User talk:Neveselbert

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Draft article: nearing completion

@Neveselbert I have made some progress at the draft page for the Premiership of Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool and there is a lot of significant editing to be done. But fortunately, much of the hard stuff has been overcome and I can finish the article in a few days. Just wanted to thank you again for your support. Also can you fix this for me: ^[1] Altonydean (talk) 14:03, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Altonydean, I think you've done a great job. Just to let you know, {{Split from}} should be included on the talkpage, rather than on the page itself. In the meantime, you can add {{Draft article}} in its place and submit it for review once you feel it's ready. I'll have a look at fixing that reference. All the best, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Theakston, Kevin (March 2013). "Evaluating Prime-Ministerial Performance: The British Experience". Oxford Academic. {{cite web}}: |archive-url= requires |archive-date= (help)

Complete: submitted for review

@Neveselbert the draft is complete and only one section needs expansion, which I hope other editors might consider extending. Nevertheless, it is almost complete and I have submitted it for review just like you instructed. Thank you so much for your help and assistance. Altonydean (talk) 10:10, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome, Altonydean. Now that the article is live, Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool § Premiership (1812–1827) needs cutting down significantly, similar to how John Major was split into Premiership of John Major. I'm not sure whether to remove the subsections myself as I haven't got round to reading the entire new article, so do you think you could have a look to see that all relevant material is included in Premiership of Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool, in order for the section to be trimmed down? All the best, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unexpected changes

@Neveselbert I admire your abilities and your willingness to help in creating the article for Lord Liverpool Premiership article. Since which I hold in the highest of regard and respect for your advice. But following your recent changes to the main article about Lord Liverpool, which saw countless amounts of content removed just to include it in the premiership section isn’t how I envisioned you would made the improvements. And also, since I specifically didn’t understood what kind of changes you proposed (I was off due to some medication) therefore I think that I would need to revert the edit you made and ask another or several editors about this particular kind of process. Thank you. Altonydean (talk) 06:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Altonydean: thank you for your kind words. Regarding the recent edits, the content removed from the main article was already included verbatim in the premiership article, making it duplicative. According to WP:ANOTHER, this process is recommended to avoid redundancy. Now that the content has been restored, it ought to be significantly cut down in line with WP:SYNC to maintain proper synchronisation between the articles. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand @Neveselbert. But these days I’m taking a certain serious medication for an illness of mine and I won’t be able to edit as frequently anymore. But however, I do appreciate your efforts and your help is as always highly valued by me and as well as the wider Wikipedia community. I think, that since the new article for Lord Liverpool has the same information about his premiership, we should expand the content in the new article instead of cutting down the original content. Like, we can expand and write additional information about events and policies that happened and were implemented during his tenure as prime minister that is not mentioned in the original article. This is my opinion and we should have a wider discussion about this if we are to avoid future conflicts. Altonydean (talk) 20:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also @Neveselbert can you re-include more content on the original page? It severely lacks information on certain important topics and areas of history significance. At least include three paragraphs or more paragraphs about sections like on economic policy, liberal policy or dissent and repression perhaps? It also need more contextual information on the foreign policy section as well in the original article. As always good luck and keep going. Altonydean (talk) 20:07, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more content to the parent article at this stage might lead to unnecessary duplication and confusion. Once the child article is more detailed, we can then summarise and include the most relevant information in the parent article. This way, we maintain clarity and coherence across both articles. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Altonydean: I understand, and I appreciate your continued efforts despite your current circumstances. I've removed the duplicative content from the main article and replaced each section with the most relevant paragraphs excerpted from the premiership article using {{Excerpt#Replacing summary section with excerpt of child article}}. This is a temporary solution until we can better summarise these topics in the main article without duplicating content. We can certainly discuss expanding the premiership article further, but for now, this ensures clarity and avoids redundancy. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:35, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok @Neveselbert but please do not mind me saying this, I think we need a bit more expansion on the original page. I mean like two paragraphs is not enough to summarise any of the important measures Lord Liverpool took in terms of economic or social policy initiatives. I think it needs three more detailed or in-depth information other than simple reductions. Foreign affairs are also important and needs more detail as of the current revision. But I always do support new ideas and proposals, but this seems a bit unprecedented due to the fact that I have previously stated that I would return to editing after my brief interval of rest so I can expand the new article on premiership. Again, I do wholeheartedly agree with many of your points and although at least consider my suggestion to expand a bit on the suggested article sections in the main Lord Liverpool article. Good luck and thanks for your reply. Altonydean (talk) 20:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!