Hungary.
Finally, while I have your ear: notable? Notable? - Biruitorul Talk 15:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
To answer your first question: it's largely a rip-off of Cheșchebec, and I just mined deeper.
You mean you actually wrote it and half of it got lost? That's horrible. I'm willing to jump in there as well, with an expansion etc., but I have to take a break now.
Yeah, and I note it's from a great contributor, no less... I'll put this in the "to-do" pile.
Nistor is notable, apparently, and they made a film about her weird career; but the article is painful. Laura Poantă... meh, borderline... but the article, I believe, merits a stubbing and a through AfD debate. Dahn (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Understood, and Stamatiad is now in working order. Constantin Beldie also seems like an interesting figure. I know you take an occasional interest in this theme, so a note: Latin peoples is up for deletion, while Latin Europe has become a disambiguation page. - Biruitorul Talk 14:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Not to jump on you as soon as you pop back in, but, in declining order of importance:
    • Sextil Pușcariu: I cannot think of a more qualified reviewer, if you so wish.
    • This.
    • Mircea Popescu: I don't know what's more irksome, the army of fake accounts or the real one voting to keep based on "39 inline citations".
  • Best, Biruitorul Talk 16:52, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

On this First of April, the 70th anniversary of the entry into force of the new orthographic norms that replaced the fluctuations that plagued the old system with a scientific model based on the phonetic principle, although which, unsurprisingly given the persistence of anti-revolutionary elements, had still not been fully embraced five years later (q.v. Hristea, Valentina, "Abateri de la normele ortografice în unele publicații literare", Limba Romînă, VII (1959), nr. 1, p. 81-93), let me warmly commend you for the work you have done in advancing knowledge of Romanian philology, across all regions of the Republic, from Pitești Region, even to the Magyar Autonomous Region (although remaining mindful of the Leninist imperative to respect the self-determination of national minorities within the socialist system, including linguistic rights with enthusiastic support from all organs of Party and State), above all to the glorious Stalin Region! - Biruitorul Talk 19:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Stalin Region has always been on my heart and mind, which is why I jumped at the opportunity to unmask a bourgeois ideologue posing as a philologist, thereby warning the working men and women of Stalin (Stalinists? Stalinians? Stalinlings?) as to the poison in their midst. Dahn (talk) 19:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I do have a small anecdote on that theme: a relative of mine was named Brașoveanu, and during the '50s, he called himself Stalinescu.
With that, your presence on a few fronts would be greatly appreciated. If you have a little time, do drop in and I'll point out what's cropped up. - Biruitorul Talk 21:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
I hope to. Soon. Dahn (talk) 08:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Now that it seems you're back at full blast, let me raise a couple of issues. Thanks for the fortified churches involvement. A few uncited statements did creep in there during the review, but I suppose I can deal with those later.
  • We should find out soon enough what happens here. At least the discussion was entertaining - I didn't mean every word I wrote, being gradually animated by a certain imp of the perverse that took hold as I waited for someone to close, but as I say, a good exchange.
  • I don't quite see the point of this.
  • Recent edits at Adevărul and Adevărul Holding?
  • Finally, I do think it's time to take another look here. An IP (from the Washington DC area, perhaps the subject himself) recently removed that section, only to be reverted a couple of hours later by this guy, who hadn't edited in five months. There is clearly something fishy going on. - Biruitorul Talk 14:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
    • One more thing: Bartolomeu Constantin Săvoiu. You will laugh. Will it be the the illustrious genealogy, the Tariq Aziz photo (as though the man didn't subsequently almost face the hangman), the chronicle of his service as right-hand man of Chirac? Or will you last until the masonic apron image? I don't know, but I'm almost certain you will be entertained at some point. - Biruitorul Talk 03:50, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure if you're back on any sort of basis, but if you are: this is languishing (we should perhaps already change "newly-elected" to "recently-elected"), this is a bit newer and then there's this. Any help with either of the first two would be much appreciated, and as for the third, that may be of passing interest too. - Biruitorul Talk 18:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
    • In this period of fruitful interactions - let me reiterate my thanks for Diaconu and especially for the Popa work, although don't forget the mess at Adevărul! - let me bring up a couple of things.
    • First, there's a positive bazaar of AfDs now ongoing - Grigore Lăpușanu, Vasile Chirtoca, Laura Poantă, Cristina Trăilă and, of course, Bartolomeu Constantin Săvoiu. Take your pick, pick generously.
    • Second, with my eye always on the next round of AfDs, allow me to ask about a few. Aura Twarowska, Andrew Rayel, Daniel Djamo (by Budismul).
    • Victor Sahleanu, by ValentinSahleanu. I tend to think he's marginally notable - emphasis on "marginally" - but I like this: "In conversations with [his sons], he discarded the idea of leaving Romania in order to settle abroad, reaffirming that he belonged to the Romanian culture". Now, from what published source would Valentin Sahleanu know that?
    • Emil Simon, by Monicaesimon. This one I'm a little more skeptical about, simply because, although he's only been dead a couple of months, there were essentially no obituaries. Looks like another Zoe Țapu on our hands.
    • Anyway, what say you to all this? - Biruitorul Talk 19:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Wow. Imna have to do some mulling here. Dahn (talk) 21:20, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Jewish Romanian communistsEdit

Hi, I don't understand why you reverted my edits like this one. Jewish people have the right to be liberal, conservative, socialists and communists too, just like any other ethnic group on this planet. I don't understand why Category:Jewish communists can't be created also. On Category:Communists by nationality there are all kind of nationalities, except Jewish. Can you explain please why you reverted? Thanks. —  Ark25  (talk) 13:17, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah... Well, for once, that is a highly controversial way of categorizing, as per Jewish Bolshevism -- this is part of the reason why the category tree does not exist, and was deleted every time it was created. Secondly, your categorizing segregates the article from the much more relevant Category:Romanian communists, where those entries clearly belong. Thirdly, to boot, it is simply not an option to start segregating all articles in all the Romanian politicians series by ethnicity -- quite clearly so when they are already included in relevant ethnicity categories, as well as in politicians categories that address their citizenship. Certainly not for something that is controversial to say the least.
But, with your "they have the right" canard, why do I suspect you're just the recent avatar of a very nasty troll? Dahn (talk) 13:25, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
And no, Jewish is not a "nationality" (click the link, read the article), and the category tree never includes it under nationality. That is why they are only there through their actual nationality, which is the Romanian one. Dahn (talk) 13:27, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
And it was only an edit conflict with Dahn's deletions that prevented me from making the same edits. Such categories have been repeatedly created in an apparent attempt to disparage subjects, and should not be accepted in Wikipedia. RolandR (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
1. I don't really believe it's a controversial (or inflammatory) issue. Jewish nation has people to be proud of and some people not to be proud of, just like any other nation. Also, Jewish communists were not bad by default. Some of them were enthusiastic communists and even supported Stalin in their naivety but later they changed their mind and spoke against communism and against communists. I think the subject of Jewish kapos is much more "controversial" than Jewish communists - for those who incline to consider it controversial, of course, not for people like me. Jewish communists existed after 1945 - Category:Israeli communists but they also existed before WW2. Comparing this with Jewish Bolshevism makes no sense, since Jewish Bolshevism is a just an (idiotic) speculative theory, while Jewish communists are an undeniable reality.
2. Those articles belong to Category:Romanian communists but they also belong to Category:Jewish communists so they belong to the intersection of these two categories, which is Category:Jewish Romanian communists.
3. The word "segregating" has some racist connotations. I was not segregating, just splitting. Recently I created ro:Categorie:Parlamentari români de etnie maghiară (Members of Romanian Parliament of Hungarian ethnicity) and that makes a lot of sense to me. Also I think it was a good idea to create the category ro:Categorie:Evrei români membri ai Academiei Române (Jewish Romanians members of the Romanian Academy) for example, so the readers can find about people who both Romanians and Jews are proud of.
I do not master the English language. M-W.com says "canard" = fabricated report. I don't understand. Jewish people can and could choose to be communists just like French people for example. So, yes, they have the right to do so - nothing fabricated here. Avatar of a nasty troll? I know there are wikipedians with extreme right views and all kind of other views, but I'm just not one of them. I edit Wikipedia since Oct 21, 2007 and just today I become the user with the biggest number of edits on Romanian Wikipedia - [1]. So I am no-one's "reincarnation".
Jewish describes ethnicity, not a nationality, but I don't think it's really necessary to create a separate category, Category:Communists by ethnicity just for Jewish people, (and maybe Tamil, Kurdish and a few others) since Category:Communists by nationality already exists.
I am very far from being antisemitic. In fact, I admire Jewish people and their politicians who take care about their own people like no other ethnic or political groups. And, as a Romanian, I know that's the first lesson I have to learn from the Jewish people - to be united with my people and to take care of them ("friends know why"). And I don't really believe such a category can help those with antisemitic agenda - they already have their own lists for sure. It makes complete sense to have this category, even if the fascists will try to use it. We can't ban knives or clubs because antisemitic people can use them - that would be nonsense. I don't think Jewish Bolshevism or Category:Israeli criminals should be deleted because the fascists can try to use it to disparage at subjects. To me, this looks like an unjustified fear that it's counter-productive for Wikipedia, but well, I won't insist much more on it. —  Ark25  (talk) 16:08, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Enough. Take it to the admins, if you really wish to pursue this, and change the consensus somewhere where it's visible, not on my page. Dahn (talk) 16:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
if the guy is being polite, why do u have to be a bitch? --Cei Trei (talk) 22:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Anittas, your butthurt is boring. Dahn (talk) 10:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

ArticlesEdit

Glad to see you're still here and beating off the trolls! Looked through some of your past articles earlier and you know most of them are easily GA quality and could be promoted very easily. The main problem is the amount of red links, which I personally have no problems with but they'd need to be either stubbed or delinked; I know you're not happy creating stubs, I don't create many these days either! Nicolae Xenopol looks a clear candidate for starters, reducing the red links might be the first step.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Great to see you around, friend! I promise I'll look into this next week, for now I'm just drifting around aimlessly. Dahn (talk) 18:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Barnstar of Diplomacy
You once said that you deserve the Nobel Prize for making peace in the ghetto. Here's the next best thing, coming directly from the heart. Cei Trei (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Dude, you ain't no Swedish Academy. Close, but not yet there. Dahn (talk) 08:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

My mistakesEdit

Hello Dahn, I admit I had made mistakes while creating the article The Wrath of the Gods (1914 film). I wanted to know if you could suggest me how to make the article better.--Skr15081997 (talk) 11:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dahn, I have fixed the spaghettilinks on the above article.Skr15081997 (talk) 15:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

CimbalistuEdit

Dahn, this is your post from 16:57, 15 December 2013‎ Dahn (talk | contribs)‎ . . (140,211 bytes) (+1,331)‎ . . (Undid revision 586208696 by Dahn (talk) actually, that is relatively okay) (undo | thank) Please explain to me what has changed between now and then. So then you left it, but now you wish to erase it, because Tismaneanu's son erased it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cimbalistu (talkcontribs)

Consensus. That is what has changed. I had opted to revert myself and leave that in, noting that it was relatively okay (despite its atrocious format and POV), in the hope that it would be cleaned up and trimmed of drama. In doing so, I tried to avert further venom of the kind I have received for the last 7 years on the article's talk page.
In addition: Sir, you leave little to the imagination as to who you are what your intentions are regarding this article. It is high time I begged you to consult the conflict of interest policy. Dahn (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for George DiamandyEdit

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

București MallEdit

Hi, any chance you can find some sources and content and remove tag? Mulțumiri.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

PhilippideEdit

That's fine — the thing is slightly chaotic and I'm sure a fresh look will uncover some areas for improvement. You're also just in time!

