This is an archive of past discussions with User:Iazyges. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Iazyges! When you want to nominate one of my short Byzantine biographical articles for GA, please check with me first specifically for each article. On the one hand, some of them, like Isaac Komnenos (son of Alexios I) are not complete yet; on the other, the reviewer may require changes where I as the main author and the one with access to the original sources need to be available to edit them. I know we discussed this some months ago and I gave you a go ahead, but this was not meant as a blank check. After all, an article I wrote back in 2010 is often not up to my standards of 2018 ;). I appreciate the enthusiasm, but currently my watchlist is full of GANs left and right of articles that are often half-baked, and trying to keep tabs with them is frustrating. Constantine ✍ 12:54, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.
Technical news
The WMF Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input on the second set of wireframes for the Special:Block redesign that will introduce partial blocks. The new functionality will allow you to block a user from editing a specific set of pages, pages in a category, a namespace, and for specific actions such as moving pages and uploading files.
Hello to all! I do not intend to write a regular peer review newsletter but there does occasionally come a time when those interested in contributing to peer review should be contacted, and now is one. I've mailed this out to everyone on the peer review volunteers list, and some editors that have contributed to past discussions. Apologies if I've left you off or contacted you and you didn't want it. Next time there is a newsletter / mass message it will be opt in (here), I'll talk about this below - but first:
THANK YOU! I want to thank you for your contributions and for volunteering on the list to help out at peer review. Thank you!
Peer review is useful! It's good to have an active peer review process. This is often the way that we help new or developing editors understand our ways, and improve the quality of their editing - so it fills an important and necessary gap between the teahouse (kindly introduction to our Wikiways) and GA and FA reviews (specific standards uphelp according to a set of quality criteria). And we should try and improve this process where possible (automate, simplify) so it can be used and maintained easily.
Updates
It can get quite lonely tinkering with peer review...
With a bit of effort we can renovate the place to look like this!
Update #1: the peer review volunteers list is changing
The list is here in case you've forgotten: WP:PRV. Kadane has kindly offered to create a bot that will ping editors on the volunteers list with unanswered reviews in their chosen subject areas every so often. You can choose the time interval by changing the "contact" parameter. Options are "never", "monthly", "quarterly", "halfyearly", and "annually". For example:
{{PRV|JohnSmith|History of engineering|contact=monthly}} - if placed in the "History" section, JohnSmith will receive an automatic update every month about unanswered peer reviews relating to history.
{{PRV|JaneSmith|Mesopotamian geography, Norwegian fjords|contact=annually}} - if placed in the "Geography" section, JaneSmith will receive an automatic update every yearly about unanswered peer reviews in the geography area.
We can at this stage only use the broad peer review section titles to guide what reviews you'd like, but that's better than nothing! You can also set an interest in multiple separate subject areas that will be updated at different times.
Update #2: a (lean) WikiProject Peer review
I don't think we need a WikiProject with a giant bureaucracy nor all sorts of whiz-bang features. However over the last few years I've found there are times when it would have been useful to have a list of editors that would like to contribute to discussions about the peer review process (e.g. instructions, layout, automation, simplification etc.). Also, it can get kind of lonely on the talk page as I am (correct me if I'm wrong) the only regular contributor, with most editors moving on after 6 - 12 months.
So, I've decided to create "WikiProject Peer review". If you'd like to contribute to the WikiProject, or make yourself available for future newsletters or contact, please add yourself to the list of members.
Update #3: advertising
We plan to do some advertising of peer review, to let editors know about it and how to volunteer to help, at a couple of different venues (Signpost, Village pump, Teahouse etc.) - but have been waiting until we get this bot + WikiProject set up so we have a way to help interested editors make more enduring contributions. So consider yourself forewarned!
I am thinking of overhauling and resurrecting the NPR school sometime soon. I see you are listed as a trainer over there. Could you check your listing on the trainer list to make sure that it is accurate, or remove the listing if you no longer wish to be a trainer. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere(or here)23:53, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the August 2018 GOCE newsletter. Thanks to everyone who participated in the Guild's June election; your new and returning coordinators are listed below. The next election will occur in December 2018; all Wikipedia editors in good standing may take part.
Our June blitz focused on Requests and articles tagged for copy edit in October 2017. Of the eleven people who signed up, eight editors recorded a total of 28 copy edits, including 3 articles of more than 10,000 words. Complete results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the seventeen people who signed up, thirteen editors completed 194 copy edits, successfully removing all articles tagged in the last three months of 2017. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are here.
The August blitz will run for one week, from 19 to 25 August. Sign up now!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.
