User talk:Yngvadottir

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
I am your puppy!


"Adieu veau, vache, cochon, couvée"

Archive of my Did You Knows

.[edit]

Small Chinese- Korean ... somethings.

Oh, great, the guy makes tvo edits per year, and this is what we get. Hafspajen (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

@Hafspajen: I hope what I did made it better. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:21, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Yes. You did well! Hafspajen (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
For dry gardens, it's an ideal ... decoration, no? Hafspajen (talk) 20:27, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
It does lack context. I looked at the file. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
  • It does, but it's nice, kinda. Hafspajen (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Hurray! I mean, yes, of course. Do you think I made a mistake here? If yes, revert me. Hafspajen (talk) 20:56, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
It's a fraught issue (I think myself that 20 years was not a long enough span for the study), and there's always a balancing act between accuracy and avoidance of copyvio or simply quoting slabs of text. So I mucked about with it a bit. I hope the para is now clearer (you said you didn't understand it) and not so obviously all quotes. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:11, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Regardless of the merits of that edit, American Pit Bull Terriers are also on a list of four breeds that are banned in the UK (as currently claimed in the article) is certainly untrue; needless to say, the supposed "source" cited is fake. "Pit bull type dogs" ("type" rather than "breed" being the important word) need to be neutered, muzzled and restrained while in public, and registered with the authorities, and can't be traded without authorisation from the courts, but they've never been illegal. The legislation in question is here, while this is a very good layman's explanation of current E&W law regarding restricted breeds—TLDR version, if it's unregistered the police will seize it but unless it's dangerous you'll almost certainly be given the chance to register it. ‑ Iridescent 21:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
@Iridescent and Hafspajen: Argh - I didn't even look at the rest of the article; it was bedtime and now I have to get ready for work. I'll change that using those sources after I get back, unless someone else already has. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
@Iridescent and Hafspajen: And I did some reading and ummm ... that's about as complicated as I thought it was. The intent of the law certainly seems to have been to make them illegal; it was somewhat relaxed in 1997 but there is still a massive split between the RSPCA and the police and many politicians ... I can try to summarise this, and I think it's important for the article not to be dominated by the CDC and other reports on the US ... but by heck, I'm increasingly doubtful I'm the right person. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

2016 year of the reader and peace[edit]

2016
RyoanJi-Kane.jpg
peace bell

Thank you for having done the right thing in 2015 already, thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thank you :-) I wish you a great year. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:06, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Click on bell for the soft sound of peace (and jest) ;) - Miss Yunshui, happy that you returned (and a few others)! The place is better with you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Gerda :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 13:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Yngvadottir![edit]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Thank you, and to you :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kerakat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ramzan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Yngvadottir![edit]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Thank you, and to you :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year Yngvadottir![edit]

Happy new year! --) (6605281377).jpg Happy New Year
Wishing you good health and happiness in 2016. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, and to you :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

??[edit]