On another note, any idea what this is? Anuarul Universității din Iași? It certainly looks serious enough - Gafton is, well, Philippide's successor as department chairman - and surely there will be a few things to pick up from those six articles. If you want to take that on, I won't object ;-) - Biruitorul Talk 23:30, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

No, no, I'm still sore from Rainer. I'm also focused on... something else (hope I'll finish it in this window of time I have these days).
It looks legit, but I wouldn't use the link to it, mainly because it's likely to go stale in no time.
Btw, when do we DYK Rainer? (This time, we'll share credit.) Dahn (talk) 23:35, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
That's like saying Holinshed should take credit for a batch of Shakespeare plays. I'm glad to have started off the skeleton of the article, but would find it a bit out of place to share credit. So, do go ahead and nominate it; it's (almost all) your brainchild.
One the something else is out of the way, I've got an idea going ahead. I was looking over the names of the Romanian Academy's various institutes, and found that six of them are still redlinks: Nicolae Simionescu, Gheorghe Zane, Costin Murgescu, Alexandru Rosetti, George Oprescu and Mihai Ralea. While the first three may not be that exciting, the latter three probably are. And since you've mentioned Ralea's name in a variety of articles, that might be a suitable project for the near future.
I read Craii de la Curtea-Veche these past few days. I'm still wondering: are you Pantazi or Pașadia? And who is our Pirgu? - Biruitorul Talk 16:16, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Heehee. If it's between you and I, I would tend to assume that I'd be the Pașadia; you seem to be more together, all in all. We keep getting Pirgus, but they keep getting banned.
Zane was a pretty interesting fella, and so was Murgescu. But yes, Ralea would have to take the cake, and I have been pondering it for a while -- between my pondering and now, the resources have popped up all over the place. But yes, all in due time. Dahn (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad to see you've taken up Ivașcu. I've been meaning to work this in for a while, but now I'll leave it to you, if it's helpful.
My interest in the man was sparked by a (rather tenuous) personal connection: as I've mentioned, Laurențiu Fulga was married to my grandmother's sister, and Fulga's daughter has been a very close friend of Ivașcu's daughter since the '60s. A couple of anecdotes. The man was quite a connoisseur of the arts, and had a particular penchant for glass icons. He wouldn't settle for buying them in Bucharest, but instead drove around to isolated village workshops in Transylvania, hunting for the most authentic pieces - or dispatched agents to do so when he was otherwise engaged. A strict disciplinarian, he taught his daughter correct posture by having her walk around the house all day with a plate on her head. Perhaps rebelling against such an upbringing, she turned out a bit of a wild child. One summer at the Black sea, she slightly corrupted Miss Beligan (who is now very far removed from Romania) with alcohol and boys. An apoplectic Radu and his wife promptly sent their girl back to Bucharest and ordered her to stay away from the Ivașcu household. I don't think any of this is really scandalous, but if you want to be on the same side, feel free to blank this paragraph after reading.
Note those red links steadily turning blue, even if they're little more than stubs. The pressure for Ralea is becoming insurmountable!</joke>
Category:Euroscepticism in Romania: hm. Category:Romanian nationalists: hmmm. Eminescu and Vadim, indeed. Speaking of Vadim, I do at some point want to turn Romanian Hearth Union into something more than a screed. Oddly, I haven't been able to turn up sources indicating that it's petered out, actually that it did so around 1992-1993. The article implies it's as active today as in 1990, which is obviously misleading.
Finally: do you think we should mention Philippide and the Jews? On the one hand, there's this: he did bring up Tiktin and (as you recorded in the article on him) Șăineanu in relation to their citizenship problems. On the other hand, especially when you compare him to, say, his faculty colleague Xenopol, he seems hardly to have been preoccupied by Jews. So, either way is fine with me. - Biruitorul Talk 16:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Cool story (nah, I won't blank it -- you're not even remotely close to some stuff they already published about Ivașcu).
No, I have to take a sabbatical. I promise I'll be back with something on Ralea, as well as fresh eyes on those categories, but for now I'm just tying up some loose ends and will then fade away to deal with RL business. Alas. Dahn (talk) 11:08, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Ah, yes, there's that thing about Philippide. Of course, by all means, we could have a sentence or two. I'll add to that when I can, either just before or just after the aforementioned sabbatical. Dahn (talk) 11:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Fear not, I am still in the land of the living, just in an Internet-free situation for a few more weeks (the present moment excepted - greetings from the capital of Moldavia, where, should I emerge from an alcoholic coma into which my gracious hosts plunged me last night, I will try to at least find Philippide's house). Great work on Ralea and everything else. One small request: at the article on Victor-Viorel Ponta, could you please, in the infobox, add in his religion, with a citation? There now being no doubt whatsoever... - Biruitorul Talk 07:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
As you may have observed, I have now more or less returned, and I do hope the absurd Ralea "issue", which must have weighed you down at least a little, can now move forward.
Speaking of DYKs, I note Maria Forescu is now on the main page. I also note most of it is based on someone's personal website. What do you make of the categories? While her native city was, of course, briefly part of Romania, that came long after she'd left the area, and although she did adopt a Romanian name, I'm not sure to what extent she was, say, a "Romanian civilian killed in World War II".
I'd like to start some AfDs; your thoughts on the notability or lack thereof for the following: Arina Avram, Cătălin Bălescu, Ionuț Budișteanu, Giulia Nahmany, DJ Layla, Dmitriy Grigoriyev?
Finally, I note the creation of Kadriye Nurmambet, Septar Mehmet Yakub and Emin Bektóre; all could use some cleanup. - Biruitorul Talk 18:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Welcome back! I was going to call you back myself to hear you weigh in on the Ralea issue, but I felt like I was going to be pestering you (still unsure whether you had full internet access) and, with all the inept accusations thrown around, it looked like it would only encourage the "indicates an agenda" guy to insinuate that you and I have a racket going. But yes, absolutely, thank you for that.
It's interesting that I had to spend all that time explaining how "not instantly verifiable" is not the same as "unverifiable" while Forescu slipped on Main Page with that kind of sourcing. Also, the article is poorly edited. And, to tell you the truth, I think there's just not enough sourcing to tell what she was: she must have, at some point in her life, carried a passport of some sort. Was she naturalized? Was she indeed Romanian by some fluke (like, being issued a passport by the Greater Romanian authorities some time after 1923)? Other such discoveries prompted me to secretly pray for your swift return online.
I have no idea who those people are, so I might need to put on my thinking cap and mull for a short while -- meaning, of course, that my guess is as good as yours. Well, actually, I know who Ms. Nahmani is, but that's only thanks to the hours I've spent, like a million years ago, watching afternoon television with the elderly. Dahn (talk) 19:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Dear Lord, did you see this gem on rowiki? At a glance: "Vechi cuzist, al cărui rol de spion nazist era notoriu pentru publicul românesc...", "escroc binecunoscut", "agent al Gestapoului" - A.L. Zissu, "spion german în Franța". - așa l-au caracterizat pe Radu Lecca, în mod nedrept și superficial diverși indivizi, bazându-se pe modul în care activitatea acestuia le-a afectat interesele individuale sau de grup. Culmea avea să fie atinsă la procesul "Marii Trădări Naționale", în actul de acuzare, Radu Lecca fiind descris drept : "reprezentantul tipic al agentului hitlerist, care-și trădează țara prin orice mijloace pentru scopuri și avantaje personale servind conștient și fără nici un pic de conștiință scopurile cele mai criminale urmărite de hitlerismul hrăpăreț și distrugător". (This is from the same editor who seems to have used the Romanian article on anal sex to instruct users about its perils. He also seems not to have any clue about copyright legislation.) Those administrators on that project are still severely incompetent. Or vile, which is the same thing. Dahn (talk) 00:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Seriously, look over that guy's edit history. It's making my head spin. Dahn (talk) 00:55, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Paging Andrei Stroe: please clean up the mess in aisle three. Not sure what else to say, except to hope they'll get sick of him (he's been flooding the Cafenea with rants, so maybe that'll do it).
Take your time with those AfD candidates; I've nevertheless started with the Russian.
We now have the other Oprescu with us, which led me here: hmmm. - Biruitorul Talk 12:08, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't think I can improve upon it in the time it takes for it to be featured on Main Page. I appreciate the editor's good intentions, but I really wish people would not expect featured status for articles on subjects they can't at least read about in a local language. In this case, the glaring problem is the article is entirely referenced with tertiary sources, which would normally have disqualified it from DYK (but who bothers to check that sort of criterion?). Eh, to be addressed at some point in the future. Dahn (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I noticed him when he was editing ro:Asasinatele din 29/30 noiembrie 1938, which gave me an eerie feeling, but I didn't have the time and skill to sieve through that mixture of facts and personal interpretations. However, your revert caught the attention of some more competent wikipedians, who found some places where he's clearly jumped the shark and challenged him. Now he seems to be digging his own articles' grave. We're moving much slower than here in our little village, but things are moving.- Andrei (talk) 19:27, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Bless you. Dahn (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Francisc RainerEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Francisc Rainer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MelanieN (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Francisc RainerEdit

Gatoclass (talk) 16:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

RomaniansEdit

i think u 'd be in favor of removing the photos from the article on romanians since it's a distraction (POV). u're welcome to leave your input. maybe it will count as consensus. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Romanians&oldid=615656090 --Cei Trei (talk) 00:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I am. Dahn (talk) 03:20, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ilie MoscoviciEdit

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 19:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mihai RaleaEdit

Thanks for your contribution Victuallers (talk) 00:25, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ștefan BaciuEdit

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Ștefan BaciuEdit

I have removed the Spanish name. Xx236 (talk) 09:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator electionEdit

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, ReduxEdit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou!

