User talk:Paul August

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm sorry, you have reached an imaginary number. If you require a real number please rotate your telephone by ± 90° and try again.



Archives

Individual archives:

Preferable title? Something about orig-year?[edit]

Hello. If I may ask, which title do you think is preferable? Also, I thought about adding |orig-year=, but apparently this book contains different essays written in different years....?

  • Averroes (1953). Crawford, F. Stuart, ed. Commentariumin Aristotelis De Anima. Mediaeval Academy of America.
  • Averroes (1953). Crawford, F. Stuart, ed. Commentarium Magnum in Aristotelis De Anima Libros. Mediaeval Academy of America. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 02:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The second, see this Google Books search. Paul August 11:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks...Happy Chinese New Year! ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 20:03, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Daedalus[edit]

What was the reason for the removal of your last edit on the Wikipedia page, on Daedalus? DaedalusGodOfWisdom (talk) 04:45, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The content you added contained no sources, please see WP:SOURCES. Paul August 10:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see, I will put it back with references. DaedalusGodOfWisdom (talk) 04:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular[edit]

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Paul August. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

For the Arbitration Committee, AGK ■ 21:47, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ¬. Since you had some involvement with the ¬ redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –MJLTalk 22:08, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of arbitration[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 15:08, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo[edit]

Hey, Paul August. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Mjs1991 (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo indeed ;-) Paul August 10:32, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Paul August: How about some help[edit]

Dear Paul August, On 10 Aug 2019 you blocked my addition on the Tartarus entry. Your reason stated was: (I) created a "now unintelligent sentence fragment". It would very kind of you to EDIT this "now unintelligent sentence fragment" and replace it with an intelligent sentence instead of deleting it. If not, how about offering some academic tutoring that would unblock my info? Miistermagico (talk) 23:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You misquoted me. What I said was "as having created a now unintelligible sentence fragment". (Unintelligible means unable to be understood, unitelligent means something entirely different.) Your edit left the following:
In the New Testament, the noun Tartarus does not occur but tartaroo (ταρταρόω, "throw to Tartarus"), a shortened form of the classical Greek verb kata-tartaroo ("throw down to Tartarus").
That's not a sentence, it doesn't make grammatical sense. The original version of that text read:
In the New Testament, the noun Tartarus does not occur but tartaroo (ταρταρόω, "throw to Tartarus"), a shortened form of the classical Greek verb kata-tartaroo ("throw down to Tartarus"), does appear in 2 Peter 2:4.
It says that, while the Greek text does not contain the Greek noun Tartarus, it does contain the Greek verb tartaroo which means "throw to Tartarus". What new info are you trying to add? Paul August 00:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Paul, Examining this further I see I made an error. Thanks for catching it. Miistermagico (talk) 04:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Paul August 10:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Artemis | Legacy - Discussion[edit]

Dear Paul,

Regarding your recent removal of an edit I made on the Artemis page, although I did not create the Legacy section I believe it should remain. The use of historic names in modern day branding and communications, specifically with NASA's new mission and Artemis the coffee company, is important in keeping the history of the original source alive in the public's mind. This information is relevant and I believe an edit to correct any lack of sources would have been more appropriate in this scenario. The two on taxonomy and astonomy do seem quite thin, however NASA's use of Artemis will be an extremely popular search in the coming years as we come closer to the mission. The content of the Artemis coffee reference is also fully factual and citations were included to validate this section. CascaraBarbara (talk) 12:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@CascaraBarbara: Notice that another editor has also removed your addition to that section. I don't believe the comnpany Artemis Cold Brew Coffee, is notable enough to be mentioned in that article. If you wish to discuss this further, please open a discussion on Talk:Artemis, thanks. Paul August 13:28, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to visit my talk page and comment on the discussion regarding the other editor's revision. The very definition of an encyclopedia is to provide information on many subjects or on many aspects of one subject as possible. This company references to more than just the name of Artemis and that why I believe it is notable enough to be included in this article. As previously mentioned, I believe an edit for incorrect information would have been more acceptable. If you disagreed with the notability of this information you should have opened a discussion in the first place instead of simply removing. CascaraBarbara (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My revert of your edit without first opening a discussion on the talk page, reflects the long established standard editorial practice described at WP:BRD: "Making bold edits is encouraged, as it will result in either improving an article, or stimulating discussion. If your edit gets reverted, do not revert again. Instead, begin a discussion with the person who reverted your change to establish consensus". That is, when you make and edit (i.e. your adding the company info) and it gets reverted by another editor (i.e. like me removing the content) you should not revert again (i.e. as you did by adding back the company info), but instead you who should have, at that point, begun a discussion, and not have readded your preferred content, without establishing an editorial consensus. Paul August 14:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Barnstar of Greece
Even though I have mostly left Wikipedia and I am no longer writing articles, I still pop over here now and then to see what is going on. This is to thank you for all your excellent contributions over the years, including your ongoing work on the articles Hecatoncheires and Cyclopes. You are one of the users whom I have most admired over the course of my time here on account of your tireless and devoted efforts to keep the articles on ancient Greece and Greek mythology in good order. I have no idea what Wikipedia would be like if you were to leave. —Katolophyromai (talk) 00:40, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Katolophyromai: How very nice! Thank you for your kind words. I'm glad you appreciate my work. I miss your contributions, and seeing you around. Paul August 00:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am still writing obsessively, but I am no longer writing on Wikipedia as much. Nowadays I mostly write answers on Quora and articles on my personal website. Here is a link to my Quora profile and here is a link to my personal website. —Katolophyromai (talk) 06:06, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The new Cyclopes page[edit]

Hello, Paul August. There seems to be an error in the transition of the article to its new title. If you click on the talk page for Cyclopes you get Talk:Cyclopes (disambiguation). You're doing a great job with your great contributions to this page. It's been fascinating to watch the progress. - Quarterpinion (talk) 14:50, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think I've fixed things now. Paul August 20:18, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question about editing protocol on bio page[edit]

My apologies, I am not a regular Wikipedia contributor, but you have undone a number of my recent attempted edits, as well as those of others attempting similar edits, and I am uncertain how to proceed when it is a matter about which I have personal knowledge that does not yet have a public source. Are you able to provide guidance? Thank you. HudPix (talk) 11:29, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@HudPix:, Hi. Sure I'm happy to provide you with what guidance I can. We can't rely on personal knowledge. Everything on Wikipedia needs to be able to be sourced to reliable published sources (see WP:Sources and WP:RS for definitions and details). Let me know if you have any more questions, and I will try to answer them. Paul August 19:22, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think I'm starting to get the hang of things, and am engaging on the article Talk page. HudPix (talk) 00:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for removing the PA and putting a target on your own back. Sorry about that. I hope you have a great weekend and a great Thanksgiving. Lightburst (talk) 20:12, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Paul August 12:29, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greek mythology sources and stories[edit]

Paul August, I have been contributing since 2006, mostly by reading and revising articles. Over the years, particularly in 2011, 2017 and 2018 I read heavily on several sources and criticized several articles that relate to Greek mythology. I am interested in sources and truth but also in structure and elegance when it comes to articles on Wikipedia. I read and commented on a variety of Greek mythology articles and, in some cases, you provided feedback. I understand that we share interest on a few subjects and primarily on Greek mythology to which I dedicated a section of my personal website. I uploaded a variety of documents, currently 9 genealogical trees and 25 paraphrased stories of gods and heroes that compare different sources as well as 2 summaries that compare a variety of mythologies. I created 6 more stories that have been in the making for a while. I would like to know if you would be able to comment on some statements I came across on Wikipedia that I was unable to verify because I could not find a source for them.

ICE77 (talk) 06:48, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I can try. Paul August 12:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The birth of the Milky Way[edit]

Thanks for the help Paul August!

In the article on Heracles under the "Birth and childhood" section I read this:

"Fear of Hera's revenge led Alcmene to expose the infant Heracles, but he was taken up and brought to Hera by his half-sister Athena, who played an important role as protectress of heroes. Hera did not recognize Heracles and nursed him out of pity. Heracles suckled so strongly that he caused Hera pain, and she pushed him away. Her milk sprayed across the heavens and there formed the Milky Way. But with divine milk, Heracles had acquired supernatural powers. Athena brought the infant back to his mother, and he was subsequently raised by his parents.[23]"

Reference 23 points to "Diodorus Siculus' Bibliotheca Historica (Book IV, Ch. 9)".

I read the passage of Diodorus Siculus at Book IV 9.6 and I do not see any explanation on how the Milky Way was created. Do you think it's pure fabrication or that is explained in some other source?

ICE77 (talk) 09:03, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Milky Way I see:
In Greek mythology, the Milky Way was formed after the trickster god Hermes suckled the infant Heracles at the breast of Hera, the queen of the gods, while she was asleep.[1][2] When Hera awoke, she tore Heracles away from her breast and splattered her breast milk across the heavens.[1][2] In another version of the story, Athena, the patron goddess of heroes, tricked Hera into suckling Heracles voluntarily,[1][2] but he bit her nipple so hard that she flung him away, spraying milk everywhere.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ a b c d Leeming, David Adams (1998). Mythology: The Voyage of the Hero (Third ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. p. 44. ISBN 978-0-19-511957-2. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  2. ^ a b c d Pache, Corinne Ondine (2010). "Hercules". In Gargarin, Michael; Fantham, Elaine (eds.). Ancient Greece and Rome. Vol. 1: Academy-Bible. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. p. 400. ISBN 978-0-19-538839-8. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Both cited sources seem reliable, so I think we can accept that there was such a story. However, neither Leeming nor Pache (as far as I can tell) cite any ancient sources, so where this story comes from I don't know. Leeming does cite Robert Graves, The Greek Myths, vol. 2, pp. 90-91. When I get home later today I will look in Graves, to see what he says. Paul August 10:56, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paul August, thank you for the information. That is my problem: I cannot link the story of the Milky Way to any ancient source which is typically where I want to go. ICE77 (talk) 05:17, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've now had a quick look at Graves, pp. 90-91—and by the way, a word of warning, Graves needs to be taken with a considerable grain of salt, he is not a professional scholar of mythology, and his The Greek Myths contains a lot of creative synthesis, which does not always reflect exactly what the ancient sources actually say, which also means that if Leeming is basing his account solely on Graves (which is the only source he cites) then I think we have to discount to some extent what Leeming says also. In any case, Graves distinguishes, per the quote from our Milky Way given above, two main versions, one involving Athena (as in Diodorus) and the other Hermes, and he also provides ancient sources for each. For Athena, he cites: Diodorus Siculus 6.9; Tzetzes, On Lycophron 1327; Pausanias, 9.25.2; while for Hermes: Eratosthenes, Casterisms 44; Hyginus, Poetic Astronomy 2.43; "Ptolemy Hepaestios, quoted by Photius p. 477"; and Diodorus Siculus 6.10. I'll do some more looking when I get a chance. Meanwhile you might look at:
  • Hard, Robin (transl.), Eratosthenes and Hyginus: Constellation Myths, with Aratus's Phaenomena (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015) ISBN 978-0-19-871698-3
Specifically: pp. 132-135, p. 150, for what Aratus, Eratosthenes, and Hyginus have to say. Paul August 12:50, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paul August, thanks for the additional comments. I will look at each source. When you say "Diodorus Siculus 6.9" and "Diodorus Siculus 6.10" what book are you referring to?

ICE77 (talk) 20:20, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that should have been Diodorus Siculus 4.9 and 4.10, so Book 4, chapters 9 and 10. These are the sections of Diodorus that Graves cites, 4.9 you've already seen, per above. However, I've just looked at Diodorus 4.10, and I don't see anything relevant there, so Graves seems to be a mistaken about the second Diodorus cite. Paul August 21:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For Constellation Myths by Eratosthenes/Hyginus and Phaenomena by Aratus I would need to go to a library since pages 133-135 and 150 are blocked.

I looked at the sources that include Athena in the story: Diodorus Siculus (Bibliotheca historica, Book IV 9.1-10.1), Lycophron (Alexandra, 1327) and Pausanias (Description of Greece, 9.25.2).

Then I looked at the sources that include Hermes in the story: Eratosthenes (Catasterismi, 44), Hyginus (Poetic Astronomy, 2.43), Ptolemy Hepaestios, quoted by Photius p. 477 and Diodorus Siculus (Bibliotheca historica, Book IV 10.1-7).

For the sources on Athena I do not see any reference to the birth of the Milky Way and I found the Lycophron "transposition" of the stories of Heracles and Theseus puzzling (Phemius=Poseidon / Tropaea=Hera).

For the sources on Hermes I could not find any source and I would need to go to a library for each of the books. This is with the exception of Diodorus Siculus that does not say anything about the Milky Way and I agree with you it sounds like a sourcing error (maybe from printing).

Based on what I have seen out of the above in just about all cases there is a reference of Hera milking Heracles but nothing more than that. It sounds like a dead end. I think the reference to the creation of the Milky Way that points to Diodorus Siculus in the article on Heracles should be removed. The paragraph should not mention Hera's pity or the Milky Way which are definitely not in the account by Diodorus Siculus.

ICE77 (talk) 07:39, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Graves cite is to "Tzetzes, On Lycophron 1327", that is John Tzetzes’ Commentary (usually titled On Lycophron) on Lycophron’s ‘’Alexandra’’ 1327, not to Lycophron’s ‘’Alexandra’’ 1327, itself. As to what Lycophron does says:
[Theseus] went with the wild beast, the Initiate, who drew the milky breast of the hostile goddess Tropaea,”
The “Initiate” is a reference to Heracles—who was famously an initiate in the Eleusinian mysteries)—while the “goddess Tropaea” is a reference to Hera, so this is clearly a reference to Hearacles being suckled by Hera, however no mention of the Milky Way. Perhaps the bit about Athena and the Milky Way is in Tzetzes—here's a link to Müller's edition: On Lycophron 1327 (in Greek, with Müller's Latin notes)—but I know of no translation of this, but I don't see it, and it would take awhile for me to puzzle out the Greek.
However here is what Eratosthenes, Epitome 44 (Hard, pp. 132–133) says:
It is not possible for sons of Zeus to have any share in the honurs of the sky unless they had been suckled at Hera’s breast; and that is why Hermes, so they say, brought Heracles along after his birth and placed him at Hera’s breast, for him to be suckled at it; but when Hera became aware of it, she thrust him away, and the rest of her milk spilled out accordingly to make up the milky circle [i.e. the Milky Way].
And here is what Hyginus, Astronomy 2.43 (Hard, p. 133) says:
There is also a circle in the heavens which is white in colour, and which men have called the milky circle. Eratosthenes recounts in his Hermes that Hera unknowingly gave milk to the infant Hermes, but when she came to realize that he was Maia’s son, she pushed him away; and that is why a bright trail of spilled milk can be seen among the stars. Others have said that Heracles was placed at Hera’s breast while she was asleep, and she acted as has just been described when she woke up. Or according to other authors, Heracles was so greedy that he sucked in so much milk he could not keep it in his mouth, and what spilled out from his mouth is shown in this circle.
So the story that the Milky Way comes from Hera’s spilt milk (usually while suckling Heracles) is well attested in ancient sources. Paul August 13:20, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tropaea is clearly Hera but who was Tropaea? I never heard of that. The same I find about Phemius which is Poseidon. That is what I find puzzling.

