User talk:Lotje/Archives/2019/April

Your thread has been archived

Hi Lotje! You created a thread called Ilaria Ramelli at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Original Barnstar
		Your userpage images did more than cheer me up, they made me feel very good indeed! Thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I think my favourite is File:1903. Письмо из америки.jpg. Do you think File:Federico Andreotti - The Love Letter.jpg was from a photo? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much Anna Frodesiak, you made my day. It feels good to make someone happy. And yes, you might be right, File:Federico Andreotti - The Love Letter.jpg might be from a photo. Lotje (talk) 12:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You made my day. I was feeling down. Thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Administrator changes

Reaper Eternal • ThaddeusB

Bogdangiusca • Christopher Parham • Necrothesp • Schneelocke • Siroxo • Sarah

Mentifisto → Lofty abyss

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

Bureaucrat changes

DeltaQuad

Kingturtle

Technical news

• In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.

Miscellaneous

• Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
• As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Toby Foyeh, please do not edit

Hi Lotje, please do not edit anything on 'Toby Foyeh' (or at least let me finish creating it). Please 'talk' to me first. I am still in the middle of creating it for the first time (I had to publish so I could see the final look and also upload the image), and I notice you suddenly deleted an entire paragraph! This is not appreciated. Thanks. Akpantue (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:52, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

@Akpantue: I did not remove anything. @2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63: has done that. Thank you for your time. I'll show you in a second what I did. Lotje (talk) 15:55, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

March 1901

• Lotje, thank you for asking questions about the reversion of your changes to the images on the article. You may not be aware that a few weeks ago, we had an anonymous user vandalizing this particular page by erasing all the images twice [1].

In this instance, while your decisions in changing layout are not vandalism (I agree nothing was erased, just rearranged) Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit". You made an edit to change it. I made an edit to change it back. You would be within your rights, of course, to edit it back your way, and I would be within mine to edit it back my way.

Before we get into an "edit war" though, I would like to explain why the images were originally arranged in this way (and many other articles in the series of this type). First, we try to maintain consistency of appearance for all the articles encompassing the 12 months of a particular year, such as in this case from January 1901 to December 1901. Second, the rationale for this type of design is that there's an ample amount of vacant space next to the list of contents on these articles, and our judgment is that it's more visually appealing to have relevant images, rather than blank space, visible when the page is first seen. One might compare it to the photo on the cover of a book. Finally, it's not quite as easy as it might seem to find and display relevant images that are also free to use; many of the images on Wikipedia are copyright-protected and allowed for use in only one article.

Recovered

With all those things in mind, you are within your rights to move images to fit your particular vision of how things ought to be, but the next editor would also be within his or her rights to move them back. If there was something within your edit that was an addition to the article rather than a redecorating, please let me know. Mandsford 13:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Mandsford: thank you for your straight answer. The thing is, I also added some wikilinks to the caption of the files. I feel it quite comfortable if, looking to an image, the link is just there to click on. Is that lazyness or just curiousity I ask myself?

Take for example File:Thomas Gainsborough Lady Georgiana Cavendish.jpg, it just mentioned Recovered, but, what was recovered? So, I replaced the caption by Portrait of Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, recovered in Chicago nearly 25 years after it had been stolen. I could of course also have added the name of the artist: Thomas Gainsborough :-) Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Lotje, thanks-- I'll look at the additions that you made to content and revise to preserve those additions. Mandsford 15:19, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Mandsford: that is very kind of you. Thank you :-) Lotje (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, revised. On the photos that are next to an entry (such as with Portrait of Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire on March 27), I agree that "Recovered" was rather vague, but I question whether it isn't a bit redundant to have a caption say almost the same thing as the first sentence of the paragraph that it's next to. In some cases, whether to do a blue link would depend on the position of the photo on the page. The blue links are a good addition to the pictures of the Nicaraguan postage stamp, of von Schlieffen and of Aguinaldo at the top of the page. Mandsford 15:41, 24 April 2019 (UTC)