User talk:Elinruby

Archives (Index)

2020/April 2020/June 2020/July 2020/August 2020/September 2020/October 2020/November 2020/December 2021/January 2021/February 2021/March 2021/April 2021/May 2021/June 2021/August 2021/September 2021/October 2021/November 2021/December 2022/February 2022/March 2022/April 2022/May 2022/June 2022/July 2022/August 2022/November 2022/December 2023/January 2023/February 2023/March 2023/April 2023/May 2023/June 2023/July

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Just to say thanks

Hi, I just wanted to drop in and say thanks for the advice and guidance you gave me on Talk:Firehose of falsehood regarding Wikipedia policies and norms, how to propose, discuss and implement appropriate changes, etc. It inspired me to do a lot of reading about Wikipedia policy and procedures. I really learned a lot in the process, and I appreciate the patience you showed in explaining things to me.

I haven't read up on barnstars enough to know whether or not one would be appropriate, but I just wanted to let you know I appreciate you taking the time to help out, especially seeing as these kinds of contentious topics can be stressful to get involved with.

I was my first conflict and I was genuinely pretty disillusioned, on the cusp of giving up on the whole idea of becoming an editor, but your calm and neutral advice spurred me on. For the future, I plan to do my best, try to make constructive improvements, stick around, and continue learning.

I've made quite a lot of changes to the article now. If you ever have some spare time, and fancy reviewing the changes and giving some feedback, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Either way you've already done a lot and I really appreciate it.

Thanks again for your kind patience and all the best! ShabbyHoose (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I really appreciate you taking the time to pen this note. Warm fuzzies all around.Elinruby (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Just a ping to @ShabbyHoose: as I should have done at the time to be sure he/she saw my thanks. This note came to me at a time when I was quite discouraged myself about something else and really, really, did me a lot of good. So thank you very much, and never hesitate to do this kind of stuff ;) Elinruby (talk) 21:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your herculean effort for Aryan Valley! You are a champ! Lamona (talk) 19:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Elinruby!

Happy New Year!

Elinruby,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See this for background context.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jublains archeological site has been accepted

Jublains archeological site, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

scope_creep^Talk 04:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. I just put up a pending tasks comment on the talk page. If you did the rating or can see the rating feel free to add to it; this is a good article on fr.wikipedia and there's no reason it couldn't be here. How did I submit the article for consideration, btw? Elinruby (talk) 05:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I found the grading scheme. Elinruby (talk) 05:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy new year in advanced

Dear, Elinruby, What's your thought on renamed Dha hanu Region for the Aryan valley . Because dha hanu region is a Historical name aas well as it has been sometimes used by an recent articles too . But it is true that Aryan valley is Mostly used by the government and others Nowadays . We need to search how many articles have used dha hanu region ,if the dha hanu region is used more than Aryan valley then my thought is that Dha hanu is a comment name then we should Renamed the Aryan valley as Dha Hanu region . However Aryan valley name will also be included in dha hanu region . Please tell me your though, Thank you Minaro123 (talk) 04:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Does Dah Hanu refer to exactly the same villages? Elinruby (talk) 05:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Dha hanu is a twin villages that is Dha and hanu. While 'Dha hanu region' refers to the four villages as mentioned by some articles .

But we need to make maintain two pages, one is dha hanu region . And another is dha hanu . We need to first collect sources to see how many articles and source have mentioned dha hanu region ,after that we can decide Minaro123 (talk) 07:41, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

@Minaro123: sorry to be slow to answer. I typed out a long answer about my understanding of the jurisdictions, then my battery died... It was pretty similar to what I said on the talk page of Aryan Valley though, so let me answer a different way, from the rules rather than by trying to understand the facts. Not that the facts aren't important; we are trying to accurately portray the facts, right? But to answer your question from the rules perspective, in general an article about an area is supposed to use the WP:COMMONNAME. This is a tricky call in this instance, especially with no knowledge outside of working on this article with you. It is not correct that everything needs to be in the article about each village. Those editors are working from a misunderstanding of policy because of their POV. Consider Napa Valley and Silicon Valley, though. These are names that apply to a region that contains several municipalities. I consider Aryan Valley a kind of special enterprise zone. Whether Dah Hanu refers to all of the villages or just two of them seems to me like it was a matter of the point in time, but that is what I am understanding from you. Does that help? Elinruby (talk) 16:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

French legal terms

Lack of proper translations for French legal terms was getting in the way of a lot of different articles we've been working on in the French criminal law area, and so I've created Draft:Glossary of French criminal law. It's only about 20% done, but it may be useful to you already, especially if your term starts with A, B, or C (and some E's and P's, and scattered others). I finally understand terms like élément matériel and élément moral, which I never did before. As a fringe benefit, I've learned English terms like actus reus and mens rea as well. (Well, Latin terms in these examples, but used in English legal texts in common law countries.) Feel free to add words from French criminal law to the list, even if you don't have the definition for it yet. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 09:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, we really need one. I will work on this a bit later today Elinruby (talk) 20:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Was looking around for more good glossaries (not being satisfied with the ones I just added to the "External links" section) and I think I hit the mother lode, with this lexicon from the Ministere de la Justice: http://www.justice.gouv.fr/les-mots-cles-de-la-justice-lexique-11199/#alpha . It's completely authoritative, and fairly comprehensive. It's monolingual French, so it still doesn't cover how to translate a term into English, but at least it's a one-stop shop for finding a reliable definition for something, since the articles at fr-wiki are often poor and unsourced, and I don't trust them. I will start back-filling some of the existing definitions with {{sfn}}s using this source. My plan is to add most of the terms from Catherine Elliott's glossary appendix; I've done pages 231-233; so pp. 234-239 still remain to be added. Mathglot (talk) 02:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Well for sure a lot of articles from fr.wikipefia are insufficiently referenced. Which is reason enough how to not trust them. Could we put anchors on individual terms? Elinruby (talk) 04:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Every term is individually anchored. The canonical anchor is the French term, as it would appear in running text, so normally lower case, unless always capitalized. Convenience anchors are included, so you can link without diacritics, or capitalized; e.g., Draft:Glossary of French criminal law#élément moral links to the same place as Draft:Glossary of French criminal law#element moral, or Draft:Glossary of French criminal law#Élément moral. Mathglot (talk) 11:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Excellent work. I was just looking around in it for the redlinks at Natural person in French law. The definitions for Personne x look at least broadly correct. I will do a comparison later for the terms relating to legal death, which was a brand-new concept to me and probably is to most people. And then there is "peine affamante". The French article keeps talking about "concubine". I am translating this as "common law-spouse", but that's confusing in this context. What do you think? Elinruby (talk) 04:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, this is not specific to French law, but I had to nail down positive law vs natural law, that's another suggestion. I'll add these when I break out the laptop later if you haven't already. Elinruby (talk) 16:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I took a little side track into template land, because I was relying heavily on Légifrance for references to the text of a lot of laws, and it was getting too tedious. One template existed already, named {{Legifrance}}, but it helped only minimally. So there are now two more templates added to the pot: {{Cite Legifrance}}, and {{Sfn Legifrance}}. You can see some examples of their use in the wild, in French criminal law. Please have a look at them, and note any problems with the template or the documentation on their talk pages. Mathglot (talk)!

So would your template take as input the citations in the jurisprudence section ? Or is it just for laws? Elinruby (talk) 23:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

rephrasing for clarity:is it just for legislation or does it include jurisprudence also?

Elinruby (talk) 23:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Looks like I never replied, and the answer is: with one small exception (which I believe is written deliberation among jurists on a case, but I'll have to check to make sure) it has every loi, arreté, decrét, réglement, and other legal text going back to 1529, and in particular, everything ever printed in the Journal Officiel, so it's *very* comprehensive. Since I last wrote, I've completely rewritten the {{Legifrance}} template, which includes a more robust design internally that produces the same output as before, but which is much more easily extensible, now. For example, the French template (and our original one) didn't handle all codes written after the "modernization" of the Légifrance system in 2008, so that for example, the Code du travail and the Code penitentiaire are not covered in the French template, but our template handles them correctly. As far as jurisprudence generally, it can handle it the brute force way, using param |url=, for example, this link:

• {{legifrance|text=affaire 21-87.140 of 22 fev. 2023|url=https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000047233670}} → affaire 21-87.140 of 22 fev. 2023

However, with the new robust design, it would be easy to upgrade the template so you just provide the JURITEXT id (i.e., 000047233670 and it would do the rest. Unfortunately, there's no "shortcut" as there is for laws, as you can't map directly from the jurisprudence affair number (21-87.140 in this case)) to the url. Mathglot (talk) 02:57, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Closing small tags