Thank you for the additional search and the comments on Eratosthenes/Hyginus. It does seem there is a story but the "milky circle" can be anything in the sky. There is no direct reference to the Milky Way itself in the original texts. I assume that "[i.e. the Milky Way]" is your comment. If now, was the "milky circle" the name of the Milky Way before modern astronomy?

ICE77 (talk) 06:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no doubt that what the Greeks referred to as the "Milky Circle" is what we call the "Milky Way". Paul August 11:40, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, then the passage in the "Birth and childhood" section should not use Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica, Book IV 9.6 for reference 23 but Eratosthenes, Epitome 44 and Hyginus, Astronomy 2.43. Thanks for the information.

ICE77 (talk) 07:02, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Theseus and the Minotaur[edit]

The article on the Minotaur says that "Theseus killed the Minotaur with the sword of Aegeus and led the other Athenians back out of the labyrinth." I read 5 sources for the story of Theseus and the Minotaur: Diodorus Siculus (Bibliotheca historica, Book IV) , Hyginus (Fabulae), Pseudo-Apollodorus (Bibliotheca), Plutarch (Life of Theseus) and Pausanias (Description of Greece). None of them says that Theseus used a weapon to kill the Minotaur. In fact, the only source that specified how Theseus killed the Minotaur was Pseudo-Apollodorus who explained Theseus used his fists (Bibliotheca, E.1.9). Do you know what is the source for the account of the sword?

ICE77 (talk) 03:52, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, not offhand, no. When I get a chance I will look into it. In the meantime you could add a: [citation needed] template, or simply remove it. Paul August 12:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paul August, thanks for the feedback. I added a citation needed tag for the missing source that claims Theseus used a sword to kill the Minotaur.

ICE77 (talk) 23:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paul August, have you been able to look into the source of Theseus that use as sword to kill the Minotaur?

ICE77 (talk) 05:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry. Paul August 12:02, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings[edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Paul August, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020.
Happy editing,

llywrch (talk) 08:04, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

@Llywrch: Thanks! Happy Holidays and Saturnalia to you too ;-) Paul August 17:35, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You must know my friend the librarian. She used to write Saturnalia carols. -- llywrch (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Really, I'd love to hear one. Paul August 18:41, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Damn, I wish I could remember one of hers. And not guess at how they went (e.g, "Hark the herald druids sing...") -- llywrch (talk) 16:35, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring[edit]

Warning[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that 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.

Paul August, You are edit warring on the article Cyclopes, please stop. You made a bold edit to the article on December 13, it was reverted, and a discussion is going on. (See: WP:BRD) There are five editors: Sweetpool50, P Aculeius, Furius, Caeciliusinhorto and myself, who have commented on the talk page, and not one of them has expressed the opinion that the guidelines mentioned on WP:BRD and on WP:CAUTIOUS should be ignored, as you are doing. I am not arguing that the particular content you are repeatedly deleting needs to remain in the article or be unaltered. That particular content was in fact in the process of being edited and adjusted by a number of editors when you interrupted that process with your bold edit. I suggest that the guidelines (WP:BRD WP:CAUTIOUS) should be followed. You are the only editor who seems not to agree with that. I suggest that you end this time-wasting edit war, and allow the editing process to proceed in a normal manner. Please respect the opinions of your fellow editors. If you continue to edit war, against consensus—which does not mean unanimity, see WP:CONSENSUS—you may end up losing your editorial privileges.Bitwixen (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bitwixen, kindly don't use other editors to bolster an argument that clearly none of them support, or behave as if you have the right to issue warnings in retaliation because you received one. None of the other editors who responded to requests for comment agree that the material you've been arguing about belongs in that article. Arguing that it has to be restored because the discussion took place after it was deleted is pointless. Several editors have already indicated that you don't seem to be willing to collaborate, but are just insisting that things be as you want them using any excuse or theory that you think supports your position—but at the end of the day, no matter what technicalities you come up with, if it doesn't belong in the article then it's not staying! Please take some advice and drop this matter before you get yourself blocked for disruptive editing. P Aculeius (talk) 13:59, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Bitwixen: Please listen to what P Aculeius says. You have made some useful contributions, I would hate to see you blocked. Paul August 14:06, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted Bitwixen again with the warning that further action on his part will be reported to the admin panel. I would prefer that came from you, but any of us could do it; judging by recent responses, I think our collective patience has come to an end. Like you, I'm reluctant to see a potentially good editor go, but I have been recognising the pattern in Bitwixen's responses from past bitter experience. Over the years 2012-14 (when I went by another name) there was an editor called WP Editor 2011 who used to call himself "a humble Wikignome" and eventually painted himself into a similarly defiant corner, leading to an indefinite ban. Bitwixen's behavior has been so eerily similar that I wondered for awhile whether it was the same person registered under another name. I am hoping a less extensive pause for reflection will bring a change of heart, and perhaps a recommendation to that effect coming from you might carry weight. Sweetpool50 (talk) 20:32, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure that P. August is understandably reluctant to resort to using his authority in a dispute in which he himself is involved—as no doubt you are as well. Asking a third party to review the situation and recommend further action, if necessary, would probably be better. P Aculeius (talk) 03:39, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@P Aculeius and Sweetpool50: Since I'm involved in the content dispute, I won't be using any of my admin tools here (and I don't think Sweetpool50 expects me to). Although there would seem to be sufficient number of editors aleady involved, asking other parties to "review the situation and recommend further action" is always an option. Can either of you suggest other parties to ask? We can, of course, always report Biwixen to WP:ANEW (where all of our actions will come under review). Another course of action would be to open a Request for comment (RfC). I don't particularly look forward to doing either of these, but if Bitwixen keeps reverting, I suppose something like this will be needed. Paul August 13:03, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I defer to your judgment, as I've mostly stayed out of admin matters in my Wikicareer, thankfully avoiding any kind of sanction—if only by knowing when to back off and give up in the face of overwhelming or at least insanely vigorous opposition. Even in matters of grammar and style—*sigh*! Your judgment, and, if you'll forgive the flattery, willingness to defer to the judgment of others when it's well-reasoned, even if you disagree with it—makes me confident that you'll choose the most efficacious course of action should it be necessary to take this further. As I see it, the worst that could happen is that someone might side with Bitwixen on technical grounds over the initial reversion, but the argument would still be moot since it's been fleshed out by multiple editors on the article's talk page, and they all think the material is better treated elsewhere. P Aculeius (talk) 15:56, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right, @Paul August:, I knew you couldn't take action yourself, but I was hoping you had suggestions for how the next step might be initiated. The last time I attempted something like this I was so technically unskilled I made a complete hash of it - and got accused of edit-warring into the bargain. That in turn emboldened the other editor, so that his misbehaviour continued much longer than it need have. What I had in mind was an ANI for edit-warring, should Bitwixen persist after his final warning. If we need someone uninvolved, I could draw the situation to the attention of the administrator in shining armour who finally sorted out the problem I mentioned above. He's very much a St George kind of character, which is why I wanted to make sure an appeal for clemency went with the appeal! Sweetpool50 (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sweetpool50: Well WP:ANI would technically be a bit premature, since that page is for "discussion of urgent incidents and chronic, intractable behavioral problems", which I don't think this is, yet (although in practice such technicalities are often ignored). The edit warring noticeboard WP:ANEW would be the more appropriate administrative noticeboard. You could certainly bring this situation to the previous admin, who you found helpful, asking for their help and advice. That might obviate the need to take the more formal actions I've mentioned above. And frankly, I don't deal a lot with this kind of administrative work, and there are many far more experienced admins in such matters than I, who might have better ideas for how best to move forward. Paul August 18:02, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@P Aculeius and Sweetpool50: Bitwixen now blocked for 31 hours: User talk:Bitwixen#December 2019. Paul August 19:09, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It seems as if you too have a dragon-slayer up your sleeve! I only hope it doesn't tip him over the edge again. Sweetpool50 (talk) 20:21, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No dragon-slayer up my sleeve, it would hardly be big enough. It's rather more likely I'd find myself in the pocket of a certain fire breathing destroyer of Japanese cities. Paul August 21:29, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome in pocket, little Paul! Feel free use catflap! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 21:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks ... but you're going to scare my guests. Paul August 21:48, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Telephus[edit]

Panels 16 &17: "Telephus receives weapons from Auge"
Detail of panel 16

Dear Paul,

You wrote,

This is a detail of panel 16, neither of these figures are Telephus or Auge. Telephus stands to the far right of panel 16 (not shown here), and only his torso is extant. On panel 17 Auge stands to the right of Telephus holding a helmet out for Telephus)

I respectfully defer to your judgment here. But perhaps you can also suggest an appropriate caption for this photo? Because it seems to be mislabelled, or not properly labelled. Regards. Y-barton (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an image of the full panels 16 and 17 which together are titled "Telephus receives weapons from Auge". Below it is the image you added to Telephus, which is a detail of panel 16. The two figures in the detail are male attendants, standing behind Telephus. Telephus' torso, wearing a cuirass, can be seen in the top image just to the right of the two attendants. Why do you say the photo is "mislabelled"? Where do you see this mislabeling? Paul August 22:06, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Paul, for your clarification. I have now added more labelling to this image at the Commons. It was just insufficiently labelled, I guess, so I got confused. Y-barton (talk) 03:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome. Paul August 12:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyokotalk 04:56, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paradeigma deletion[edit]

If that counts as a challenge to deletion then the definition of challenge is meaningless. Anyway I think the article is not notable and I don't have an account. 2604:3D09:417F:DEB0:4C7D:ACD:5A4A:C5E3 (talk) 05:45, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right about the article (Paradeigma). In any case WP:PROD is for uncontested deletions, which is not the case here. By policy, the quality of the challenge is not a consideration. Your next step would be to nominate the article for deletion, see WP:AFD. You don't need an account to do that. Regards, Paul August 11:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hueg table on ANI[edit]

I know you meant well, Paul, but my son informs me it's "hueg" now. Compare Urban Dictionary. Admittedly that definition is from 2004, so it's probably something completely different by now. Bishonen | talk 21:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

;-) Paul August 21:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Post at WP:AN[edit]

You forgot to sign it, you might want to do that.LakesideMinersCome Talk To Me! 15:52, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Paul August 15:54, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Paul August, its kinda amusing given the topic. LakesideMinersCome Talk To Me! 15:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

You are welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:38, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article About Jason[edit]

This article has had barely any activity for the past 8 or so years, and if someone even knows about this article, they can add onto it. I request that you leave this article unprotected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.24.210.141 (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the admin who last protected the article. Paul August 19:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Followup[edit]

I somehow missed that you said you didn't get what the gorilla was about. Believe it or not, it's a kind of expression of sympathy for arbcom members, who -- once elected -- can't ever really be just regular ol' editors anymore, because everyone knows they hold the power of life and death. It's kind of like how movie stars can't just go into a restaurant for a quiet bite to eat. This is completely different from implicitly accusing an arb of abusing their authority or intimidating someone, as you seemed to think. (I'm explaining here to avoid complicating that thread further.)

I just want to add, and I really mean this, that though I think you're dead wrong about the analog people, I bear no one on the project ill will (well, almost no one) and you're welcome to visit any time. EEng 04:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng: Thanks for the explanation. I could have investigated via the link that Iri provided, but was too lazy. And in any case I felt confident at that point that the image didn't mean what it looked like it might. So you think I'm dead wrong about the "analog people", but I don't think I've expressed an opinion on them. I'd really like to know what is it exactly that you think I think? As I admire many things about you, I welcome your welcome, and I will try to make a point of visiting more often (even if only to scold, and by the way I only ever bother to scold people who I think might be good enough to be worth trying to make better). Paul August 13:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about your expressed opinion that the analog-binary caption was unacceptable. Don't admire me, I'll just break your heart. Besides, Levivich has already agreed to marry me; J.S. Mill is writing our vows. EEng 03:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@EEng: But I never expressed an opinion about the caption. I certainly never said it was unacceptable. Here's what I did say:
"I think you happen to be in the wrong here. We all make mistakes, and we should all try to listen with an open mind to other people when they tell us we've made one. ... For me, if some[one] thinks one of my jokes is offensive—even if I think they are the only one who thinks so—I think my response would be to apologize, and retract it. It seems to me to [be] just a matter of simple politeness. ... Regardless of whether or not the removal was right, I'm trying to say that your response could have been more polite. ... I'm sorry, but I see nothing in your responses above that indicate to me that you are listening to or taking on board any of the constructive criticisms your fellow editors are trying to give you. It would be good if you could try harder to do that. ... That you seem to believe that everything you've done here was perfectly appropriate—that you seem to believe all your critics are wrong—that you take no responsibility at all for any part of this problem—is disheartening."
I didn't mean by any of this that your *caption* was necessarily inappropriate, but that, in my opinion, your *response* to those who did think so was less than ideal. Paul August 10:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I wish I had an appropriately funny image and caption with which to lighten the mood. Paul August 10:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC) [reply]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 21, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 20:50, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Patroclus[edit]

What was the reason for the removal of the last edit on the Wikipedia page Patroclus, about his intentions? Nawel Laakel (talk) 06:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well it misspelled "Sarpedon" as "Saperdon", and the edit was poorly worded, and seemed like unnecessary details to me. If you feel strongly about it, you can add it back. Paul August 10:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2020[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for April 30[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Achelous, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alcmaeon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

removed GnangarraKaisershatnerMalcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Paul August, I seem to have gotten into a content dispute at the above article but managed to persuade the other editor to take it to the Talk page. Trouble is that the subject is judged of low interest in the template there, so there may not be much discussion. I remembered when you were working on Cyclopes that you went to the relevant topic project and interested other editors in taking part. That would be Project:Nevada in this case, but I'm not sure where or how to word such a request so that it doesn't sound like canvassing. I'd be grateful if you could advise me on that.

