Jump to content

User talk:Llywrch

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 1  · Archive 2  · Archive 3  · Archive 4  · Archive 5  · Archive 6  · Archive 7  · Archive 8  · Archive 9  · Archive 10  · Archive 11  · Archive 12  · Archive 13 · Archive 14 · Archive 15 · Archive 16 · Archive 17 · Archive 18

Happy New Year, Llywrch!


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

Moops T 17:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you take a look at an old edit of yours at Thebes?


A lot of unsourced stuff and an "It seems safe to infer". I got there looking for a legitimate date for when it became a city.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_oldest_continuously_inhabited_cities&diff=1131723277&oldid=1131557552] which says 3000BC, which isn't in the article for the city.\

Thanks. Hate to be a pain. Doug Weller talk 13:28, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Sorry for the delay in responding. I meant to reply Thursday night here, but it slipped my mind & I only started checking my references on hand tonight. Anyway, my original edit (way back in 2003), was drawn from the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911, which gave a date for its foundation in the 14th century BC. And that was the date of its earliest fluorescence. However, checking a source more up to date -- the Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd rev. -- I find that the experts date its foundation much earlier, to the Early Helladic II; according to Helladic chronology, EH II is dated to c. 2650-2200 BC. (That latter article provides another source for this date of the founding of Thebes.) So while Thebes was in existence before the 14th century BC, it definitely was not as early as 3000 BC. -- llywrch (talk) 09:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Frankly I think even modern versions of the Britannica are useless for archaeology, more or less useless for history. Doug Weller talk 09:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Census GAN


Hello Llywrch, as the GAN reviewer of 2010 Zambian census, currently the only census article with GA status, I was hoping you would be able to review my article on the 1961 Indonesian census. If you can't commit to a full GA review, I'm happy to hear your feedback about the article as well, since you mentioned experience working with census returns. No pressure either way. Cheers! —Arsonal (talk + contribs)18:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arsonal: I'd be happy to have a look. I might be a bit slow to complete the GA, however. I'll keep you informed. -- llywrch (talk) 18:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sultanate of Dawe for deletion

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

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

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

mi1yT·C 04:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aulus Didius Gallus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marcus Aemilius Lepidus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor Tewodros mother


According to the Ethiopian chronics Tewodros mother was from Noble family in Gondar. The only source that mentioned her from Amhara sayint is from Hormuzd Rassam. 2A02:6680:110B:2E76:915F:D0FE:E4FD:5E65 (talk) 01:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC) sockstrike ☿ Apaugasma (talk ) 14:24, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about Tewodros II, I haven't touched that article in years. I used the best source I could find at the time. -- llywrch (talk) 17:18, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Benishangul-Gumuz Region, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Amole, Oromo and Damot.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fausianus or Faustianus