I think you forgot to do so, in this edit. I've closed it for you here; I think it's where you intended it to be, but if not, feel free to move it. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:24, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @Writ Keeper:, I appreciate that. I will check. I was trying not to add too much explanation to something I had already said was overly complicated. Elinruby (talk) 19:31, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, not creating a new thread but I will appreciate if you can file whatever you are filing against me at ANI (or elsewhere) after the dispute with VC resolves. Which ought be in the next couple of days (I guess) with Uanfala actively looking into the issue. Obviously, you can draw on VC's thread for pointing behavioral similarities or whatever you feel; just that, I am not in the headspace to tackle two simultaneous disputes. Regards, TrangaBellam (talk) 17:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I just now noticed this request. I would be just as happy to try to discuss this with you. I don't know if you noticed, but another dispute blew up. I am only peripherally involved but it is big and ugly and *absolutely* is intractable behaviour that will never change unless he is blocked, which he already has been on two other wikis. It's sort of not up to me, but (speculating) maybe you believed something K3 told you in error? I appreciate the courtesy of your request and would be willing to attempt to discuss at least, and Minaro3 just wants to be allowed to work, I am pretty sure. I am willing to do the necessary coaching and explaining to him. Let me know your thoughts. I am deep in the middle of something else that requires concentration and many open windows, so I probably won't take a look for your answer or check on that complaint until tomorrow sometime, just to give you a time frame.Elinruby (talk) 17:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

As long as Minaro123 does not disrupt the article-space, I offer no objections. But I do oppose edits like this claiming Mint (newspaper) and Open (Indian magazine) to be "unreliable sources". TrangaBellam (talk) 14:59, 18 January 2023 (UTC

@TrangaBellam:, You too have removed by edit cited by international reliable newspaper like BBC and The hindu .I removed the statement because of two reason: first the statement was a critisim ok Aryan valley and it's inhabitants and second The Mint is not mentioned in reliable newspaper as per wikepedia. Please don't just tell the one side of a story and please don't be good in someone eyes. Minaro123 (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, E. Please feel free to open a thread discussing my edits at AE (preferred due to the structured discussion format; or, AN -?) at a time of your choice. I did not expect that your acceptance of my request would entitle Minaro123 to run roughshod over the article reverting me, JJ and K3 under spurious excuses! The sanctity of content is of paramount importance. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:36, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Reminder re: translation

When copying or translating content from other articles or other Wikipedias, as in this edit at Administrative police (France), don't forget to include attribution. Even if the whole thing is inside <!-- comment delimiters >-->, and even if you delete it five minutes later and it never gets used or seen by anybody, you *still* have to provide translation attribution, per our ToU. To make it really easy, if the article in question happens to have an {{Expand language}} template at the top (as this one does), you can unroll template and there in the 4th bullet, you'll see a model attribution statement that you can copy-paste right into the edit summary. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 08:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I did that thirty edits ago . Unless I am missing something? I'm copyediting and referencing the translated text. If I missed this at some point when I brought the text over please be specific and I'll fix it Elinruby (talk) 08:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

The specific link is this edit at Administrative police (France). There's also this one, or this one. Mathglot (talk) 06:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, I was thinking I did this whole article from commented-out French. Apparently not though, or that doesn't get captured in the logs somehow. Ok. I need to verify that this is true, but I guess I will do a dummy edit that this is a translation of the entire administrative police article, and fr:ordre public was consulted (it currently has a translated template but I believe much of that was moved to my sandbox). Anyway, I'll look at remedying this later today. Elinruby (talk) 18:33, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I did a big translation attribution dummy edit Elinruby (talk) 03:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Admin law glossary

Happy Wednesday; here's a skeleton of Draft:Glossary of French administrative law, it's all yours. Happy hunting! Mathglot (talk) 08:17, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I think we'll find the lines are blurry but I had some stuff for n my sandbox for it. Elinruby (talk) 08:28, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

In some cases they are a little blurry, and certain terms should live in both glossaries. I've been looking into selective transclusion for that, so we only have to actually include the definition in one place, and the other glossary can just transclude it. That will solve the problem of fragmentation of similar content, and keep the maintenance to just one copy of it, instead of having to sync it in two places all the time. Mathglot (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Found another really good glossary; it's bilingual, with all the dictionary entries in French, and all the definitions and explanations in English. It's called the Council of Europe French-English Legal Dictionary, and it's in Google books, so you know how Google skips pages here and there, so it's not complete, but there are a *lot* of pages available. Almost everything from A to J is available (with several short gaps with missing pages) but there's nothing past 'J'. But it's really worth trying it for any French legal terms in the A to J range. Mathglot (talk) 07:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Awesome. I just found out that the river in Quebec was declared a person under Innu law, or at least by Innu entities. Elinruby (talk) 07:22, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I was just looking at that glossary. It looks partially populated, is that the transcluding you were talking about? Elinruby (talk) 03:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The transcluding, is where it slurps content from the other glossary; see for example, bon père de famille or ordre public, and look at the wikicode. Mathglot (talk) 10:51, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Btw, the Draft:Glossary of French criminal law is about 75% releasable (not 75% done, because it could be vastly expanded, but close to releasable). Please add any words you need and don't see there, to the Talk page, and I'll get to it eventually. Mathglot (talk) 10:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Dominican monastery, La Guardia de Jaén

Dominicans are not monks so don't have monasteries. Modern English does use "Convent", but for an older establishment "Priory" would be the more usual word. ("Friary" would be technically correct as well, although it's not often used for Dominicans). Ingratis (talk) 12:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thanks Elinruby (talk) 12:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Elinruby. Thank you for your work on Assemblée primaire. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thank you for creating this article. Hopefully you will write more in the future!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Military of the Qing dynasty

added links pointing to Shaolin and Zhang Yong

2021 Kazakh legislative election

added a link pointing to Amanat

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Cool tools

Check this out.

There's also this other tool: try Vichy France, or Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff Mathglot (talk) 09:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Chagatai language

added a link pointing to Khorasan

Diskit Monastery

added a link pointing to Hundar

McMahon Line

added a link pointing to Dhola

Porus

added a link pointing to Hund

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Could you merge French material at Collaboration with the Axis Powers?

Hi, I was looking over Collaboration with the Axis Powers#Political collaboration and saw a brief résumé of Vichy politics that covers more briefly the ground previously treated at Collaboration with the Axis Powers#France.

If I had the patience and expertise, I could try merging the material myself, but I'm sure that you, being far more knowledgeable than I about Vichy, could do a far better job. (Also I'm lazy.)

Nothing stops you, of course, from merging the other two paragraphs covering Denmark and Greece. See the article's talk section.

Regards—— Shakescene (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shakescene: Answered you there. Will let it sit a day or so in case somebody objects, but I don't see why they would Elinruby (talk) 21:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I just reworked the beginning of a paragraph about the post-war consequences, beginning:

Some few collaborators (such as Paul Touvier) were tried in the 1980s for crimes against humanity. René Bousquet (who was rehabilitated after the war and later regained some influence in French politics, finance and journalism) was prosecuted in 1991 for deporting Jews, but was assassinated in 1993 just before his trial would have begun....

Does this look accurate to you?

—— Shakescene (talk) 21:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Also re-looked at the immediately-following sentence, a little mystifying in English, although it no doubt makes sense in French or the writer's own language:

Maurice Papon, who had become after the war prefect of police of Paris (a function in which he illustrated himself during the Paris massacre of 1961) was convicted in 1998 for crimes against humanity.

How does one illustrate oneself in a function? (There was a 1960's novel called The Illustrated Man in English). Was the sought word perhaps distinguished ?

Perpexèdly yours —— Shakescene (talk) 21:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shakescene: "Distinguished" sounds right. On the French side I just saw the word "retentissant", resounding as in a bell or clarion, applied to his trial. The other questions will take some clicking around to answer Elinruby (talk) 23:37, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

(more about this section as a whole)

After editing the France section yet again, I see some balance problems (inevitable as specialists in different fields contribute to a page). There's a long paragraph about ship-builders, and others about the Holocaust, the LVF, and the colonies. But nothing about the STO (Service du Travail Obligatoire), which is a classic case of the effects of Vichy's rarely-successful attempts to placate and appease the occupiers, in often-vain hopes of winning some crumbs (in this case, for a relative handful of French POW’s).

There are, as you can perceive, similar gaps about political, corporate, intellectual and artistic collaboration.

We don't want to rewrite the whole Vichy article (q.v. it to readers), but if you can fill in some of the gaps, it might help.

Happy Valentine's Day

—— Shakescene (talk) 04:59, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shakescene: Yeah, I was thinking there is too much about the shipyards, but saw nothing obvious to cut. And yeah, I know STO, can do that at least. Would also suggest the Milice, much more interesting. Also SNCF strike, but that's the opposite of collaboration Elinruby (talk) 05:06, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Currently referencing going down the page, am at Czechoslovakia. Will add Milice and STO when I get to France. Elinruby (talk) 05:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

also maybe a sentence about the constitutional crisis that put Pétain in power, what do you think? Elinruby (talk) 05:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Since you ask — and while I don't immediately recall the details of Reynaud's fall (although chapter 10 of Churchill's Their Finest Hour covers it from the British end, including the abortive Anglo-French Union) — I think that question hinges on what was the last gasp of resistance, what was internal French collapse and whether seeking an armistice is the same as beginning collaboration.

On the other hand, you might need such a sentence or two about the fall of the Third Republic and the birth of The French State to make the subsequent collaboration clearer.