Should that not generate discussion, I believe there's another forum where some of the procedural aspects of the article might be discussed. For me that's primarily weighing secondary and tertiary sourced facts against WP:UNDUE. I'd like to draw on your knowledge on which forum that might be, in case it comes to it. You did a superb job of moderating on Cyclopes and managed the discussion there very skilfully. It's a skill that I lack, unfortunately! Thanks in advance for any advice you can give. I hope you're staying safe. Sweetpool50 (talk) 10:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sweetpool. Yes I'm staying very safe thanks, I hope you are as well.
I'm sorry to hear about your content dispute. I've taken a brief look at the talk page discussion, and it seems to have just got started. If it were me I'd probably see what happens there before asking others for help. However, the place to raise the issue with the Nevada project would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Nevada. That project seems a bit moribund however, so I wouldn't count on much help from there. If you do post a request there, or elsewhere, just briefly, and neutrally describe the dispute, provide a link to the appropriate talk page discussion, and ask for help (see WP:CAN). You could also ask the other editor (or editors) to help in the writing of such requests. Which would be a good exercise in consensus building. Other places you could ask for help are WP:THIRD or WP:DRN. Before doing that, be aware that both of those boards will expect that the issue has been thoroughly discussed on the article talk page first.
Benediximus, Paul August 11:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, that's most useful. I've edited down the section in question in the hope that will help defuse things. Sweetpool50 (talk) 09:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Paul August 10:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Come On, I literally cited a source[edit]

I cited a source, namely, Greekmythology.com, just look at that page on Greekmythology.com and it says that he is worshiped by many as a protogenoi god with Chaos and Gaia as his parents. 82.17.221.173 (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've just left the following reply to you on Talk:Oceanus:
"The website greekmythology.com is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia. (For what constitutes an acceptable source please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources). Nor does that website cite any acceptable sources, in fact it cites no sources at all. Ultimately any source for this would have to be based on some ancient source, and as I said, I know of no ancient source which says this. Paul August 20:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)"[reply]
Paul August 20:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Achelous, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 May 2020[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEekCreffettCwmhiraeth
removed Anna FrodesiakBuckshot06RonhjonesSQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fifteen Years of Adminship![edit]

Wishing Paul August a very August happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
;-) Paul August 19:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Requesting a block[edit]

Please take a look at James Sadat (talk). To the best of my knowledge, this user is edit warring and violating ‘What not to have on your user-page?’ I think the user should be blocked under ‘Conflict of interest’ and ‘Clearly not here to build an encyclopaedia.’ Idell (talk) 10:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've blanked that page and left an explanatory message on their talk page. WP:COI or WP:NOTHERE don't yet apply. Paul August 12:54, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sadat has reversed the blanking. Sweetpool50 (talk) 13:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've now blanked and protected the page. Paul August 14:08, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 15[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thoas (king of Aetoila), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nestor and Meriones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rhexenor[edit]

Rhexenor is categorised as a DAB page.

It might be better to move the mythological stuff over Rhexenor (mythology), or to return it to an SIA and hatnote the millipede. Narky Blert (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that page is now a mess. I think somebody tried to merge a dab page and set index article. Paul August 14:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've now made that page a SIA, with a hatnote for the millipede genus, as suggested. Paul August 20:09, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Narky Blert: I now think I've fixed everything with respect to that page. I've also tried to explain things, as best I could, to the user who did the merge here. Please feel free to add to, or correct, what I've said there. I'm sorry I undid your edits without taking the time to look into the situation more carefully. Regards, Paul August 10:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I've checked the pages to which I'd added a {{dn}} tag, and all are now clean.
I think the hatnote solution is best. The obscure millipede junior synonym is outnumbered by the obscure mythological figures. A DAB page might be permissible under WP:TWODABS, but looks really unnecessary - Rhexenor is not going to collect bad links-in. Narky Blert (talk) 10:42, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and I agree. Paul August 10:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Another advantage has only just occurred to me - if anyone is looking for the millipede, they'll learn the origin of the name en route. Narky Blert (talk) 09:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, presumably it was named after one of these, but which one? And whatever for? Paul August 09:39, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The taxon authority just says "mythological", and gives no reason. Narky Blert (talk) 13:17, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's often the case I would assume. And even the entry "mythological" has little value to me, since I would guess that such an entry is often simply the result of an (albeit reasonable) assumption on someone's part. Paul August 13:57, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, you goaded me into digging up the original paper and adding it to Narceus, which is all to the good. Biologists' style is to say just (Authority 18xx) or the like, trusting that there's been no data corruption between the first publication and whatever it was they copied the information from. An interesting and relatively straightforward search, starting clean from "Brexenor millipede"; it took only 20 minutes, with few dead ends. Narky Blert (talk) 20:32, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good. Paul August 22:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 June 2020[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crome Yellow[edit]

Sorry to trouble you, Paul August. A while back you managed to widen discussion on the Cyclopes Talk Page by drawing attention to it through the appropriate portal. I'd like to do that for a discussion about the novel above but can't see where to do that at the Novel Portal. Could you advise me, please? Sweetpool50 (talk) 14:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't note the discussion on any portal, rather I mentioned the discussion at the Wikiproject: Classical Greece and Rome's talk page. For information on Wikiprojects see Wikipedia:WikiProject. An appropriate project might be Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels, you could mention the discussion on that projects talk page: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. As for WP:portals, I don't know much about them, other than that most apparently attract little traffic. Paul August 14:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, I'll follow it up there. Sweetpool50 (talk) 16:21, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Circa[edit]

Circa is significantly easier to look up than the more cryptic "c." Please stop being critical of changes that are helpful, but you do not happen to "like". 50.25.221.206 (talk) 02:28, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:MOS which says:
"To indicate approximately, the abbreviation c. (followed by a space and not italicized) is preferred over circa, ca., or approx. The template {{circa}} may be used."

Sixteen Years of Editing![edit]

Hey, Paul August. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Chris Troutman (talk) 21:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks ;-) Paul August 23:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day![edit]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded EuryalusSQL
removed JujutacularMonty845RettetastMadchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed KeeganOpabinia regalisPremeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 August 2020[edit]

Euripides, and translation generally.[edit]

Hello. I recently replied to you on Euripides' Talk page. I am not as well-turned in Wikipedia as you presumably are, with your administrator title, and accordingly do not know if that was the correct way to reply. But I am now here, as a guess, because you have not replied there; and because I want to direct myself directly at you, because your administrator title implies that you know things that I do not; and that you have some disposition to improve things. I bring you myself as such a thing for improvement, which may consequently sprout some improvements to articles, which is surely very enticing indeed. To be plain with you, if I may, I want you to be plain with me, if you may; particularly concerning translation (and particularly of ancient text, such as quotes we swing mid the Euripides ship and fellows, etc). You have removed some translations I made, calling them "original research", and suggesting I read about such things. I have read and read again everything pertinent I could find on the original-research-reliable-neutrality-translation-citation-etc pages, but doing so has only led me to believe that proffering translations of Euripides quotes (because the quote, as I interpret it, is of Euripides; not his translators) is neither "original research" (for that, as I interpret it, is nonsense), nor unacceptable. Somewhere it says that "official" translations are preferred to those of article-editors. But this suggests indeed that an article-editor may proffer translations (as I said on the Talk page, one reason I included the Greek is because the Greek is the quote, not the translation). What I will do now, is demonstrate very simply and quickly why I preferred myself to the "reliable sources". For it is not vainglory, nor such stuff. I have access to two "reliable" translations of Aristophanes' Clouds. But first, the Greek: line 123: "ἀλλ᾿ ἐξελῶ σ᾿ εἰς κόρακας ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας". I do not know if you can Greek, but that, in English, is: "I will expel you from the house, toward the crows". Nearby, line 133: "βάλλ᾿ εἰς κόρακας":"Throw to the crows" ("yourself" is implied). Now, for the reliable sources: Alan Sommerstein, in an Aris & Phillips edition, gives: "I'll throw you out of the house, and you can go to blazes"; and: "Oh, get stuffed!", respectively. Jeffrey Henderson, in a Loeb edition, gives: "I'll throw you the hell out of the house!"; and: "Buzz off to blazes!" So, we may note here, if we choose to, that only I and Aristophanes speak of the carrion birds. What I am hoping for, from you, is some clarification concerning translation generally; particularly, to stick with our examples here, why I cannot enlighten the world with what text actually is (ie source text (ie Greek)), and what it actually means (ie target text); because, as we have seen, in our examples, the reliable sources are not actually reliable sources; and because we do not equally understand the rules. This latter is desirable. Untitled50reg (talk) 17:49, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and, just for clarity: my issue is not THAT my translations were removed, but WHY; rules are unclear. Untitled50reg (talk) 18:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I'm sorry I haven't been more responsive here, but I've been mostly sick in bed since Saturday. I will try to clarify things when I'm feeling better. Hope that is ok. Paul August 18:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was myself stuck in bed, sick, for much of last week (and, indeed, until Saturday), so am content for you to carry that on without me. I don't mean to imply any impatience, but rather that I was not certain that you would be aware that I replied to you. I am now suspicious that some sort of communication has been successful, so can leave you til whenever. Untitled50reg (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Untitled50reg: I'm finally feeling well enough to give what I hope is a cogent reply :-)
All assertions made in Wikipedia must be verifiable (See WP:V). In particular all quotes must be accompanied by a cite to a reliable published source from which the quote has been taken. That would not be possible (presumably) for one of your translations.
You also ask if you may provide the Greek text associated with some given quoted translation. You may, provided you give a reliable source for that Greek text. For example if you wanted to give the Greek text for Euripides' Medea lines 250–251, you could write:
κακῶς φρονοῦντες: ὡς τρὶς ἂν παρ᾽ ἀσπίδα
στῆναι θέλοιμ᾽ ἂν μᾶλλον ἢ τεκεῖν ἅπαξ.[1]

References

  1. ^ Kovacs, p. 306.
Where "Kovacs, p. 306" might refer to the following entry in a "Bibliography" section of the article:
I hope this helps. Regards, Paul August 14:58, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Paul August: I think I understand, if I understand that a translation of a quote is considered to be itself the quote; and, though verifiable, as pointing to what it translates, is itself, perversely, what it translates, and therefore needing a source as if it were a quote. And, for reliability, that pertains rather superficially and abstractly to dogma and names, thus, from my neutral point of view, what I think, sticking with translations of Euripides, extends only to, say, minimising distortion, using verifiable information; employing verifiable dogma to ward off unverifiable dogma, which latter may distort unacceptably.Untitled50reg (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Text delete[edit]

Dear Mr August.

My name is Moutzouris Ilias, i am a medical doctor Microbiologist in Agios Dimitrios, Messinia, Greece. If you have some avaliable time, can we please discuss about the deleted text https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Helen_of_Troy&oldid=972989910 ?

As you know the theories for the birth of Helen are many. One of the theories is that Helen and Dioscuri (the brothers of Helen: Castor and Pollux) came out from the same egg. This theory can be verified from at least 3 different sources:

1. Timothy Gantz - Early Greek Myth (page 321): "the scholia at Homer Odyssey 11.298 have all the three childer (as Zeus') emerge from the egg." In Servius, we find again the notion (as in the Odyssey scholia) that the three childern were born from one egg afther the mating of Zeus/swan and Leda (Σ Aen 3.328; cf. VMI78; III 3.6)."

2. Fulgentius - The mythographer (page 78): "For Jove disguised as a swan lay with Leda, who laid an egg from which were born the three, Castor, Pollux, and Helen of Troy. "

3. The Vatican mythographers (page 45): "The Story of the Swan and Leda. Striving after the love of the maiden Leda, Jupiter changed himself into a swan and pretended that he was fleeing from an eagle. He had transformed Mercury into the eagle. Thus, received into the lap of Leda, he had intercourse with her; she produced an egg from which three offspring were born: Castor, Pollux, and Helen."

In at least 2 different sources we can read that Dioscuri were born on a specific islet called Pefnos, beneath the crests of Taygetus mountain in Messinia-Peloponnese:

1. Pausanias - Description of Greece (English) (page 225): "And about twenty stades from Thalames is a place called Pephnos, by the sea. There is a little island in front of it not greater than a big rock, which is also called Pephnos, and the people of Thalames say that it was the birthplace of Castor and Pollux. Alcman also gives us the same account i know in one of his poems. But they do not say that they were brought up at Pephnos, for Hermes took them to Pellana. And in this island there are brazen statues of Castor and Pollux about a foot high in the open air. These the sea cannot move from their position, though in winter time it dashes violently over the rock. This is indeed wonderful, and the ants there are whiter in colour than ants generally. The Messenians say that the island originally belonged to them, so that they claim Castor and Pollux as theirs rather than as deities of the Lacedaemonians. "

2. Homeric hymns - xvii. 3, xxxiii. 4 sqq. (page 63): XVI. TO THE DIOSCOURI Of Castor and Polydeuces do thou sing,—shrill Muse, the Tyndaridæ, sons of Olympian Zeus, whom Lady Leda bore beneath the crests of Taygetus, having been secretly conquered by the desire of Cronion of the dark clouds. Hail, ye sons of Tyndarus, ye cavaliers of swift steeds.

The famous professor of Archaeology Dr. Petros Themelis, who is the leader of excavations for over 30 years of the city of Ancient Messene ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messene ), combined those sources and concluded that since Dioscuri were born on the Pefnos islet and since Helen and Disocuri were born from the same egg, then the birth place of Helen is Pefnos islet in Messinia. In order to verify this, he created some days before a statue of an egg with engraved the union of Zeus/swan and Leda, as it is shown on the ancient statue stored in British Museum ( https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1973-0302-1 ). You can see more photos and info of the statue at a facebook page created: https://www.facebook.com/Η-γέννηση-της-Ωραίας-Ελένης-στη-βραχονησίδα-Πέφνο-614729455848919 and a drone video of the construction at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fYLr6Nqa14

In 22 of August the municipality of West Mani ( https://www.dimosdytikismanis.gr/en/home-english/ ) has a ceremony on the Pefnos islet, with the unveiling of the statue. The presentation of the statue will be done by the Minister of Culture and Sports of Greece, Miss Lina G. Mendoni ( https://www.culture.gov.gr/en/ministry/SitePages/political_leadership.aspx?role=Υπουργός ) and Dr. Petros Themelis. I will send you the verifications of all this after the 22th of August, from various newspapers and tv stations.

So you can understand that the verification of Helen's birthplace from the official Greek government and from Dr. Petros Themelis, one of the most famous and important archaeologists of Greece, are some major facts we need to seriously consider.