Saw your edit and note at LoRC. Perhaps this is too close to OR, but I note that the cited inscription is assumed to be missing a 't' that would have been part of the name. A search for "Faustian-" in the C-S Datenbank reveals 83 inscriptions in which this string occurs, and 0 with "Fausian-"; "Faustus" and related names are quite common throughout Imperial times, but "Fausi-" turns up only three inscriptions, and in none of these cases is it clear both that it was a name, and what the correct form of the name would have been, from which I conclude that "Fausianus" is not even remotely probable; i.e. there is no evidence that was ever a name, and even the existence of another name from which it could have been derived is doubtful. If a few examples turned up, they could still be misspellings for "Faustianus", but I cannot even find any examples that could be such a mistake. However, I will defer to your judgment—you're a better scholar than I am eight days out of the week. P Aculeius (talk) 21:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@P Aculeius: My note was only intended at completeness. It all started when I noticed an earlier list of consuls (Liebenam) called him "Faustinianus"; I then turned to Cooley (who is often cited in that list) & she gave his name "Faus[t]ianus"; seeking a third authoritarian opinion, I turned to Degrassi, who gave it as "Fausianus", with a pointer to this inscription. It was only after I looked at a couple of manuscript consul lists -- the Chronology of 354 & Hydatius' -- that I saw a split there too. (For the record, there are a number of rare or unusual names that later scribes "corrected" to more familiar forms, so the number of instances isn't as decisive as it might seem. If there was enough to create an article about the consul, this matter might be worth discussing.) So is his name actually "Faustianus" & the contemporary inscription a mistake (which happens), or is it "Fausianus" & later lists erred by correcting it to a more familiar form (which also happens)? I honestly don't know. In any case, there is good reason to record it as "Faus[t]ianus" until further inscriptions remove all doubt. -- llywrch (talk) 21:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough! P Aculeius (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://edh.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/edh/inschrift/HD049240 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DC:711:C0D4:D49:5AC0:857:CB32 (talk) 10:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That inscription is for one L. Mummius Faustianus, not Nummius Faus[t]ianus. Names are almost identical, but not quite: for them to refer to the same person, the person who inscribed CIL XIV, 5357 would have to have made two mistakes, not one, which is tending towards special pleading. Unless you can find a reliable source that not only identifies the two but also plausibly explains the errors. -- llywrch (talk) 18:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, the inscription says: consul ordinarius. How many consuls of that name do you think were consul ordinarius? There are actually two errors in the inscription. Sounds funny, but that's how it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DC:711:C0D4:8D64:B12C:F02B:596F (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And what is your intent here, anonymous commentator? To improve Wikipedia, or to prove you're smarter than me for some reason I can't fathom? My intent with my edits was to show that the experts differ on his name -- & they have good reasons for that. Nothing more. I figure they know about that inscription, & likely have matched the name to another consul ordinarius. (One of the related websites date it to the last quarter of the 3rd century, later than Nummius Faus[t]inus' term holding the fasces.) There are many cruces in ancient history, & we are quibbling over a couple I doubt either of us know enough to solve. -- llywrch (talk) 22:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can't you think logically? Do you know Google? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DC:70B:1B83:ADD3:BE6:D8BF:48AA (talk) 08:31, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Leprosy & plague


I answered you question on leprosy talk page. Please review and let us discuss COM-03 (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of historical earthquakes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pingyang.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Riddle-tales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PMLA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rulers of Sennar has been nominated for renaming


Category:Rulers of Sennar has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:27, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thanks!


Thanks for your thanks re my comments. I'm going to your talk page actually because this nexus of the primary sources and basic facts just came up in the article Marcus Atilius Regulus (consul 227 BC) (which I just rewrote). What happend there I think further supports why my approach re basic facts and primary sources is the better one. Going through the edit history, there were two historical versions of the article which greatly differed on MAR's actions in 216 BC:

  • The older version c. 2008 is based on Livy. MAR is relived by the new consuls, pleads old age, and returns to Rome.
  • A newer version, c. 2011 is based on Polybius. Here, MAR joins the new consuls at Cannae only to die.

Here, Livy's version has to be preferred, as MAR is noted as censor in 214 BC (MRR 1.259, citing Livy 24.11.6 and the Fast. Cap.), even though Polybius is usually the best source for this period. The first editor got lucky. There are two sources and it's a coin flip. The second editor would have been much better served if he had read Klebs 1896 or consulted MRR, where this whole disagreement is sorted out instead of just replacing Livy with Polyb.