Admiration and regards as ever —— Shakescene (talk) 05:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

And yes, something about the Milice (and Cagoulards, Police Nationale, etc.) would, apart from balancing this section, clarify for the unfamiliar reader the nature of Vichy as half-willing surrogate of the Reich and make my sentences about post-war reprisals more understandable. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:42, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Blush. Will need to look up the details but basically the Third Republic resigned rather than sign the armistice. Not foreseen in the constitution, thus crisis. Legislature (?) appoints Pétain,a WW1 hero for having saved French lives. He is supposed to appoint a Constituent Assembly but does not. No provision in the law that appointed him to make him do that. Perhaps senile? Constitution crisis redux. Will work on summarizing this. Elinruby (talk) 05:48, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

“Nous, Philippe Pétain, ...” —— Shakescene (talk) 12:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Pardonnez-moi, mon Maréchal: "Nous, Philippe-Marie Pétain" —— Shakescene (talk) 15:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Fell asleep before I got to this but I did find quite a good reference for one of themore general statements and even included a quote (which I don't usually do) about how in Laval's mind this was a trade-off between French POW lives vs otherized lives. I have lunch plans but can come back to this late-afternoonish (Pacific). Elinruby (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shakescene: yanno... Really, we don't need Battle of Madagascar (not collaboration) or DeGaulle's trip to Africa (there is a moral decision there but shouldn't it be under the country in question?)... Except barely possibly as background, no? And is forced labor collaboration? Elinruby (talk) 23:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby: After a brief once-over, I tend to agree with you on both points:

1. The shipbuilders' paragraph is so confusing at first or on tenth reading — so many dates, so many details — that it's hard to pluck out nuggets about either collaborationist shipyards or collabo shipbuilders. And in a section where many important elements of collaboration are either omitted or reduced to a single sentence or two, I doubt that this particular subject (important though it might have been to the U-Boat campaign) needs much more than a mention or statement. (Even in the fields of military-industrial collaboration, there's no mention of the French involvement in the U-Boat pens, the Atlantic Wall, or the V-1 & V-2 launching-pads.) If there's no article now (on anglophone Wikipedia or perhaps even in Wikipédie) on military-industrial, commercial and financial collaborationism, in either France, Occupied Europe or whole empires, perhaps someone well-versed in the subject (not me! and I'm not volunteering you) should start one, perhaps with a subsection on managing the labor supply and workers' reactions to industrial mobilisation.
2. As for the colonial Empire, a mention should be made in relations to the metropolitan Vichy governnment, with a general list of areas affected (Africa, Caribbean, etc.), but the missing work should be in the relevant continental sections of the article outside Europe. Collaboration in Indochina can probably be slightly expanded. Syria and Lebanon, (and for Britain) Egypt and Palestine (the Grand Mufti) are not mentioned. The place for African collaborationism should go into new subsections of the Africa section (North Africa, AOF-AEF & while it lasted, Madagascar). And so forth.

Don't take any of this as a plea (let alone a demand) for you to do more original work than the vast amount you've already undertaken (they should triple our wages in Occupation francs). My own chiefly-editorial contributions pale in comparison. And now I, in the Eastern Time Zone, need to get some sleep. Cordially, —— Shakescene (talk) 03:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Cham Albanians in Greece and Balli Kombëtar

¶ Another head-scratcher as I was lazily skimming the Greek section: the original text said the Cham Albanians worked under the "Resistance Balli Kombëtar". But digging back through the Wikilinks, I see that the Balli were apparently more often (but not always) allied with the Germans and Italians. So I deleted "Resistance" but couldn't think of an appropriate substitute descriptor. Did the OP (or translator) mean something like "guerrilla"? —— Shakescene (talk) 01:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hmmm I may not be able to tell, depending on what language it is translated from, but I was just now trying to reference the Belgium section of that article, let me take a look Elinruby (talk) 01:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

side comment: pronouns are among the most frequent machine translation errors. so I suspect you may be right. Elinruby (talk) 01:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

looking at the Kombëtar page, it looks like they were nationalists who wanted to be independent and chose the devil they didn't know once that option was no longer on the table (?) Note that this is based on a wikipage not RS, and is thus tentative Elinruby (talk) 01:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

(after more clicking) so...I think you were right to delete "Resistance". I am completely devoid of topic knowledge, mind you, but it looks like "resistance" is true in the sense of fighting a previous dictator, making this one of several countries that greeted the Nazis as liberators from a dictator. (4th of August Regime in this case) LMK if you find out otherwise? Elinruby (talk) 01:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

since I don't seem to have finished my thought above, I am thinking that they were "resistance" to the Greek occupation, not the Nazis, the usual scope of the word in modern English. Likely a translation from Albanian or Greek or Macedonian (?) Elinruby (talk) 02:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

List of scandals in Brazil

I started Draft:List of scandals in Brazil because we have similar articles for Argentina, Chile, UK, Germany—you name it, but not for Brazil, which seems like a big oversight. But I won't be able to develop it and get it ready for launch. Can I hand it off to you? I don't think it's too far off, just a few more references, maybe a few more scandals, especially if you know of any from the 50s, 60s, and 70s, and then it's ready for main space. If you're too busy, no worries, just lmk and I'll mention it at the Brazil WikiProject, and hopefully someone will pick it up there. Maybe Paulo S would be willing to help; he may know of some scandals that we don't, because they're not as well publicized in the Anglosphere. Mathglot (talk) 07:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

juicy morsel I though you might appreciate from Paulo Maluf: "So notorious is Maluf's reputation that in Brazil the verb malufar was created, meaning "to steal public money". This verb is also sometimes used outside Brazil, with one example being the French newspaper "Le Monde". [1]" Elinruby (talk) 02:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Malufar, that truly is a juicy tidbit, thanks for that! Do you want to take it on, or should I advertise it at the project? Mathglot (talk) 02:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see you've started on it already; that was fast! Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 02:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I am having fun but if a Brazilian is interested, they will clearly be more qualified. OTOH they may want to just review for accuracy and omissions, for which we clearly aren't ready. Scandals seem to be very thick on the ground, dating back to early colonial times, if one is to believe Corruption in Brazil. I guess advertise, but emphasize that we know it's very incomplete. Elinruby (talk) 02:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi PauloMSimoes, is this something that you would be interested in helping out with? We need additional references (in any language) for the existing list items, and also, anything we might have missed in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s which maybe isn't as well-known or reported in English media, as it would have been in Brazilian media. This is a draft of a list article; I'm not sure if you are familiar with the "List article" concept at en-wiki; you can read about it here. Each bullet item can be very brief—a single sentence or two is enough—and if possible, it should contain a link to some other article that discusses it more in detail, preferabley in English, otherwise linking to a Portuguese article via template {{ill}}. If you are interested, please see Draft:List of scandals in Brazil. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Mathglot. Is a very hard work, and I can help as possible. I had made some improvents in Elinruby draft. As ever, my apologies for my poor English. The categories Escândalos de corrupção no Brasil and Escândalos políticos no Brasil also can be useful (are more complete that respective en interwikis). As possible I will try to get the references. Thanks !--PauloMSimoes (talk) 13:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@PauloSimoes: thank you very much. And please, there is no need to apologize for your English; my Portuguese is much worse. I will take care of the English, no worries. Free to ping me. Elinruby (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@PauloMSimoes:}

Fresh scandal (Jan 2023), corporate page not updated yet: Lojas Americanas Elinruby (talk) 03:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Also this doesn't seem to have a catchy name yet, but would have been enabled by Bolsonaro...pretty sure some kickbacks would have been involved. Also boatloads of stuff about illegal logging and slash and burn. Belo Monte, Funai good search terms. Going to go look for better sources for that than mongobay, also Maluf as mayor of São Paulo. Also, there was an Operation something or other on the spinoffs of OCW that had something to do with mining and indigenous people Elinruby (talk) 04:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, sometimes there's no accepted name in English, and we have to pick a WP:NDESC title.

Btw, I dropped two "historiabrasileira" references from the draft; they were WP:CIRCULAR references from online sources that were copied from Portuguese Wikipedia, and therefore unreliable. Whatever source they were copied from, they should also be dropped from that article .Mathglot (talk) 04:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

That's recent enough that I should be able to figure that out. Good catch. Elinruby (talk) 04:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I only saw one. There were two urls because it was archived. Just mentioning that in case I missed something, which is of course always possible. The one I saw was from the history section of Corruption in Brazil, and I did replace that one with a cn tag Elinruby (talk) 05:07, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

You're right, just one plus the archive. I was trying to keep up and help out a bit, but it's just delaying the glossary, which is delaying the criminal law stuff, so I'll leave it in your hands! (But I probably won't be able to resist popping back in from time to time; can't wait to see it launched.) Not that far from it now, I'd say, although if Chile had all those scandals in the 19ths century, surely Brazil did, too? Mathglot (talk)

A lot to unpack there. 1) it was a good catch; I was just making sure. 2) I am nerding out on this for the moment, as it's fast amusing work, mostly cut & paste, but I will be back to Admin law, Jublains, Ladakh, Vichy, legality, etc 3) that was my thinking in trolling History of Roraima. I am going to do other states next. 4) I ignored some stuff about slave-catching, on the theory that it probably wasn't a scandal at the time. But soldiers killed by indigenous people probably counted, hmm? Elinruby (talk)