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Following the annexation of Crimea, Russian parliamentary speaker Vladimir Zhirinovsky sent a letter to the governments of Poland, Romania and Hungary, proposing a joint division of the country.

http://news.yahoo.com/putin-offered-divide-ukraine-poland-polish-ex-minister-210859509.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cei Trei (talkcontribs) 22:24, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!Edit

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!Edit

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!Edit

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Global accountEdit

Hi Dahn! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:01, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Ion AgârbiceanuEdit

Hi! Thanks for your substantial edits to the article Ion Agârbiceanu. I am thinking to nominate it as a good article. What is your opinion? Please reply on the talk page of the article or on my talk page. Gug01 (talk) 22:59, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Gug 01

Hi again! Since January 5, the article has been expanded greatly. Do you think the article is ready for GA? Please reply on my talk page, where I can reply quickly. Gug01 (talk) 20:22, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Barnstar of Diligence
Hi! Thank you so much for your contributions in the field of Romanian history, particularly helping to bring the Ion Agârbiceanu article to B-class. Gug01 (talk) 23:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, it was my pleasure. Dahn (talk) 06:59, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Ion AgârbiceanuEdit

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Traian BrăileanuEdit

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
 
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Eight years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Daniel RosenthalEdit

 

The article Daniel Rosenthal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Textbook WP:BLP1E. Wikipedia is not a directory of every domestic murder.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  – iridescent 09:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Not my article. I started the redirect, which I think you should consider restoring instead of deleting the link itself. Dahn (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Sava TemišvaracEdit

Hello! I saw your contributions and was wondering if you have any information, or could point me a direction, on Sava Temišvarac (Sava of Timișoara), a military commander in the service of Transylvania?--Zoupan 03:35, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Ahmed Shawki (socialist) for deletionEdit

 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ahmed Shawki (socialist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Articles for deletion/Ahmed Shawki (socialist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Mircea SântimbreanuEdit

Hi, can you or a page stalker expand this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

CuriosityEdit

Hello, out of curiosity, as you mentioned them more than once, which are the other national charts available in Romania? I am not a Romanian and I don't know any other chart. I would like to take a look at them. Thanks in advance, Cavarrone 16:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Ion AgarbiceanuEdit

Hi Dahn, the article Ion Agârbiceanu which you helped to greatly expand is currently under GA review by Winner 42. Winner 42 has pointed out a number of mistakes in our article. Please help us to correct these mistakes. Gug01 (talk) 12:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015Edit

  You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Biruitorul. Thank you. Aero Slicer 17:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Heh. I'll hold on to this notification. This should be fun. Dahn (talk) 15:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
But incidentally: didn't we go through this process at least once in the past? Me and Biruitorul must have merged physically since then. Dahn (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

You're Invited!Edit

{{WPW Referral}}

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator electionEdit

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Special Barnstar
I think this is the single largest expansion of an article I've ever seen. How are you doing it?? I assumed you may be translating from ro.wiki, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Number 57 14:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, do you happen to have any data sources for the results of pre-1919 elections in Romania? I'd be very keen to get my hands on some. Cheers, Number 57 14:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks. To answer your first question: I've researched it (including the paper sources). But the article itself took months to write, bit by bit, I just decided to save it today; this is why the expansion appears more imposing than it is. (As an aside: Romanian wikipedia is largely a failed project, and I am not involved with it.)
The second question: I've struggled with that myself. There are to my knowledge only fragmentary and incidental accounts of the results, which one may find by scouring through the period newspapers here or here, or in various books that deal, for instance, withe the career of elected officials (such as Z. Ornea's biography of Constantin Stere). More topical sources might exist, but I have not found them anywhere. It took scouring through two separate sources to tell me that the PND only managed to have 2 parliamentarians before 1918. Dahn (talk) 14:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Wow, so you do it all offline? It's a shame regarding the lack of sources – I will have to do some digging in the British Library. Number 57 14:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I usually edit in a widow and preview, but only save when I get reasonable progress. Dahn (talk) 14:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I like the idea that 60KB is "reasonable progress"! Number 57 15:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

TalkbackEdit

Hello, Dahn. You have new messages at
Template:Did you know nominations/Goa Vikas Party.
Message added 17:28, 9 October 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for reviewing! Bharatiya29 (talk) 17:28, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

You are most welcome. And sorry for misunderstanding that Pacheco tidbit. Either way: good article, good hook, a pleasure to review. Dahn (talk) 17:34, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Welsh language speakersEdit

Hi

I see you were involved in a 2006 debate to delete this category (among others); you were part of the overwhelming majority against this category clutter. The category was duly deleted but almost immediately reinstated and another debate is ongoing, but this time Welsh language activists are conducting a determined and vocal - if irrelevant - campaign to keep it. You may like to help the other side again! --The Sage of Stamford (talk) 11:50, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Mark SlonimEdit

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Ion BuzduganEdit

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bessarabian Peasants' PartyEdit

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!Edit

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Dadaglobe submissionGaw54 (talk) 18:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Edit

Hi Dahn, Given your contributions to related articles, I thought you might find this article draft also of interest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dadaglobe I welcome any suggestions or edits you might have to improve the page. This is only my second Wiki article and I'm still learning the ropes.

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

contact for an adviseEdit

Could you, please, give me an email address where I could contact you for an advise I would like to ask? Thank you. (I am only writing in English to better integrate in this page, I am a Romanian too.) Arhitectul (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

ApostrofEdit

Would you like to explain how your addition has improved this article? --OJ (talk) 08:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Would you?! Dahn (talk) 08:59, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ieremia CecanEdit

 On 9 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ieremia Cecan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ieremia Cecan, a regional leader of the Romanian Nazi Party, campaigned for the unification of the Orthodox and Catholic churches? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ieremia Cecan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:Members of the Romanian Academy elected post-mortem has been nominated for discussionEdit

 
Category:Members of the Romanian Academy elected post-mortem, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BDD (talk) 21:08, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ioan BianuEdit

 On 6 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ioan Bianu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that being a thrifty man, bibliographer Ioan Bianu raised cows on Romanian Academy grounds in downtown Bucharest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ioan Bianu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ioan Bianu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:20, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:58, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

CategoriesEdit

To your first point: I'm trying to become a bit better about that of late, largely by putting things in chronological order, at least. Though it's not always intuitive.

To the second: I do, actually, create those narrower categories sometimes. (See Category:20th-century American short story writers, for instance.) There are several reasons I don't do it more often. The chief one is that I tend to not like creating smaller categories. So something like, say, Category:20th-century American essayists would be plausible (though the parent category is just at the threshhold where I'm not sure about it) might be viable. But Category:20th-century Romanian essayists is small enough that I wouldn't consider it. Also, I tend to flit about from subject to subject when I edit, and I like having things in a basic category like that, because I'm not sure if/when I'll get around to breaking it down. I am changing a bit in that regard, and part of that is discovering new capabilities with AWB that I hadn't considered before. So it's a work in progress.

To your point about overcategorization: I haven't found it to be much of a problem often, honestly, and most of the time I do encounter it, it can be pretty easily remedied with some judicious pruning. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:57, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

And there, too, is part of the problem - it would never have occurred to me that there were 277 articles in the category Category:Romanian essayists. (Largely because I didn't realize our coverage of Romanian writers was that strong.) So I never would even look there to consider creating a narrower cat.
I realize "overcategorization" isn't quite the apposite term, but I couldn't think of anything else. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Well...yes. I've told you. I am doing that. I am considering. I tend to proceed cautiously, but I am thinking about it as I go along. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ioan KalinderuEdit

 On 13 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ioan Kalinderu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that though Romanian courtier Ioan Kalinderu lacked any interest in horseriding, he did so every day after reading that it was fashionable among lords in London? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ioan Kalinderu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ioan Kalinderu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator electionEdit

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Bonifaciu FlorescuEdit

 On 19 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bonifaciu Florescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian literary scholar Bonifaciu Florescu had the reputation of an unrepentant bohemian and allegedly slept on a pile of hay? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bonifaciu Florescu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bonifaciu Florescu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Yiddish perspective on "Copilaria unui Netrebnic"Edit

Dear Editor Dahn,

I am today at page 222 in "Copilaria unui Netrebnic". I am fascinated by the description of Jewish holidays, food, speech in Dorohoi. It is familiar and foreign. I am from Siret a shtetl 30 kilometers vest of Dorohoi. The vocabulary describing my childhood Jews is Yiddish or German. Calugaru's characters speak Romanian. Thus "dreptul de la Stefanesti" turns out to be "Der Tzadik fin Stefanesti" in a minor Aha moment. I am puzzled. Did the Jews in Dorohoi in 1907 speak Yiddish or Romanian? Did Calugaru translate the dialogs into Romanian for the benefit of his educated Romanian readership? The first names of the people are clearly Yiddish: the boy Mochi (Motye diminutive of Mordekhay), the oldest brother Ițe (Itzye diminutive from Itzhok), the Mother Țipra (Tzipoyre in Yiddish, Tzipora in Hebrew), the father Țalic (Zelig in Yiddish, of German not Hebrew origin) but the boy's name Buiumaș I can't match (is it from Yiddish Burikh? Barukh? Hebrew). The surnames are Romanian and I believe them to have been thus in 1907 Dorohoi. In Siret (Sereth, Bukowina) our family names were German. Whenever we met a Jew with surname such as Pantofaru, Croitoru, etc. we knew he was from the "Regat" (Romanian Kingdom before 1918).

I am translating into Romanian The novel "Brennende Doerfer" by Leo Katz. It describes Sereth in the same year 1907 as Calugaru's Dorohoi. It got its title Burning Villages from the same 1907 Moldavian peasant revolts that dominate Copilaria "Copilaria......"'s first chapter: "1907". The contrast in the lives of the Jews in these two close by shtetlykh, during the same year is striking.

Question: Does it make sense to add a section with the Jewish ethnographic perspective to the "Ion Calugaru" English Wikipedia article?

  Do you know of any similar attempts?  Is it the wrong place.  It may be of interest to American Jews.  Also more Israelis read English than understand Romanian. Probably it would not interest the Romanian reader at ro.wikipedia.org

73.200.110.93 (talk) 18:32, 21 September 2016 (UTC) 73.200.110.93 (talk) 18:32, 21 September 2016 (UTC) Stefan Fuma

Hi. Please see our policy on original research. Dahn (talk) 03:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Juste a heads up!Edit

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ADahn&type=revision&diff=741732163&oldid=671295206 HTH --Vlad|-> 09:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Anastasie FătuEdit

 On 1 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anastasie Fătu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Moldavian pediatrician Anastasie Fătu proposed a ban on open-casket church funerals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anastasie Fătu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Anastasie Fătu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Writer's Barnstar
Your article on Mircea Eliade is the most comprehensive article about a historical figure that I have yet to encounter on Wikipedia and--the edit history proves--your dedication to making/keeping it that way is truly inspirational. ScheherASAde (talk) 09:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 ChallengeEdit

Hi, can I interest you in contributing towards this? If you and a few others get some people together I can create a 1000 Challenge for Romania if you want it like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Turkey).♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:05, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge inviteEdit

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you.

