The MediaWiki software that runs Wikipedia is under constant development. Do you want to see the latest, greatest features? Then head over to test.wikipedia.org, where the development branch is tested. But be careful. That wiki runs in debugging mode, so even the smallest problem in the code might cause it to spew out error messages. Take a look at the list of features under development in the MediaWiki roadmap. MediaWiki already is one of the most feature-rich wiki engines; see the MediaWiki feature list. MediaWiki and its dependencies are open source, so if you are the inquisitive type, please take a look at the code and help improve it.
To add this auto-updating template to your user page, use {{totd}}
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
(I have relocated these very precious kindnesses from others to the top of my talkpage, so they will never be lost or forgotten. I am very grateful for each one.)
Ovinus has given you a bowl of peaches! This delicious fruit promotes WikiLove and has hopefully made your day juicier. Spread peachiness and WikiLove by giving someone else some peaches, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, by adding {{subst:Peach}} to their talk page with a friendly message!
Was thinking of you and your work earlier, Jen. Thanks for everything and I hope you have a good day! I certainly will be... today is a dim light at the end of this year-long tunnel. Warmly, Ovinus (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Jenhawk777 for the message that you left on Gerda's page for me. Truly, the volunteers of these huge projects like WP, LibriVox, DP cannot go the extra mile without people like Gerda and you, who inject fresh energy into the volunteers. The kind words are our only salary, and fortunately we all can pay each other a lot. :) Qapisce (talk) 10:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A superior barnstar for you!
The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
For all the time and effort you have put in — across thousands of edits — to markedly improve numerous articles related to Christianity all these years. The magnitude of the positive impact you have had with regard to Wikipedia's coverage of academic topics related to Christianity is unprecedented; I cannot think of any other editor who has worked so rigorously and improved those topics to the extent that you have. You are a phenomenal editor and your work is awe-inspiring. Thank you for all that you do! — The Most ComfortableChair21:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ActivelyDisinterested Bless you! Thank you! I so deeply appreciate you and all your work. You are still the one I will reach out to when I have a problem, but you have taught me a lot, and this article was just too much to ask someone else to do for me. I would have enjoyed banging my head against a wall more, but hey, I followed your example and got it done. I put it up for peer review and others suggested adding back a theology section which I am beginning work on today. Thank you again. You are a great blessing. Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For a surprise, a Bach cantata is on the Main page today, where it was last year for the 300th anniversary, and they were too lazy to find something new ;) - Look at my story, and listen to the 3 whole-tone steps and the dialogues of Fear and Hope. - An open letter open to be signed (more info just below and on the talk), - I haven't checked if you did, please ignore then. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did sign it. I think maybe I've read some of Beutler tho not Riffaud. We are losing that whole generation aren't we? They are leaving behind a valuable legacy. Who is coming up to take their place? Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My interaction with Doug doesn't really qualify as a clash. He was trying to help me by directing me to the Teahouse for additional learning back when I was in a panic over Jytdog. Inexperience on WP on my part, and bias on Jytdog's, produced a perfect storm for me, but Doug was nice about it. I'm very sorry to hear he is ill. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He's one of the very few I've contacted off-wiki when I saw the need. Admin, former arbcom member, sound mind. And we were both disliked by a Wikipedian who thought she was a descendant of Jesus and Mary Magdalene (true story). She did some socking and one of her accounts was named Doug Dumbass (subtle). For some reason he don't think [1] is funny, but Great Wikipedians are allowed to be eccentric. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. A long and seemingly pointless argument imo. Primary sources have limited value and not just in religion. Most commentaries are akin to a modern blog, and should not be quoted as authoritative.
I went to a State school. My religion professors were not all believers, and of those that were, they weren't all Christian. They flunked any paper, any person, who did not practice accepted mainstream scholarship. They defined mainstream scholarship by its use of modern critical method - by "methodological naturalism" - and what is verifiable historically - which in religion, isn't much when it comes down to it. I graduated #1 in my class and won a full ride to Vanderbilt grad school, and I did not do so by quoting dubious commentaries that reflected personal belief. On WP, I have never used a commentary in any religion article I have ever worked on and never will. (I am clearly infinitely superior in every way... and humble of course...)