Otherwise he would have had to have actually read both (instead of assuming one of the older version was just wrong), recognised there was a legitimate disagreement, consulted Fast. Cap. and then further verified by consulting Val. Max. 2.9.8 (which confirms Fast. Cap.'s censorial pair; there's no date index in Val. Max. so one would just have to know). Ifly6 (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor Tewodros II


Hi, can you re-edit the page of Emperor Tewodros II? A lot of important information got removed from there including Tewodros mother origin. This is misinformation. Geysb819 (talk) 23:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you also own the account Gabi838r? -- llywrch (talk) 15:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sultanate of Dawe


Hello. In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sultanate of Dawe you were contacted as the creator of the article, yet you said you were not the creator. If you aren't the creator, who was? BTW, I was the one that flagged it as a hoax. I saw the references seemed fishy. 26zhangi (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good question. As an admin, I could look at the deleted article's history & the earliest version has my username on it, with the comment "moved text; no guarrantees made about its reliability". So it had been created with another subject name I looked for the most likely previous name, "Sultanate of Dewe" which was also deleted, but it appears that the history of that article was lost when a page was copied over the existing redirect.
My guess is that whoever created the article is no longer active on Wikipedia. There were a lot of transient accounts contributing to Ethiopian topics back then -- & probably still are. -- llywrch (talk) 17:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:1960 in Nyasaland indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 19:49, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete Melka Rafu. The reason given for deletion was not a valid reason for speedy deletion; you could just as easily have delinked the circular redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery:The redirect did nothing more than point back to the one article linked to it; there was nothing to delink. So common sense is not a valid reason to delete a redirect? -- llywrch (talk) 04:08, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. Wikipedia's deletion processes are based on enumerated criteria, not individual admins' views as to what is "common sense". And redirects do not exist solely to be linked to. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:09, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to differ. You've been around Wikipedia to be aware of the principle of ignore all rules. In this case, there was no point to this circular redirect: a person wanting information about this town is not helped by a redirect back to the article about the woreda it is located in. This is emphasized by a bit of research with Google. Although woredas are often named for their administrative centers, a Google search shows this woreda is not known by the name the CSA gave its chief town, but by an alternative name for the town, "Kombolcha". I found out more about this town by searching on the name "Melka Rafu" than the string "Kombolcha Oromia".
I would say that at this point instead of insisting on strictly following process, you need to prove why process should be followed -- other than because it is process. As the saying goes, "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life": slavishly following process without understanding it can only harm Wikipedia. And do you honestly believe if nominated for deletion, this redirect would have been kept? -- llywrch (talk) 07:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Article wizard/bioskeleton


Template:Article wizard/bioskeleton has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:04, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive:
  • On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open


Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of equites has been nominated for renaming


Category:Lists of equites has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you put that comment in the right section


Hi, appreciate your feedback on Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-11-20/Recent research. Am not asking for any changes, but I think you might have put your comment about the Harper essay at the wrong point in the discussion. Smallbones' introduction of the essay happens down the page a bit after "convenient break". ☆ Bri (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bri, which comment are you referring to? I made two on that talk page: one last week, & another a little while ago. -- llywrch (talk) 18:01, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This oneBri (talk) 20:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That was the first time he mentions the Harper's essay, not below, so I thought it appropriate to add it there. -- llywrch (talk) 20:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message


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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:19th-century Ethiopian courtiers has been nominated for merging


Category:19th-century Ethiopian courtiers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:45, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]