Russian salad
Marià Fortuny - Il contino - Google Art Project.jpg

Is this meant to be removed? Hafspajen (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't know, to be honest; there was supposed to be a discussion but I don't know what was actually decided. Wikidata is very much open to vandalism and is hard to watch and to correct; it's another of those dubious WMF projects. However, the WMF has indeed decided that it supersedes Persondata. And since Persondata itself isn't visible except when you click "edit", it was hard to keep it correct. There were some people who got a large part of their edits from adding Persondata; now there are some who are simply removing it, like that person. I would rather it was left alone, and especially that people not systematically remove it like that, but as I say I don't know whether a decision was ever made. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC) Apparently the RfC did decide it should be removed. Happened while I was trying to retire. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:51, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I know that there were some people who got a large part of their edits from adding data, categories and such. Not really a fair play, if that's the oly thig they do, some evem make the automated. No more helpfull, then a robot. I think actually that there suld be some kind of robot for that kind of things. You would make a very good admin, don't you think=? Hafspajen (talk) 19:10, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Couse contentment.jpg
No, I was a bad one, although I did my best. But in any case I can't be one again for the forseeable future. Sorry to deprive you all of my second RfA; the first was quite entertaining and I'm sure the retry would have been too.
I didn't see the point of Persondata when it was introduced, but it was a useful place to put things like birth and death place and alternate names, that can be hard to fit neatly into an article (I have never understood why, but the English Wikipedia Manual of Style disagrees with the other Wikipedias and with every biographical reference work I've ever read and deprecates having birth and death places with the dates in the parentheses after the first mention of the person's name.) Adding and improving categories and so on can be very useful, and sometimes I've created a category and then added it to a whole bunch of articles in a series of edits. There's nothing really wrong with that kind of work. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
  • HM, well, not if somebody is doing it as Amantino. But it can be a simple tactic play to, like a user wants to create fast a background and wants to show up a huge amount of edits. Welcome templates, moving categories around, adding tremplates, and stuff like that gives the impresion that the editor has huge amounts of edits and it's experienced. But it is just tactics. Hafspajen (talk) 19:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
  • That guy's a "swordslinger". Nonchalantly he regards the onlooker, with his hands in his pockets. His rapier is not in a scabbard; he is daring the viewer to move closer… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
That was why his stance looked familiar. I've had fights with guys like that, usually with knives. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The Beethovens[edit]

Andries van Bochoven - Portrait of the painter Andries van Bochoven and his family - Google Art Project.jpg

The Beethovens - well, no, the van Bochoven. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andries_van_Bochoven. Drmies should write this article for us. Hafspajen (talk) 20:25, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Sadly, he's described as "obscure" in the one book where I found anything about him; that painting and an attributed still life seem to be it. See here. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Der Bücherwurm

Gender: male Born: Utrecht between 1609-03-01 and 1609-03-31 Died: Utrecht 1634-12-02 Father: unknown Mother: unknown? Hafspajen (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2016 (UTC) Here is more: click on the DetailsHafspajen (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I see - he memorialized them all on the painting. Poor lad. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016: Game On![edit]

We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016: Game On![edit]

We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maria Britneva, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Streetcar Named Desire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

![edit]

Here, sign it pease yourself, or Arbrust will kick us in the but. Hafspajen (talk) 16:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Yngv, sign it so it's done. YOU must sing it, FP is not like DYK: You must sign the nom yourself so there is evidence that you did it. Hafspajen (talk) 17:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I just got up, Hafs, sign where? support it? Yngvadottir (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
This image is waiting for support. De728631 (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I signed but now I think I messed up, cos someone put me as co-nominator? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:14, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, I guess you'd just have had to confirm the co-nominator bit by signing that line. De728631 (talk) 19:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
This is why I'm so confused ... I didn't want to be a co-nom, but perfectly willing to support; as I said, if they think the scan merits it (I don't have the eyes to evaluate image quality), the painting certainly deserves to be featured. Plus I really don't like to get involved with good/featured stuff. I guess I'll leave it and they can sort it out over there if it sits ill with them. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
furet, værbitt over vannet, med de tusen hjem. ;) Polentarion Talk 00:07, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Reform of Wikipedia[edit]

You might be interested in my page User:Biscuittin/Reform of Wikipedia. I shall probably be accused of WP:Canvassing for leaving this message but I can't imagine why because the first line reads: "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus". Biscuittin (talk) 23:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Differences between different WPs[edit]