I did see some stuff about 18th-century scandals involving the Catholic Church that I wasn't willing to parse just then; downloaded a couple JStor articles. Also something about the emperor Elinruby (talk) 08:51, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Actually, your comment is very apt, and good timing, too; because in thinking about some of the incident, it occurred to me we should think about what actually counts as a scandal. Some things can be pretty awful (war crimes, slavery, repression of women or minorities; one could go on...) and yet they aren't called "scandals", usually; so what counts as one? At first, I thought we might need a definition statement, but actually, I think we don't: I think we should simply rely on what the secondary sources say; if sources call it a scandal, then it is, and if they don't (or only a tiny minority) then we shouldn't either. So in the end, we don't even have to define it. Mathglot (talk) 08:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

taking a break, eyestrain kicking in. Probably back later, unsure, but if you want to reformat/edit something now is a good time. Or not. There is no deadline, etc. Still have a million windows open, but what else is new? Going to rest eyes and talk to the cat. Elinruby (talk) 10:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

There's an awful lot of scandal in Brazil ! —— Shakescene (talk) 04:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

very thick on the ground, which is why it's ironic that this list does not exist yet. Feel free to Google around if bored. Lots and lots of English-language sources....you know you want to <g> Elinruby (talk) 04:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Shakescene Not really; check out List of political scandals in Chile; and that's limited to political ones. Mathglot (talk) 04:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

but MG, I don't think anyone sung that "There's an Awful Lot of Coffee in Chile" ;-) —— Shakescene (talk) 11:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Enjoy the cat. Btw, turns out there is a name developing for the Amazon miner issue, and it's in the url you linked: "Yanomami Shield". Well, actually, maybe not; that seems to just be the name for the protection operation by the government, to stop the humanitarian scandal caused by the miners, so maybe it doesn't actually have a name, yet. But if you search for Yanomami Shield, you'll find lots of stuff about it in English, or Operação Escudo Yanomami to get Portuguese results; this is the operation to restore order, not sure the scandal has a name. Now I'm on break for a while. Mathglot (talk) 11:25, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Manoel Beckman,Ragamuffin War, Acre -- Brazil breaking treaty by 1000 km? mi? Elinruby (talk) 14:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Stumbleupon

Doesn't work for collaboration article, consider for disinformation articles

From Southern Rhodesia in WW2 "A widespread belief developed among Japanese troops in Burma that the British Army's African soldiers were cannibals, partly because of deliberate disinformation spread by the black troops themselves as they travelled around the country. While entirely unfounded, the notion "that we Africans eat people", as one RAR soldier put it, had a fearsome psychological effect; men of 1RAR reported Japanese soldiers picking up their comrades' bodies in the midst of battle and running away." Elinruby (talk) 06:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

References

Technical note

Re: [2]. I think you misunderstand the concept of "failed verifiction". {{failed verification}} says that it is to be used when "the source does not support what is contained in the article", not that "I have tried to follow a link but it's broken" (as you wrote in your edit summary, "page 15 is not accessible at the url provided"). Unless you can see the page in question and can confirm said page does not support a claim it is referencing, it is not a failed verifiction, it is a failure to access the source to do a verification. Google and other URLs rot and expire, or are not available in all countries, or require "tricks" to deal with (ex. I've had the page not available error in GBooks, but changing the url to the previous page and scrolling down for example can help sometimes, etc.). If you were unable to see the page, but would like someone else to verify it, you should use {{request quotation}} or {{verify source}}. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

nod:: what would you suggest using instead? Actually, I would normally ignore that, but six in a row (bad anyway in a lede) was sort of a flag. I really need a short break. I have no problem restoring the sentence myself so it's clear we agree. All we are saying is that there is no Pétain, right? I won't be long, and I will be happy to listen to you about anything on the page Elinruby (talk) 08:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Pretty much. In case you want to read more, this is a decent section, although sourcing can be improved (I just replaced a 1940(!) source with something more verifiable and reliable). One down, zillion more to go. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:35, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

18th century sources are common in French history. while I have your attention could you look at my RSN post about the Blue Police? Elinruby (talk) 08:51, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

18th century can be occasionally ok, but citing a 1940 source for a controversial WWII topic is generally a red flag :) I think I commented there already half an hour ago? I can look again a bit later, going AFK now my myself for a few hours. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:54, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah ok, hadn't seen it yet. Will look shortly Elinruby (talk) 09:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Verification is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, IMHO. Thank you for trying to tackle this issue! I hope this kitten will help you destress from the hard work. Keep up the good job!

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Your article Draft:Rubricaire

Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page Draft:Rubricaire to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. Pages in foreign languages will not be kept here, and may be deleted if they are not translated into English. Thank you. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:26, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe: re Draft:Rubricaire approximately 20% of this very technical translation, towards the end, is still in French, that is true. Please point me to a policy that says that a draft must be 100% in English or alternately feel free to comment out the French if you feel strongly about this. This is not a stale draft: I have worked on it quite recently, but I need to look up some of the archaeology terms with respect to the plumbing of the Roman baths. I am however currently preoccupied with trying remediate some of the egregious sourcing and balance issues in Collaboration with the Axis powers, where your assistance would btw be welcome, particularly in the section on Jewish collaboration. Elinruby (talk) 22:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I was just tagging it because I didn't know if you had forgotten about it. I hadn't seen many partly-done translations before and thought that something interrupted your work, but obviously I was wrong about what happened. My apologies.

What issues are you talking about in Collaboration with the Axis powers#Jewish collaboration? Are you talking about the currently tagged sources (unreliable/failed verification) or are more suspect? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I may have been a bit stiff in my answer. Quite a few people think translations are suspect in and of themselves and it may be making me defensive. I primarily work on mobile and and have ADD, so it is very hard for me to do a translation that isn't on a single screen. I often do comment out the French, but this draft was created for someone else that expressed interest in translating it but did not have CTX rights. They never did do it, so I tried knock it out a little while back, but got stuck on the correct translation of what sounds like a water heater but is probably called something else when it comes to Roman plumbing. Anyway, thanks for getting back to me; it decreases the angst.

The tagging is mine. Some if it is along the lines of the source itself being fine but not really supporting an accusation of collaboration in wikivoice. I haven't really gotten past the first paragraph. For context, I initially removed the entire section as undue because the scope of the article is world-wide, and the section discusses individuals in Poland and doesn't really substantiate what it says about them. Someone who's never edited the article reverted and I'm unsure what I'm supposed to do about that, since she's skipping over the Discuss part of BRD and won't reverse herself. Meanwhile I'm double-checking myself and have started a BLP and a RS noticeboard discussion about the Times of Israel source.Elinruby (talk) 01:06, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Anticipating a followup question: what help am I asking for? Whatever you feel able to help with. The rest of the refences in that section need to be verified. I added quite a few references elsewhere in the article but given that this is one of the ones Jan Grabowski took issue with, on reflection the should probably have quotes also. The whole Asian theatre needs a LOT of help and I have unanswered questions all over the talk page. I was asked in here to help with France, where I know a little, and have recently been told that I am neglecting that, which is true, and also that the article has too much military history, which is also true. Any input is welcome Elinruby (talk) 01:35, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

@Rsjaffe: I apologized for barking at you; you're entitled to know that. Shoulda pinged, sorry Elinruby (talk) 15:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

French section of Collab with Axis

Hi, ER,

(1) No doubt to a cascade of succeeding edits and re-edits, the second paragraph's subjects get confused:

Pierre Laval actively collaborated in the extermination of Jews. It also participated in Porajmos, the extermination of Roma people, and the extermination of other "undesirables." Vichy opened a series of internment camps in France where Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and political opponents were interned.

(2) The first paragraph obviously tried to summarize a vast amount of material into a few sentences. But the result seems to be a series of judgements and conclusions without specific citations.

Because he was a hero for saving lives at Verdun in World War I, France's most notorious collaborator, Maréchal Philippe Pétain, became the head of the French State after a catastrophic French loss at the Battle of France. The government of the French Third Republic collapsed because its executive could not agree to either sign the armistice or continue to fight, and the Assemblée Nationale voted to put Pétain in charge of convoking a constituent assembly, which he did not do. The resulting authoritarian government operated outside the bounds of the French constitution and was largely run by its ministers, who initially prioritized the saving of French lives but proved willing to sacrifice foreign Jews in exchange for French prisoners of war.

(3) I don't think that it constitute Own Conclusions or Undue Weight to let the uninitiated know that Léon Blum was Jewish, so long as that reader doesn't get the impression that his premiership and identity were the principal moving cause behind French anti-semitism (which would still have been rife had the Popular Front been led by a devout Roman Catholic war hero of impeccable Gallic ancestry going back to Joan of Arc.) Similarly, I think it probably best to translate Assemblée Nationale into "National Assembly" as the wikilinked article does, or even to call it (as many writers in English do) something like "French parliament".

(4) My last comment at Talk:Collaboration was not about the oft-noted length of the article itself (as suggested by your last comment at my Talk Page), but about its Talk Page, (current length pushing 100k).

I'm just mentioning these as pointers. Hope this helps. —— Shakescene (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

On Blum, what I am having trouble conveying is that he got blamed and yeah this was a symptom not a cause. Camelots deserve a mention. I took Pétain out because he was already mentioned and seems in fact to have been content to mostly be a figurehead; not that I excuse him. Senile or not he was the face of evil in France. In an attempt to summarize however I seem to have gone too far into my own head though; I know that this portrayal is a result of recent reading but I am having trouble sourcing these exact sentences. Which is a problem. I will try again later today.

