User talk:SuperSkaterDude45/Archive 2

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans Hedemann has been accepted

Hans Hedemann, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

Bkissin (talk) 18:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Bourbon Restoration Flag

Hi,

Just to let you know, I've started a discussion on Talk:Bourbon Restoration in France about the issue of the flag, in case you want to join in. Cakelot1 (talk) 00:43, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Philip Robert Anstruther

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Philip Robert Anstruther requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Robert Anstruther. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mccapra (talk) 07:42, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Separated sets

Please refrain from policing editing matters of which you are unprepared to be familiar with the policy, and which are unconstructive both towards the material and other editors. 109.70.40.55 (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@109.70.40.55: What policy? The only policy I can see is you essentially violating MOS:LISTBULLET with improper indenting. See MOS:LIST for more information on bulleting instead of cluttering the article along with disruptive editing. Please cite a MOS that proves me wrong and I'll change my mind. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 17:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from making disruptive edits. The policy is clear. 109.70.40.55 (talk) 23:01, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Again, cite a MOS and I'll change my mind as you literally have no basis on making the article more cluttered. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 23:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Franco-Prussian War

I have been working on your translations of articles about various battles in this war. Some of them look like they are machine translation and may need to be deleted, unless you prefer that I put them in your draft space. But right now I am working on Battle of Buchy, which can probably be rescued. I currently have two questions: 1) is it possible that “Formiere” is really “Formerie”? 2) I cannot find any mention of a General Briand, can you help with this? Thanks Elinruby (talk) 03:37, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Most of the translations were from the Vietnamese wiki and while yes, I did use Google Translate to primarily translate the majority, I did do some modifications to fix some grammatical errors and overall transfer most of the content over to the English wiki. To answer the following:

1. Likely, the direct transliteration just said "Formiere" but that could be a fault on Google's end as it isn't a 100% accurate. 2. Some articles have little to no info on the generals and are likely not notable enough for even their own biography.

That being said, I'm willing to do a revision on some key articles you want me to review as they are definitely some of my more earlier articles that could use improvement. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Ok. One of the other ones I am most concerned about is Battle of Gray; see comments about it at WP:PNT and we can go from there. I realize that it is common to just say “General Briand” as I spend a lot of time fixing up machine translation of French military history, but it would be really nice to determine his first name at least. But anyway. Do you speak Vietnamese? The problem I am having is that usually l look at the original when baffled, and I don’t speak Vietnamese. But even if you don’t you may, from going through these, be able to answer some of my questions. I will have more. These articles do seem to contain information that isn’t on the English Wikipedia right now, so I would prefer to fix them up 😆 Cheers Elinruby (talk) 04:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Unfourtunately, I do not speak Vietnamese as I do my edits via Google Translate. At the time, I was translating all the redlinks that were on the Franco-Prussian War and the original source doesn't list his first name. I can try to find a source to determine his first name but so far, I can't find anything. The best I can do for the Battle of Gray is to switch some paragraphs around to have it make more sense and improve its structure. Otherwise, I'm just the guy that translates articles from other wikis. I'll try to improve its overall structure and maybe even copy edit. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 04:56, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I understand. See if you can figure out what that stuff about the king’s room by the river is about, and why that meant the French had to withdraw, though. The problem is at the level of sentence structure not paragraph order. My best guess is that it may be about the capture of Napoleon III? Did that happen there, do you know? Elinruby (talk) 05:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

@Elinruby: The battle occurred a month after the Battle of Sedan so its likely just a transliteration error but I'll do a review myself later today as I'm currently working on several other translations so I'm rather busy right now. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 05:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

ok. LMK. But yeah, if you are saying he was captured at Sedan, that’s the sort of insight I am bugging you for. My own acquaintance with this war dates to high school a long long time ago. Elinruby (talk) 06:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

@Elinruby: After doing some quick translation work, I found out it was just a transliteration error and wasn't actually meant to be there. Fixed it as of writing this. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Mohammad Shahbakhti moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mohammad Shahbakhti, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 06:04, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Circular Campaign moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Circular Campaign, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 06:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Your recent draft

Please see the many recent discussions, such as Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1074#Chris Chan, to explain the deletion. In the future, if you see a page has been WP:SALTed due to past issues, it would be wise to familiarize yourself with the history to avoid repeating the exact same issues that led to the protection. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:52, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Important notices