Hi Dahn I was hoping to get some people flying the flag for Romania in Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge. Care to join and contribute?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Are you going to contribute to this or what? I've just added a bit to Surdila-Găiseanca.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVII, November 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Dahn. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVIII, December 2016Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!Edit

   
 

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue CXXIX, January 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

  1. ^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. ^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

The Bugle: Issue CXXX, February 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 04:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Romanian general election, 1867Edit

 On 19 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Romanian general election, 1867, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the January 1868 death of a Romanian nationalist monk just days after he had been elected deputy sparked an antisemitic riot? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Romanian general election, 1867. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Romanian general election, 1867), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Scarlat VârnavEdit

 On 19 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Scarlat Vârnav, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the January 1868 death of a Romanian nationalist monk just days after he had been elected deputy sparked an antisemitic riot? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Scarlat Vârnav), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit

March Madness 2017Edit

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wallachian legislative election, 1857Edit

 On 2 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wallachian legislative election, 1857, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that two former Princes of Wallachia ran for deputy seats in 1857, both of them losing at Buzău and recovering to win at Dolj? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wallachian legislative election, 1857. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wallachian legislative election, 1857), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Romanian Senate election, 1868Edit

 On 4 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Romanian Senate election, 1868, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Romanian Senate election of 1868, which consolidated the "reddish" liberal legislature, was held in July, when many conservative voters had left on vacation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Romanian Senate election, 1868. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Romanian Senate election, 1868), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wallachian princely election, 1842Edit

 On 5 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wallachian princely election, 1842, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the aged, hernia-afflicted Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea reportedly ran in the Wallachian princely election only to hamper other candidates? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wallachian princely election, 1842. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wallachian princely election, 1842), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Alecu Filipescu-VulpeaEdit

 On 5 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the aged, hernia-afflicted Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea reportedly ran in the Wallachian princely election only to hamper other candidates? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXI, March 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXII, April 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIII, May 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIV, June 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Gaston Marie JacquierEdit

Hello! Thanks for reviewing my DYK nomination. Just wanted to let you know I responded to your comment. If there's anything else I need to do, please let me know. Thanks! Jgefd (talk) 18:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXV, July 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Poor DionisEdit

 On 18 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Poor Dionis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a rhyming passage from Mihai Eminescu's novel Poor Dionis proposes "that this world is merely dreamland and a cat's fantastic vision"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Poor Dionis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Poor Dionis), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Luceafărul (poem)Edit

 On 19 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Luceafărul (poem), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in creating his Luceafărul myth about the impossible love between a deity (pictured) and a mortal, Mihai Eminescu may have been influenced by the Katha Upanishad? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Luceafărul (poem). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Luceafărul (poem)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 12:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Fascinating read; thanks you very much for your work on this article. I shall have to find myself a copy. Yunshui  13:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Yunshui, you are very kind. Messages like yours are particularly touching. Dahn (talk) 16:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for George Barbu ȘtirbeiEdit

 On 3 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article George Barbu Știrbei, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Prince Știrbei, the Romanian arts patron, buried sculptor Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux in Courbevoie, then fought over the remains with Carpeaux's widow? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/George Barbu Știrbei. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, George Barbu Știrbei), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rano M. ShaizaEdit

  Hello! could you please have a look at Rano M. Shaiza I have changed the hook as advised. Thank you.  FITINDIA  19:58, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Fitindia (talk · contribs). Thanks for following my suggestion, but please note that I was not reviewing your article, merely making a quick comment. Dahn (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reply Dahn. Cheers  FITINDIA  20:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVI, August 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Nicolae Petrescu-ComnenEdit

 On 9 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nicolae Petrescu-Comnen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Foreign Minister Nicolae Petrescu-Comnen promised that Romania would only "take a few badly aimed potshots" at Soviet planes entering its airspace during the Munich Crisis? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nicolae Petrescu-Comnen. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Nicolae Petrescu-Comnen), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Drop the stickEdit

You were warned to drop the stick and have failed to do so. Because of this, you are blocked for 48 hours. Next time you're asked to drop the stick and move on, I highly recommend that you consider your actions and do so. Thank you. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 16:33, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Oshwah, you are right in saying that I should not have responded after the warning, and, though the warning only referred to me editing other pages, I should have inferred that it also referred to the topic itself. I do not object to the block, I do not ask for it to be lifted, and I accept it is deserved under the circumstances. Please note, however, that I was responding to very serious and entirely unsubstantiated allegations, also published after the editor in question was similarly warned (but never blocked). These claim that I run several accounts, that I also contacted and seriously threatened the other user, on an outside forum (one I never ever wrote on), and that all of my edits constitute "subtle threats" (an unfalsfiable accusation). This while the user admitted to harassing by noting he had posted on my talk page (and elsewhere), over and over again, messages he believes "only I would understand", under the assumption that I am whoever he imagines I am. What would have been the appropriate response to this, without violating the warning? Even opening a formal investigation for harassment would have presumably violated the warning, if it applies to any page. Supposing I initiate one after my block, using the claims made in SPI as evidence: will I be in violation of the warning? I'm asking because I am actually considering this course of action, and would not like to find myself blocked again. Dahn (talk) 23:55, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Dahn, the essence of "dropping the stick" is that you stop responding--one of the reasons you are asked to do so may well be that someone, an administrator for instance, thinks that nothing useful can be gained from further comments, and that further comments are indeed counterproductive. You'll just have to accept that from an admin, or suffer the ensuing block. So the appropriate response, after y'all were going back and forth for a few days, including in the SPI, would have been to leave it be, and to leave it in the hands of the admins looking into the matter. And if you drop the stick, and the other doesn't, then you must have faith that the other editor will suffer that consequence. Since you've been here for over 90k edits, we can expect you to be better than you were. Further investigations or whatever should have followed a decision in the SPI--lest you also be accused of forum shopping. Does that make sense? Oshwah, I have some faith, some, that this won't be repeated. I have also left a note at the SPI and on the other user's talk page; I'd appreciate it if you had a look at those. I support an unblock for Dahn--and if he returns to this matter, or taunts the other party (who, IMO, is really guilty of harassment and disruptive editing), then the block should be reinstated. But I hope Dahn will not pick up this stick again, and if he does, it will be to place it in the hands of the community or an administrator, without a million follow-up posts. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you for looking into this, and both Oswah and you are clearly right to point out my failures of conduct (in my defense, the SPI comes after years of harassment, a harassment intensified during these past weeks -- though that should not ultimately matter, as I should have known better). I will only add that I did not actually start a new investigation, not did I mean that I would start one while the SPI is ongoing -- that would be shoppy. The problem that needed clarifying here is that my block came not after a comment in the SPI (I have not added anything there), but after a reply on the other user's talk page. I can accept that I was being out of line, and I do not contest the block I received, but I had to ask basically if I was still ever allowed to comment on the topic, this while the other user had continued to publish more and more serious allegations; in other words, whether I can, at some point, defend myself, or ask for a new investigation, or whether that too would be in breach of the warning. Your clarifications to me and warning for the other user have addressed that. Dahn (talk) 02:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
I trust Drmies' judgment, and I also appreciated your understanding and your response. You're unblocked now :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for zillion of articles created or improved. And very cool work on {{Template:Country data Wallachia}} and {{Template:Country data Moldavia}}. Codrin.B (talk) 12:06, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you! I hope you arent vexed by my two recent reverts of your edits there: the Ypsilantis flags was probably never used in Moldavia, and the 1840 Moldavian flag was probably never used at all (there was a Crimean War during that interval, but Im not sure Moldavia counts as a belligerent, or if she had time to put up a special flag before the Russians, then the Austrians, flooded the scene). Putting them as options would arguably lead to anachronistic usage, which is what my edits were experimentally trying to avoid. But we can of course discuss if you object. Dahn (talk) 14:37, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVII, September 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator electionEdit

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVIII, October 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Radu PaisieEdit

 On 13 October 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Radu Paisie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Prince of Wallachia Radu Paisie was deposed by his Ottoman overlords in 1545, with measures taken to prevent his "abscond[ing] with the treasury"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Radu Paisie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Radu Paisie), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 01:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Salvator CupceaEdit

Please stop this edit war. Cupcea is clearly a psychiatrist - manager of the Cluj University Psychiatric Clinic. He certainly made contributions to many other fields, but that does not make him a cardiologist or geneticist. These are professional categories. Doctors have to qualify in particular specialities. No evidence that he did that I can see. If you can provide contrary evidence please put it on the talk page for this article. Rathfelder (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

No, you are proposing that I follow your POV as the benchmark, and as such that I violate a core policy of wikipedia. And as such, you are removing articles from relevant categories, never to be retrieved again, because you feel that their contributions, however debatable, do not qualify them for the relevant domains. This is particularly problematic since you are pushing your view on articles from an era were specialization was less relevant than contribution, and preventing for instance people researching the history of cardiology in Romania from accessing data about doctors active before said narrowing. This though quite clearly Cupcea was considered a cardiologist and a geneticist, enough for him to lead institutions and programs in those fields. You are wasting my and the community's time, and come here to stop the "edit war" when you're the only one so far pushing for that POV -- two editors have reverted you, and when I approached you on your page about a similar edit, you simply ignored me. Please either cite the consensus, not your personal impressions, or leave those pages alone; I have other things to do than waste my time on your entrenched preferences. Dahn (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Its true that specialisation was much less advanced at that time. But that does not make him a cardiologist, unless you can produce more evidence. He clearly trained and worked primarily as a psychiatrist, a very different field, even then. Eminent scientists often contribute to papers and research outside their own field. That does not qualify them to claim specialised status. The place for this debate is the talk page of the article, not here. Rathfelder (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
I have asked you to first of all provide evidence that the consensus on wikipedia is to include as cardiologists only doctors who had a formal specialization in the narrow field, and not also those who, at a stage in their career, were recognized as authorities in the field -- such as directing specialized institutions and research in the narrow field. Unless you will produce this evidence, your claim that I should follow your POV on the matter and answer to your tailored concerns created from it is utterly irrelevant. If you want to have a debate on the article's talk page, start it there, but hopefully not by repeating yourself with the same self-referential claims. Dahn (talk) 16:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
No. Perhaps you can cite where this rule you refer to can be found. As we stand, such categories were routinely added to articles about people who made contributions to the field, as doctors of whatever background, and no one seems to have taken issue with this until you decided that we need "better" -- namely, that we should follow your POV. The article on cardiology clarifies nothing as to our categorization policy, and your vague suggestion that I should peruse the category is not just pointless, but also self-referential -- I would have to look at a category you yourself pruned, from your perspective, with massive silent edits. I repeat: what is the consensus here, and where has it been stated? Did you even check to see what it was, before you bombed wikipedia with your edits? Dahn (talk) 20:39, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Cardiologists are not defined by wikipedia but by the medical profession. Rathfelder (talk) 08:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
1) You are not the medical profession yourself, you are just a guy with an opinion. 2) We are not discussing what is the "truest" criterion for defining cardiologists, but what the standing wikipedia consensus or policy says on this matter, which is one of categorization and is designed to help the reader find articles, not give professional validation. Dahn (talk) 09:00, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • I am not going to discuss this further here. You and I do not agree. The talk page for the article, or WikiProject Medicine, is the place for such discussion where other people can be involved Rathfelder (talk) 10:34, 21 October 2017 (UTC).
I should not be expected to start debates on topics that you engineered out of the blue, and which address your arcane views; you should be able to provide a single piece of consensus or policy that endorses your view, and in fact you should have checked whether this is the consensus before starting to remove thousands of articles from their categories. So either present the consensus or start the debate yourself and let me know what you came up with; in the meantime, I am under no obligation to follow your directives as to what article should go in what category. Dahn (talk) 10:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIX, November 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Dahn. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and votingEdit