Someone is damaging the page of the Yejju. Deleting well established scholarship sources and he/they just typing there whatever they want. The name of the user is Abrasax123 2A02:6680:2105:BEB9:F17A:CF7A:32AE:3A42 (talk) 15:18, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear why this issue was brought to my attention, but okay. -- llywrch (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then who should I speak with? 2A02:6680:2105:9789:BDF8:9CEB:427C:256B (talk) 19:58, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have looked into it, but I don't see a difference between the two versions. I asked Abrasax123 what the difference was & they said there was none -- which does not explain their comments on their edits. Right now I'm at work & without access to my library, otherwise I'd have a good look at the article & see if I can't draft some kind of compromise version. -- llywrch (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Check the sources in your free time if you can please. It is all backed. The yejju were not ethnically Oromo, but partly assimilated one. 2A00:A040:198:F2D3:B4AE:AFE4:F4F3:3D3E (talk) 18:12, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. There was no change to the ethnic identity of the Yejju in my harmonized version; that they were adopted into the Oromo is possible. What you have changed -- against what the sources say -- is that the Yejju were ever Christian. The Futuḥ al-Ḥabasha makes no such claim; it only states that some had converted to Islam. The doctoral paper which cites this passage as proof misrepresents what the text actually says. (Mistakes like this occasionally happen in scholarly works, while not invalidating the central thesis of the work.) I don't know why you insist on this unfounded claim -- as well as insisting that footnotes should not be combined. (P.S. The ethos website is offline for some reason so I can't confirm what Merid Aregay states.) -- llywrch (talk) 20:01, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
“it only states that some had converted to Islam.” Well from what religion? The Yejju lived in a district called Qawat which was located in the area of modern-day Shewa robit. So they were definitely Christin. 2A02:6680:2101:3D03:F024:63C8:F569:40B3 (talk) 15:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There were pagan believers north of the Abbay at least as late as the 14th century -- see the Gadlat of Tekla Haymanot, which describes his encounters & conversion of a number of them; Christianity came late to many parts of the Highlands that are firmly Christian today, such as Gojjam. So not only is it rash to assume all of the people in that region had embraced Christianity, it is original research. Let's just stick to the verifiable statements. -- llywrch (talk) 16:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Depends which areas in Gojjam you are talking about. East Gojjam was Christianised relatively early. West Gojjam in the other hand became predominantly Christian only after the centre of the empire moved from Shewa to the area of lake Tana. 2A02:6680:1107:CEED:B963:929B:D888:9EFE (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please take this to Talk:Yejju people. -- llywrch (talk) 23:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yejju page


Hey, remember when you solved the Yejju page conflict by harmonizing the two versions? User:2A02:6680:2105:9789:CD:705C:5BB3:D3A7 is still changing things up, even though the references prove otherwise. Abrasax123 (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for intervention over at WP:AN/I. Since I have no other way to contact the anon IPv6 editor, I am announcing it here. I hope this is sufficient notice. -- llywrch (talk) 00:34, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings!


Amhara people page


Someone removed the writing that Amhara are the heirs of Aksum empire. The person that removed it was with Arabic user name. He recently changed it to English. Sorry, I just don’t know who more to connect since you are both administrator and editor of Ethiopian pages 2A02:6680:2101:3D03:F024:63C8:F569:40B3 (talk) 14:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which article(s) did this happen at? -- llywrch (talk) 16:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A what do you mean? I’m referring to the page of the Amhara people 2A02:6680:1107:CEED:B963:929B:D888:9EFE (talk) 22:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He did that again by the way. Now he wrote that Christianisation of Amhara begin in the late Aksum empire period. Now not only that he deleted stuff from the page but add other stuff based on his own agenda/mind. Users such as Dawit S Gondaria used to check him but now since he got blocked few months ago as due to be accused of personal insults no one is checking him anymore. He doing whatever he wish. The name of that user is Socialwave597. He used to had an Arabic user name but he changed it to English a short while ago. 2A02:6680:1107:CEED:B963:929B:D888:9EFE (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please take this to Talk:Amhara people. -- llywrch (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It will be pointless. There is literally no one in the other side 2A00:A041:E19A:2600:B920:55A9:EE37:C6ED (talk) 09:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!


Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May your days be groovy and bright!


P Aculeius (talk) 13:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!