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:53, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Khyriv moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Battle of Khyriv, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Zhovkva moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Battle of Zhovkva, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring at British Raj

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on British Raj. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 17:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Actually, I was already discussing on the article talk about the ensigns but alright. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 17:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Talking it out on the talk page is the right approach in a content disagreement. If there isn't enough opinion or you need additional, fresh eyeballs, there are other things you can do such as requesting a third opinion, listing the discussion at a WP:WikiProject such as at WT:WikiProject British Empire (or any of the other projects listed at Talk:British Raj—look for the word 'WikiProjects' in the Template header at the top of Talk:British Raj, and click '[show]' for a complete list). There is also mediation, or starting a Request for comment. An Rfc is a more formal, structured discussion where other, disinterested parties get notified by a bot to come attend the Rfc and render an opinion; it stays open for 30 days, and gets closed by an experienced closer. See also WP:Dispute resolution. An Rfc is a last resort: see WP:RFCBEFORE, but if you do get to that point and need help setting one up, you can ask me on my talk page, or at WT:RFC and someone will assist you. But try everything else, first. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

At talk pages, comment on content, not on editors

When discussing on the Talk page how best to improve an article, please comment on content, not on the contributor. Comments like the following are disruptive:

the fact that [something other editors are or aren't doing] just proves that your arguments are opinionated and invalidated.

Wikipedia's page on WP:No personal attacks has this to say: "Personal attacks are disruptive. On article talk pages they tend to move the discussion away from the article and towards individuals. Such attacks tend to draw battle lines and make it more difficult for editors to work together." Please keep that in mind while in discussion with other editors at Talk:British Raj.

The other thing is, your requests for other editors to "Please... give several reliable sources that clearly state that the Raj did not use neither the civil or naval ensigns", but that's an impossible task. If I asked you to prove that the moon is *not* made of purple cheese, you won't find anything in libraries or online about that, but that doesn't mean that it *is* made of purple cheese. Likewise, there may not be a *single* source that says that the Raj did not use a particular ensign. But that does not prove that they did use it.

It's possible on a Talk page to disagree with other editors, even disagree strongly, but if you keep your comments restricted strictly to comments about article content and not about other editors, you're likely to get a better reception from others, and in the end, more likely to persuade others of your position. It's very hard for others to agree with you, if they feel they are under attack. Hope this helps, and feel free to contact me below, or on my Talk page, if you have any questions. Mathglot (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Carl Nordensvan moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Carl Nordensvan, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:11, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raid on Callao (December 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Slywriter was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Raid on Callao and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Raid on Callao, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Slywriter (talk) 15:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SuperSkaterDude45! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Slywriter (talk) 15:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Selah H. R. Tompkins

The article Selah H. R. Tompkins has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Cannot find enough in-depth coverage to show how he meets WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Cristero War infobox

Hey -- I opened up another thread for you on the Klan's inclusion in the infobox as a "Supporter" of the revolutionary Calles government, and tried to summarize last month's threads there as well. Hope that helps. 2600:1702:6D1:28B0:9C2B:6A86:92A0:29ED (talk) 19:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I Think there is gonna need a new page for this wiki

I would like to say if you wanted to create a countryhumans page, even it is a imaginary, but i think you can complete that page or create one if you really wanted to do it, besides, countryhumans needs to be on this wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junkie257 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ivar Virgin

The article Ivar Virgin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability. The single source is an extremely inclusive list of people with very short, stenographic "biographies", and hardly an indication of notability (looking at other entries, I see a lot of "apothecary", "reserve lieutenant", "veterinary", "engineer", ...).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 09:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Ivar Virgin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ivar Virgin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivar Virgin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Fram (talk) 14:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Miguel Martínez de Hoz moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Miguel Martínez de Hoz, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello

Just a suggestion, you should keep copies of articles you create in your sandbox or another user-subpage, (or better yet, offline somewhere) so you can try to improve them in the event of deletion. (fyi/jmho) - wolf 20:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Siege of Montmédy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Siege of Montmédy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 06:01, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Siege of Montmédy

The article Siege of Montmédy you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Siege of Montmédy for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 04:41, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ma Yukun has been accepted

Ma Yukun, 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.

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!