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXL, December 2017Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

It has been a whileEdit

Nice to still see you here. Nice job with Marcu Cercel. User:Piotrus (on alt). --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 07:03, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy to hear from you! And thanksies. It's great to see you as well, and I'm glad you liked it. It seems I am sometimes returning to topics from back in the day, maybe I can pester you to do the same, and join me in this from time to time? Say, like writing more stuff on the Movilești? Dahn (talk) 07:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military HistoriansEdit

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Marcu CercelEdit

 On 9 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Marcu Cercel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Marcu Cercel, who ruled over Moldavia in 1600, was probably born to a Turkish Muslim apostate? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Marcu Cercel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Marcu Cercel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Costea BuciocEdit

 On 14 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Costea Bucioc, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that statesman Costea Bucioc, who reputedly survived a poisoning attempt at the Moldavian court, was later impaled by the Ottoman army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Costea Bucioc. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Costea Bucioc), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 12:03, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for A. de HerzEdit

 On 18 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A. de Herz, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1919, Romanian playwright and journalist A. de Herz was court-martialled for alleged collaboration with the Central Powers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A. de Herz. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A. de Herz), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 03:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

CategoriesEdit

It's an issue with AWB. AWB always, to my knowledge, adds new categories to the end of the list rather to their proper place. I'm not technologically savvy enough to know of a fix - if you know of one, please point me in the direction and I'll do my best to incorporate it. I've not known of one yet. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:12, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Well...yes, I take your point. It would mitigate some of the issue, but (in my experience given the way some category trees are) it's also possible that a different sort of mess might result.
I suppose I've been a bit wary of creating more narrowly-defined categories because I know there are varying schools of thought on having male-gendered categories in the first place, and I'm still being a bit ginger about the issue. Perhaps it's silly, at this juncture...I think, for lack of a better way to put it, I would have preferred to see evidence of another by-nationality category for male writers before striking out on one. Safety in numbers, and all. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:28, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Well...for every category that exists, I've seen a couple that have been deleted. I've seen the broader categories kept, but I've seen narrower categories deleted.
Personally, I happen to think that male-by-gender categories are useful. That's why I've created a bunch. But I've been involved in a couple of fairly lengthy discussions on the subject - a couple of years back - at WP:CFD. And in both cases the categories were deleted. Which is why I say I'm not sure consensus is there yet. I think it is changing, slowly, but I'm still not convinced it's there. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
To your question about large categories - yes, actually. I tend to view them as useful in a different fashion from subcategories, as I find they can give a useful broad overview of a topic. For something as broad as gendered writers, at least. If I had to parse further, I have complex reasons for these feelings.
I'm beginning to change my outlook a bit, but it's slow...and it's recent. And a lot of what I'm chewing on is the result of conversations I've had off-wiki with other editors, very recently. (After these edits were made, actually.)
If you don't mind, I'd be happy to go into this further off-wiki, for a couple of reasons. Not least because I don't want to clutter up your talkpage with a wall of text. :-) (Just hit the e-mail link at the bottom of my talkpage.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

To Dahn: This gratuitous category changing being done by Ser Amantio has gone far outside the bounds of constructive editing, and must stop. I have dozens of examples of thoughtless changes and outright factual errors that he has done over the past several weeks and months. I will be reporting it to higher editorial authorities. Do you agree, and what is the proper procedure involved to get this done? SamJohn2013 (talk) 18:31, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@SamJohn2013 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): I would certainly comment on such a report, not because I think Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is wrong on all counts (he probably isn't), but because he doesn't seem to give it any consideration before he embarks on immense projects that modify thousands of articles. My problem, as noted above, is that he keeps moving articles into huge categories which are, best, relevant to him for reasons that he never seems to state (it's "complex"). I myself get as many of tens of articles a day in which he just adds generic categories using automated tools, even though I had taken the trouble of sorting out categories in some observable order. This I find quite annoying, and it makes editing here less fun than it should be. As you can see from the convo above, it never occurred to him to create the narrower category before, or together with, the larger ones, meaning that the work load he sets for other editors (and himself!) is potentially infinite. It is, in any case, indefinite.
I would suggest opening a request for comment here. I really think Ser can contribute a lot to wikipedia, but that would require some adaptation of his editing philosophy to something that actually makes sense. Dahn (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Dahn: (See also the talk page for Orangemike.) Ser Amantio di Nicolao is completely out of control and must be stopped. What he is doing is not constructive editing, it is madness. He pays no attention to anyone, just continues on with his vandalism. Look at his contribs, all done by AWB, numbering in the THOUSANDS, and that is only going back a few days! He is doing irreparable, mindless damage to Wikipedia. I delete two or three of them and I take heat for tampering with content, or I am reprimanded because category deletes require consensus. Dizzy robots are eating holes the encyclopedia! Does anyone care? SamJohn2013 (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@SamJohn2013:: I'm not sure I agree that all he does is unconstructive, but I must admit I'm not keen on being absorbed by the issue -- particularly since I do find fault with so many of his edits, and I frankly want to protect myself from wasting more time on it than on other projects. Please consider opening a request for comment, and substantiating your case with diffs which would show other editors precisely what you mean by "eating holes in the encyclopedia". I will add my comments there about the problems I have encountered, and surely, if you make your case and I make my case, editors will look into Ser's edit history and it might even result in a ban on his use of the automated tools, if there really is no other solution. My guess is that Ser is being misguided in some attempt to increase his edit count artificially, and whatever negative consequence this has had, it needs to be corrected -- I agree with you here. I am of the opinion that Ser can be a genuinely productive contributor once he switches focus from this... I won't call it disruption, but let's go with static. Regards, and please let me know if you take a step such as requesting for comment, so that I may add to it. Dahn (talk) 22:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLII, February 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Marițica BibescuEdit

Hello Dahn. I have just been reading your interesting biography of Marițica Bibescu. Your presentation is of a high standard, not just the well-drafted text but the illustrations and the detailed sourcing. It looks to me as if it could be submitted for GA review as it is. I see you have had a number of GA successes in the past -- so why not try for one more? There's just one last question in regard to the article: you say she wrote poetry but that none of it has been published. Do you happen to know if any of her poems have been preserved? It would be interesting to know, and even more interesting to see an example of what she wrote.--Ipigott (talk) 10:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

  • @Ipigott: Hi and thank you. To answer your main question: I find the review process rather cumbersome and distracting, but I might give it a go. On the other issue: I had a glance at one source, by one author I already cited with another article, which mentions some things about her, but it was through google books and not entirely visible; also, it was the kind of e-book version where you don't get to see page numbers. I promised myself I would try and get the book in print, because it seems promising on this and other subjects. Anyway, that source has an attributed poem which is just a few lines long, in which she mocks both her husband and her brother-in-law, something along the lines of "dumbest Ghicas". It is in a really basic form, more of a chant or a folk song than a poem -- like the stuff her father used to write. For what that sounded like, you can check out that Frunză verde și-o lalea stanza from Eminescu which I rendered for the "In the arts" section -- it sounds more or less like a trademark Văcărescu poem, or like any poem from that stage of literary development (Eminescu was playing around, he could, and did, write much better stuff). Dahn (talk) 10:18, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I had already looked carefully at Frunză verde și-o lalea. Nevertheless, the statement that she had a "talent for writing poetry" implies that her work was of a fairly high standard. Glad to see you are contemplating GA. Not too many women's biographies make the grade but I am sure this one would encounter no major problems.--Ipigott (talk) 10:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but a high standard contextually, in a generally illiterate society, and where the literary language was just emerging. For instance this is what males in her family wrote a generation before, and they are still considered exceptional in their context (the pieces are not entirely bad, but the meter and vocabulary are what you find in a 90s pop song).
Thank you again. And thank you for reading it and liking it, this feedback is actually more of a reward for me than GA status. And if you do pick up any spelling or other mistakes, please don't hesitate to correct them. Dahn (talk) 10:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Marițica BibescuEdit

 On 28 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Marițica Bibescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the recognition of Marițica Bibescu (pictured) as Princess-consort of Wallachia involved "complicated maneuvers", including the ousting of an Ecumenical Patriarch? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Marițica Bibescu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Marițica Bibescu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIII, March 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

A small token of appreciationEdit

  The Epic Barnstar
I have long enjoyed your meticulously researched and well-written articles on historical persons, so this is long overdue. On the occasion of your work on Iacob Heraclid (a very interesting figure), allow me to give you this small token of appreciation for your excellent work. Please keep it up, Wikipedia needs contributors like you! Constantine 17:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
@Cplakidas:: Thank you so much, Constantine, this is praise from Caesar. I also much appreciate your copyedits. And yes, this was probably the most incredible figure I ever wrote a piece on. Beyond the very basic facts of his life, there was so much more I was not aware of -- it seems that various authors have just focused on tidbits, some not even aware that there was more to write about, and I got the privilege to connect the pieces of this chaotic story. Dahn (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Wallachian uprising (1821)Edit

 On 21 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wallachian uprising (1821), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first Romanian-language references to "patriotism" are traced back to documents issued by both sides of an armed uprising in 1821 (peasant soldiers pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wallachian uprising (1821). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wallachian uprising (1821)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

DS AlertEdit

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Whoever this is from: Please note that I have not edited (and will not edit) any version of the article, but simply discussed it on the talk page. The discussion with other editors has proven constructive, so this tag is really irrelevant to me. Dahn (talk) 21:16, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom specifically modified the previous wording from "articles" to "pages". Anyway, this is purely pro forma, as it states in the first line. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Dahn - I did want to drop a short thank you. Mediation, on the talk-page, by less involved editors on the subject is helpful. While I might not come off that way on the TP when objecting to some of your suggestions (and I apologize if so), I think your steering is helpful. Thanks!Icewhiz (talk) 08:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
@Icewhiz: And thank you right back for being receptive of suggestions and criticism. If I may offer a piece of advice: please consider making the case for the position you disagree with, and accept that it will continue to exist, is not abhorrent, and will need to be cited in articles, at least once in a while. Simply calling out labels, more or less applicable, more or less relevant, makes it look like you're simply trying to poison the well. Not all Polish commentary is nationalist, and not all nationalism is extreme (and I'm not saying that as a nationalist, as I most certainly am not one). And using the Holocaust in a current political debate, to score political points against present-day people who (whatever their other sins) have no involvement with either the Holocaust or its denial, is probably one of the worst, most morally depressing, ideas people on the Left have ever had in recent years. Dahn (talk) 13:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 Milhist Backlog DriveEdit

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
  • updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK for SuffragettoEdit

 On 31 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Suffragetto, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the board game Suffragetto (pictured) featured suffragettes trying to storm the House of Commons? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Suffragetto. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Suffragetto), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

re: GrabowskiEdit

Interesting point. Did you raise it on his bio's talk page? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:14, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Go ahead and edit the articles, you are bound to be more neutral than quite a few participants. And you are right, our criticism is not that relevant - if reliable sources don't say it, well... (plus NOTFORUM, but who cares, right? :D). One thing: because of the current Polish gov't politicization of the national media, I am afraid the difference between 'national radio' and 'right wing portals' is becoming slim. For years now, my parents have been calling the national TVP news program pl:gadzinówka... (hmmm, need to TL that to English :D). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

TranslationEdit

Thanks for your contributions to articles on Poland and other countries in the World War II era. Your have greatly enhanced the talk pages' scholarly qualities, and the corresponding articles' asymptotic approach to truth.