Please let me know of your opinion

Best regards

Dr. Moutzouris Ilias Medical doctor of Microbiology --Kavouras55 (talk) 09:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IE languages in the southern Balkans[edit]

We're having a discussion about a particular source and whether it should be used in Talk:Molossians#Georgiev in the context of the theories it puts forward about IE languages in the Balkans. What are the prevalent opinions about it in your experience with relevant bibliography?--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Euripides[edit]

I stomped through Euripides, and left a trail of "cn" and "what". "Since We and Thou had it out already" (possibly quoting here Finnegans Wake, to stress the seriousness), I am sticking a big serious sign to your face, which says: "I have already accepted this responsibility, and am glad to fix things forthwith".Untitled50reg (talk) 20:52, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pandora[edit]

Thx for yr patience! Sweetpool50 (talk) 09:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Paul August 14:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2020[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

added Eddie891
removed AngelaJcw69Just ChillingPhilg88Viajero

CheckUser changes

readded SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Helen of Troy birth[edit]

Dear sir, You just deleted a text from the birth of Helen of Troy, because you mentioned “it does not belong here”. I am a user with little experience in wikipedia, can you please help me with this? I mentioned the birthplace of Helen, do you suggest it does not belong to the “Life-birth”? Should i make another title on “Life” called “Birthplace”? Best regards Kavouras55 (talk) 13:18, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The commemoration of the supposed birth place, by a town in Greece is not particularly notable. In any case, according to the ancient accounts of her mythology, Helen was born to Leda, who was the wife of the Spartan king Tyndareus. I don't know of any ancient source which specifies Helen's birthplace, but the presumption would be that it was in Sparta. I don't know why the island of Pefnos claims she was born there. I know of no ancient sources which say this. So in lieu of such sources, I don't think that claim should be in the "birth" section, or in fact anywhere in the "Mythology" section (the recently renamed "Life" section). At most the local claim of the Island to be the "birthplace" of Helen might warrant a mention in our article Pefnos, but as I say that fact is not particularly of "encyclopedic" interest. Paul August 13:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir, Please let me refer on two things that needs to be considered:

1. The claim of Pefnos to be the birthplace of Helen, is not a local claim as you mention. If you see at the official web page of the Greek ministry of culture and sports https://www.culture.gov.gr/el/Information/SitePages/view.aspx?nID=3432 (only Greek text), you can read that the Minister of Culture and Sports of Greece, Miss Lina G. Mendoni ( https://www.culture.gov.gr/en/ministry/SitePages/political_leadership.aspx?role=Υπουργός ) herself inaugurated the statue on the Pefnos island and claimed that Helen was born from this egg. I made a translation for you of the Greek text: "Inauguration of the monument of Dioscuri, on the islet Pefnos, in West Mani On Saturday night the Minister of Culture and Sports Mrs. Lina Mendoni, representing the Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, inaugurated in the Municipality of West Mani, in Agios Dimitrios next of Stoupa, the monument of Dioscuri, on the islet Pefnos: An egg that the artist Giannis Gouzos has carved the mixing of Leda with Zeus-Swan. According to the legend that has been saved in the verses of Euripides Helen and in the texts of Pausanias, Leda after her union with Zeus-Swan laid an egg on the islet of Pefnos or in another variation of the myth laid two eggs. From the union of Leda with Zeus Helen was born, the beautiful Helen of Menelaus, Clytemnestra and the Dioscuri, Castor and Polydeuces, whom the Spartans worshiped as demigods and when they were thrown into battle they were singing the paean in their honor. Professor Petros Themelis contributed to the depiction on the monument, while the Mayor of West Mani believes that the monument will contribute on making Agios Dimitrios of West Mani known to the whole world and will attract visitors. Especially if the monument-egg will be connected with the two carved tombs of Agia Sophia in Old Kardamili, which are attributed to Dioscuri by Strabo. The Minister of Culture and Sports in her greeting spoke about the intertemporal depiction of the myth of the union of Leda with Zeus: "The ancient Greeks are distinguished for their fertile fictional imagination, but the myths contains and often indicates historical data. The myths were depicted in all art forms of antiquity - this spesific myth adorns a mosaic of exceptional quality in Palaipafos of Cyprus - but they were also a source of inspiration for all the great painters of the Renaissance and otherwise. A typical example is the famous painting by Leonardo da Vinci, which in a unique way depicts the moment of the birth of Leda's childrens ", noted Mrs. Lina Mendoni, exciting the Italians attending at the event. "The myths that refer to this area, in today's Mani, such as the one about the birthplace of the Dioscuri but also of Eleni and Clytemnestra, inspire the inhabitants, the local authorities and the artists and becomes the cause of creation of modern works with new approach. The rich cultural reserve of Messinia allows our imagination to give existance to the myths, tied to its magical natural environment. The visitor of Agios Dimitrios will be able to follow the path of Pausanias and Strabo and live the myths and the history of Mani in its big duration, in a combination with the hospitality, the local products and whatever is consistent in showing that the place becomes a destination ", the Minister concluded, thanking the Municipality of West Mani for his initiative."

So as you can read on the official text of the Greek ministry of culture and Sports, the minister herself which is responsible for all the antiquities of Greece, claims that Helen was born on Pefnos island. As you can also read, the famous professor of Archaeology Dr. Petros Themelis, who is the leader of excavations for over 30 years of the city of Ancient Messene, also claims the same thing, as he also inaugurated the egg of Pefnos island. So the claim is not local, its an official claim from the official Greek government and also from one of the most famous Greek archaeologist professors.

2. The legends that are mentioned on the above text, are ancient texts of Euripides "Helen" and texts of Pausanias. The texts from Euripides "Helen" (https://www.poetryintranslation.com/PITBR/Greek/EuripidesHelen.php) Line 17: "Helen: As for me: My land is the famous Sparta and my father is Tyndareas, though there’s a story that says that one day Zeus disguised himself as a swan that was supposed to be fleeing the clutches of an eagle and, if one is to believe that story, he flew to my mother’s bed and, by deception, he made love to her. Leda is my mother’s name and mine is Helen." Line 252: "Helen: Dear friends! Look at the Fate to which I am yoked: My mother has brought me to this world to be nothing more than a monstrous freak! No woman –neither Greek nor barbarian- has given birth to the egg of a white bird, yet, they say, that this is what my mother has done. Leda, they say, delivered me inside the shell of a bird’s egg. Zeus is my father."

As you know Tyndareas was the king of Sparta and Leda was his wife. Thats why Helen mentions Sparta as her land. But she also says that there is another story, the story of Zeus/swan. According to this story Helen was not the daughter of Tyndareas, but daughter of Zeus. So we assume from the text that according to the first story Helen is from Sparta, but according to the second story she is not from Sparta.

The text from Pausanias: Description of Greece (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0160%3Abook%3D3%3Achapter%3D26%3Asection%3D2 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0160%3Abook%3D3%3Achapter%3D26%3Asection%3D3 ) "[2]Twenty stades from Thalamae is a place called Pephnus on the coast. In front of it lies a small island no larger than a big rock, also called Pephnus. The people of Thalamae say that the Dioscuri were born here. I know that Alcman too says this in a song: but they do not say that they remained to be brought up in Pephnus, but that it was Hermes who took them to Pellana. [3] In this little island there are bronze statues of the Dioscuri, a foot high, in the open air. The sea will not move them, though in winter-time it washes over the rock, which is wonderful. Also the ants here have a whiter color than is usual. The Messenians say that this district was originally theirs, and so they think that the Dioscuri belong to them rather than to the Lacedaemonians."

In this text you can read about the island Pephnus (or Pefnos) and the report of Pausanias that Dioscuri (Castor and Polydeykis - the brothers oh Helen) were born there. But since we know that Dioscuri and Helen were born from the same egg (at least 3 different sources verify this - Timothy Gantz - Early Greek Myth (page 321), Fulgentius - The mythographer (page 78), The Vatican mythographers (page 45)), then the conclusion is that Helen and Dioscuri were born from the same egg on the island Pefnos.

As you mentioned at another point, Helen and Dioscuri were not real persons, they were myths, thats why their stories belongs to mythology. But even if it is mythology, it has places mentioned that are actually real places. And the reason for this is because the ancient writers liked to put their "heroes" living near or between them, on places that were familiar to them. One of this places was a small island that had the shape of a bird's nest, when you look to it by the shore. Because of its shape, the ancients (Pausanias, the people of Thalamae and the ancient poet Alcman) imagined that on this island the famous egg was born. And from this egg Dioscuri and Helen came up. This island is called Pefnos and indeed it looks like a bird nest. On this island according to Pausanias used to be bronze statues of Dioscuri and now there is a modern sculpture of an egg depicting the union of swan/Zeus with Leda. The egg was made by the local municipality of West Mani (Check their official site: https://www.dimosdytikismanis.gr/εγκαινιάστηκε-από-την-υπουργό-πολιτι/), but it was such a big event for all Greece, that the minister and the most famous professor of archaeology inaugurated it.

Please tell me your opinion about all this.

You can also check reports about the birth of Helen on Pefnos island, from various websites: https://www.athina984.gr/en/2020/08/25/egkainia-toy-mnimeioy-ton-dioskoyron-sti-duyiki-mani/ https://houseinpeloponnese.com/the-mysterious-peloponnese-mani-beautiful-helen-born/ https://www.in.gr/2020/08/25/culture/texni/egkainiastike-mnimeio-ton-dioskouron-stin-stoupa/ https://best-tv.gr/δυτική-μάνη-εγκαινιάστηκε-από-την-υπο/ https://ioniantv.gr/o-mythos-twn-dioskourwn-epistrefei-sthn-dytiki-mani/ https://www.iefimerida.gr/politismos/mani-marmarino-aygo-sti-brahonisida-pefnos https://eleftheriaonline.gr/local/politismos/ekdiloseis/item/221269-messinia-glypto-gia-ti-gennisi-tis-oraias-elenis-sti-vraxonisida-pefnos-sti-mani-vinteo https://www.messinialive.gr/dytiki-mani-parousia-tis-ypourgou-politismou-egkainia-tou-avgou-ston-agio-dimitri/

That's a lot of material to digest. However, as far far as I can tell, the only ancient source mentioning a related birth on the island of Pefnos is Pausanias 3.26.2 which says:
"The people of Thalamae say that the Dioscuri were born [on Pephnus]."
So no mention of Helen being born there. Note there are many different accounts involving the birth of Helen and her siblings. Yes some ancient sources say that Helen and the Dioscuri were born from the same egg, but other sources say there were two eggs, one containing the Dioscuri, the other Helen and Klytaimestra. I see no way to conclude from Pausanias' account, that the legend of the "Thalmae" whereby the Dioscuri were born on Pefnos, must necessarily have included Helen being born there also. In fact it seems to me that if that legend had included Helen, Pausanias would have said so. Paul August 11:53, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your effort on the subject. Please note that Pausanias says: "The people of Thalamae say that the Dioscuri were born here. I know that Alcman too says this in a song". So its the people of Thalamae (Thalamae is a village of West Mani) and the famous poet Alcman that claim this. The ancient sources that claims Helen and Dioscuri were born from the same egg are at least three: 1. Timothy Gantz - Early Greek Myth (page 321): "the scholia at Homer Odyssey 11.298 have all the three childer (as Zeus') emerge from the egg." In Servius, we find again the notion (as in the Odyssey scholia) that the three childern were born from one egg afther the mating of Zeus/swan and Leda (Σ Aen 3.328; cf. VMI78; III 3.6)."

2. Fulgentius - The mythographer (page 78): "For Jove disguised as a swan lay with Leda, who laid an egg from which were born the three, Castor, Pollux, and Helen of Troy. "

3. The Vatican mythographers (page 45): "The Story of the Swan and Leda. Striving after the love of the maiden Leda, Jupiter changed himself into a swan and pretended that he was fleeing from an eagle. He had transformed Mercury into the eagle. Thus, received into the lap of Leda, he had intercourse with her; she produced an egg from which three offspring were born: Castor, Pollux, and Helen." Ofcourse there are other sources claiming about two eggs etc, but those sources are not that many.

The important thing to understand is that there are two scenarios of where Helen was born, as she mentions in Euripides "Helen": In the first scenario she was born in Sparta, in the second scenario she implies she was born somewhere else. So where is this other place? Its the place that Zeus disguised as a swan and seduced Leda and Leda created an egg. So we can find the second scenario place, if we can find the place that the egg was created.

According to Pausanias, Dioscuri were born on the island Pefnos. As we know there also two scenarios of were Dioscuri were born. The first is in Sparta (if Tyndareas were their father) and the second is in Pefnos (if Zeus was their father). On the second scenario they came out from an egg.

After the mate of Zeus with Leda, she created either one or two eggs. As we can understand she could not place one egg on Pefnos island and the other somewhere else. Like in nature, all the animals that produce eggs, they do it to their own specific nest and they dont put eggs here and there.

So we can understand that definitely Leda put the egg (or eggs) on Pefnos island, since Dioscuri were born there. So this is the place from our previous question, the place that the egg (or eggs) were created.

Pausanias saw a small statue of Dioscuri on Pefnos island ( http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0160%3Abook%3D3%3Achapter%3D26%3Asection%3D3 ): "In this little island there are bronze statues of the Dioscuri, a foot high, in the open air. The sea will not move them, though in winter-time it washes over the rock, which is wonderful. Also the ants here have a whiter color than is usual. The Messenians say that this district was originally theirs, and so they think that the Dioscuri belong to them rather than to the Lacedaemonians." As we can read in his text the Messenian people claimed that Dioscuri belonged to them rather than to the Spartians (Lacedaemonians). And thats the reason they put Dioscuri statue on the island, because Dioscuri were gods of war and the locals were always wild and war-friendly in these areas. Helen was not of much interest for them, thats why they didnt care to put a statue or even mention anything about her.

The most important is that since the Greek ministry of culture officially claims that Helen was born on this island ( https://www.culture.gov.gr/el/Information/SitePages/view.aspx?nID=3432 and a translation from another website here: https://www.athina984.gr/en/2020/08/25/egkainia-toy-mnimeioy-ton-dioskoyron-sti-duyiki-mani/ ), wikipedia cannot ignore this. I think that at least we should mention this on the page of Helen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kavouras55 (talkcontribs) 12:34, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can't simply assert that Helen was born on Pefnos. The most we can ever do, in this regard, is to report where ancient accounts said she was born. However, no ancient report is explicit about where that was supposed to have been. The most we have is conjecture based upon inferences drawn from several different ancient sources, that, in at least one version of the story, she might have been thought to have been born on the island of Pefnos. And for Wikipedia to assert even the possibility of the existence of such a legend, would require "Reliable sources", which I don't think we have here. Otherwise, no matter how valid and convincing such conjecture might seem to you or me, it is not appropriate for Wikipedia (see Wikipedia's policy on "Original research"). Paul August 13:12, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr Paul, I just communicated with the professor and he gave me one of the ancient reports that proves Helen came from Pephnos. The ancient poet Lycophron on his poem "Alexandra", describes Helen as "Pephnaian bitch" (in Greek: "Πεφναίας κυνός") (Lykophron: Alexandra, by Simon Hornblower, Oxford University Press, page 143: "I see the winged firebrand rushing to snatch the dove, the Pephnaian bitch, which the aquatic vulture gave birth to, encased in a round covering of shell.") You can see the book here: https://books.google.gr/books?id=NprxCQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false On the cite 87 (page 142) the writer explains what the "Pephnaian bitch" means: "87. Πεφναίας κυνός: these words are best separated off by commas, as by Hurst/Kolde: Helen is both dove (Aphrodite's bird) and Pephnaian bitch (i.e. sexually shameless, a description applied by Helen to herself more than once, e.g. Il 6.344; cf. 850, and for the two passages see Sistakou 2009: 242). For Pephnos in Messenia see IACP: p. 551 (G.Shipley); more fully at Shipley 1997: 266-7; Barr. map 58 C4, on the river Pamison between Thalamos and Leuktron. The Spartan poet Alkman (PMGF 23), cited by Paus. 3.26.2, says the Dioskouroi (Helen's brothers) were born there; this makes the ethnic appropriate as a way of designating Helen of Sparta (Σ adds that she set out from there); cf. Ghali-Kahil 1955: 207. This ethnic therefore drops an advance hint of the long Dioskouroi section at 503-568." Please tell me your opinion. Best regards.

Thanks for Hornblower's note to Lycophron, ''Alexandra 87. Given that note, together with Pausanias, 3.26.2, I think we might now be justified in asserting the following:
Pausanias also says that there was a local tradition that Helen's brothers, the Dioscuri, were born on the island of Pefnos, adding that the Spartan poet Alcman also said this,[1] while the poet Lycophron's use of the adjective "Pephaian" (Πεφναίας) in association with Helen, suggests that Lycophron may have known a tradition which held that Helen was also born on the island.[2]
Paul August 14:51, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Pausanias, 3.26.2.
  2. ^ Hornblower, p. 142; Lycophron, Alexandra 87.