SiliconRed (he/him) (talk) 08:49, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Translating from Thai

Hi. I just went through the Chaophraya Bodindechanuchit (Yaem na Nakhon) and Phraya Thephatsadin articles. I'm quite impressed with how much you were able to piece together from what I presume was Google Translate, seeing how extremely garbled its output is on the Thai Wikipedia articles. I also notice that you clearly studied my previous copyedit on Chaophraya Bodindechanuchit (Arun Chatrakul), so thank you for the effort. However, the machine translation's still bound to throw many things wildly off, and a manual review is very much necessary. I'm usually watching WikiProject Thailand's new articles feed, but if you don't see follow-ups to a new article, please leave a note at the wikiproject talk page or make use of the {{rough translation}} template. Thanks! --Paul_012 (talk) 14:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

@Paul 012: I'm trying to improve on my translation on Thai military articles as it took me around 2 days to make the Chaophraya Bodindechanuchit (Yaem na Nakhon) article. That being said, I know it's not perfect and I'll be sure to take notes on the translation copy-edits! SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Operations in Valtellina (1866) has been accepted

Operations in Valtellina (1866), 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

>>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:04, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: José Miró Argenter has been accepted

José Miró Argenter, 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.

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!

Bkissin (talk) 23:21, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cretan Revolt (1897–1898) has been accepted

Cretan Revolt (1897–1898), 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — 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!

Artem.G (talk) 11:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Carl Nordensvan

I noticed your draft at Draft:Carl Nordensvan. Two comments on that. First, the {{translated}} template on the talk page is not correct; did you mean to link the article fi:Carl Nordensvan or sv:Carl Lennart Nordensvan? Correct attribution is critical. Second, the translation needs significant copyediting. For example, Carl's father presumably wasn't a "Court of Appeal" all by himself and I assume "The Nordic Swan" is a machine translation error of "Nordenswan" rather than a nickname. You also shouldn't translate the names of sources (e.g. there is no such book as "Biography of Finnish Jaegers", only a book called "Suomen jääkärien elämäkerrasto". Please remember that Wikipedia consensus is that an unedited machine translation, left as a Wikipedia article, is worse than nothing. If you have question on how certain domains-specific terms (e.g. Finnish "jääkäri" or Swedish "jägare") are usually translated, let me know and I'll gladly help. -Ljleppan (talk) 10:34, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Ljleppan: The draft was an original translation from the Finnish Wikipedia but I've used more info that wasn't present from the original. Overall, my older translations weren't exactly the most accurate and I only translated 2 Finnish articles so I could definitely use some help with some wording. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 11:18, 25 March 2022

  I changed the {{translated}} template to point to fi.wp (since you said that's the original), so that's solved. I'll try to find time to do a copy edit pass in the next few days and will also search for any newspaper sources or equivalent. Right now it feels a bit borderline w/r/t WP:NPEOPLE, but I'd imagine I can find something in the archives. -Ljleppan (talk) 11:38, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

  Just FYI, I did a bunch of edits to the draft. Mostly copyediting stuff, but also referencing work. For example, it turned out that three different references were actually pointing to the same article. Another major thing, I took a look at Smele's book through Google Books and didn't get any hits for "Nordensvan", so I removed that references. If you have access to the book, and can verify that the cites were in fact correct, please do reinstate that stuff. I also added a few {{citation needed}} tags for stuff that I couldn't source to the present references but that would greatly benefit from referencing. This ended up being quite a lot of changes, so I hope you don't feel like I overstepped. - Ljleppan (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Third Battle of Winchester

Hello SuperSkaterDude45 - I noticed you made some changes to the flag icons in Third Battle of Winchester. Thank you for your interest, and maybe I can learn something today. The battle occurred in 1864, and 1864 flag icons were originally in the InfoBox. You changed them to 1863 flags. What was the reasoning there? I don't want to make the same mistake next time. TwoScars (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

This is because when you just use the 1864 variants, they don't actually exist in neither the American nor Confederate templates so it defaults to using the 50 star and 1865 variant respectively which neither were conceived by the time the battle occurred. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Good to know and thanks! Is there an easy way to check what templates exist? I'm working on an 1862 battle. TwoScars (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Mohammad Shahbakhti

Hello, SuperSkaterDude45. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mohammad Shahbakhti, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Circular Campaign

Hello, SuperSkaterDude45. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Circular Campaign, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Battle of Zhovkva

Hello, SuperSkaterDude45. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Zhovkva, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Carl Nordensvan has been accepted

Carl Nordensvan, 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.

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!

Dege31 (talk) 11:26, 2 May 2022 (UTC)