User talk:Wtfiv

August music

Today I have three "musicians" on the Main page, one is also the topic of my story, like 22 July but with interview and the music to be played today -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 August, Bach's cantata was 300 years old, and the image one. The cantata is an extraordinary piece, using the chorale's text and famous melody more than others in the cycle. It's nice to have not only a recent death, but also this "birthday" on the Main page. And a rainbow in my places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

today's story is about education, 10 years OTD after lecturing our founder). Music for today's feast is Monteverdi's, the best concert we ever did (so pictured again on my talk). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help? My story today is about a woman, nominated for RD but needing support as I write this. A composer died whose article is long and mostly unreferenced. And some articles open for review, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Plumb book review in Frederick the Great

Hi. You say that the review "Sounds like an interesting tertiary source discussing biographies of Frederick, but not used as citations in the article." What do you mean by "not used"? Is there a rule proscribing its use? If so, what exactly does the rule proscribe? Or is it merely your judgment that it should not be used? If so, why?

I think that the key word in your comment is "interesting." My view is that the fact that it is interesting is a sufficient reason to include it. It doesn't take up a lot of space or otherwise do any harm; it's just one more of more than two dozen articles listed. If including it violates a rule, then I disagree with the rule, but I must submit to it. If it doesn't violate a rule, then, unless you had a good reason to delete it, I'd like to put it back. Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll answer on the talk page of the article. Wtfiv (talk) 23:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now I think I understand. "not used as citations" means that it should not be under "Sources." It should be under "Further reading," but this article has no "Further reading" section. I don't know whether it's worth creating one just for this article, although other editors may supplement it in the future.

I also wonder whether we must take "Sources" so literally. I don't know, but I suspect that not every article listed was used as a citation. Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maurice Magnus, since we started here, and you've added a bit more, I figure it's best to reply here.

When I mentioned the review looked interesting, it did, at least the little bit I could access freely, but that doesn't mean its appropriate for the Frederick article. The article's focus is not Frederick the Great. It is a tertiary article about biographical writing, which happens to be Frederick in this case, that compares Mitford's and Ritter's treatment of their shared subject. Plumb seems to focus particularly on how they handle Frederick's sexual life.

Yes, all the articles in the sources are linked to citations; there are no uncited articles. Had the Plumb been formatted using the appropriate citation format, it would have appeared as unlinked. If you are interested, there is a great tool you can add to your user scripts to see if a source is uncited: User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.

As to adding a section on Further Reading. When we did the review for Featured Article for the Frederick article, we realized that "Further Reading" would be a mess, and it is better not to have one. The secondary literature is vast and could go on for 1000s of books and journal articles. It would be longer than the article itself, and the list would be based on individual preferences.

I hope that answers your concerns. I did very much appreciate you fixing and linking the sources that you did., such as Paret. His contributions are too important to be lost in a misspelling. Wtfiv (talk) 00:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wtfiv (talk Thank you for explaining all this; yes, it answers my concerns, and I'll drop the matter and not create "Further readings." Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Israel citation

The reason that I moved [Review of the Encyclopedia of Enlightenment] outside the citation template was because of the quotation mark at the end of it. [Review of the Encyclopedia of Enlightenment] is not part of the title of the article, so it should not be within the quotation marks. Is there another way to solve this problem? If there is, then please fix it. I'll defer to you on this. Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think because review is bracketed, it should not be a problem. The bracket within quotes denotes added information. Given your concern, I've tried a slightly different format that may work. It brings Review part out of the quotations but keeps the citation integrity. Wtfiv (talk) 03:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; that's perfect. I've never understood the point of templates, which often impose unwanted punctuation. Why not just type what we want to see: author (year) title, journal, etc.? Maurice Magnus (talk) 11:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September music

Today is Schoenberg's 150th birthday! On display his portrait by Egon Schiele, music from Moses und Aron, and two DYK hooks, one from 2010 and another from 2014; the latter, about his 40th birthday, appeared on his 140th birthday ;) - See places for a stunning sunrise, on the day Bruckner's 200th birthday was celebrated (just a few days late). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations from the Military History Project

		Military history reviewers' award
		On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe) for participating in 2 reviews between July and September 2024. Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Thank you for improving articles on October and the rescue! - My story today is a cantata 300 years old, based on a hymn 200 years old when the cantata was composed, based on a psalm some thousand years old, - so said the 2015 DYK hook. I had forgotten the discussion on the talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy whatever you celebrate today, - more who died, more to come, and they made the world richer. Greetings from Madrid where I took the pic of assorted Cucurbita in 2016. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Save Award

On behalf of the FAR coordinators, thank you, Wtfiv! Your work on Andrew Jackson has allowed the article to retain its featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. I hereby award you this Featured Article Save Award, or FASA. You may display this FA star upon your userpage. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of Battle of Saipan

Congratulations, Wtfiv! The article you nominated, Battle of Saipan, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]