Mengistu Haile maryam


I have read the Wikipedia page of the dictator Mengistu Haile Maryam and I think there is false information regarding what is written under the category of his early life; when it mention his background/family. 2A02:6680:1107:CEED:B963:929B:D888:9EFE (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to state what you think is wrong at the talk page for that article. That is at Talk:Mengistu Haile Mariam. -- llywrch (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need help


Hello @Llywrch! There is an ongoing discussion in the talk page of the Amhara people article. The topic is about the Christianization of the Amharas. I stated in the article that the christianization started in the 4th century with Emperor Ezana and added reliable sources. For some reason my edit was reverted by "Socialwave597" without a good explanation and so I decided to start a talk page with him. Before starting this topic in the talk page, I had already seen other people complaining about him and when I checked the history logs I saw that he reverted every edit that didn't fit in his narrative, but I still tried talking with him. It turns out he literally does not approve any of the sources I provided, using random excuses he can find to try and invalidate them. He then proceeded to ask for more "peer reviewed scholarship on this topic" and I agreed, giving him more of what he wanted. Guess what? He started invalidating them left and right. Throughout the discussion he also provided some sources, but when you read them they do not mention any of his claims. I really need help as I do not know what to do. Any edit I make he will revert it. He even reverted one of my previous edits that had multiple well known sources! Javext (talk) 13:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Page of the history of Jews in Ethiopia


Hi, sorry to bother you, but can I ask you for help on the page of the history of Jews in Ethiopia (referring to the Beta israel). 2A02:6680:1105:A944:6013:ECA7:D6A2:1589 (talk) 15:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which page are you referring to? Is it History of the Jews in Ethiopia? If so, the only problem I see is that a quotation from the Futuh al-Habasa, that supports the statement made immediately before that the Imam Ahmad Gragn encountered communities of Jews in Simien, is sometimes replaced with a quotation from Edward Ullendorff which has nothing to do with either the Futuh al-Habasa or the Imam Ahmad Gragn. Although the quotation does contain some information about the Beta Israel. and Ullendorff is very much a reliable source, that quotation makes no sense where it appears. If you mean another article, it would help greatly if you were to link to that article. -- llywrch (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct. Can you help in this and just confirm? And for some reason I think that he is lying and that Richard pankhurst did not even give that translation.
P.S: even if you read G.W.B Huntingford book; “The Geography of Ethiopia” he wrote that fruth suggest that the Beta israel of semein were serfs for the people id Tselemt (where G.W.B Huntingford believes that Bahr Amba was located). 2A00:A041:E180:D800:1C73:5D6B:B26D:516A (talk) 23:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of* 2A00:A041:E180:D800:1C73:5D6B:B26D:516A (talk) 23:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m talking about the translation. I have reason to believe that this user, social, may lied and gave a false translation which Richard pankhurst did not wrote. 2A00:A041:E180:D800:1C73:5D6B:B26D:516A (talk) 23:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I consider that a good-faith mistake, especially since that statement was in the edit summary. I own a copy of the book in question: although Pankhurst did not translate the Futuh -- that was the work of Paul Lester Stenhouse -- Pankhurst contributed explanatory footnotes to that translation. (I suspect Pankhurst reviewed the translation & made suggestions.) Since Pankhurst's name is better known than Stenhouse's, that was likely the first name that came to his mind.
I also have a copy of Huntingford's work, but don't remember any such statement about the Bet Israel. Can you provide a page number? -- llywrch (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That user, social, purposely translated the text wrong from his own personal view/agenda. The translation text doesn’t call the beta israel “slaves”.
Edward Ullendorf source have the correct translation. He have both the text in Arabic and then the translation in English. Do you understand what mean? That user, social, is editing stuff based on his own head. 2A00:A041:E180:D800:9475:513B:8293:79AD (talk) 10:29, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, are you here? I’m right or wrong? Because Edward Ullendorff wrote “subjected” and “employed” nothing about “enslaved”. So my only question is which is the right translation? I believe that Edward Ullendorff is. I take big offensive of that. Can you just help in that? 2A00:A041:E180:D800:2D97:5FBA:A97B:ACB6 (talk) 04:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm here. I don't have immediate access to the book you cite from to determine the context, but from the way you quote Ullendorff I'm not convinced that it is a translation of an excerpt from the Futuh, as opposed to his own opinion. However, I do have a copy of Stenhouse's translation, & that is accurately quoted in the article. Therefore I'm siding with that quotation. As for the difference between "subjected" & "enslaved", I don't know enough about Highland Ethiopian culture to elucidate the nuances between forms of involuntary servitude; the Beta Israel may have been considered slaves, or as gebbar, the Ethiopian equivalent of "peasant". In any case, you are making a distinction without much of a difference. And this is the point where I believe this discussion has gone as far as it can at this point. -- llywrch (talk) 20:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Didn’t you read the source that I sent? Edward Ullendorff translated the fruth Al-Habesh word for word. He even had the Arabic version above the English translation. I thought that you already saw it.
https://books.google.co.il/books?id=Y0YDve-kiK0C&dq=the+semein+province+was+ruled+by+the+jews+of+Abyssinia&pg=PA28&redir_esc=y 2A00:A041:E180:D800:DF6:361B:7E9D:AC9B (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
G.W.B Huntingford in his book the “Geography of Ethiopia” (page 133) also wrote that the according to the fruth-Al Habesha primary source the Falasha of semein were serfs of the people of Bahr Amaba. There is a different between serfs and slaves. You have both notable scholars (G.W.B Huntingford & Edward Ullendorff) agree on the transition of the fruth. So I really don’t understand! Why anyone can type whatever they wants in Wikipedia? What is this?! I’m asking very simple thing. 2A00:A041:E180:D800:50B2:B547:3D72:7530 (talk) 15:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive:
  • On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Women’s Day Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon, Sunday, March 10