My pleasure to help on this, Mr Paul. I totally agree with the way you described the referrings to the ancient poets (Alcamn, Lycophron) and traveller (Pausanias). I suggest if we add as cites, an opinion article of the professor of Archaeology Petros Themelis on a Messenean newspaper, describing the myth of birth of Helen in a very poetic way: https://eleftheriaonline.gr/local/politismos/item/222736-me-aformi-to-avgo-tis-lidas-stin-pefno-i-gennisi-tis-oraias-elenis-kai-i-optikopoiisi-tis-mnimis The only problem is that its in Greek, but i think the professor can translate it in English and publish it again on the newspaper. Also may we add the official press release of the Greek ministry of Culture and Sports, which describes the myth and adds an official verification of the modern Greek state: https://www.culture.gov.gr/el/Information/SitePages/view.aspx?nID=3432 .The problem is that this is also only in Greek. Best regards

I think the sources provided above (Hornblower, p. 142; Lycophron, Alexandra 87; Pausanias, 3.26.2) are sufficient for Wikipedia's purposes. Paul August 14:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right Mr Paul, i agree on this. The only think i would like to add is a photo of the sculpture placed on Pefnos island, a marble egg depicting swan/Zeus with Leda. Hope you agree on this. Best regards Kavouras55 (talk) 14:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr Paul, should i post the text you proposed or would you like to post it? Best regards Kavouras55 (talk) 14:11, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll post it, thanks. Paul August 14:29, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Thanks for the constructive dialogue we had. Best regards Kavouras55 (talk) 14:43, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've now posted a (slightly modified) version of what I wrote above. Note I did not add the image you've suggested, since I don't think it is appropriate here. Please be aware that other editors may disagree with this addition to the article. Also, in that regard, I am going to copy this discussion to that article's "talk page": Talk:Helen of Troy, so that there is a record of this discussion there, and so that other editors can read and perhaps comment on it. If you wish to contribute anything further to this discussion please do so there, thanks. And thanks again for contributing to Wikipedia. Regards, Paul August 15:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again Mr Paul, glad i could help. Best regards Kavouras55 (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance with an Article for Creation[edit]

Hello Paul August!

First of all, my name is Calvin, and I am currently working on my first ever Article for Creation! I come to your talk page to ask for assistance with said AfC, and I found your user page by reading the list of active administrators on Wikipedia! I also read through your user page and you seem to be a very thoughtful and helpful editor. I am here to ask for help with the article for Kurt Kerns (Draft:Kurt Kerns) who was a member of the rock band Gravity Kills and since then has gone on to become a notable architect.

The Article for Creation has hit numerous blocks for not passing notability guidelines, and just recently the editor that Rejected the draft told me that he was not convinced, and I should try to ask another editor for their opinion. I would love for you to take a look at the page if you have time and let me know what you think! If you look at the draft's talk page, you can see the dialogue I had with the other editor about the AfC meeting the WP:AUTHOR guidelines, and his reasoning for Rejecting. I do not agree with the editor's reasonings, and I am interested in what you think of this issue.

Any assistance would be much appreciated, and I look forward to receiving your input. Thank you!

Calvin Foss (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Calvin. I'm sorry that your proposed AfC was rejected. I had a brief look at your draft, and the associated discussion. Unfortunately I have no expertise, and little interest in this topic area. However, although notability is inherently somewhat subjective, it is not clear to me that the subject of your draft has received the "significant coverage" required to meet Wikipedia's "General notability guideline". Note that, as that guideline also points out:
"If a topic does not meet these criteria but still has some verifiable facts, it might be useful to discuss it within another article. "
So you might consider trying to incorporate some of this content into other articles.
Regards, Paul August 10:32, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Hi! You're right about this. I just noted that this IP editor has been unjustifiably removing content for some time and reverted several of their edits. I shouldn't have reverted that one though. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Paul August 14:46, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thales[edit]

I think the article on Thales could use some work. Not being a historian, I don't know how exactly to do it. I've added a section in that article's talk page detailing what I think doesn't fit well. It'd be nice for you to drop in there. I'm new on Wiki and you're one of only two historians I know here, and have repeatedly seen making good edits, so I thought I'd ask you. Hope you don't mind... Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI (talk) 04:43, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Zagreus[edit]

You stated, "Sources establish the existence of Zagreus as a character, but no sources given which establish any particular relevance, significance and notability with respect to the article's subject." What sources, in your opinion, would establish particular relevance, significance and notability with respect to the article's subject? Other pages about the Greek deities contain sections on their depictions/receptions in modern culture.Claym-45 (talkcontribs) 16:24, 21 September 2020‎ (UTC)[reply]

Hi Claym. We would need some source which, in discussing the Greek god Zagreus, mentions the character in the video game as being a particularly relevant/significant for the understanding of the god, or is a particularly noteworthy example, say, of the gods continuing importance. For quidelines on such matters see WP:TRIVIA, and in particular MOS:POPCULT. As for other articles, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Regards, Paul August 17:05, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 September 2020[edit]

The Signpost: 27 September 2020[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for getting Seven against Thebes going: I was looking at it, or really for it, this summer and was surprised to find almost nothing at all, so I really appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: Thanks. Yes I've created a stub, and I'm working on fleshing it out. A complete article will be biggish. And yes it is very surprising that such an article didn't already exist! The Theban Cycle (of which the war of the Seven against Thebes plays a major part) is second only to the Epic Cycle in importance for Greek mythology. I suppose that the lack of an article was also partially due to the fact that Aescylus' play Seven Against Thebes is, I guess, what most people think of when they see "Seven against Thebes". And the plays' article, acting like a black hole, sucked in all the references to the Seven. I've been working through the hundreds of links to play, tying to fix that. Paul August 15:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, I made that mistake myself, as you can see from the corrections. And this is incredibly important for a whole bunch of things that matter to me, including teaching Antigone--the play is of course very terse on the matter, and a bit of background is absolutely necessary for my students. Plus I also teach Chaucer's Knight's Tale in the same class, which is also set in the aftermath of the Seven against Thebes. And then there's Statius, as a second guide for Dante, but I see you've been working on Thebaid (Latin poem) also. Well, I appreciate the work you're putting in: it is very necessary, and it's a biggish job indeed. Drmies (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thanks again. As for Statius' poem, I've been reading it while recently rewriting our articles on Hypsipyle and Opheltes, which is also how I came to notice our glaring omission regarding the Seven. Paul August

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

added AjpolinoLuK3
readded Jackmcbarn
removed Ad OrientemHarejLidLomnMentoz86Oliver PereiraXJaM
renamed There'sNoTimeTheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Homotopy analysis method[edit]

Regarding the lemma homotopy analysis method, I have found one older publication from 1989, in which the method is used [1] early than any other reference. Do you think, that it should be incorporated/quoted into the lemma? Bg, Warboerde (talk) 17:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 27[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Seven against Thebes, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Olympia and Ker.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 November 2020[edit]

Case that slipped under the radar[edit]

Hi, Paul - would you please close this case? It was archived with the indef t-ban being imposed. Thx in advance. Atsme 💬 📧 15:28, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Atsme: I would recommend that you move that discussion from the Archive, back to the original page, adding a request that it be closed (closing such things is not really my cup of tea, but I may give it a look if I can find the time). Paul August 15:56, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Atsme: Well it now looks like someone else has just moved it back. Adding a comment/request for closer, should keep it from being automatically archived again. Paul August 15:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Atsme: Actually Rhododendrites, when they moved that discussion back to the main page, they added a DNAU (DoNotArchiveUntil) template, which prevents it from being automatically archived. Paul August 16:28, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Paul - I see that it was handled. Atsme 💬 📧 16:39, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good. Paul August 16:55, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 15[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Seven against Thebes, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dryas and Ismarus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor[edit]

As an administrator I would like to bring to your attention the great irony of the 12:01, 23 November 2020 edit to Polyphemus (I do not know how to link directly), as well as the perceived unwarranted hostility toward myself from that editor. This latter is exemplified by the reversion being performed because of who performed the preceding edit. The editor which I point to, as you may be aware, has before now quasi-vandalised my talkpage (scrubbed out by a different editor), in addition to quasi-threatening me and ignoring my polite overture concerning the - as perceived by me - wildly unreasonable hostility. The hostility is not a problem, but the editor's behaviour which is goaded by the hostility is a problem. Untitled50reg (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want other editors to take you seriously, and treat you with respect you shouldn’t make edits like this unconstructive edit. My advice is to make only constructive edits, and not worry about other editors. Paul August 16:12, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the advice. But I do not care at all what anybody thinks of me, whether on Wikipedia or elsewhere. My concern was not so much about an editor but rather the edits of an editor. There is evidently a strange clique which curls around the classical pages of which you are an editor of authority therein, and I accordingly thought that you might want to imply that the hostile editor is an ass, to thereby soothe his sweet soul, and let Wikipedia go on unimpeded by the unconstructive edits such as the one I brought here (for the tag which I placed there, which was removed, is quite an applicable tag). For I am a thing of much benevolence and desire most acutely the soothing of a sweet soul. But if I told the editor that the editor is being an ass, this would not be a sweetness. From you it would be a sweetness. But I will trouble you no more on the matter, for I am not an editor taken seriously nor respected. Alas. Untitled50reg (talk) 22:08, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2020[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed AndrwscAnetodeGoldenRingJzGLinguistAtLargeNehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jiminy Cricket[edit]

Paul, you're so organized!! You even have a "Work queue"! I'm lucky to have Siri remind me about appointments, and to set the timer so I'll remember to turn-off the heat when I'm hard boiling eggs - (trust me, you don't want to burn all the water out of the pan when you're boiling eggs). That's as organized as I get anymore these days!! My wardrobe is pretty organized because of the COVID-19 lockdown - I have night pajamas on the right and day pajamas on the left. The Cheetos are on the middle shelf next to the cashews and beer nuts. 0:) Atsme 💬 📧 17:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have a work queue yes, but it just keeps growing. Paul August 21:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Achelous, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Argos.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:44, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 13[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Oicles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alcmaeon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 20[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adrastus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aristomachus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:41, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 27[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arion (mythology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arcadia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 December 2020[edit]

Happy 2021[edit]

You'll have noticed that I moved the discussion to which you have lately contributed a query to its proper place at The Walnut Tree. Best wishes for a safe and productive New Year! Sweetpool50 (talk) 06:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sweetpool50: Felix novus annus.

Titanomachy (epic poem)[edit]

Thanks for undoing on Titanomachy (epic poem). I'm a bit curious, based on the references, shouldn't it be known that Zeus comes from outside Greece and not Greece? Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leger Agrippa (talkcontribs) 17:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean. What "references"? Why do you say Zeus does not come from Greece? Paul August 02:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adrastus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Etruscan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist[edit]

Hello This bot Materialscientist is confusing me with other vandalizers I was reverting a bad edit. this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1000944392 I reverted it https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1000944462

And then this bot reverted and warned me on my talk page.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1000944622

The same thing happened again I reverted the unsourced edit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1000946415 Here’s my edit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1000946594 The bot confused me with the unregistered user https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1000946628


How can I avoid this problem and how can I remove the warnings from my talk page? Oxforder (talk) 19:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist is not a bot. Why do you think so? The edit to Row hammer that you reverted, removed some questionable and unsourced text. That's not vandalism. What makes you think it was? Materialscientist reverted your edit because you failed to provide a reliable source for the content you were adding back. There is nothing inappropriate about that. The other edit was perhaps a mistake, you should just ask Materialscientist on their talk page. As for the posts on your talk page, you can just remove them. Paul August 21:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2021[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 10[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amphiaraus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hard.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greek mythology Featured article review[edit]

I have nominated Greek mythology for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:51, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look. However, a thorough review of that article would be an enormous job. And I am just qualified to know that we have few (if any) editors qualified to do it. Paul August 12:38, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2021[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said ZebedeeHiberniantearsLear's FoolOnlyWGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adrasteia[edit]

Hello Paul August--you have access to JSTOR, right? I typed in the name and got plenty of hits; if you don't and you'd like me to email you some material, please let me know. Have a great day, Drmies (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do have access to JSTOR, thanks. Will check there (eventually). I'd be interested in knowing any particularly useful titles you've found. Paul August 15:29, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2021[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed AlexandriaHappyme22RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Redesigning the featured, good, and article assessment icons. Pbrks (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cepheus (father of Andromeda), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Argos.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2021[edit]

Pee ef pee[edit]

User:Pee ef pee has had their user name reported at WP:UAA. I thought I saw constructive edits, but then I saw your "only warning". I was wondering what prompted that. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: Hmmm ... Unfortunately I don't remember the cirmcumstance here. The "warning" was apparently in response to this edit, which is primarily pro Albanian POV pushing. What that edit does is to add the unsourced statement that:
"genetic links between Albanians and Pre-Indo-Europeans are fairly strong"
and at the same time essentially delete, in the subsequent note, the following:
"Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Bernd Jürgen Fischer, editors of Albanian Identities: Myth and History, present papers resulting from the London Conference held in 1999 entitled "The Role of Myth in the History and Development of Albania." The "Pelasgian" myth of Albanians as the most ancient community in southeastern Europe is among those explored in Noel Malcolm's essay, "Myths of Albanian National Identity: Some Key Elements, As Expressed in the Works of Albanian Writers in America in the Early Twentieth Century".
replacing those two senetences with the sentence fragment:
"Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Bernd Jürgen"
which deletes some opposing (apparently sourced) POV, misnames one of the editors (intentionally?), and mangles the note.
However, unless the name change was intentional, this isn't really vandalism, so that particular warning now looks inappropriate to me. Paul August 10:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aerope, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pausanias.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed EnchanterCarlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cyclopic rambling[edit]

I was about to ask you if severe pruning of the final section of Cyclopes might not be in order, but you have already stepped in. I've cut it down even further so that it remains focussed on the proper subject. Hopefully Madreterra won't make an issue of it, but his editing history doesn't look reassuring. Sweetpool50 (talk) 13:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes look fine. Paul August 14:10, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Accurate titles"[edit]

What you have done here is very strange. Neither of the titles is "accurate" (see the scan here, for example), and "PH.D. in two volumes" is meaningless anyway. Plus, besides these two titles where I had slightly edited punctuation (this by itself is generally perfectly allowed), that edit included many more legitimate changes, so reverting it completely was at least not polite. So I'm restoring my edit. If you have any concerns, please edit only what is needed (which we can discuss, if you want). — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 20:46, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikhail Ryazanov: I'm sorry I didn't mean to be impolite. You changed the title of four works in the references section (incorrectly in my view) and correctly added three periods to the end of three of the works. So the easiest thing to me seemed to be to revert your edit, and add back the three periods, which is what I did. So in effect I did change "only what is needed". As for the titles:
  • Hard's book, has "H.J. Rose" in the title not "H. J. Rose". This is how it is printed in the copy of the book I own which I used as a reference, see also: WorldCat. So I think that should be changed back. Do you disagree?
  • As for the the other three titles they were take (perhaps incorrectly) from here, here, and here. Paul August 22:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Normalizing punctuation and formatting to conform to the house style is in fact recommended. English Wikipedia generally uses spaced initials with periods. For the Murray books, I have inserted links to their scans (at the Internet Archive) to the article, so you can check how these titles actually look in these books. For the Hard's book, look carefully at its title (I did at Google Books, already linked in the article) – it, for example, does not have the quotation marks and the colon, but does have a space between the initials (on the cover, although not on the title page – however, in the text they also don't space any initials, so this is their house style) and very different capitalization and italics. So there is no reason to copy titles verbatim from the books themselves or from any third-party catalogs, because if we do so, the references section will be a crazy mix of incompatible formats. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 23:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK Paul August 10:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Wishing Paul August a very August happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
19:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Thanks!