We just have to follow the same standards no matter the topic. Problem solved. Religion discussions are not quite as bad as politics, but they tend to be filled with passionate personal opinion that is usually blind to its very nature as personal - and that happens on both sides of the divide. Sigh. You and me bud. And Gerda of course. Everyone else is a bit nuts... Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the laugh! Yep, noone would think there's something nuts in dedicating hours to this place. But as I told my brother recently, I can do this, or something like watch a tv-series, play a video-game, read a novel, solve a crossword (and I do most of those). But WP has elements of all those things, so I like to do that too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is hard to explain the appeal to non-wikipedias isn't it? Long hours of research and reading, recording minutiae into an outdated format to occasionally obtain over-the-top criticisms from people you'll never meet for work they don't even recognize. Whhoohoo! What fun! At least one of my children thinks I am simply wasting time, and that is no doubt absolutely true from time to time. Yet we all go to WP first when looking something up! But you know, personal tastes are impossible to explain or justify to others. My dad loved golf and that is completely inexplicable to me... :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there are annoying people you encounter, but there is also the complete opposite, like yourself, and that makes it worth it. And the successes, though perhaps minor, can be so effing rewarding. Cooperating with unknown people you perhaps just share a narrow interest with can be so fun.
A while back, the wife of Skeeter Reece asked me if there was any way we could get a pic she had of her husband and a somewhat known boxer onto WP, she had the only copy. I managed to find the photographer who took it in 80:s online (unusual name, now an astronomer and used to be married to Richard Pryor). Mrs Reece called her, and she agreed to do the Commons-thing, which is not that easy for a beginner. So now the world can look at File:The Champ and The Clown.jpg, I put it in every article I could think of. Call me nuts, but I like that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Going back to the start of the thread, there's now over a thousand signatures. I don't know if you've been following the India-story at all. This video is a little long, but interesting. And the guy reminds me a bit of Jar Jar Binks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Women in Religion have a monthly virtual edit-a-thon and the next session is December 2nd 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. CST. For Zoom meeting details, contact Dzingle1 or RosPost. Women in Red members are welcome to join the Zoom Meeting here
Tip of the month:
Think of rewarding contributors, especially newcomers, with a barnstar.
So am I, - one of its organists played a (scheduled) festival concert shortly after the fire, and invited donations. - Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, good word for same attitudes, views, beliefs. For taste, it's rather "wir haben den gleichen Geschmack" or "wir mögen dieselben Dinge". - I came to fix the cellist's name, with a 10-years-old DYK and new pics - look for red birds! - Good luck with the FAC! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is unlikely it will pass. Its length and the inadequacy of some topics that simply can't be fully covered because of length are already raising exclusively negative comments. How is it possible to cover 2000 years of history - that they demanded last time must include the entire world - and its impact on politics, economics, art, and culture without it being long? Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has to be long. - See, I don't make Bach's chorale cantata cycle a GA, but individual cantatas, - some even became FA. I think I said this before ;) - Today is a woman poet's centenary. And then I'll look into a recent death, and then work on the Advent cantata which I should have tackled in November ... (but there was travel, celebration and death). Last few pics from trip uploaded. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes everyone tells me to take a smaller article to FA, but it isn't the FA I care about so much as the article itself. But I think I am giving up. There is just no way to satisfy everyone. Cé la vie! Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you are interested in anything besides the history of Christianity right now, but just for later: today's story is about the Hauptfriedhof Mainz where I had to go and sing, and brought flowers. - I think I never told you not to make the history a FA, but to make something smaller your first FA, as a preparation, to better understand how it works, to be known and respected in that (a bit difficult) elite community. I hope you can see the difference ;) - I tried to put the history of Christianity in one DYK hook, for Christum wir sollen loben schon, BWV 121, on the second day of Christmas, and have to be happy that it was accepted at all although late - imagine: someone sacrificed a hook in the full set to later to make room. However, of the 1500 years my hook covered, only 500 are in prep. I hope that readers will find out in the article. - Finally: crying a bit is ok! I will be back for Christmas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! We rehearsed for tomorrow. - Today it's another great woman, soprano Sigrid Kehl, and I found a 1963 Christmas Oratorio detail. 10 years earlier than that cycle, Bach wrote seven cantatas for the 1724 season, based on seven songs, - my focus this year. Expect three stories for the three days they celebrated in Leipzig ;) - Enjoy the season! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question from WikiAccumen (07:06, 13 December 2024)
Hi mentor, do you know how to change a photo used on a wikipage? I would like to edit the page of a favorite celebrity to have a nicer more flattering photo, thanks for your kind help on it. --WikiAccumen (talk) 07:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiAccumen More details are needed. Basic rule of thumb is that any random pic you find online is under copyright and can't be used. Apart from old stuff in the public domain, and some stuff by governments, WP is generally restricted to pics uploaded here by the copyright holder, almost always the photographer. We can't use a pic because "nice", we go by "per rulez". So, we have a lot of pics from comic cons etc.