I copied the section about volunteers off to my sandbox and it's extremely unsourced, as are the pages about individual units.Elinruby (talk) 21:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Actually it looks like for the pronouns I can just switch Vichy and it, I'll do that now before I go afk, because ick Elinruby (talk) 21:16, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

OK I got the pronouns, and while I was there decided that only mentioning Laval could be read as minimizing, and addressed that too. Don't really like the result but too fried on this article to worry about style. Elinruby (talk) 21:40, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

getting back to this: are you questioning that they were only willing to sacrifice foreign Jews? Or that they eventually deported French Jews as well? I am sure this is true but yeah it needs to be sourced....Just LMK Elinruby (talk) 05:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Repatriation to Vichy from the UK

You might have some interest in this RefDesk query:

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Repatriation to Vichy from the UK

`````` —— Shakescene (talk) 20:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Interesting question. I answered it, or more precisely was confused in a different vocabulary. Will take another look later Elinruby (talk) 01:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

You might also be interested in the RefDesk query above this one:

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#General de Mauduit at St Helena, and the Comte de Mauduit, Chief of Staff

I think the OP/enquirer has just been reading de Mauduit's 1940 book

—— Shakescene (talk) 01:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah but it's a very unusual name (I take it you read what I said?) I didn't try Mérimée or anything; I was very tired and had just gotten home. But it's weird he didn't come up at all on a Google search. At all. Possibly just a matter of browser language? But if medieval title transfers come up? And we have a Resistance fighter, with the French Foreign Legion no less, in the same time period as a Lord HeeHaw? Hmmm. Fascinating my dear Watson, fascinating. French Wikipedia doesn't know about the cookbooks, either Elinruby (talk) 05:44, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Gap article in archaeology

You know my predilection for finding important gaps in our coverage, and I think I found one that is up your alley, kind of like "Jublains" although potentially much more important in the grand scheme of things. Still can't understand why we don't have it. Has to do with a very ancient site in the Americas, possibly older than any other in important respects. Interested? Mathglot (talk) 03:35, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

oooh. You know I want to hear some more ;) Elinruby (talk) 05:57, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

It was this article that turned me on to the Montegrande pyramid. (Did some brief searching, that seems to be the most common name in English, with a couple of likely alternate titles that should redirect to it, including 'Huaca Montegrande'.) Other search terms to find more: 'peru spiral pyramid', 'templo de montegrande de Jaén', 'templo arqueológico montegrande' and so on. I later found out that es-wiki has this article about it. The Santa Ana-La Florida site in Ecuador is possibly even older. Too snowed under with Fr law to deal with this, but I know you'll enjoy it and do a great job. If you hit translation problems with Spanish sources, ping me; I can help with that, at least. Looking forward to seeing the article(s)! P.S., There's also a "Nova" tv documentary episode about it; I'll try to find the name again, if you can't locate it. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas. Do you know, Andean culture is a dab page? Elinruby (talk) 14:23, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

it needs more work but it's a decent little article now, a good start. Elinruby (talk) 14:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Great! Thanks; I added a couple of redirects to it. There are also a couple of discussions at WT:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages that touch on that aticle; you might want to monitor them. Mathglot (talk) 00:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

👍 Elinruby (talk) 00:54, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Will be fun to watch this one over time; I think interest in it will grow, and it could well become the primary topic at some point, if it's as important as early indications seem to point to. This is one of those times when I wish we had a WP:CRYSTAL BALL. Mathglot (talk) 20:18, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

List of World War II puppet states

This could be very useful; but unfortunately its tabular form with long essays in a tiny right-hand column makes it impractical and unattractive for the average reader. (It also means that individual states such as Slovakia can’t be accessed directly from the Table of Contents.)

I have too much of a backlog (and too little patience) to tackle re-formatting this, which looks like a full-time job that would pre-empt any other editing that I might (and should) be doing, e.g. planting outside tags for Collaboration with Imperial Japan or summarising Radio Berlin.

Do you have any experience or skill in manipulating large tables like this; or do you know someone who does?

Have a nice weekend, —— Shakescene (talk) 18:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Mathglot is good at stuff like this but has been preoccupied lately with another big project. (Not tagging because they follow my talk page and will see this and presumably speak up if they already have or know of a tool.) It's the kind of nerdy mindless stuff I could do between Brazilian and collaborator cognitive overloads but I am on a mobile and based on your description I probably can't even read it outside of code view. I'll keep this in mind but I just did a ce from top to bottom of the Europe section to make sure I didn't break too much when I copied off some of the volunteer material. I still need to find an organization scheme for the stuff in my sandbox. It's telling that I can't make a draft because there aren't even enough references for that. That's the goal though. Except that would mean OWNing this stupid disorganized mess that was scattered all through the sections. Some of these units were definitely mostly POWs how signed up not exactly as "volunteers" to put it mildly. Anyway, I hear you. Maybe. If nobody else takes it on. Elinruby (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@Shakescene:, not sure if you're a WP:Visual editor user or not (I'm not), but certain table operations are about the one area where VE is superior to the wikicode editor: namely, if you're adding or deleting columns. If it's something else having to do with tables, I'd stick to the wikicode editor. What exactly do you want to do with the table, reformat it in some way? If it's about reassigning the column widths, see Help:Table#Width; there might be additional useful info at User:Dcljr/Tables. If you want to tag every row (or some rows) so they're individually addressable from a wikilink, see Help:Table#Section link or map link to a row anchor. If you still have questions after you've tried that, ping me. Mathglot (talk) 21:51, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, ER, Thanks for all your work on the puppet-state table. I added flags for the Soviet section. Just in case you want to add other flags as you reformat other sections, here are the codes (I reduced my own copies to 120 px from 150px.)

|[[File:Flag of Iraq (1921–1959).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Manchukuo.svg|150px]] [[File:Flag of the Republic of China (1912-1928).svg|150px]] [[File:Flag of Reformed Government of the Republic of China.svg|150x150px]] |[[File:Flag of the Republic of China-Nanjing (Peace, Anti-Communism, National Construction).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of the State of Burma (1943-45).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of the Philippines (1943-1945).svg|150px]] |[[File:1931 Flag of India.svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of the Empire of Vietnam (1945).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Cambodia under French protection.svg|150px]] [[File:Flag of First Slovak Republic 1939-1945.svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Bohmen und Mahren.svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of France (1794-1958).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Independent State of Croatia.svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Greece (1822-1978).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of the Government of National Salvation (occupied Yugoslavia).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Nasjonal Samling.svg|150x150px]] |[[File:Flag of Russian Liberation People's Army.svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Albania (1943-1944).svg|150px]] |[[File:War flag of the Italian Social Republic.svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Belarus (1918, 1991-1995).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Hungary (1920–1946).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Albania (1939-1943).svg|150px]] |[[File:Flag of Greece (1822-1978).svg|150px]]

Hope you're having a nice weekend —— Shakescene (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Baltic madness

I'm too sleepy, and right now don't have to patience, to dig sufficiently deeply for all the correct details about the transitional (or "puppet") governments that voted in August 1940 to become constituent SSR's of the U.S.S.R. But, they weren't yet SSR's, so they should have other titles (and probably pre-war national flags, unless they had some other flag between Republic and SSR). If we can legitimately use the 1918-1940 flags, that would also make my 180px blow-ups less necessary (since they don't have small letters above a hammer-&-sickle); perhaps we can then compromise at some size like 120px. [Wiki know-it-alls will say that readers can always open the thumbnail, but I was on Wikipedia for years before I understood what that little icon meant. The same know-it-alls say that details need no textual explication, because a blue-link suffices, forgetting that pop-ups can only be seen by registered editors, a tiny fraction of Wikipedia's readers.]

Anyway, the transitions as the Baltic states moved from independence to Soviet puppets to SSR's to German military government (¿to German civil government?) to Reichskommissariat Ostland to transitory autonomous governments between German and Soviet rule, to returning as SSR's to the USSR [to independence in 1989-91], is incredibly hard for me, with my limited knowledge and resources, to untangle and verify. And then, we have to figure what qualifies as a puppet government. Wikipedia, as usual, is not entirely helpful here.

Yours in confusion —— Shakescene (talk) 03:06, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that was one of the things I was thinking of when I specified I hadn't done fact checking. Apparently there's a strict definition somewhere based on the talk page discussion. Btw, I can find an answer on that Arabic vs Farsi question; just not up for hunting down the page about how to distinguish them at the moment. But anything over 90 will show as centered over here, which might not be that important even if I personally dislike it. It feels a bit in your face for the really simple flags like Estonia's though... Meh. Eyestrain starting to kick in; have a good night. Elinruby (talk) 03:21, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Himetataraisuzu-hime

I'll plug away at Himetataraisuzu-hime. So far, the translation isn't bad, just clunky. So i'm trying to consolidate by removing some of the fillers but keep the original meaning. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:47, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: Thank you very much. However, I am also concerned about the sheer mass of material created (see user talk page). But I guess the question is whether the material is really that bad. I don't see how it statistically could not be, if the user does truly not read Japanese at all, but I will bow to your opinion. Maybe let us know what you think? I appreciate the brainpower you are applying to this. Bottom line, if the user merely produces ugly English, PNT as it is can deal with that even with our current lack of any Japanese-speaking regulars, but if actual errors of fact are being introduced, it's a big problem. I don't know if you recall the CTX kerfuffle? Elinruby (talk) 06:54, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Cross-article reusable citations