Barnstar[edit]

The Content Creativity Barnstar
For dedication to improving and expanding the Ancient Greece topic. Cote d'Azur (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Paul August 19:47, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

added AshleyyoursmileLess Unless
removed HusondMattWadeMJCdetroitCariocaVague RantKingboykThunderboltzGwen GaleAniMateSlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 15[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pleisthenes, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Porphyry and Hellanicus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Telephone icon[edit]

I just want to come clean now and admit I shamelessly copied the ascii code unicode for your telephone talk icon. --- Possibly 03:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

;-) Paul August

The Signpost: 27 June 2021[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for June 29[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adrasteia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Curetes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day![edit]

;-) Paul August 11:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 20[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adrasteia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Curetes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Odeum" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Odeum. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 20#Odeum until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 July 2021[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Achlys, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aether.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment[edit]

I am in no way making light of the broader situation. But I just wanted to let you know, when I saw your response, I was laughing out loud. You well hoisted me by my own petard, and I well-deserved it. I was sitting there, waiting to see when "someone" would propose actual text so we could dive in an see if we could get something to work. I hadn't even thought that that someone could/should be me...lol

I'll go wander around some policy pages and see if I can figure out something. Thank you btw.

Oh, and your top-of-the-page note here is awesome : ) - jc37 23:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

;-) Paul August 23:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know other stuff is going on. But just thought I'd let you know.

I "proposed something". - jc37 15:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've added my support for your proposal there. Paul August 16:12, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 23[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Prometheus Bound, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Olympian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greek mythology sourcing[edit]

I've recast the table of offspring and mothers in Hermes much as I did at Ares and now I may I understand your concerns at Talk:Ares#Kids' table a bit better. I found what seems to be really poor use of poor primary sources and began to see how widespread it might be. I've described a couple of examples at Talk:Hermes#Offspring, mothers and sources but I'm still wondering if we might need a centralised discussion at say Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome or similar, because cleaning this up could take a lot of tagging and/or deletion, and I don't fancy trying to produce long forensic explanations for each one. (To be honest, I don't fancy making a career of it at all.) I haven't been editing in this area long and I don't know what current attitudes are to what seems to be long-established use of primary sources for classical mythology and even history. Do you see a way forward? NebY (talk) 22:17, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look at Talk:Hermes. Using untranslated primary sources is useful, but never sufficient. However using translations of primary sources is sufficient for citing what the primary source says, but not for what the primary source means. So, for example, if the translation says that A was the father of B, then citing the translation for that assertion is fine. Paul August 11:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look forward to your comments, here or there. There are issues with translation (in the cases I examined. I found Brimo well-translated as Hecate, but another translation might leave it as Brimo and give an editor the impression that was a different goddess; likewise I'd have liked to be pointed to the translation of Tzetzes and I wonder if the editor should instead have cited the secondary source in which they found a mention of Tzetzes on Hermes) but they're not the biggest problem for me. It's the use of bad sources such as the pseudo-clementine Homilies for a claim that may not be found in most secondary sources, for good reason, or the misunderstandings and consequent synthesis on Brimo, or what might be a thorough misreading of Tzetzes. Behind that sits a process of cataloguing in Wikipedia every primary-source mention rather than relying on modern scholarship, leaving the poor reader with a mixture of "mainstream" and distinctly outré mythology. NebY (talk) 13:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I essentially agree with all that. If a translation of a primary source containing "Brimo", leaves it untranslated, then it would be WP:OR to cite that translation as a source for some assertion about Hecate. And many citations in Wikipedia to such things as Scholia on such and such, where no secondary source (translation or not) is cited, are coming from non WP:RS sources (e.g. other Wikipedia articles, or various web sites such as Theoi.com). I will try to add some comments at Talk:Hermes, when I find the time. Paul August 14:32, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 21[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Uranus (mythology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dies.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2021[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pan (god), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Servius.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Accidentally reverted your edit[edit]

Hello there. I'm sorry, but I've accidentally reverted your edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1041315993 while reverting edits of another user. I've been trying to review the edits that Xa Sancle (talk) has made. There are a lot of articles that the user has edited. Somerandomuser (talk) 20:57, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Short descriptions[edit]

The previous short description was too long. Please see WP:SDSHORT. Editor2020 (talk) 00:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've shortened that Short description at Tartarus. Paul August 11:43, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 30[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aether (mythology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chaos.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2021[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Uranus (mythology), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dies.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

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) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2021[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A TrainBerean HunterEpbr123GermanJoeSanchomMysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pagination at Selene[edit]

Hello. I noticed you edited one of my more recent edits at Selene, specifically the page number in Keightley from 62 to 56. As I have been informed by Haploidavey, there are several edition of his work; the page I linked (62) is the correct page in Thomas Keightley, Second edition, 1838, though elsewhere in the article the expanded version (paper?), 1877, with Leonhard Schmitz is used (which I did not notice when I first added the link to the other edition), where the correct page is presumably 56 (as this particular edition is not searchable on Google books, so I cannot verify myself). When you edited the article, you changed the page number from 62 to 56, but not the link itself (to the edition where p. 56 is the correct one that is), so it led to a page with irrelevant information for Selene. So that's why I edited it back. Best regards, Deiadameian (talk) 11:56, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Deiadameian: Hi and thanks for your note. When I changed your page numbers I didn't notice that they were referring (and linking) to a different edition than the one used elsewhere in the article (I should have checked but didn't ;-) As you note, the edition used elsewhere is the fourth edition 1877, edited by Leonhard Schmitz and published by G. Bell and Sons, 1877, and that's the edition listed in the "References" section of the article. I think we should, of course, cite (and link to) the same edition throughout which I think should be the more recent fourth edition. Google Books has versions of the 1877 printing, as well as a 1902 reprinting of the fourth edition); are you able to see the relevant pages using the Google links given above? Very best regards, Paul August 13:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 6[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Selene, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Servius.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled[edit]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Fabuae[edit]

(-;

Thankyou for fixing all of those. — Dave12121212 [talk] 08:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome. It was my original error, of course. And thank you for all the excellent work you're doing (You're a quick study). Paul August 11:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 December 2021[edit]

Happy new era[edit]

Your friend Bishzilla and all her socks wish you a happy and healthy new Jurassic era! Bishonen | tålk 08:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks Zilly! Hope this one's better than the old Jurassic era. Paul August 11:33, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Best be careful like me avoid all extinction events! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 13:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Happy New Year, Paul August![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Merchandise giveaway nomination[edit]

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks

Hi Paul August! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users[edit]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Pamprepius fr. for Selene[edit]

You left this comment on Deiadameian's talk page regarding an alleged fragment of Pamprepius. You seem to be planning on using: "... while, in a possible Pamprepius fragment, she is called ..."; I assume you're using the word "possible" because you can't see the book in question that lists it as a Pamprepius fragment. However, I've had a look and I apparently have a 2018 De Gruyter reprint of the 1979 Teubner edition[1] of fragments of Pamprepius. The 3rd fragment in that book (p. 16 contains the relevant passage) is the same as what is in LCL 360, pp. 566, 567. I don't know how (or if?) you'd want to cite it, but I thought I'd let you know, as with this we should at least be able to justify calling it a Pamprepius fragment. Regards, Michael Aurel (talk) 08:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Pamprepii Panopolitani carmina, edited by one Enrico Livrea. ISBN 978-3-110-58566-7.
Thanks for this (please tell me you don't look at all my edits). However the reason for the "possible" is not to express doubt that this fragment has been listed somewhere as Pamprepius fr. 3 (which you apparently have confirmed, could you send me a copy of the relevant passage in the Pamprepii Panopolitani carmina?), but doubt, as described on LCL 360 pp. 564–564, as to whether the fragment is actually from a poem by Pamprepius or not. Paul August 02:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, that makes sense. Regarding the book I'm looking at, there isn't really anything to send as it doesn't contain a translation or anything other than the text in Ancient Greek, which (I've checked) is all the same as what is in the Loeb volume (i.e. the relevant passage is no different to what you're looking at), meaning it should be fine to cite it as "Pamprepius, fr. 3 Livrea" or however you want. (And don't worry, I wouldn't be able to keep up with all the edits you make each day, I just checked to see what you were planning on using.) Michael Aurel (talk) 07:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 January 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion error: A groveling apology would be appropriate, but not required.[edit]

I noticed that you reverted a stray "</ref>" on the article Kouros, restoring the "</ref>" that appears in the text. Your comment on the reversion was "not stray".

At this point, I can only see it as time for harsh words:

Your reversion was an incompetent edit. You did not look carefully before acting, and presumably did not look afterwards to see what effect your action had. If you are going to do something as drastic as reverting other editors changes, you are obliged to do so thoughtfully and carefully. The re-appearance of the un-paired "</ref>" shows that you were neither thoughtful nor careful.

Shape up: Change your mind, change your actions.

And no: you do not get a "free pass" to treat anonymous editors with less consideration.

71.94.235.196 (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely correct. I was wrong, you were right, that was a stray "</ref>". I made that edit in haste. I should have been more careful, and I should have checked the result of my edit. So I'm sorry and I offer the sincerest of apologies. I respect editors who wish to edit anonymously, and although my long experience has taught me to have less confidence in the edits of "IP editors", I know that, nevertheless, such editors can and do make good contributions, and I strive to treat all edits on the merits of their content and not on what I may think about the editor. Certainly I meant no disrespect to you personally (as far as I know everyone makes mistakes, so my thinking you might have made one does not mean anything in particular). Regards Paul August 16:02, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your well-thought-through apology was very well done, and kudos to you for leaving the post up. Thank you. I definitely respect preserving evidence of a personal error within your own bailiwick. Especially since it is a mild indicator of probable change in mind and action that was the goal of my scold. Reciprocal regards. 71.94.235.196 (talk) 10:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My ham-fisted edit summary...[edit]

...at Satyr was meant to say the direct opposite of what it actually says - I meant to justify the restoration of the Macrobius material, not its removal :( Haploidavey (talk) 07:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes it was a bit confusing, but nevertheless I got what you meant. Paul August 11:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About your revision in the Satyr section[edit]

"This remark by Macrobius is historically noteworthy, if nothing else. And, of course it's an opinion, that is all we every have in such contexts."

You said this in regards to your revision. But this isn't really noteworthy, that is just in your opinion. You acknowledge that the Marcobius quote is just an opinion, and so is everything else in contexts apparently. But this specifically stands out as it makes the least amount of sense, because unlike every thing else being said about the race, this one doesn't add up at all. It again: is just in theory.

Searching the words "Saturn and Satyr" on google leads you to just see that one dumb phrasing by the wiki that isn't even accurate saying something about "Saturn + Satyr = Penis". This is the only place that says this in theory. Think about it. In comparison to the other connections there, this one doesn't even matter nor really contribute to anything. Please see reason so that it isn't a thing people try to use for themselves when it comes to other media when people google this. Unlike before, as of now when you google it, you get the general information instead of the whole "Saturn + Satyr = Penis" irrelavancy: https://files.catbox.moe/2063nr.PNG

I've left a "Welcome" message on the user's talk-page, highlighting relevant issues. Haploidavey (talk) 13:39, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Netero10: Hello! That Macrobius, a 5th-century Roman poet, thought that the words "Saturn" and "Satyr" were derived from the Greek word for penis is a fact (based upon the cited source: Riggs 2014, p. 234). There is no way to know for certain how any words were derived, but Macrobius's opinion on this—even if incorrect—is noteworthy (and that's not just my opinion, but also the opinion of the cited source, and now another Wikipedia editor Haploidavey, who has also reverted your edit). Your statement that the article is saying that "Saturn + Satyr = Penis" is simply not true!
Wikipedia is a collaborative process, and content is achieved through consensus. Since two editors now disagree with your removal there is currently no consensus for your proposed change to the article. If you still think you are right, then you can begin a discussion about this on the article's talk page: Talk:Satyr, where all editors can discuss this issue and we can try to build a consensus for any appropriate changes to the article. Please don't insist on your version of the article, by simply repeating your edit after being reverted by other editors, doing so can lead to your editing privileges being removed (See WP:EDITWAR).
Best wishes, Paul August 14:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


@Paul August: How is it noteworthy when it does not really pertain to anything? It's not even correct information, but something speculatory. Thoughts. There's no benefit from that when learning about the lore of Satyr. All of that being said, even it being in favor of Marcobius, its just hypothetical and like I said (as you may have ignored) when you google Saturn and Satyr, that's exactly the impression both of you and Haploid's edit is going to give. Because there are other iterations in media. If it wasn't saying "Saturn + Satyr meant Penis" or was drawn from the word Penis vice versa, then sure I don't really mind it staying there and won't just continue to edit it. Perhaps you should just make it more specific and say that it was in theory and was just an opinion being made. This really shouldn't be something to be so attatched to. This isn't about Marcobius after all, it's about Satyr. Netero10 15:27, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 March 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928)
  • When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Admin 3RR noticeboard[edit]

Sorry to trouble you, but I've just had a report at the 3RR noticeboard booted back for insufficient formatting. I'm helplessly untechy and went next to their specimen report and made an even greater hash of that, which I haven't dared post. I wonder if you could guide me thru my failed attempt - Page: A. E. Housman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Galileeblack

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A._E._Housman&oldid=1080627520

Previous version reverted to:

  1. [3]
  2. [4]
  3. [5]
  4. [6]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Galileeblack&oldid=1081347814

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:A._E._Housman&oldid=1081246595

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [7]

I'd be very grateful for your guidance. Sweetpool50 (talk) 20:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Am a bit busy right now irl. I will look into this when I get a change. Paul August 11:06, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Could you perhaps put the reply on my Talk Page? Sweetpool50 (talk) 20:55, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sweetpool50: Hi Sweetpool50, sorry I'm only just now able to look at this. Is this still current? It looks to me like you tried to "roll your own" report rather than clicking on the button "Click here to create a new report" at the top of that page (WP:AN3). Consequently your report was declined by Bbb23 as "malformed". If you still want to pursue this you should try clicking on the button and:
1. Replace "<!-- Place the name of the user you are reporting here -->" with "Galileeblack" (there are two instances of this).
2. Replace "<!-- Place name of article here -->" with "A. E. Housman".
3. Replace the various instances of "[diff]" and "[link]" by the appropriate diffs and links.
4. Add any comments after the "Comments" section, and sign your name.
Note: I'm replying here (with a ping) to keep the discussion all in one place (I'll also put a pointer to this reply on your talk page). Paul August 15:03, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, it was immediately declined again by the same editor - I don't know what I did wrong this time! Sweetpool50 (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sweetpool50: No what? Your second attempt still had several errors. In particular the field "User being reported:", also no link in the field "Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:" You could see this by comparing your report with, for example, the one right above it. Paul August 02:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent reversions of my spam removal[edit]