You've noticed difficulties locating Polish-language sources, and difficulties obtaining competent translations of them into English.

Should someone locate worthwhile Polish sources, I would be willing to render them into English.

Best,

Nihil novi (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

  • @Nihil novi: Thank you, but I'm not sure I deserve such praise; most of the work on retrieving the scholarship has in fact been done by Icewhiz, once we moved from where the article was taking a stand in the polemic to where we all agreed that things are probably not as clear and Manichean as the hype would have us believe. He has been constructive and has actually contributed, all in all, the whole range of points of view expressed about Grabowski. (I also rarely contributed to articles about Poland, and rather few abut WW2.) Concerning the other issue: well, I'm at the level where I don't have an image of what other Polish sources are likely to have dealt with this; my advice is that you or other proficient Polish speakers conduct google searches with keywords and through domains that are likely to produce reliable and relevant results, and cite the sources -- for instance, what Polish academic journals have produced less-than-positive reviews, and on what grounds. My involvement with the article is only third-party and cannot possibly replicate that effort. Dahn (talk) 09:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Leon TomșaEdit

 On 7 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Leon Tomșa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Leon Tomșa, who passed laws limiting Greek immigration to Wallachia, was reportedly a Greek oyster-monger? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Leon Tomșa. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Leon Tomșa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIIV, April 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:55, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Iacob HeraclidEdit

 On 19 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Iacob Heraclid, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before taking over Moldavia in 1561, Iacob Heraclid (pictured) had been executed in effigy and staged his own death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Iacob Heraclid. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Iacob Heraclid), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Greeks in MaltaEdit

 On 24 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Greeks in Malta, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Malta's Greek community once included slaves, as well as the privateers who captured them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Greeks in Malta. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Greeks in Malta), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVI, June 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Poate v-ar putea interesaEdit

Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 00:37, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

P.S. Coroamă nu prea avea ce să caute pe la Mărăşeşti, vedeţi aici la ro:Regimentul 15 Infanterie (1916-1918). Alte info despe Coroamă aici la ro:Regimentul 15 Infanterie (1918-1920).Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 00:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Nici nu am scris că ar fi fost la Mărășești, ci că evenimentul în cauză era după bătălia de la Mărășești; prezența lui în zona Oituz este confirmată de sursa citată cu notă la finalul frazei. Articolele sunt interesante și foarte bine scrise. Dahn (talk) 04:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Ok, există şi alte articole despre diverse alte subiecte, scrise şi mult mai bine decât atât, cu siguranţă (exemple: ro:Atacul de la Smârdan (pictură de Nicolae Grigorescu), ro:Mișu Popp, ro:Constantin Lecca, ro:Ștefan Luchian ...etc...). Foloseşte la ceva dacă semnalizez existenţa lor cuiva ? Întreb deoarece traducerea articolelor din engleză în română esteo activitate curentă, pe când traducerea articolelor care chiar ar merita din română în engleză şi postarea lor la en.wiki pare că este zero.Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 08:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Cu regret, eu personal nu mă ocup cu traducerile, într-unul sau altul din sensuri -- găsesc activitatea de editare de la zero mult mai interesantă, și pentru că știu sigur ce spun sursele pe care le folosesc. Dacă mă răzgândesc, o să mă asigur c-o voi face integrând sugestiile de mai sus. Însă în orice caz mă bucur că wikipedia în română depășește nivelul execrabil la care a rămas nepermis de mult timp, și sunt încântat că se scrie pentru prima oară competent, cursiv, declișeizat, domol, ne-pășunist, pe subiecte cât se poate de interesante. Dahn (talk) 08:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Deși, totuși, mai avem exprimări cam pompoase, subiective și editoriale, de tipul: „ Prin extensia eronată a termenului, datorită aurei de glorie căpătată de dorobanți, numele lor l-a substituit pe cel al infanteriștilor care nu erau cu nimic mai prejos în acte de sacrificiu suprem sau de bravură.” Nu cred că e treaba utilizatorilor wikipedia să dea certificate de bravură soldaților de la 1877 -- ce e relevant în fraza aia poate fi rescris atribuind opinia către autorul ei. Dahn (talk) 08:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
De asmenea: „Edificiul social habsburgic, intrat în colaps odata cu revoluția din 1848 afișase până atunci o artă evazionistă, lipsită de vigoare și desprinsă de realitate, idilică și care dezvolta în exterior un optimism fals, plin de elemente convenționale.” Aceasta e o opinie care-i poate fi atribuită emitentului, Ion Frunzetti, ceea ce i-ar permite și cititorului să-și dea sema că e vorba de o frazeologie marxistă -- în caz că nu e deja clar din formaulrea despre cum arta bună nu poate fi decât „nedesprinsă de realitate”. Biedermeier n-o fi cine știe ce curent, dar e cât se poate de respectabil, și sunt autori care susțin că fără Biedermeier n-ar fi existat Eminescu. Nu e un fapt că arta austriacăm de pe la 1850 era idioată, deși da, o opinie în acest sens exprtimată de Frunzetti este citabilă, și mai ales atribuibilă. Ideea că „edificiul social habsburgic era în colaps la 1848” este de asemenea colorată în wishful thinking-ul retoricii marxiste -- edificiul social habsburgic era cât se poate de viguros și la 1867, și la 1881, și la 1914. Dahn (talk) 08:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Heh, the main source in history-related articles seems to be a pompous teleological account of WWI written by a biologist. Agree that rowiki seems to be catching on with WP:V, and appears more open to NPOV that I remember, but it still has serious issue with identifying WP:RS and giving due weight. Anonimu (talk) 11:33, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Kirițescu is pretty much a standard account, though certainly not beyond reproach. He was not just a biologist, but a participant and a political figure; he was also the recipient of accolades from historians under several regimes, including communist. I myself think the work can be used profusely, especially for banal facts but also including for its editorial opinions, and of course challenged when there's a source challenging him -- just like we would for Duca or Alimănișteanu or various others. Dahn (talk) 11:53, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I disagree. As a matter of fact I think Kiritescu is no more reliable as a historian than Roller. Neither had trainig as a historian and both served primarily to legitimise the government discourse, distorting or omitting facts as needed. I would never use neither unattributed (or, better said, I would never use either at all, there are better sources representing the same POV). As for the other you mention, they are both usable for historical events as long as they are attributed (as are Marghiloman, Argetoianu and other high government figures). As for Kiritescu's use by the "communists", you're talking about the 80s, when the nationalist historiographical discourse was pretty much indistinguishable from the interwar (complete with condemning PCdR's stance as "anti-national"). I expect a major topic such as WWI to be well researched by actual historians (including nationalists ones such as Iorga, Nistor and Buzatu), precluding any need to use Kiritescu.Anonimu (talk) 15:18, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Well in any case I haven't used him as a source myself, and probably won't; I'm ust arguing that him being used as a source is probably not much of a concern. But off-hand I think CK, Iorga and Nistor are all more reliable on any topic than Buzatu, whose professionalism is widely questioned. Dahn (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I was not criticizing you, and I do expect Kiritescu do get things right on simple facts like dates, places, etc.; moreover, his interpretations of many of the events he describes may very well be the consensus view in “classical” Romanian historiography (though not necessarily elsewhere). I hope that if anyone decides to translate the linked articles in EnWP, he puts an effort into improving the referencing, which would include at the least finding a more reliable source than Kiritescu. Regarding Buzatu, I just mentioned it because the first linked article uses it as a source. I’m well aware of the issues with his writings, but, him being an actual historian, he may be usable on topics not related to Antonescu or Romanian Jews.Anonimu (talk) 20:28, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
În limba română există 3 surse fundamentale despre WWI:
  • Dabija, Gheorghe (general), Armata română în răsboiul mondial (1916-1918), vol.I-IV, Tipografia „Lupta” N. Stroilă, București, 1932-1936
  • Kirițescu, Constantin, Istoria războiului pentru întregirea României, vol. I-II, Editura Științifică și Enciclopedică, București, 1989
  • Ioanițiu, Alexandru (lt. col.), Războiul României (1916-1918), vol. I-II, „Tipografia Geniului”, București, 1932

Kiriţescu este parte a acestora. Cu siguranţă are păcatele lui, dar punctul său de vedere poate fi un bun reper de la care se poate porni. Din experienţa proprie, pot spune că cele spuse de el trebuiesc relativ frecvent verificate. Există de altfel referitor la WWI în prezent două proiecte: ro:Portal:România în Primul Război Mondial şi ro:Portal:Acțiunile militare postbelice (1918-1920). Primul este bine conturat în prezent, al doilea e la început. Ca principiu există şi o preocupare pentru a oferi o alegere pertinentă între diverse surse bibliografice de încredre. Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 09:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

De altfel, prin intermediul proiectului despre WWI activitatea de pe ro.wiki a primit şi o recunoaştere, cred eu binemeritată. Aş zice că lururile totuşi se mişcă un pic.Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 09:13, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Sunt multe articole scrise - zic eu, destul de ok, în prezent. Poate că o categorie de genul ro:Categorie:RoWikipedia Core ar fi utilă din acest punct de vedere pentru genul acesta de articole (exemple din alte arii de acoperire ro:Orașe și ani (roman), ro:Parcul Copou, ro:Asprete, ro:Cetatea Timișoara, ro:Ioan Slavici, ro:Accidentul aviatic din Munții Apuseni din 2014, ro:Salina Târgu Ocna, ro:Vicina (oraș), etc...).Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 09:35, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