You know how we can use named references in an article, so you don't have to code the same citation umpteen times, just the name part? Ditto {{sfn}}'s, which do something like that, with the sfn's inline, and the full citation living just once in the "Works cited" at the bottom. Well, have you ever been in the situation, maybe at Vichy, or Operation Car Wash, or your current work, where there's a bunch of related articles about the same general topic, that tend to re-use some of the same citations from one article to the next, but you have to go around hunting down some citation you already wrote for one of the other articles, and try to remember which article had it, and then you have to copy the whole thing and paste it into the other article? Well, this is exactly the situation I find myself in with all the related articles about French criminal law, more or less the ones linked from the Nav template {{French criminal law}}. So I got sick of it, and came up with a better way to do it. I've extracted many of the citations for French criminal law-related articles into this reference library, and with the help of new template {{Reflib}}, I can import the references en masse from there into any of the related articles that use {{sfn}}'s and need it. It's very economical, and reusable, and all the citations are in one place for all of the related articles; you just slurp them in to whatever article that need them.

See for example, this edit at Public action in French law; it drops 1,687 wikicode bytes worth of full citations, replacing it with one call to {{Reflib}}; the page renders exactly the same after this edit as before (i.e, the viewer sees no change at all, but editors do). The real win, though, is that all the citations are in one place, and now I can use them from French criminal law, or from any related article (like Public action), and from all the new articles I'm about to create from the red links at nav template {{French criminal law}}.

So, now I have a question for you: I need to expand the reach, by picking up some other domain, besides "French criminal law", which has that citations library page, and "Vichy France", which is the other one. Do you have some area where you've been working recently with several articles, all on related topics so they tend to overlap on the citations they use? It works especially well, when building out a poorly covered topic area that has multiple, related articles that need to be written (just like French criminal law). Are you aware of a topic are like that, where you are working, or might like to, but where the citations issue is a headache? I'm looking for something like that, not to create the articles, but just to create the common citations library, which should then make it really easy to grab the citations from one place, instead of copying them every time. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Mmmwell...remember when I had all those units of the French Foreign Legion? I currently have something like that with volunteer units of the German/Japanese and maybe Italian armed forces. The reason I'm in this is that not all the volunteers units were really volunteer, and there's a lot of overlapping nomenclature.... If you'd rather start with something that isn't constantly on the noticeboards, I think all those French Foreign Legion units are still sitting around and we're poorly sourced as I recall. Alternately, I have some villages in Ladakh. I guess I could compile a list of references for any of the above if one of those choices speaks to you. Elinruby (talk) 10:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

There will be admin law eventually also ... Elinruby (talk) 10:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

alternately...there's a series of AfD going on about place names in Arizona, but I don't think the references overlap that much. And some of them really are, like, parking lots at the end of a mountain road Elinruby (talk) 10:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Normally French foreign legion articles would be a good choice, but as I started out with French law and Vichy, adding FFL would make it seem like a "French lake", so it would be good to branch out with a couple of non-French topics. The key feature to look for, is a group of articles that might share some citations; if they all have unique citations with little or no overlap among them, then it's not a good candidate for tihs. What about the Ladakh villages thing: how many articles are we talking about, and is there a significant overlap in citations among them? Mathglot (talk) 19:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, there's a subset in Ladakh and Baltistan that all have Tibetan invasions and Buddhist monasteries in common, is what I was thinking, but this requires some thought. Maybe neither of us should automate our ignorance on the topic, say I, thinking of the MT from Japanese ANI case. Wildfires in California might be a better test case since we both have some familiarity with the geography, but I've worked on them before and some of them are quite well-referenced. But my experience there was that *recent* fires were good, but older ones were spotty and could benefit from systematic review.

Place names might be a better category. Still brainstorming: something like communities affected by the Lytton fire would have certain litigation and climate change in common. But I suspect that isn't an existing category, however maybe it's food for thought. Catalan municipalities probably is a category and might be easier. Quebec, especially northern Quebec, is a sinkhole of nobody working on it. Oh! There is a *whole* bunch of battles in various wars of independence in South America. A lot of the involve Simon Bolivar?

Basically what we need is a set, preferably an existing category so we don't have to compile, that tends to be poorly referenced yet has one or more strong commonalities, right? And for test cases at least we should definitely be able to evaluate output. Forts of France is too French probably. Let me mumble a bit to myself here. National Heritage sites in Britain are probably meticulously maintained already by people who know more. Battles of Genghis Khan? Crusades? National register sites in the US may not have enough commonalities. Native American treaties? Central Valley communities affected by groundwater pollution would be technical but would have a common set of state environmental reports and laws in common. Police departments and consent decrees probably would involve paid editors. Campaigns of Charlemagne is too French? And I just ODed on the French Dark ages with Rubricaire. Roman roads seem to be a recent archaeological topic not addressed by the settlement stubs. You're probably also fried on Brazil. Mines in the Congo -> paid editors. Slave trade? Hey, human rights treaties and various wars? Gold rushes? Northern Ireland? I got zero grief for referencing History of Belfast. Spanish Civil War? Deforestation in British Columbia would have a certain few corporations in common, also pipelines, but again I smell paid editors. There's probably something in privateers.... I need coffee. Hope some of that helps. Elinruby (talk) 21:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Water litigation along the Colorado river? Voting rights law? Sudan needs help badly but is probably too unfamiliar. Let's stick to our languages for first test cases at least. Settlements on the Navajo nation. Internment camps in World War 2 - BC, California. Might not be a large enough set. Métis rebellion? References would be in English. Cossacks, they won't and might be political. Some subset of the Silk Road? Avoid Azerbaijan though. Robert the Bruce? Temples in India tend to be poorly referenced but hidden minefields are possible. Conquistadors? Baltic history can be fraught. Portuguese colonies in Asia? Elinruby (talk) 22:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; plenty here for me to mull over. Mathglot (talk) 10:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Venezuelan civil war of 1848–1849 <-- a place to start on one of the suggestions above Elinruby (talk) 01:58, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Would need to know the other related articles in the group, or have a nav template or something; for an article by itself, it's hard to know if it would benefit from a reference library or not. Mathglot (talk) 07:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

It would take me a while to untangle it. I guess I could start a list somewhere for a navbar. Is the California idea panning out? Elinruby (talk) 07:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Haven't looked at that yet. I got sidetracked in a discussion at WT:CITE where I discovered a really cool module called {{Reflib}} by Trappist the Monk which dumps a table of statistics about article citation use, and ended up wrapping it in a new template called {{Ref lib banner}} suitable for article Talk pages. Here's what it looks like for OCW:

Pretty cool, huh? Trappist's template has been sitting around since at least 2016, and I only just found out about it. (It does slow down the page somewhat, so if you're finding this page too slow now, just comment it out.) Mathglot (talk) 08:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Collaboration with the Axis powers

I like what you're doing on Collaboration with the Axis powers and its TP. Keep up the good work! François Robere (talk) 16:32, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, (1) you might be interested in this paragraph from Pierre Laval

More and more, the insoluble dilemma of collaboration faced Laval and his chief of staff, Jean Jardin. Laval had to maintain Vichy's authority to prevent Germany from installing a puppet government, which would be made up of French Nazis such as Jacques Doriot.[58]

since that differs from including Vichy (at least for most of its existence) as a puppet state.

(2) Sorry to rewrite much of your work on Collabo#France, but I was trying to emphasize the Collaboration elements of Vichy within a small but sufficient amount of political and military context. I'm sure you could fix some of my omissions or inconsistencies. (Perhaps, for example, you could restore a line or two about French complicity in the Holocaust to the Rafles subsection, which might itself need a more-comprehensive subtitle.)

Happy International Women's Day —— Shakescene (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC) (he/him/his)

I'll look but am not mad; my problem is always too much detail. Did you get the writers in? You know what they say: don't edit Wikipedia if you don:t want to be rewritten. As for whether Vichy was a puppet -- sigh. Denmark and Belgium thought much the same thing, so if Vichy was a puppet government so were they. I don't think I want to take anyone's moral inventory. I am not suggesting we use the nomenclature at collaboration. As for the puppet government page, I noticed last night that I had work still to do an NOW it's done. I am not certain I want to attempt substantive change over there, as my hands are currently full. I did take another look at what peacemaker had to say, and it had to do with dates and Yugoslavia, so something we haven't addressed yet. Not pertinent to current discussion. Elinruby (talk) 21:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

@Shakescene:, my recollection is that while once the term "puppet state" was used to describe Vichy, most historians consider this inaccurate, and a better term is "client state". This was amply documented somewhere, but I'd have to go find it, if it's not in the article now. Mathglot (talk) 09:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

the context here is List of World War II puppet states, which does include Vichy on its list, and I believe that puppet state uses Vichy as an example. The main thing he and I are working on is Collaboration with the Axis Powers, but he got involved with thet puppet state article after he spun off collaboration with Japan. This led to a discussion of what is a puppet state. Sounds like there is a inconsistency between pages, but I merely report. The German were apparently really good at holding out false hope, in Vichy's case, of saving French POWs. And French Jews still went to extermination camps anyway. But like I've said before, I am glad I never had to make some of these choices and I am trying to write this with the nuances included, neither blaming nor excusing. Elinruby (talk) 10:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Y Mathglot (talk) 12:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Page needed for digital books on GBooks without page numbers

I've noticed [3]. If we follow the link to [4], Google Book (digital?) version doesn't have page numbers, BUT the url does have "pg=PT114". In my experience, that tends to correspond to the page number (here, probably p. 114). To be 100% sure, we would need to access a physical copy, however. <sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 07:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