Entrance to the Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education
The Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education (OJMCHE), in partnership with social practice artist Shoshana Gugenheim and as part of the Art+Feminism Project, will host an International Women's Day Wikipedia Edit-a-thon to edit and/or create Wikipedia articles for Jewish women artists. The event will be held at the museum on Sunday, March 10 from 11am-3pm PDT. Pre-registration is preferred but not required. Members of the public are invited to come to the museum to learn about the editing process, its history, its impact, and how to do it. We aim to collaboratively edit/enter Jewish women artists into the canon. An experienced regional Wikipedian will provided will be on site to teach, support, and guide the process. Participants can select artists ahead of time or on site.
Please visit this link to RSVP and the Wikipedia meetup page for more information. Thanks!
Cascadia Wikimedians placed this banner at 22:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC) by using the Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland/Participants list.
To subscribe to or unsubscribe from messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland, please add or remove your name here.

https://english.elpais.com/technology/2024-03-20/regardless-of-the-platform-or-algorithm-its-humans-that-make-social-media-toxic.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C2:1A80:8B10:5098:DCBE:B0B1:9A29 (talk) 06:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking up sections


Hi, I see that you brole up sections on the List of unsolved deaths, good job! Do you think you could break up the lists on the List of solved missing person cases as they are getting really long. it says in the heading: This article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. Consider splitting content into sub-articles, condensing it, or adding subheadings. Davidgoodheart (talk) 02:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

checkY Done. I don't mind the work, but you are quite welcome (& encouraged) to make the changes yourself. -- llywrch (talk) 00:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't quite sure how to do, so thats why I asked you to. Thanks very much for doing it. Davidgoodheart (talk) 02:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Katherine Maher [1] story has really blown up since you posted on Village Pump . Your comments were insightful with good foresight.

Do you know if WMF is preparing a response to get ahead of it?

I worry that the perceived Ideological_bias_on_Wikipedia and the eye-watering comp package may have a negative impact on the Wikipedia community. Tonymetz 💬 01:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday June 23 Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network meeting (WMF BoT statement on Movement Charter ratification)


Hi Llywrch, I just got the notice for this a few minutes ago on my Meta talk page.

Please see meta:Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network/2024 06. Peaceray (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 3 2024


Hey Llywrch, I saw your post on my page (back in 2017!). Yes, I'm inactive on Wikipedia, but it was a blast writing and editing articles with you! Maybe there will be some time in the future that I'll return.