AntonescuEdit

May you kindly tell me what am I supposed to do then? If Google Maps is not good enough, if sites are not good enough, what exactly do you want from me to get the name of some streets? If you're going to criticize at least provide a solution. Torpilorul (talk) 05:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Nowhere. The info isn't vital under any definition, and if nothing was published on that in a third-party source, we don't conduct our own research to publish it. If it was, then use the source. Dahn (talk) 06:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Gee thanks for the help. -_- Torpilorul (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
      • You're welcome. Dahn (talk) 06:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:People associated with Junimea has been nominated for discussionEdit

 
Category:People associated with Junimea, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVII, July 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Banat RepublicEdit

 On 26 July 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Banat Republic, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an army commander in the Banat Republic of 1918 claimed it could raise 40,000 troops against the French Danube Army, but in reality it had less than 4,000? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Banat Republic. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Banat Republic), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Flag of the Romani peopleEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Flag of the Romani people at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SounderBruce 02:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ion Negoiţescu.JPGEdit

 
Thanks for uploading File:Ion Negoiţescu.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLVIII, August 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

DYK for National Agrarian PartyEdit

 On 13 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article National Agrarian Party, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gheorghe A. Lăzăreanu-Lăzurică, a self-proclaimed "Voivode of the Gypsies", supported Romania's far-right groups, beginning with the National Agrarian Party? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, National Agrarian Party), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Gheorghe A. Lăzăreanu-LăzuricăEdit

 On 13 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gheorghe A. Lăzăreanu-Lăzurică, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gheorghe A. Lăzăreanu-Lăzurică, a self-proclaimed "Voivode of the Gypsies", supported Romania's far-right groups, beginning with the National Agrarian Party? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Gheorghe A. Lăzăreanu-Lăzurică), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Writer's Barnstar
Fantastic work promoting Gheorghe A. Lăzăreanu-Lăzurică and National Agrarian Party to DYK. One of the best articles I've seen on the Main Page in a long time. GA status next? Happy editing! MX () 14:39, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@MX: Thank you! I'm touched by this message, and it's always wonderful to hear people picked up an interest in reading about these somewhat obscure topics by means of one's work. And yes, I might go for GA, but I'm in no rush. Dahn (talk) 17:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Flag of the Romani peopleEdit

 On 20 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Flag of the Romani people, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the flag of the Romani people (pictured) was a triband, before the red stripe was removed over suspicions that it stood for communism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Flag of the Romani people. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Flag of the Romani people), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

[year in literature] pagesEdit

I see no need for the subtitles added as the lists are in date order, US style with month first. Consistency is important. So is correct typography. They unconsciously reassure readers that they're not reading amateur guesswork (which they usually aren't.) I may say it took about six months' work to achieve near-consistency of format and typography on these pages. You are coming rather late onto the scene. I'm also unclear what your criteria are for including pages. Hitherto most writers and one or two of the best works have been added. Printers, publishers and editors have not been consistently added. Bmcln1 (talk) 10:34, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Why are you adding far more information about some years than others? Surely the years should offer similar ranges of information. Bmcln1 (talk) 10:41, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Bmcln1: The primary purpose of subsections is to help readers navigate. Instead on focusing on absolute consistency of format between the 499 small articles and the one article I'm currently expanding, you could for instance look up what they do for articles such as 2000. Of course there is no need for such changes in articles that have been expanded and where the content simply is managable -- this is why I did not do the same for 1563 in literature or 1658 in literature. As for inclusion criteria: the articles are on literary professionals (and yes, publishers as well as actors or illustrators, because they seem to have been included by consensus even before I ever edited a page in the series); any suggestion of culling by "importance" or whatnot, if that is what you're suggesting, would render these pages woefully POV. Dahn (talk) 10:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • "Why are you adding far more information about some years than others" Because that is my editing style, I would rather focus on individual years, and I usually start off when there's something significant in Romanian literature that can be included -- then add more detail on various other regions for the pleasure of it. Wikipedia, unless you don't know this already, is not consistent, and there is no real way of making it consistent just like that: this is why we have featured articles on obscure topics and stubs on more relevant ones. Dahn (talk) 10:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  • So if it's your editing style, it's correct? That's not the usual principle on Wikipedia.

Importance is difficult, I agree, but I don't think the answer is to include masses more. Your judgement in this respect is as good as mine. I also agree that some publishers, etc. crept in again, although they were cleaned out a couple of times. On a more positive note, I fully agree with internationalising, i. e. including "important" from Mexico, say. I fully agree that the 21st century pages get out of hand but I don't feel qualified to change them. Can we conclude this discussion somehow fairly quickly? Bmcln1 (talk) 10:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

There is nothing about my editing style which conflicts with the principles of wikipedia. And please focus: ideally, all articles should be expanded and referenced much in the way I did; you agree with that, by and large, so suggesting that I should add more content to all articles to martch this one, or that I should remove content from this one, would be absurd and disingenuous proposals.
I am not including "masses more", though. I am performing searches for events, issues, biographies that are at least contextually important to national literature X, and I pick them up from quite top-shelf reference works, which generally is clue enough to their importance. For instance, I did not add the info about Carlyle's wedding (just properly referenced it); but I can argue that the introduction of printing to Madagascar/Liberia or Pushkin narrowly escaping a hanging are at least equally important events in that year. Rest assured, I would not content on [obscure Romanian writer] getting married, as I am sane enough to understand that seminal events in the lives of Carlyle or Pushkin or Eminescu are of more than relative importance. Dahn (talk) 11:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
We can both focus on the end result here, though: what the reader gets is a panorama of literature in that year, with events and biographies outlines and intertwined in a way that no other reference work has provided so far. I can't promise we'll get that for all articles in the series, but surely it's a net gain even if it's just in some. Dahn (talk) 11:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
@Bmcln1: A small note on my editing style. I started expanding 1563 in literature after I had added a note on Heraclid's lynching. To me, an article that gave the reader this, but no info on what are much more important events of that year, simply looked bad, and so I started adding other facts. Modesty aside, I don't think there's anyone who can say they dislike the result, which is probably the most complete image of that literary year that's out there. Dahn (talk) 11:13, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Your note on Heraclid's lynching is short, interesting and important. If the same can't be said of all you added, then put the extras on the linked page to the person or event concerned. This is a list of links, so clarity and relevance are important, but so is brevity, which makes things easy for readers to find. A grand account of all that happened in 1563 misses the point. I can see why you did it – you had the information and wanted to put it somewhere. So do you have any proposals? We can't go on discussing for ever. Other things to do on and off Wikipedia, sorry. Bmcln1 (talk) 11:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
I don't think you get my point: I have explicitly noted that I do not want to have everything from the year 1563 listed on that page, but yes, an account of everything important in 1563 literature is clearly achievable; and this is why I don't plan on adding more to the 1563 article, as I have clearly expanded it to what its purpose should be. That said, I'm very interested t know what other notes you found excessive: some are longer than the note on Heraclid, but all the things mentioned in them are important enough, show links between individual biographies, and never does the whole thing cover more than a small paragraph. This was also established practice: for instance, what we did for the Normandy landing in 1944 in literature (unreferenced, btw!) is exactly what we now do for the Decembrist uprising (in 1826) or the French Wars of Religion (in 1563). Maybe you should consider carefully looking into the texts I've added instead of assuming I have no editorial standard and that I will add just about any nonsense. Dahn (talk) 11:59, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations openEdit

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLIX, September 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Category:Romani people and Romanipen in Romania has been nominated for discussionEdit

 
Category:Romani people and Romanipen in Romania, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 14:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commencedEdit

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commencedEdit

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

Have your say!Edit

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CL, October 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

CongratulationsEdit

  100000 Edits
Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 519 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

-- Dolotta (talk) 13:54, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Emanoil BăleanuEdit

 On 31 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Emanoil Băleanu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the citizens of Târgoviște, Romania, put a jinx on boyar Emanoil Băleanu, which was seen as being fulfilled when his wife died in childbirth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Emanoil Băleanu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Emanoil Băleanu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLI, November 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:39, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Dahn. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Dahn. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Constantin Cantacuzino (died 1877)Edit

 On 21 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Constantin Cantacuzino (died 1877), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when Constantin Cantacuzino (pictured) was made Caimacam of Wallachia, his own son reportedly shouted in protest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Constantin Cantacuzino (died 1877). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Constantin Cantacuzino (died 1877)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Nominations now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awardsEdit

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Stroe LeurdeanuEdit

 On 8 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stroe Leurdeanu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Wallachian statesman Stroe Leurdeanu was sentenced to live as a monk for conspiring against a rival family? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stroe Leurdeanu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stroe Leurdeanu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLII, December 2018Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:34, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Voting now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awardsEdit

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

A cookie for you!Edit

  Great improvements on 'Otto Roth'; I just reviewed the article and was impressed at how you improved the article, keep it up! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 19:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
@SshibumXZ: Thanks, and: Glad you enjoyed it! Dahn (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
No problem. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:27, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Crăciun fericit!Edit

  Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas/Crăciun fericit! Mentatus (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIII, January 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:58, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIV, February 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Iacob Heraclid, and the Hospitaller role in the Battle of VerbiaEdit

I just had a look at two articles which you wrote: Iacob Heraclid and Battle of Verbia - well done! I was intrigued by the Maltese/Hospitaller connections to both articles, and I had never heard about them before. I changed the birth place in the Heraclid article from "Hospitaller Malta" to "Malta, Kingdom of Sicily", since in 1527 Malta was still part of the Sicilian kingdom (the Hospitallers arrived on the islands in 1530).

Regarding the Battle of Verbia, I find it a bit unusual that in 1561 the Hospitallers were meddling in Central European affairs since at the time they would have been preoccupied with the Ottoman threat to Malta itself (following the defeats at Gozo and Tripoli in 1551, and Djerba in 1560 - the Ottoman threat would manifest itself in 1565) - although anything is possible. Do you have any further information about any possible Hospitaller assistance to Heraclid's cause? Perhaps you might want to add some information to the Knights Hospitaller or History of Malta under the Order of Saint John articles?