Bionadefriendly deWP exists ;)
Revenge of the Gnoms

Hallo Yngva, haven't talked for a while. HOw are you? I was involved in some hotspots, deWP Taharrush gamea got a review in the FAZ but was reduced to a stub, the biggest part is now de:Sexuelle Gewalt in Ägypten, the enWP goes for a fortress Europe narrative and i dislike that and deleted it on my list. I saw as well the lengthy discussion at Genesis creation narrative, something completely impossible in the deWP. Sometimes you have to be able to leave the kids alone. Less controversial is the de:Sparverein, a recent article about a proverbial German topic, which has not been written (even redirect had been deleted) for years and various reasons. Do you think it could be of interest here? Polentarion Talk 14:47, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi again! Frequently depressed by this place and tend to have very little time, I'm afraid is the answer :-( You mean "Wo Belästigung und Neckerei ein Wort sind" in FAZ? I can't see it because I don't have an account, I'm afraid, but well done :-) ... And that would be the problem with translating Sparverein; the major article in Die Zeit predates the online archive and it looks as if I wouldn't have access to many of the sources. If I could see at least 2 lengthy discussions of the topic, I might be able to make a brief article, especially since there are images on Commons, but otherwise it would be too easy for it to be challenged here; and I'm not sure I could find anything through my library. You would have the same problem if you just translated it, unless you could link to a large number of online references the en.wp people can check. It does appear to be a very valid topic; I'm puzzled by the history of deletion, including the clean-up when you had given credit quite clearly to the other article ... sigh. And it's wound up looking good to my eyes, although of course I fiddled with a repeated reference :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:04, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
thing is, if you go to serious (or as said the FAZ commenting on your work), you get more flame. I faced some hatespeech on the deTaharush gamea disk page, you mentioned the depressing aspect already. The URV agent seems to be an old foe. Things happen like that. Sparverein is a blatant example of the role of the Vereinswesen in Germany, an alleged petty bourgeois leisure game and as well a powerful instrument of microfinance, community and institution building. I take your advice. I fear you have a featured article in mind and, as you said, it won't work based on the sources at hand. Most of these articles, including de:Kegelclub have been written deep back in the old age of deWP. I think an article, that explains Sparschränke and Sparverein combined, you find them in a lot of traditional German pubs, would not be object of an AfD. Neither seems Oil constant, a nice stub and a university joke I loved to hear. Polentarion Talk 20:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Nooooo, I don't do featured articles. I just try to avoid them being AfD'd or slapped all over with templates (like the ones in the self-portrait on my user page). As you know, there's a lot of resistance on en.wp to foreign topics, not just German ones, so they require clear referencing or they are likely to be challenged - also I like to be able to consult key references myself so that I can explain things. Thanks for the FAZ link BTW - I sympathize with you, though I know you love these political topics, but I have to wonder why the newspaper wouldn't just show me that page. I mucked about with the Oil constant article a little bit, but it could use an English source explaining how it's a pun :-) Please excuse any incoherence - back to bed now. I was bad and stayed up late trying to finish my expansion of the saga article - one where de. is better than is. but still pretty poor. And people say we are "nearly finished". They live in another world. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
The empire strikes back on Bionade-Biedermeier....Polentarion Talk 08:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the pic, that's a de.wp admin and medieval studies professor on the left and a GLAM/campus ambassador on the right :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 04:55, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
You have met Marcus? Hope to see him thursday, will ask him. Good guy. Polentarion Talk 06:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
No, I haven't met anybody :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 06:40, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
not meeting RL works in the enWP better than overthere. But the two of us have met at Hafspajens! Bionade AfD, ist not easy for en WP sysop, since the soapopera overspills. Löschantrag ist die beste QS however. Definitions had been lacking, Duden was a good point. Point is, it started and developed as an extremly catchy title and catchphrase, and further use in titles in abundance, but not much explanation, since its quite self evident. Polentarion Talk 13:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
The way I see it, the sources demonstrate that there is or was a real (or commonly perceived) social phenomenon for which this is or was the common label. It doesn't much matter if it's run its course - notability doesn't expire. And it doesn't much matter if the articles about it are about the phenomenon itself and thus don't repeat its name several times. Consensus could wind up disagreeing with me, of course. And the nominator appears to have nominated it twice simultaneously, but I imagine whoever closes it will be able to deal with that.
The WMF invited me to express my opinion and I am writing truly splenetic responses on Meta. My job is also being almost unbearable. So I am probably extra-nasty to be around right now and folks should be very glad I don't do conventions, meet-ups, or other gatherings. Although I suspect I ran into a pair of Wikimedians of some sort in a supermarket in Silicon Valley a few years ago; they understood my joke about the WMF. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I am in Berlin now, worth while to have a look on the headquarters. I am singing in a choir and do some english Toastmastering but whle I am quite active online, I just was once at a WMD stammtisch, never got warm with those gatherings. BBwise, you know, there was my blood on the wall, a statement like matters if the articles about it are about the phenomenon itself is true, but.... Point is, a trendy neologism needs some base and endurance, instead you just put it with Bioheme as a see also at LOHA. But thats OK now. Nominator did it wrong the first time, no true second nom imho. He translated meatatlas, received kudos from Haf for the pics and I got some idea about the deWP background. Polentarion Talk 15:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
@Polentarion: You're in Berlin?? You are lucky I just got up, I'm sure there is a list of places I should be asking you to photograph for Commons :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Impressive row of keeps, as well at the end. ;) Polentarion Talk 12:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Oh good :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 13:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mic-Mac hockey stick, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Ynglingatal[edit]