Oh okay, thanks for your response, to be more specific, just wanted to remove a more unflattering pic on the page, the other pics are great and that one is just not representative of the beauty at all, thank you for the helpful details you provided, appreciate it. WikiAccumen (talk) 08:23, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question from Writer.ch2 (05:35, 16 December 2024)
Hi! I wanted some help in creating an article- I do have a conflict of interest so I may need help with getting someone else to write it (I can provide sources) or review it.
I've completed my review of your work in Religion. I wish to thank you for your contribution. You introduced some great new sources and thematically covered things appropriately. I had to make some changes, but it's all based on the work you did with some great sources I enjoyed reading. Thank you. Biz (talk) 06:30, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your comment on Gog's page "I was hoping that someone would read it all the way through and comment on content, but so far the comments have all been about little things that have been easily fixed". I think this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how FAC works. A reviewer mentions a general problem with the article and gives a couple of specific examples. You fix those examples, add a little "Done" with tick on the review, and move on. But it isn't done at all. This is a common problem with some nominators at FAC, and their noms usually struggle. The reviews you had, even in a few days, raised (often contradicting each other, sure) a long list of basic issues that will not be "easily fixed" at all. Johnbod (talk) 02:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ChloeBella185, hello! Making an acceptable WP-article (I assume that's what you mean, like for example Wheelbarrow race) without knowing how to edit WP is hard. A common advice is to "just" edit for a while first, to try to get a hang of this place.
That said, your first hurdle is "Can a WP-article about your chosen subject be written at all?" Start with reading WP:BACKWARD. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", move on to WP:YFA. If your choice of topic fails WP:N, the article will not be accepted. If you decide to go ahead, you need to learn how to add references correctly, WP:TUTORIAL can help with that. This is crucial, and I can't stress that enough. Really. If you intend to write about a living person, read WP:BLP. If you intend to write about yourself (WP:COI), the short advice is "don't."
I've not had a chance to read through History of Christianity yet, and I see the FAC has been closed. I'll read through it in the new year, I can still give feedback from an amatuer perspective if it would be helpful. Hope you enjoy the holidays. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested«@» °∆t°00:28, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I am so glad to hear from you! I had to pull the nomination because all it was getting was negative feedback. My inexperience with the FAC requirements ... An editor more familiar with those is working on it now. He's amazing. I am surprised the process is making it less detailed, so less precise and more general, which for my academic mind is completely backwards - but a narrative is apparently necessary. A narrative with simple words. I am just watching from the cheap seats right now, but you know I always appreciate your input. You are pretty amazing yourself. Hope you and yours are well and having a happy holiday season. Two days till presents!! :-) Merry Christmas! Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Holidays
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!
Hello Jenhawk777, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 22:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, and hey, I apologize for the revert. I was given wrong info. I think I've fixed it now. Again. Without you that might not have been found. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The hyphen-thing? I just noticed that per article-text, they were rare (when I noticed it). Quite possibly, they are one of those MOS-things that can be either way (but should be consistent within an article) and some people feel strongly about. I considered "4th century" style, but that didn't seem to be in use. No biggie. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your work on "History of Christianity"
Hi Jenhawk777, as you know, I've been reading "History of Christianity". I see that you've contributed almost three-quarters of the content, and I wanted to congratulate you for your fine work on the article—most impressive. The "Who Wrote That?". tool shows which parts you wrote. A huge task, and I think you're doing a splendid job. Carlstak (talk) 03:40, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OMG! Thank you. I haven't received many compliments, since most comments have come from reviews looking for ways to improve it, so I am doubly grateful. Hardly anyone realizes what a huge task this has been - maybe ~~ AirshipJungleman29 who is helping to make it more concise is beginning to feel the weight of it a little. It's a humongous topic, and I am not an expert in all these ages, so it has taken two years for me to do the reading and research needed. I am committed to getting this article where it needs to be, and as the wonderful and amazing AirshipJungleman29 will tell you, I have a tendancy to be verbose and include minute detail, so when this is done, he will be as deserving of praise as anyone. And thank you for your input. I am grateful to everyone who has shown up to help on this article. It really needs to be one of WP's best. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