Best regards, --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 21:24, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

  • @Xwejnusgozo: Hello. First off, you are absolutely right about his birthplace, and thank you for the fix. Also thanks for the kind, if surely undeserved, words of praise. On the other issue: it's a bit of a contentious topic; apparently, two Maltese historians are convinced that Heraclid acted as a vassal of Valette, but one Romanian scholar disputes this as wishful thinking (I've summarized that disagreement in the Heraclid bio). The military assistance they provided was probably in the form of paying for his mercenaries, which his army was mostly a motley crew of various nationalities; I don't find any source saying that the Hospitallers actually fought in the field of battle, though it may be. In any case, this effort involved some 2,000 people in all, and we know for a fact that most of them were Polish, German and Hungarian, and therefore supplied by other Heraclidean allies. To be sure, Moldavia had some strategic importance as it could keep the Ottomans busy from the rear, but it was also the back of the woods, with very small armies able to accomplish quite a lot, if only for a short while. So I personally don't think it's that important a detail in the history of the Order, or of Malta, though it is an interesting quirk for sure. One may find a place for it in the body of articles, and yes, I can I add to it if you want me to. Dahn (talk) 21:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
  • @Dahn: Thanks for your reply. :) I agree that it's unlikely that Hospitaller knights actually fought in the battle (but there's always the possibility of a very small number of knights being involved), and I think that their paying some mercenaries was more likely, if they even had a role at all. Anyway, all this is speculation from my part since I'm not knowledgeable on the subject. The articles you wrote seem to be as neutral as possible giving all the different viewpoints. I will leave it up to you whether or not to include a mention in the main articles about the Order or not - you're definitely way more familiar with the subject than I am. All the best! --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 15:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
  • @Xwejnusgozo: Let me know if you're satisfied with the additions in both articles. I tried to keep them proportional to what's already in there, and hope I managed to not make them overfocused. Dahn (talk) 19:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • @Dahn: Yes I think that both additions are appropriate. Thanks for adding these interesting anecdotes to the articles. :) Xwejnusgozo (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • @Xwejnusgozo: Excellent then. Thanks for the suggestion, the trust, and the feedback. Dahn (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for KunságEdit

 On 17 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kunság, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the population of Kunság (banner pictured) was "almost entirely wiped out" during the Ottoman occupation, before recovering through re-colonization? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kunság. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kunság), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:27, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Coat of arms and flag of TransylvaniaEdit

 On 26 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coat of arms and flag of Transylvania, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "wolf's teeth" were once a feature of Transylvanian state symbols (example pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coat of arms and flag of Transylvania. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coat of arms and flag of Transylvania), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde (Talk) 12:01, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLV, March 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Romanian general election, 1946Edit

 Template:Romanian general election, 1946 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Hhkohh (talk) 11:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Bund symbol?Edit

Hi. I saw you added a nice svg symbol for the Polish Bund. Are you certain regarding the colour scheme of the symbol? --Soman (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Soman (talk · contribs) Hi, always a pleasure to hear from you. Unfortunately no, but I used the same colors that are used by the Bund to this day in various combinations (as with the SKIF), and I think we can safely assume that at least one part of the symbol is red. I think it is an improvement from the greyscale, even though part of is an educated guess. I'm always open to suggestions. Dahn (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
It looks great. Just one minor point. If you look at the greyscale version there is also a Polish-style quotation mark around the name. --Soman (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@Soman: You are very right, and thank you. I've updated the image, but it may take a while to replace the old version (some browsers have an initial delay). Dahn (talk) 05:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Very good, thanks, --Soman (talk) 12:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVI, April 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK for French National-Collectivist PartyEdit

 On 20 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article French National-Collectivist Party, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1941, the far-right French National-Collectivist Party proposed sending its women paramilitaries to fight for Vichy France in Syria? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/French National-Collectivist Party. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, French National-Collectivist Party), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVII, May 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Romanian nationalist partiesEdit

I saw your most recent revert of my edit and I don't think you fully understand the nature of the Romanian nationalist parties category. You see, that category was specifically created for parties that subscribe to Romanian nationalism regardless of country. This differentiates it from Category:Nationalist parties in Romania which is for all nationalist parties in Romania regardless of nationality. This is why I reverted your revert. Charles Essie (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I have reverted myself. Dahn (talk) 20:32, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Charles Essie (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVIII, June 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mama LolaEdit

 

The article Mama Lola has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Referenced from a single author (the numbers in parentheses are the page numbers from the single book used to write the article), other sources I found are all by the same author. Does not meet WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Orville1974 (talk) 05:20, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIX, July 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:00, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Imagining the BalkansEdit

You have edited the page. It needs some additions.
I have created Westplaining, currently criticised. Xx236 (talk) 09:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
@Xx236: Yes, I did, a million years ago. I'm all for deleting Westplaining, as it appears like cruft to me. Dahn (talk) 09:31, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't like the form, but the problem is real.Xx236 (talk) 11:05, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Postcolonial literature#RomaniaXx236 (talk) 11:00, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Er, Romania was never a colony? I mean, there was a condominium of European nations in charge for maybe 10 years, but most Romanians dont remember it at all, and those who do are universally happy with it. Maybe we count as a Russian or Ottoman colony, but both Russia and Turkey state (absurd) claims to being anti- and post-colonial states, so why would that count here? Dahn (talk) 20:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination for National Peasants' PartyEdit

I have asked questions at Template:Did you know nominations/National Peasants' Party. Please respond there soon if you are still interested in a July 29 special occasion request. I have also asked at WT:DYK for others to assist. Flibirigit (talk) 18:16, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I reviewed it, and two paragraphs need a ref. Fine work, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Poate vă interesează...Edit

Salut! Am remarcat harta dumneavoastră vectorială de la Commons făcută după Guillaume Lejean și aș dori să știu dacă vă interesează subiectul despre ceangăi. Eu unul mă documentez de mai mulți ani și mi-am transpus munca de cercetare la articolul în limba română (w:ro:Ceangăi), mai ales la secțiunile despre origini, fizionomie, grupuri, religie. Evident, mai este mult de muncă dar față de cum era cândva a ajuns departe. Dacă doriți, vă pot sta la dispoziție la scrierea articolului în limba engleză. Dețin cărți scanate, unele din ele mai puțin accesibile (fiind rare sau destul de vechi). Numai bine,--Kunok Kipcsak (talk) 19:13, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for National Peasants' PartyEdit

 On 29 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article National Peasants' Party, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite a ban on the National Peasants' Party (logo shown) taking effect on this day in 1947, the party still organized in the Romanian underground, attempting to field a candidate in the 1985 election? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/National Peasants' Party. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, National Peasants' Party), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
valereee (talk) 00:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Romanian science fictionEdit

Hi, Dahn! Could you help us figure out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Abbey (novel)? Haukur (talk) 09:16, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! That was extremely helpful. Haukur (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Most welcome! Dahn (talk) 17:04, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLX, August 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Backlog BanzaiEdit

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations openEdit

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:37, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for International Agrarian BureauEdit

 On 2 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article International Agrarian Bureau, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the International Agrarian Bureau was criticized by the right as advocating the "peasant-boot dictatorship", and by the left as a vehicle for "peasant individualism"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/International Agrarian Bureau. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, International Agrarian Bureau), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
valereee (talk) 12:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Jewish Democratic CommitteeEdit

 On 8 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jewish Democratic Committee, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Jewish Democratic Committee and the Romanian Communist Party together sent Romanian Jews to Israel, hoping to make it a communist ally? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jewish Democratic Committee. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jewish Democratic Committee), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 04:50, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 16:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Max AuschnittEdit

 On 11 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Max Auschnitt, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that billionaire Max Auschnitt bribed Romanian authorities, and worked with "an anti-Semite, but a civilized one", to help Jews escape the Holocaust? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Max Auschnitt. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Max Auschnitt), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
valereee (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commencedEdit

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXI, September 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 15:38, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way markEdit

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of UNITEREdit

 

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on UNITER requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 4meter4 (talk) 05:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Aristide BlankEdit

 On 25 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aristide Blank, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a court in communist Romania found banker Aristide Blank guilty of high treason, based on his meetings with foreigners and notes from Blank's unpublished novel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aristide Blank. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Aristide Blank), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
valereee (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 20:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Romanian hospodarsEdit

Dear Editor.

I can see that he has knowledge of Romanian language and has made major edits in the biography of Prince Leon Tomșa (d. 1632) of the Wallachian country. Wouldn't you like to improve the biographies of other princes in the Wallachia and Moldavia, who are often (too) short in English? I'm a Hungarian person, but I am very interested in the history of these two neighboring medieval countries - but there is hardly any book in Hungarian. I don't know Romanian, a little English, and it would be nice to have a look at these prince biographies. Regards: 12akd (talk) 12:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@12akd: Hi and thank you for your message. I tend not to approach topics in a systematic matter, as this makes writing articles more boring for me, but I have worked on several hospodar bios, such as Radu Paisie and Stephen III of Moldavia; I also created articles on quasi-princes, such as Barbu Mărăcine and Hrizea of Bogdănei. I might do more in the future, as time and fatigue permit. Allow me to thank you for on interest in this, and to express my excitement that you found the Tomșa article interesting. Dahn (talk) 07:31, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the history of Eastern European countries can be known to a minimal extent even today. While English / French / German / Italian history is the subject of a series of detailed summaries in almost all languages ​​- the history of Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Poland and Russia is less well researched (up to the 20th century). The reason for this is obviously the strong central view of Western Europe, although Eastern European history is at least as interesting and instructive. for example, I know only one more detailed book on medieval Romanian history: a 19th century book by Pál Hunfalvy (1810-1891). The synthesis of the 20th century linguist-historian is not very accurate: The History of the Romans (2 volumes), Budapest, 1894 (positivist work) [2]. The newer books in Hungarian / translated into Hungarian deal only extensively with the main parts of Romanian history before the 1862 unification (about one book of 400 pages in 50 pages, the rest from the end of the 19th century + the 20th century).

And even in these medieval / early modern part, almost only of the Wallachian princes, Old Mircea (+1418), Vlad III (+1476). Neagoe Basarab (+1521) and Mihály Vitéz (+1600) - in the Moldavian part Bogdan I (+1365), Alexander I. (+1432). Stefan III (+1504), Petru Rares (+1546) are named. Between 1600 and 1862, almost no one is mentioned by name (perhaps Vasile Lupu and Dimitrie Cantemir), only they refer to Turkish rule, and since the 1700s, the two rulers ruled the Fanariota Greeks. Yet these princes, in their time, ruled over hundreds of thousands of people, levied taxes, made laws, and ruled countries. And yet they were forgotten ... 12akd (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

I could not agree more, and have sought to remedy the void here precisely based on this rationale. Unfortunately, I am bound by time and by energy. Will do more, however, over the coming weeks, months, and years. Dahn (talk) 09:33, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Good luck! Thanks! 12akd (talk) 10:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXII, October 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Barbu LăzăreanuEdit

You know much more about him than I do. I only have a minor question. The Romanian Wikipedia indicates that his first name was Baruch and indicates of reference which I was not able to check. Your article mentions the name Avram. Maybe you could be so kind and check whatever you can and then correct either the English or Romanian Wikipedia. Both information cannot simultaneously be correct. Afil (talk) 06:42, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello there. All I know is what the one source which goes into that level of detail from the ones I used says, and I cannot vouch about whether it is ultimately correct, nor about the text on rowiki. Dahn (talk) 21:38, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXIII, November 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXIV, December 2019Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:47, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020Edit

 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and