In response to a request for a copy-edit at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests#Ynglingatal, I have begun a copy-edit of Ynglingatal. In the request, the editor made clear that it was translated from Norwegian language sources. I have found the copy-editing slow going, however. There are many places where I had to make an "educated guess"; I also added quite a few "clarification needed" tags with hidden questions for the editor. I've completed roughly a third to a half of the article. I'm wondering whether it might make more sense for someone with a knowledge of Norwegian to attempt to put the sentences into English before I copy-edit. (I'm kind of used to doing what I've been doing, but at a certain point it kind of seems like we're going about this wrong.) Do you know any Norwegian? Can you help here? Or do you know an editor who knows Norwegian who can help? Corinne (talk) 15:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Like many of our articles on ancient Scandinavian topics, this was created and has been heavily edited by experts whose first language was not English. I do see your problem, though the English was not as bad as many I've seen, and some of the problems appear to have come from updates in the past few years. There is an additional problem in this case, that the article deals with material that has been heavily debated in recent Scandinavian scholarship, with at least one scholar casting into question almost everything that one would say at the outset to orient the reader.
Yes, I can read Norwegian, and am familiar enough with the issues to attempt to clarify the article. But it is contentious; see Fairhair dynasty for an article where I have previously tried to make an article clearer but the scholarly debate has led to conflicts about what we should say. Also, there is an on-going conflict among Wikipedia editors about the use of Old Norse, which some feel presents a barrier to non-expert readers, but for early Scandinavian material is the lingua franca for citations and names among scholars in most of the world, but continental Scandinavian scholars usually use their native-language forms instead, with little if any gain in clarity for the English-speaking reader. (For example, note "Þjóðólfr of Hvinir (Thjodolf)" at the start of the Ynglingatal article and at the start of his own very short article. That's more the modern Norwegian and Danish than it is a common anglicisation.) Also I'm frustratingly busy these days, and this is the kind of article I can only work on at home. Most of the people I would have pinged on this have already worked on the article, but I'll ping Bloodofox in case he wants to add his expertise or his knowledge of who's currently active on Old Norse material. And I'll add it to my list of things to work on. If I were you, I would be inclined to set aside the copyedit except for obvious English improvements, but your method of noting things that need clarifying works too. I can't promise to get to it soon and am not the ideal person to do so, in view of that scholarly controversy. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your informative reply. That's very interesting. Corinne (talk) 04:12, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye on this. The article is important and might just need to be rewritten from scratch, failing all else. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

New editor needing help.[edit]

Building I armtwisted an editor into photographing with his iPhone, for Architecture of the night