Hello Paul August,

I noticed you reverting my removal of links to demonax.info. demonax.info links to copyrighted material per WP:LINKVIO. Please unrevert my edits. - car chasm (talk) 22:49, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I noticed you're linking to demonax on your own user page as well - maybe you want to remove that? - car chasm (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your Edit summaries mentioned WP:lINKSPAM not WP:LINKVIO. Did you check to see if the links to the works removed are under copyright? I doubt that they all are. If you did check then you can go ahead an remove them. As for links to demonax home page, since there are no copyrighted texts on that page, there would be no violation of copyright. Paul August 23:11, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The main ones I noticed were links to Demosthenes' Speeches and a few fragment collections that were published after 1927 from Loeb Classical Library. I think they are in that ambiguous zone for copyright, but I think we generally err on the side of caution there (?) while a lot of sites don't. Also my main motivation for removing the links is that they were all added by one user, User:Fredmond4 back in 2013, which made me very suspicious about the purpose of adding them - it looked very promotional.
It seems to me that if the website stores copyrighted material though, we probably shouldn't link to it at all? I'm not sure what the official policy there is, but given it appears to be somebody's personal web page I figured linking to it wasn't the best either way. - car chasm (talk) 23:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, the policy on WP:LINKSPAM that I was following was "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed." - car chasm (talk) 23:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe many of the works you've removed links to are in the public domain, so OK to link to. (I think that it probably true for most of the works on Demonax). Not linking to any website which might contain copyrighted somewhere on it, would mean not linking any websites, including Wikipedia. As for spam regardless of the motives of the original linker, these links are not spam, they are extremely valuable links. Paul August 23:29, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm - I see your point on the copyright there that we would be too exclusive there. I wonder about the value in every case: it looks like it's just linking to plain text versions of the texts? I suppose that is valuable if we don't have any links to wikisource, etc. though. Before I considered the copyright angle I did think also that they'd get added back (by someone other than the WP:SPA) if they were needed - I went directly from that user's contribution to find demonax links so any that were added by someone else weren't touched. But if you want to revert any of the others that don't link to copyrighted material, I don't have any concerns anymore now that we've discussed it. I'll also stop removing them entirely. :). - car chasm (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Carchasm: I'm reviewing these link removals, and restoring any that I presume to be in the Public Domain. Paul August 15:26, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New administrator activity requirement[edit]

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

  1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
  2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 May 2022[edit]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Dinosaur TrexXX33 (chat?) 11:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Happy Adminship from the Birthday Committee

Wishing Paul August a very August happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!

-- Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 12:09, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Wishing Paul August a very August happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 21:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, OK. Thanks all! Paul August 02:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
  • The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 June 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Technical news

  • user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eighteenth anniversary on Wikipedia![edit]

Hey, Paul August. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Chris Troutman (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment for First Macedonian War[edit]

First Macedonian War has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 15:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lucius Artorius Castus talk page[edit]

Thanks Paul for your contribution. I undid your edits on the archived talk page because we can have the history. I restore your edits in the original talk page after the reverting of Gwinn. Emryswledig (talk) 11:22, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Emryswledig: A given discussion should occur only once, either on the talk page itself, or in the archives, not both at once. Since I had copied the archived discussions from the archive to the talk page, I deleted them from the archive. But since my edits were reverted I don't intend to take further action there. Regards, Paul August 20:54, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry that our new information on Castus is frowned upon by some users. I think our theory is worth being mentioned. Thanks. Emryswledig (talk) 10:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"I think our theory is worth being mentioned" - That's not up to you to unilaterally decide! This is not how Wikipedia is supposed to work - otherwise we would have complete chaos here. Linda Malcor's books and papers have received many scholarly reviews, almost universally negative; a smattering of the more notable ones have been posted to the Lucius Artorius Castus Talk page and are available to view in the Archive. Your co-authored paper with Linda, "Missing Pieces...", thus far has received only one scholarly review (by Bradley Skeen, Journal of Indo-European Studies, 48, 2020, p. 61ff.) and it is devastating. The fact is, you and Linda are fringe authors pushing fringe theories on Wikipedia, which is not allowed, per WP's policies on FRINGE THEORIES and UNDUE WEIGHT. 2603:8000:CF40:2EDB:FD0A:F611:3ED1:3529 (talk) 14:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page is not the place to have this discussions, that is what article talk pages are for! Please take this there. Paul August 17:08, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're right Paul. I'm sorry for this insane anonymous user who doesn't want to log in. Please delete this section. Thanks again. Emryswledig (talk) 21:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paul, user Emryswledig is using the talk page of the Lucius Artorius Castus article for nothing more than ad hominem rants against other user - it's hardly acceptable to allow that content to remain on the page, especially in light of WP's policy against ad hominem attacks, personal attacks, aspersions, et al. M.Aurelius.Viator (talk) 22:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm using LAC talk page in a correct way.
User from LA (Viator), you can't remove other user's comments or revert edits of the administrator.
@Paul August said that this isn't the place to have this discussion. No personal attacks.
Please stop. Use LAC talk page without removing any comments or spamming the same messages everywhere. Thanks. Emryswledig (talk) 12:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2022[edit]

Echidna[edit]

In the article Echidna (mythology) I took off the picture named "Echidna - Furia alata" because is not an Echidna but a Fury, the name of the picture is wrong, it's only correct the "Furia alata", not the "Echidna". The Echidna in Parco dei Mostri, in Bomarzo (Italy), is near a group of lions, it's for that I changed it. Enric (talk) 17:16, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Enric: Ah ... I see. If you are sure that photo captioned "Echidna - Furia alata" is not Echidna then you should remove it (giving an edit summary saying so) But I don't think the photograph you replaced it with is needed in the article since a better photo of the Echidna, from the Parco dei Mostri, already exists there, and we don't need two. Paul August 20:18, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK! I removed it. Since there are no more images of Echidna in the commons category but the one in Parco dei Mostri, I think it's the better option. Best wishes! --Enric (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the archiving edit war on that talk page has, despite your efforts, continued. I came across it while doing RCP and noticed what seems to be several blatant instances of WP:OUTING being thrown from all sides? I would start an ANI thread but I am currently in no state to try and to process the sheer chaos being strewn across that talk. Padgriffin Griffin's Nest 16:18, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Padgriffin: Yes that situation needs dealing with, but I hate taking things to WP:ANI. The WP:OUTING, the edit war, the deleting of other editor's comments, are all serious concerns, not to mention the non-consensual editing and edit warring on the article itself. I am reluctant to administer editorial sanctions myself, for several reasons, but if this keeps up I likely will take some action, or, of course, some other administrator may decide to intervene in the mean time. Hopefully, before then, some editorial consensus will emerge (e.g. see just below). Paul August 10:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have made a proposal on the talk page that I hope might resolve the issue. I think the proponents of Malcor's theory just want to have their paper and up coming book referenced. Allowing it in the 'Identification with King Arthur' section may placate them. Keeping the main body of the article for mainstream academic opinion and consensus should placate the other posters.
Thus I've suggested their paper followed by Skeen's rebuttal is placed in that section.
Any reference to their up-coming book, or mine, could follow that.
I've tried to simplify the issues in a previous talk section and the proposed new paragraph is concise and avoids long winded explanations.
I hope this helps
regards TonySullivanBooks (talk) 07:43, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonySullivanBooks: Thanks for attempting to resolve things there. It is to be hoped that this, or something like it, will succeed. Otherwise (see just above) some administrative action will probably be required. I would really like to avoid that! Paul August 10:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete my account[edit]

Hi Paul, How can I delete my account on wikipedia or make it inactive? The user 2603:8000:cf40:2edb:1cf5:d166:9aae:6c70 aka (Redacted) (blocked) is stalking on my user talk page and he 'spams' everywhere. Please delete my account since I'm not interested in editing Wikipedia since it is controlled by this user and his friends. Thanks. Artoriusfadianus (talk) 06:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Artoriusfadianus: I'm very sorry that you want to stop contributing to Wikipedia. Perhaps there would be a way to resolve the problems you've been having instead. If you think another editor is harassing you, there are ways of dealing with that, see WP:HARASS. And please note: no editor (or group of editors) "controls" a Wikipedia article, see WP:OWN. If you think any editors are violating this Wikipedia policy, then there are ways of dealing with that too. However it is not possible to delete an account, see WP:UNC. Your account could be blocked so that it could no longer be used, see WP:BLOCK. But I don't see the need for that, since you can simply stop using it. Regards, Paul August 11:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).

Administrator changes

readded Valereee
removed Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • CapitalistroadsterSamsara

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
  • An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

  • The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
  • Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
  • Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
  • Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above-named person states his birth-year is wrong in the article. I realize that is not a reason to change it, but it's also unsorted, so shouldn't be removed.

I'm banned from editing user-facing pages in Wikipedia for, IMO, refusing not to note that I was being bullied. I'm pretty sure this post is not in violation of my ban.

Think you could do something about it? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Arthur Rubin: Hi Arthur. I'm a bit confused. Where does Jan Strnad say this? Also did you mean to say that the birth-year in our article is unsourced, so should be removed? Paul August 11:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the delay. Someone claiming to be Jan reported, on a Facebook thread related to a Wikipedia article, that his birth year was reported incorrectly on Wikipedia, and he was (he said) unable to correct it. Obviously, he might not be able to verify it was him, but I rechecked the guidelines, and WP:BLP (I can't find the specific NOTFAMOUS link) suggests that personal information about a non-famous living person should not be listed unless he gives permission. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Arthur Rubin: Well, meanwhile, someone did change the birth-year to 1950, trying apparently, to link to the Facebook thread you refer to, but the link given does not work, and I am not certain this would be considered to be a reliable source anyway, so I've removed the date altogether. Paul August 10:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That seems best. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:04, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 27[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aeolus (son of Hellen), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Locrian and Amphissa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Board of Trustees election[edit]

Hello hello. I hope this message finds you well.

The Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Board of Trustees election ends soon, please vote. At least one of the candidates is worthy of support. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've voted. Paul August 17:20, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rape of Endymion by Selene[edit]

Hi. By "editorial consensus" do you mean it's rape if the majority say it is, and not rape if the majority say it isn't? People don't know what rape is anymore to the point that we have to be at the mercy of the internet court to say if a person sexually assaulted without their consent because they were unconscious was raped or not? --FábioScorpio (talk) 18:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CONSENSUS and WP:RGW. JBL (talk) 18:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the links provided by JayBeeEll above. Editorial consensus does not determine if something is true or not, rather it is used on Wikipedia as the best way to determine whether the weight of expert opinion has determined that something is true or not. In this case the weight of expert opinion does not seem to support describing Selene as having raped anyone. So even if a majority of Wikipedia's editors thought that Selene ought to be called a rapist, without a supporting expert consensus, we are not allowed to assert such a thing in any article. Paul August 12:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 5[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ceto, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dino.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zagreus etymology[edit]

I don't see how it misrepresents the source: the gloss is tentative at best given our modern understanding of PIE, and Kerenyi assumes it's Ionian too. Hesychius isn't infallible. Zagreus99 (talk) 03:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's no way Zagreus has a Hellenic origin based on our now very precise understanding of IE phonology. I won't comment that without a source, however it is still the case that Kerenyi is simply interpreting the gloss as Ionian Greek. Zagreus99 (talk) 03:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Zagreus99: I'm sorry I haven't had the time to reply to this sooner. I still have some questions about how you've represented what Kerenyi is saying. I will (when I get a chance) open a discussion about this on the talk page. Regards, Paul August 15:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hermes[edit]

Hermes was also and originally a nature deity and in a few sources he was associated with winter like Boreas and Demeter Akaora (talk) 14:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Akaora: Ok, but what is your source which says this? Paul August 15:40, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A book I just purchased.But it is wrtitten in greek.Please I tell you the truth Akaora (talk) 19:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2022[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2022[edit]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

CheckUser changes

removed TheresNoTime

Oversight changes

removed TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays[edit]

Happy Holidays
Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton (talk) 20:25, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 January 2023[edit]

Happy New Year, Paul August![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Moops T 00:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On reverts of rollback use[edit]

Hi Paul, it looks like you undid a set of my rollbacks about 25 times with the edit summary "Why did you revert this apparently good edit?" The answer is that these were all done under WP:ROLLBACKUSE #4, "To revert edits by banned or blocked users in defiance of their block or ban", related to a range block that is visible in my action log. I did leave edit summaries under the first few uses in this set, but the total number was prohibitive to do manually. In general, many of the block-evading edits have been/continue to be simple examples of fixing WP:NOTBROKEN links while ignoring all efforts to be dissuaded from doing so, which was also what resulted in the original block that's being evaded here, in which case these are not actually good edits either. This example of your reversion, for example, simply consisted of changing wikilcnks from Titan (mythology) to Titans and Gaia (mythology) to Gaia; Gaia (mythology) and Titan (mythology) already redirect to the right article, and I think we can also imagine a case in which the mythological figures are not considered the primary topics of the terms, in which case the link would have to be fixed again in the future. If you have a chance to reinstate the rollbacks, I would appreciate it. Best, Dekimasuよ! 01:14, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you want to change, for example, "[[Gaia]]" to "[[Gaia (mythology)|Gaia]]"? Paul August 01:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to make the change, but rather to restore the page to its original form; the intention is to prevent an indefinitely blocked user from systematically evading the indefinite block to continue to institute changes like "[[Gaia (mythology)|Gaia]] to [[Gaia]]" across a large range of articles. The reverted edits are generally in violation of WP:NOTBROKEN (and have the potential to create additional links to disambiguation pages in the future). Dekimasuよ! 03:24, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, but since having "[[Gaia]]" is clearly better than having "[[Gaia (mythology)|Gaia]]", I don't want to make the change either, and so I don't intend to. Regards, Paul August 13:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
  • Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 February 2023[edit]

Polyphemus categorisation[edit]

Hi, Paul August, a dispute has arisen about the categorisation of Polyphemus on its talk page [8], about which I wondered whether you had any comments. Sweetpool50 (talk) 15:13, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I can't think of anything useful to contribute to that discussion. Why do you think that category doesn't apply? Paul August 17:06, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because it limits apprehension of a figure who is very obviously sighted in the Galatea narrative. Sweetpool50 (talk) 17:23, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he was sighted but became blind, so why wouldn't that category apply? Just like Oedipus no? Paul August 17:35, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 March 2023[edit]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023[edit]

The Signpost: 03 April 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 26[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Morpheus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Juno.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023[edit]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023[edit]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Wishing Paul August a very August happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! interstatefive  00:02, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary![edit]

Dinoz1 (chat?) (he/him) 15:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ker[edit]