So, Piotrus item one, indeed when you click the link it does go to a page. I have done it several times now and am not sure why I got the cover page, except (speculation) maybe I triple-clicked the link or something and interrupted it as it was loaded. So my bad on that, however however however the page that loads is about requiring Czech brides to submit a picture of themselves.

As I recall we had this problem with this same book in the Poland section of Collaboration with the Axis Powers, and it was p.117 over there, but I don't think it was for the same statement. A pity, because nobody is going to say this book is not a good source, so it would be good to identify the edition problem that is causing this. Nonetheless, according to the sourcing in the business section of Collaboration with the Axis Powers for IBM, *they* did a lot of the compiling. Or maybe this is talking about the data submitted to IBM? That's all I can tell you right now. Elinruby (talk) 11:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Didn't realize which book you were talking about because of the numerical "[5]" anchor (you know how to add the display text, e.g., Eichmann in Jerusalem, right?), but anyway, I happen to have a copy, although not the Penguin but the Viking Press 1963 version. Checking the gbooks page image in your [5] link (which is annoying, because in Preview mode it changes to '[2]', because it's only the second ref in the section I'm editing), the sentence which begins "Dr. Globke, as he explained at Nuremberg,..." is the first sentence on page 129 of the Viking edition (OCLC 898973275). The Penguin 2006 print book that you linked to is OCLC 65198074, which has an eBook version as OCLC 1009092626 which is available at my local library; closest to you is NYU Shanghai, but as it's an eBook, physical location doesn't matter, so try any library you're a member of. If all else fails, I can get it from my local library as an eBook for you. Or, if you have a specific content question that isn't about the page numbers, the Viking copy I have should be able to provide the content. Otherwise, try WP:RX. Mathglot (talk) 10:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

he may be preoccupied with the class he is teaching and/or the Signpost. I am stupid tired right now but I would love to repair the references to Arendt at least, and track down why this happened. I'll get with you about that those page number sometime tomorrow. I should probably also look up that documentation I was quoting from your link, and investigate that because I have been gotten this tired by adding Google books urls, gah. Elinruby (talk) 11:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I'll take another look. Google assigns page numbers that don't always correspond to the physical copy. I don't remember what happened when I clicked the link. But if the url contains a page number, you'd expect it to go to that page. Elinruby (talk) 07:35, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Piotrus, not always the case, especially for digital copies, where the "page" number depends on how large your font is, your reader is, your margins are, and so on. The "PT" numbers are, as near as I can make out, an internal Google numbering system that conforms to their fixed format display of the book on their google books page, and may or may not correspond to a printed copy. Interestingly, our Template:Google Books URL lists some of the other, non-PA values for their |pg= param, but strangely, |pg=PT is not one of them. If you discover more about this, it would be great to add some concrete information about this to one of the Google technical pages, maybe that one. Mathglot (talk) 10:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot Fair point. Wonder if we should call it Google Page or such? How to deal with books like that that GBooks claims have ISBNs etc. and correspond to paper edition but are stripped of page numbers? We should report "something" to help with verification process. <sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 11:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, t would be really nice to figure this out. Who wrote the bibliographic item that the named reference goes to? Is it possible that they were looking at a hard copy? My best suggestion at the moment. Elinruby (talk) 11:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Followup: of course Hannah Arendt wouldn't have known about IBM in 1963; the info about IBM didn't come out until 2001.Elinruby (talk) Elinruby (talk) 11:43, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

So...I found that item, and it does say 114. The source is used three times and none of the text it is behind has to do with Czech brides. So that's not the problem. I've noticed this numbering discrepancy before, but usually you *can* find an actual page number. I'm thinking that maybe some of their subcontractors started numbering with the frontispiece. So (speculating)

the real page number might be 116 or 118? Elinruby (talk) 12:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Wait. @Mathglot: are you saying that my page 114 may be different than his page 114? Elinruby (talk) 12:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

oh hey look at this in the documentation in the Google Books template (which I didn't realize existed). @Piotrus: this might explain a LOT: As of 2022 the Elinruby (talk) 12:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

trying again: As of 2022 the |p= and |pg= parameters do not seem to work if a preview is unavailable; Google Books may not support going to a page specified by number. q and dq do work; dq to a phrase that only appears on one page will find a specific page. Elinruby (talk) 12:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by this question, but this may help. Arendt's ref is used three times, once with a page number? That's confusing, although it could mean that whoever added it early forgot or didn't know how to list page numbers; one use has page range in the rp template 117–118, the others two don't - one could be 114 (maybe the second one?). But regarding the final sentence - and the only one it is used as a sole citation (Political theorist Hannah Arendt stated that without the assistance of the Judenräte, the German authorities would have encountered considerable difficulties in drawing up detailed lists of the Jewish population, thus allowing for at least some Jews to avoid deportation) perhaps this is the part that in the book that's relevant: If there had been no Jewish organizations at all and no Judenrate, Adrendt suggested, the deportation machine could not have run as smoothly as it did." - and the discussion in the next paragraph or three, spanning to the next page, seems relevant If the Judernate... hadn't compiled the list of potential deportees... would fewer people have died?. I think this is "PT11"for the first quote, and "PT12" for the next, but which printed page number does it correspond too is a good question. Based on the scroll bar, it is somewhere early in the book, so, errr, "around" pages 11-12, probably. If you need to find the pages, I suggest searching within the book for the term Judenräte; that's how I located the cited passage. Hope that helps. <sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 12:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Hmmm. So there are two Arendt items and I was looking at the wrong one? Possible, of course, because infinite are the ways in which I may be mistaken. It also sounds like whatever you are looking at this on displays quite differently, because I don't get a scrollbar. But to sum up, scratch page needed, but verification failed, however I might know why. See message I left on your talk page. In case that's not the problem though, I will click around in pp 10-13, but not right now; I need to rest my eyes. But Google changing something about their URLs might explain a lot. I will investigate further but probably not until tomorrow. Elinruby (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Are you in the chapter titled House of Justice? This is the URL for the source given for that quote: [5] Elinruby (talk) 13:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Elinruby (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The term Judenräte appears at the top of p. 11 of the Viking 1963 ed. (OCLC 898973275) in chap. The House of Justice, but not enough to support the quote above, so maybe it's from someplace else. I'll try to find an online copy of this edition so you can see for yourself; in the worst case, I can email you both a photo of the page. Mathglot (talk) 11:19, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

11->114 is a plausible typo. But seriously need to put phone does rt now, too tired to type. Online version better; ok to IA comment I just got, thank you. Will see if it has page numbers Elinruby (talk) 11:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Following your plausible typo idea, I checked later in the Viking 1963, and p.124 has "the Judenrat's policy of cooperating with the Nazis" (quotes in the original) and a paragraph about that. So maybe that was the source. Mathglot (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Also, IA version will have page numbers, as their books are scanned facsimiles of print books, or at least, that's the only things I've found there, but I'm only an occasional user, not a power user of IA books. Mathglot (talk) 11:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Found it. The Internet Archive has it, here; you have to borrow it (14-days) to read or download it, but it's a free registration, and if you're not already registered, it's totally worth it. Lots of books at IA are borrowable for one-hour segments, then you can renew every hour; but this one has a 14-day borrow term. If you can't access it, or don't wish to register, I can email you a copy of p. 11. Maybe IA also has the original, Penguin edition you were talking about above, so check around. Mathglot (talk) 11:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Piotrus: read the above when possible Elinruby (talk) 11:38, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot For me the above book shows the usual 1 hour. But IA copy isn't digitized, I failed at locating any pages identical in the two editions except the Note to the Author which is not numbered. 10 minutes wasted flipping pages. Aaaargh. <sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 13:50, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Piotrus:, Oh gosh, so sorry! (Hm, wonder why it shows 14 days for me for that one; maybe because I finally registered and logged in?) Anyway, I didn't follow this whole thread in detail: if we go back to basics, what are we looking for, exactly? Must it be a particular version? As I mentioned, I have the Viking ed. in paper and can send photos, if that helps, and I can get others online. What do you need? (No need to ping; I'm subscribed.) Mathglot (talk) 22:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

this is one of several sources that fail verification. I suspect an problem of edition in this case at least. Alternately maybe a less famous and/or re-issued source? A source is not required to be easily verifiable but it would be so much better if it could be verified. Elinruby (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

shouldn't we try that dq parameter, Mathglot? I need to do some things before it gets dark but later tonight I can do some experimenting if you don't have time. Elinruby (talk) 23:25, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I think you could use |dq= as a second-best approach if all else fails, especially if there's only one search hit for the query expression. The weakness of that approach, is that it depends on which pages Google is excluding from their preview, and I'm not sure that is a consistent set. I have the very strong impression that sometimes my visits to a particular book with limited preview sometimes shows one set of pages, sometimes another, but I could be wrong; but if I'm not wrong, then the |dq= isn't guaranteed to find it for someone else, or even for you again later when you try it again. Would be good to nail this down, one way or the other. (Btw, I think you might've been looking for {{od|:::::::::::::}}, and not :::::::::::::{{od}}.) Mathglot (talk) 03:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

heh, like I said somewhere, stupid tired. Sorry bout that. Elinruby (talk) 07:25, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot Take a look at my post above that begins with "I am not sure what you mean" where I provide a quotation that I think supports the sentence that it is referencing. I think we need page number(s) for it - the quotes I provide span two pages in Google books. I think that's what we need in this particular case, although Elinruby may have additional comments? <sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 02:00, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I think we we should test it. Willing to put some typing into this Elinruby (talk) 07:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