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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Constantine ✍ 17:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
There are a number of specialised templates that make linking to an article on Wikisource easier. They usually do this by placing a wrapper around standard template like {{cite encyclopedia}} (I have a none definitive list of them in User:PBS/Notes#List of PD Templates). These templates only support a limited number of standard parameters and often have specialised ones. Any additional parameters are not usually passed through to the standard templates and additional parameters often place an article into a category bucket. In the case of {{EB1911}} into Category:Pages using EB1911 with unknown parameters which is how I noticed your edit to the article Maurice (emperor).
It would help if you could read the documentation for {{cite EB1911}}{{EB1911}} as that will explain how these templates work. It will also familiarise you with what parameters are available. If you look at my recent sequence of edits to the article. You will see three other points.
If there is a mixture of cs1 ({{cite book}} family of templates) and cs2 ({{citation}}) there is a difference in how the delimiters between parameters are displayed and some other alteration see Help:CS2. So either add mode=cs1 to the {{citation}} templates or mode=cs2 to the {{cite book}} family of templates. If mode=cs2 is adopted there is no need for the ref=harv parameter as it is the default in CS2.
You changed defence to defense. This was a violation of WP:ENGVAR. It also introduced inconsistencies as defence was also used in two other places in the article.
You removed a parameter short=x If you had read the {{cite EB1911}} you would have seen that short=x was serving a valid purpose (it removes some of the verbose details used in citations, but not needed in the other appendices and ought not to have been removed.
I altered one template from {{Cite journal}} (not sure why that was used instead of {{cite book}}) to {{Cite CE1913}}. It is a good example of how the wrapper templates simplifies adding a citation to a Wikipedia source and simultaneously use the advise at Help talk:Interwiki linking.
G'day Iazyges, I just wanted to encourage you to nominate one of your Milhist A-Class articles for FAC. This one seems like a good one to have a crack at. Maybe you could co-nom it with Sturm if it would be your first one? Anyway, have a think about it? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Iazyges. GA review. On 10 August Constantine finally finished and cleared you to carry on the assessment. You have just put the assessment on hold. Without, so far as I can see, giving me any actions to do. Am I missing something? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Iazyges, that was a prompt review. Many thanks. All of your suggestions addressed and all bar one implemented. Comments on the GAN talk page. Thanks again. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:40, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@Renato de carvalho ferreira: what sources do you have for the armenian embassy, the theodemir, valamir, videmir part, and the Lazica campaign? I'm more than willing for the info to be added to the article (I do not have access to whichever source you are pulling from), but I need the sourcing information for it to do so. Also I need the page number, year, and ISBN of the Phosphography you are citing (presumably one of the five "big" Phosphographies.) for this edit. Thanks! IazygesConsermonorOpus meum15:39, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Well, the officers I put on the article are mentioned in the second volume of the Prosopography, on the entry about the emperor Marcian (pp. 714-715). About the other points:
On the Portuguese version of the article I put all necessary information about the Armenian embassy in the first paragraph of the subsection "Conflito com os hunos" (Em 450, o naxarar Bardanes II Mamicônio [...]). I don't know if you understand Portuguese. If not, you can try to understand what it is in the French version of the same topic on fr:Hmayeak Mamikonian. It's one of the Armenians who went to Constantinople asking support for the Armenian revolt Vardan II Mamikonian was preparing against the Sasanian Empire. The idea was ask for Theodosius' support, but he died in the middle of the embassy and Marcian decided not involve himself on a war against the Persians. On the second volume of the Prosography (pp. 85-46), it's mentioned on the Anatolius entry that he and Florentius convinced Marcian not to make war against Persia.
Done
About the Ostrogoths' brothers. Our Portuguese version mention the same thing. It's on the same section of the previous information, but in the end ([...] os ostrogodos liderados pelos irmãos). Wolfram (1990, p. 258 and 261) and the Prosopography (1980, p. 138) mention it.
Done
About the Lazica's campaign, you can verify the Portuguese text on the subsection "Outros conflitos" ([...] Cerca de 456, Gubazes I (ca. 456–468) [...]) or verify the English version of Gubazes' article that I linked here.
Hello once again. I reviewed the Portuguese version of Tiberius (son of Constans II) and Heraclius (son of Constans II) using your last editions on the articles. Both are really fine, but both of them use Canduci in a substancial part of the last paragraph ("Throughout all this, Tiberius was kept under [...]") and it's not a reliable source. I searched that information on other sources, and I found nothing. I removed that part and added relevant information based on their PMBZ's profiles. Maybe you should read that. I also changed Norwich, another source not so good, for Stratos. Maybe you should see that too.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 07:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg)
,_160906,_ako.jpg)