Are you somehow under the impression that the article for Keres does anything at all to cover the topic of Ker, in addition to covering the distinct personifications known as the Keres? And if so, how did you come to that conclusion? - Burner89751654 (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. As far as I'm aware there isn't really that much to cover concerning Ker, and that article covers all of it. What more do you think could be said? And if there really is a lot more to say, then feel free to create a separate article. Paul August 00:54, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 11[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Styx, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Alcaeus and Sol.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Attalus I[edit]

I have nominated Attalus I for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 13:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 June 2023[edit]

I think ...[edit]

... this may have been an accident. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, thanks. Paul August 12:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AlisonW case request accepted[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:51, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023[edit]

Proposed decision posted for the AlisonW case[edit]

The proposed decision for the AlisonW case has been posted. Statements regarding the proposed decision are welcome at the talk page. Please note that comments must be made in your own section. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 15:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Labours[edit]

Do you think the changes I made here were problematic? I'm happy to discuss any of them of course, if you disagree. Perhaps it was an accident? I can't quite tell. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:53, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry, it was an accident. Paul August 02:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All good, I thought so. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BHG block[edit]

I'm sorry, what now? Do you really think it's helpful or in the best interests of the project to impose a block on BrownHairedGirl when a) there's an AN/I ongoing for several days now, which involves her, and sanctions due to behaviour have been requested for other users in that dispute, which you're aware of; b) the AN/I case has been referred to ArbCom; and c) you have not bothered to inform the AN/I thread, or the blocked user? It's not like there aren't any admins well aware of what BHG (and the other involved parties) have written over the last week. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 13:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

+1 SN54129 13:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't then. do now. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.. The section is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#BrownHairedGirl_blocked. Black Kite (talk) 13:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW has been closed, and the final decision is viewable at the case page. The following remedy has been enacted:

  • For failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, AlisonW's administrative user rights are removed. She may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW closed

The Signpost: 17 July 2023[edit]

I owe you an apology[edit]

I was clearly wrong about the need for that block. Clearly. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks, and of course apology accepted. Out of curiosity, why do you say this? I didn't think you said anything which needed to be apologized for. Paul August 15:18, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned as a potential party to an ArbCom case[edit]

You have been mentioned as a potential party in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#BrownHairedGirl at CFD and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SmallCat dispute case opened[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 4, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Admin's Barnstar
This serves as a little token of appreciation for all you do around here with the mop... Volten001 07:17, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Paul August 08:58, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023[edit]

Macedonia (Greece)[edit]

In this revert, you restored the word "Greek" (from Macedonia incorporates most of the territories of ancient Macedon to Greek Macedonia incorporates most of the territories of ancient Macedon (emphasis added), but your edit summary stated The topic of this article is about the geographic region of Greece, so "Greek" here is redundant and misleading. I'm confused. Do you believe the word "Greek" should be in this sentence or not? (For the record, I believe it should be there, at least in this first instance, to differentiate from North Macedonia. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:52, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Sorry yes, I (lacking sufficient coffee) misunderstood the edit I was trying to revert! And yes that edit summary did reflect my then view. But after I read the article more carefully and thought about it some more I realized that "Greek' was probably better there. So I've restored the original version. Sorry for the confusion. Paul August 11:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NEVER edit without sufficient coffee first!! :)— Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiDan61 (talkcontribs) 12:02, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Have one on me! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiDan61: ALWAYS sign your posts!! ;-) Paul August 12:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Ooops!!!) WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chaos (mythology)[edit]

Paul, would you happen to be aware of what it is that happened to our article on Chaos? You seem to have been the main author of that page, though it is now a redirect to Chaos (cosmogony), where that article's information is accompanied by some other (in certain cases, perhaps questionably related) examples of "Chaos". I was somewhat confused by this recently, but I thought asking you directly might be a good idea, as I think the Greek Chaos is deserving of its own page. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:58, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well as you can see from the revision history of that article, that article was merged into Chaos (cosmogony) by Dbachmann. I don't think there was any discussion about this (at least I don't remember any). I did (and do) think that that the Greek Chaos is deserving of its own page, but for whatever reason I chose to go along with the merge. But if you want to recreate a separate article, go ahead, I would support that. Paul August 13:26, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see, I had mostly been confused that no one (particularly yourself) had opposed the merge. As a separate article seems the sensible course of action, I will hopefully create one soon. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2023[edit]

Proposed decision posted for the SmallCat dispute case[edit]

The proposed decision in the SmallCat dispute has been posted. You are invited to review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 10:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kratos article edit revert[edit]

You reverted a minor edit that I did for Zelus (Zeal), while you changed it to Zelus (Glory). What is the reason for that change? Zelus or Ζήλος, in greek means literally zeal while Kleos or Κλέος means glory. Please do not change it again. Alkiviadis (talk) 07:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alkiviadis: In ancient Greek ζῆλος, in addition to meaning fervor or zeal, can also mean pride, honor, or glory (see LSJ). In particular, as the corresponding note in the text explains, the translations being use there are Gantz's. Gantz's translation are perfectly fine and there is no need to change them. But even if we were going to use a different set of translations, they would need to be sourced, and we would also have to change what the note says about whose translations we are using. I'm changing it back. Paul August 11:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do not need a translation to speek my native language. If you need a reference, you can always check the article for Zelus on wikipedia. Glory was represented in the greek pantheon by Aglaia, one of the Charites, Clio the muse and also by Eucleia, of the younger Charites. I will move this chat to the article talk, so that we reveive another opinion. Alkiviadis (talk) 12:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Alkiviadis: You, of course, may not need a translation to read ancient Greek, but most of our readers do. And, by policy, when we provide a translation we need to also supply our readers with a reliable published source; our own private knowledge is not enough (see WP:VERIFY). Paul August 12:31, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So zeal does not give any hint that is directly connected to Zelus. The word for both in greek is Zelos or Zelus if you will. Also I do reference the article from wikipedia. Please check it, Zelus. The word for glory in ancient greek is cleos or kleos. As a reference to cleos, you can take in mind all the names of ancient or modern greeks finishing with -cles, like Heracles, Pericles, Androcles etc. It is a reference to cleos or glory. Alkiviadis (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I wrote above ζῆλος does mean zeal, that is not in dispute. Nevertheless, any translation given must be sourced! Please read WP:VERIFY. Paul August 12:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Timothy Gantz is a well regarded scholar, and his book is a quality source. If he thinks that "glory" is the appropriate translation to give in this context, then there is no problem with us presenting things in the same manner; I don't see that there is any reason to not follow Gantz here. Checking another source, I notice Robin Hard's Routledge Handbook of Greek Mythology gives "Emulation or Glory". – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
English and Greek words don't correspond one-to-one, words often have many meanings, more than one word in one language can be appropriately translated as the same word in another, and words often have meanings in modern Greek that they didn't in ancient Greek. The new Cambridge Greek Lexicon shows some of the variety and shifts in the meaning of ζῆλος and associated words, beginning with ζῆλος as "1. competitive feeling of jealousy, jealousy, envy" followed by "2. spirit of emulation, admiration, emulation... (personif., son of Styx, brother of Victory, Power Strength) Emulation Hes." and three other meanings (bold emphasis per lexicon). Later of course we had Simon the Zealot as an eager servant, epitomising a shift which eventually gave us English's "zeal" but which we should not read back into Hesiod. NebY (talk) 13:21, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023[edit]

Removal of merge tag on Astra Planeta[edit]

You seem like you should be an experienced enough editor to know that it is improper to remove a merge tag that has just been added to an article. If you object, use your words on the talk page. Thanks. Skyerise (talk) 12:19, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You also reverted my improvements to the see also section. I've reverted all of your changes due to: wholesale reversion of all my edits with a misleading edit summary ([9]). An admin should know better. Skyerise (talk) 13:01, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyerise: Yes I do know better! Sorry that edit was unintentional, see my last edit for my intensions, I must have been editing an old version, sorry again! Paul August 15:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I should have realized it was made in error. Sorry. That whole thing needs work! Skyerise (talk) 15:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! Paul August 15:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu–Arabic numerals[edit]

Hi Paul. I wonder if you would (or if you know anyone else who would) be interested sometime in the foreseeable future on collaborating on making a better article about the Hindu–Arabic numerals and their history. There are a few editors who have diligently worked over the past few years to minimize or eliminate any mention of India from Arabic numerals, usually in a series of salami-slice edits spread out over time. I'm not quite sure what the motivation is, maybe ideological? Here's a subset of them so you can see what I mean:

Edit list

A while back I started a complaint about this at talk:Arabic numerals but after getting a couple of links inserted I stopped pressing for more significant changes.

Anyway, after thinking about this, my personal preference is that Hindu–Arabic numeral system should be merged into Arabic numerals and moved to Hindu–Arabic numerals, maybe also with History of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system moved to History of Hindu–Arabic numerals, and should discuss both the structure of the numeral system and the specific glyph shapes, as well as their influence and some comparison with other numeral systems.

The current article at Arabic numerals gets more than twice as many page views as Hindu–Arabic numeral system because it is more commonly wikilinked and gets more traffic from search engines. Cf. this page view comparison of {Arabic numerals (50k monthly views), Decimal (25k), Arithmetic (25k), Hindu–Arabic numeral system (23k), Numerical digit (11k), History of ancient numeral systems (3.7k), History of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system (1.8k), History of arithmetic (0.6k), Positional number system (0.06k)}. Based on this, as a project Wikipedia should ideally focus on getting Arabic numerals up to at least "B class" quality, with a reasonably self-contained and comprehensive discussion of the numeral system, not just one form of the glyphs.

However, the current article at Arabic numerals does not do a very good job serving a broad audience of readers, because it has been artificially constrained to a very narrow scope of only discussing the development of the numeral glyphs in N. Africa and Europe from the 10th–17th century (that part of the content is okay), and eschewing any broader context, broader historical analysis/comparison, or description of how the numerals are practically used. The anti-Indian editors for a long time prevented the page from even linking to Hindu–Arabic numeral system or History of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system (because of "Hindu" in the name??), and any time someone tries to add material about how the number system works (arithmetic, etc.), jump in with weird wikilawyering about how that is out of scope for the title "Arabic numerals" because it isn't about numerals per se.

Anyway, I think before trying to actually make some kind of broader community appeal about this, it would probably be a good idea to write up a draft proposal for a merged article so there is something concrete to compare, which means actually doing the research/writing. But I don't feel like I have the expertise or bandwidth to tackle it as a project by myself (and have a bunch of other Wikipedia articles I'd also like to work on). Maybe with a few editors we could come up with some kind of outline, list of high quality sources, and start at filling in the details, then solicit broader help filling out a more complete draft, making diagrams, etc., before finally taking the matter to the broader Wikipedia community for discussion.

Thoughts? –jacobolus (t) 19:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jacobolus:Hi. As I have no particular expertise on this topic, and my current interests lie elsewhere, I'm afraid I not going to be of much help here. Here's one thought. Even though I'm sure that many people use the term "Arabic numerals" to refer to the "Hindu–Arabic numeral system", they are really two different things and probably warrant two different articles. I think the navigational issue can probably be effectively ameliorated by appropriate linking between the two articles (e.g. see this edit), and rewriting both articles a bit, to make them more appropriately aware of each other.
I will continue to follow edits and discussions related to these topics, and try to give some more thought about the issues you've raised here, and at Talk:Hindu–Arabic numeral system and Talk:Arabic numerals.
Paul August 14:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I don't have significant expertise either, I just think it's worth Wikipedia covering thoroughly and not politicizing. –jacobolus (t) 09:47, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023[edit]

Attalus I[edit]

I've been swamped elsewhere and haven't kept up well enough at FAR. Attalus I needs a Featured Article Save Award nomination, and because I didn't follow closely enough, I'm unsure who to nominate, and don't want to leave someone out. The original writers/FAC nominators are not eligible for FASA; I'm not sure how to handle this in your case, as the article's FAC was in the days when the original writer usually wasn't the nominator, although it was done on your behalf. So I could squeak in a FASA for you if that seems the right thing to do, even though you're basically the original writer. But more importantly, who helped bring it over the line? Was there anyone whose work was crucial in saving the star other than SnowFire, who I should add to the FASA nomination? Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think SnowFire deserves all the credit, I did virtually nothing. Paul August 21:11, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Save Award for Attalus I[edit]

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Attalus I/archive2. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef
readded Tamzin
removed Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

added Pppery
removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
  • Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
  • Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
  • Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
  • Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
  • Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
  • An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023[edit]

spoiler edit-warring[edit]

As an administrator active at WT:SPOILER, I wanted to ask your input on a matter. Please forgive me if I'm out of line.

CNNsOneViewer (talk · contribs) has been editing Drop the Dead Donkey explicitly to remove spoilers (I've removed the appalling spoilers for the character endings, which have stood here for too long; Last spoiler removal). Adakiko (talk · contribs) reverted the first bout of edits, citing WP:NOTCENSORED. CNNsOneViewer replied by edit-warring and alleging Adakiko of bully[ing] me because I'm a so-called 'newbie'.. so stop; a "newbie" whose very first edit was editing their common.js. Seemingly an SPA and experienced editor, I wonder if they're evading a ban, sock-puppeting, and/or just disruptively editing. Unaccustomed with such, I didn't want to overreact and begin any of the formal processes, but though I'd check with somebody whose mop might signify experience with something similar. Thanks for your time! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 03:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fourthords. Their first edit is a bit unusual, but not much yet to be too concerned about. The edit-warring and other things can be dealt with in the usual way. Paul August 11:11, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given they're explicitly editing to remove spoilers, and if I'm unfamiliar with the subject, should they just be reverted again? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 05:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Whether something is or is not a "spoiler" is irrelevant. So no, I wouldn't revert them on that account. The only relevant question is whether their edits have, in your editorial opinion, make the article better or worse. Paul August 11:58, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
  • The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
  • Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023[edit]

Happy holidays![edit]

P Aculeius (talk) 13:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@P Aculeius: Thankyou! Happy Holidays to you too! Paul August 13:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year![edit]

Cynwolfe (talk) 16:53, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cynwolfe:Thank you! And Happy New Year and Happy New Discoveries to you too. Paul August 16:57, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024[edit]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024[edit]

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

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 18 March 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/March 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024[edit]

Citation needed explanation[edit]

Did you bother to read my edit comment? Clarityfiend (talk) 02:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I "bothered". What do you me take me for? However your edit summary didn't help me understand why you think that statement needs a source. Each of the sources given in the note 2: Jost, s.v. Styx; Antoni, s.v. Styx; Grimal, s.v. Styx; Tripp, s.v. Styx; Parada, s.v. Styx; Smith, s.v. Styx, says that the mythological Styx is both a river and a goddess. Do you dispute this? If you agree that "River Styx" is a name for the river (and I've been assuming you do, am I wrong?), then you must agree that River Styx is also a name for the goddess. I'm really trying to understand your position here. Paul August 11:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024[edit]

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

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cyclopes[edit]

I suspect a sock has intervened with edit]. Can that be investigated? Sweetpool50 (talk) 16:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using multiple IP addresses is not socking. Paul August 17:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry it may well be. Sweetpool50 (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Socking is pretending to be two different people by using two different accounts. Using two different IP addresses is not socking. Depending on how one connects, you might have a different IP every time you log on. Paul August 02:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]