In preliminary tests I did not get dq to work whether a preview was available or not. I will go back through this later checking each step; right now rl calls. Elinruby (talk) 00:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

There's another potential problem with |dq=—it's a query, not a specific location. To the extent that users sometimes provide a citation to a book with no page at all (sometimes tagged later with {{page needed}}), having a Gbooks url with |dq= in it might be sort of like that. Better than nothing, but needing a page or other location indicator. Adding|dq=, is sort of like saying: "I found it in Jones-2016 looking for 'Foo'; now you go find it." It's better than nothing, but not ideal. Mathglot (talk) 01:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I hear you but there a lot of these. It would be nice to be part of the solution for the problem I am pointing at. I think that Piotrus is also just trying to solve this. Elinruby (talk) 01:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh I agree; converting dq to page or loc (or perhaps to PT) is the way to go. Mathglot (talk) 01:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Piotrus: Based on history, original page # may have been 117 or 118 Elinruby (talk) 06:41, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby Thank you. Do you think it would be fine to provide a page range as 117-118 for now? <sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 11:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Not sure. I saw it in the history of Collaboration with the Axis powers that way but there was an edit was going on. I will try to figure this and the other question out before I go to bed. I also need to go look at what the statement was that it was referencing, fo one thing and see if it is different from the one at collaboration. Elinruby (talk) 12:05, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Polite distortions of the truth

"polite distortions of the truth seem to prevail in wiki proceedings over attempts to defend it that also express irritation" should be put here Help:Introduction to Wikipedia to warn potential editiors. People studying a certain subject are frequently emotionally involved in it, psychopats, manipulators, ignorants, paid trolls are not. I understand there exist crazy people, who may destroy any work, but the Wikipedia looses part of its potential concentrating on kindergarden rules. At the same time the WP does not defend its editors from stalking and the majority of the editors is unable to identify and sue a stalker. Xx236 (talk) 08:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

it's a problem. I understand that the rationale for not wanting to address content disputes is avoiding the appearance that there is a party Line, but it takes really extraordinary measures to get ANI to to recognize a verifiable misrepresentation of a source. Come to think of it, I am not sure that that has ever been done. Elinruby (talk) 08:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I mean mostly I*, according to VM.

This Wikipedia discriminates editors coming from war regions, eg. WP:Contentious topics/Balkans or Eastern Europe.

Xx236 (talk) 06:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok. I was wondering if you had some similar story, is all. Elinruby (talk) 07:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Database privileges for Wikipedia editors

Hi, Elin, here's the link to the WP Library portal and how to sign up (which as an active and seasoned editor, you should have no difficulty doing):

Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library

More precisely:

https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/

[Seemed silly to put this on my own Talk Page].

—— Shakescene (talk) 02:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm signed up. I Elinruby (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm signed up. I just lost the link Elinruby (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Perhaps you don't have this one in your salad'o'meter yet :) Thank you for trying and generally succeeding at being a friendly, AGFing team player in a very difficult topic area. Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

A comment

I saw your question and see that you are new to arbitrations. Arbs are looking for diffs with evidence of misbehavior by named parties only, and preferably very recent diffs, nothing else (although bringing diffs about recent brutal misbehavior by someone else in this subject area would be OK). I do not have such diffs, and therefore do not post any evidence. I am puzzled to see how several very experienced contributors are not doing just that on the Evidence page. Note that just claiming a guilt by someone without providing a really convincing evidence in form of diffs during such proceeding may by viewed as an evidence against you and results in sanctions against you, and that is what frequently happens. Just for the sake of example, someone complaining about G&K during such proceedings, would be probably bringing evidence against himself, unless this is clearly framed as rebuttal of claims by G&K about himself. My very best wishes (talk) 14:41, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, you warned me about this before, but thank you for doing it again. It confirms what I suspected; I should shut up about old edit wars I wasn't in and only know about because I am trying to fix the result. I appreciate you having my back. I know you are private so: like this or respond in some way so I know you've seen it, and I'll tidy up my talk page. Elinruby (talk) 14:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@My very best wishes: Elinruby (talk) 15:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

You can remove this or not, I do not care. Also, consider the statement by Adoring nanny and the way it was summarized. This is because the only thing relevant to the case in her statement was the link to the WP:AE episode. Speaking of which, that was an AE case "with merit" because some sanctions were made, and no one disputed these sanctions. Hence, GizzyCatBella arguably did good thing (for the project) by advising to bring this case to AE. My very best wishes (talk) 15:09, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

She is her own worst enemy. I have seen you try to warn her too My very best wishes Elinruby (talk) 15:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, I think that GCB and VM could be much better off right now if they did not care so much about content. See also WP:FUCK, but I mean really did not care. For example, if another guy (let's say, I.) wants to include some undue content or remove something of significance, why not let him have a fun? This is just a website that many people do not take too seriously. When I have a math question, I never use WP. My very best wishes (talk) 21:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

True. It is a good philosophy. I had mostly seen it as indifference to threats, but ... Elinruby (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

One should realize that WP is a low-quality source, even though it may be very useful in some areas. G&K complain about the coverage of Holocaust in Poland. But they did note see the coverage of Russia and USSR! The coverage of Poland is so much better, thanks to contributors like P. and VM. I gave up on Russian subjects long time ago, but would not edit them right now also for another reason: this war did change my perception of that country. Let this content rot. My very best wishes (talk) 23:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

And if Russian subjects are still more or less covered, this is thanks to users like M. Who cares that he created a lot of sockpuppets? I was wrong about him. Content he created, that is what matters. I also liked User:INeverCry, he was a fine contributor; I have no idea why he is globally locked. I guess some people are committing a "suicide by admins". My very best wishes (talk) 23:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

As an illustration of my comment, did you see this [6]? I think this contributor made an excellent point, but this is not what Arbs are looking for. They can not sanction someone who does not contribute on-wiki. They need to find someone who does. Is it fair? No. But such is life. Perhaps I feel too relaxed. This is because I do not give a fuck and not sure why I am included at all as one of the "parties". My very best wishes (talk) 23:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

in the France section somebody had confused the battle of Marseilles (a battle) with the rafle of Marseilles, when they loaded the population of the Old Port onto freight trains. They both really happened but they were very different events a year apart. That's a pretty big mistake. But I think it was caused my somebody who thought they had Google superpowers. Let that be a lesson to us all. Elinruby (talk) 01:51, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

As for why you're included: As far as I can tell it's because G&K mentioned you, and they mentioned you because they saw you when they were looking. Bad sample, probably, yeah. Who is Mick Gold for example? He's not in the article I know anything about Elinruby (talk) 02:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

he's not wrong. But if that's not evidence it is a problem nonetheless if it remains true. Elinruby (talk) 01:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

This is a very unusual and dramatic case. Here is why. Speaking very generally, the biggest problem of WP is the involvement of external actors. Consider the misuse of WP for advertisement, this is huge problem, a lot of accounts are blocked on a regular basis. Or consider countless accounts that have been indefinitely blocked for promoting various political agendas. Why they did it? Just to "prove" their own bias or because someone paid them to promote misinformation and conflicts and get someone else banned? No one knows. At least, I do not. We do know there are organizations created to intentionally promote misinformation, here is just one of many. This is an exceptional case where the Arbcome (no less!) has decided to take the side of an external party that demanded the WP content to be changed in the way these external actors want. The probable involvement of the banned user only makes this worse. I do not care if they are good or bad actors. This is an unacceptable precedent that can be followed by others. Banning some people might be OK, but not on the request by external actors. My very best wishes (talk) 02:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Well. In the case of the IRA we know why. I read Bellingcat. Believe me, I know, but the other side of determining the truth by committee is that once the power of truth by fiat is in play you can wind up with a horse as high priest. And yet we do curate, so... As always it's more complicated than that. Elinruby (talk) 03:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

And yet I found out that I was not willing to allow mass rapes to get left out of the story. Elinruby (talk) 03:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

If you don't stop attacking TrangaBellam, as here ("I will be extremely careful nonetheless to notify the extremely litigious TrangaBellam the *next* time I perceive her to be in a knife fight with someone trying to respect an edit restriction"), I will set an interaction ban between the two of you. You can read here about what that would entail. Bishonen | tålk 14:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC).

I already plan to ask for one at AC, Bishonen, and Marcelus should already have one Elinruby (talk) 14:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Bishonen see "Closing small tags" further up this page Elinruby (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You and TrangaBellam are indefinitely banned from interacting with each other. Please read WP:IBAN to see exactly what an interaction ban entails. Note that the ban applies to the whole of Wikipedia, even though it is described and logged as particularly relevant to Eastern Europe. Providing evidence in the current "History of Jews in Poland" arb case is an exemption from this ban; you may each provide evidence about the other there if you should wish.

You have been sanctioned in order to relieve both of you from unconstructive interaction, where both complain of harassment by the other, and to relieve other people from being distressed and interrupted by it.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Bishonen | tålk 22:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)