Hi Yngvy, this editor needs some help. Her first article (which came from her own blog) is getting tagbombed and AfDed (and there's not even an AfD notice on her talk page). She's seeking help adding new refs to the article. I think Wikipedia should endeavor to retain this obviously intelligent and good-faith contributor. Since you were so helpful with another new editor recently, I was wondering if you could help this one? Thanks, Softlavender (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

That was an astonishing oversight not even to let her know it was at AfD. I hope I've helped a bit; I'm glad to see a number of people have been working to help save and improve the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:12, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Hallo Yngva, I had a look, but you made a good save. One question - where does one get all the newspaper clippings from? I would need some hints for my meeting at the RL WP tonite, since I meet with a guy from one of my portals, where those would easily safe lotta articles under AfD. I would have tried to check wether Carneri has a Stolperstein, that is a must keep then in the deWP. One of the German DYK collegues is quite active in the field. Polentarion Talk 15:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for contacting the new editor! I think she has a family scrapbook with the clippings in it, and since Carneri was born in Austro-Hungary and was in Vienna for much of her career, that might well complicate both getting access to printed newspaper archives from Germany and the Stolperstein idea. Also, I understand many German-speakers nowadays can't read Fraktur - can you? But I see the nomination has now been withdrawn, hooray :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the help Yngvy. In terms of the clippings, if push comes to shove she could scan and upload anything that was disputed or questioned, or provide typed quotations in footnotes. (To my mind Fraktur isn't or wouldn't be that much of a barrier if the copy/reproduction is clean; my German sucks but I can read and understand it -- it's like any calligraphy from the 18th century and, to me at least, is not that puzzling.) Softlavender (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Good meeting in Berlin. They had no Bionade however. Pics for Commons - my camera is just an I-phone now. But they have a project making photos. Wikipedia:Bilderwünsche and Portal:Berlin. Fraktur is no prob, but my Sütterlin, the handwriting went awry. It was not easy deciphering a digitalized handwritten Sparverein Rules of Order. I did my first newspaper articles as an Abiturient based on archive studies with handwritten files. @Nancypolk1:, I gave @Meister und Margarita: on deWP an hint about a Stolperstein / deWP translation SG? nomination for Carneri. He is in Austria, I believe, likes the idea and and should be able to go further on that. Polentarion Talk 00:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
@Polentarion and Softlavender: Maybe that's a myth about Fraktur then; I hope so. My ability to read Sütterlin is purely theoretical; I have trouble deciphering even what I myself have written in it. (I've used it in the past for financial records, like the medical student I heard of once who took her lecture notes in Tolkienian Elvish to discourage classmates from stealing them.) But Fraktur still largely defeats OCR, which makes search hit or miss, and some of those old newspapers are terribly blurry. I've thanked Meister und Margarita for one of his edits to the article - he has really helped already. As to photos, Sharktopus photographed a building in New York for me using his iPhone a few years ago, and I think he did a fantastic job - see above right. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:35, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Lets do it like that. I won't go for lists, since I am more into writing than pics, but if you need a specific Berlin picture, lets say around Prenzlauerberg oder Charlottenburg, I am in. Polentarion Talk 22:38, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Bot articles and machine translations[edit]

DeWP recently mocked about a cebuano WP, that overtook us article number wise. Sorry, same as for Sweden beetle article stubs, that's hilarious. If you deem each biography as being automatically relevant, you end in bot generated stubs of questionable worth. I would prefer to have some overviews, essay writing by human authors is being needed, less machinery. Software can do lists, networks, elaborate common issues. Software won't write articles like the one about Carneri with a narrative and content. Point is, the bot problem applies as well to Stolperstein articles. Meister und Margarita will disagree. I opt for solid infobox content first and a more solid choice of where an real article is being needed. Except if I write an essay about a topic that is anatema for the Bionade-Biedermeier of deWP ;) In so far I agree with Yngvas points against machinery translation. I would prefer to have solid infobox databases available for all WPs however. Polentarion Talk 17:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)