ContentsSilverseren |
Archives |
||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||
Well...here's my talk page. If anyone has questions about an edit I did, please put it here. --Silver seren 14:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
User:Silver seren/Ukrainian People's Militia
The article was removed in 2010. A Polish article, based on Polish only sources exists. The Talk page is blank, so the critic perished.Xx236 (talk) 08:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Xx236: Okay. And? SilverserenC 19:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm interested why the article was removed and how to restore it.Xx236 (talk) 05:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Xx236: Based on both discussions at AfD, it looks like the main thing that needs to be done is to add additional reliable sourcing, preferably sources that are available to be perused online, rather than having to rely on the word of the editors using the offline sources, as there are concerns about the accurate use of those offline sources. So if you can find news articles, books, scholarly articles, ect, online that have information on the militia, then that would be a good step toward making the article ready to return to main articlespace. SilverserenC 07:39, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm interested why the article was removed and how to restore it.Xx236 (talk) 05:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- The Polish article quotes:
- https://www.academia.edu/1314919/The_Lviv_Pogrom_of_1941_The_Germans_Ukrainian_Nationalists_and_the_Carnival_Crowd
- http://www.uamoderna.com/md/199
- https://www.academia.edu/1439240/Rites_of_Violence_The_Pogroms_of_Summer_1941
I haven't read the articles and I don't have any opinion about their quality. Xx236 (talk) 08:26, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Xx236: Those looks like perfectly reliable sources to me. Feel free to edit and work on the article in my userspace (you can even move it to your own userspace, if you'd like). My only suggestion is to be careful that you don't mix up any information between the People's Militia and the Ukrainian Auxiliary Police, which was a concern during the AfDs, as the former eventually became the latter. SilverserenC 17:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- There are more people interested Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland.Xx236 (talk) 05:57, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Question for my mentor
Hey Silver, I know you've been away for a while, but I was wondering if you could help guide me with a question I had. I've been working on David M. Cote on and off for a long time, and after initially butting heads with nearly everyone (I was rather new at the time) I've started to make some progress with another editor. However, at this juncture, we disagree on whether the CEO of a corporation can/should be held solely responsible for the actions of the company. Would this be a suitable question to open up an RfC?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 22:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- @FacultiesIntact: That's a fine thing to have an RfC on. Personally, without knowing about this specific case, I would say that inclusion of company actions on a biography article should only be done if the actions or controversy relate to the person specifically, such as if they were involved in corruption in regards to the company. It has to be some sort of personal activity. But a controversy just involving a company in general should be on the company page and not on a biography page, as that would be a very undue weight issue. That's my two cents on the matter at least. SilverserenC 22:01, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- So I instead opted for a 3O, and got a response from someone there. However, the editor I'm in a dispute with has yet to respond to the opinion itself or my inquiry a week ago as to whether or not he agrees with it. How would you recommend I move forward from here?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 22:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- @FacultiesIntact: I would bring it up with the person who responded to the 3O, so see what the next best course of action would be. SilverserenC 22:39, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- So I instead opted for a 3O, and got a response from someone there. However, the editor I'm in a dispute with has yet to respond to the opinion itself or my inquiry a week ago as to whether or not he agrees with it. How would you recommend I move forward from here?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 22:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Notes
Hi, these can be done either as a (sub)class of references, or using the efn (e-footnote, I guess) template, but not both at once. And of course one shouldn't change a system of referencing once it is in use. But since I agree with you that efn is easier to use, I've changed it here so we only have one system again. Verb. sap., as they used to say. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:44, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was just working through the missing reference lists category and trying to fix articles via the simplest method. It does get really confusing when references are trying to use both efn and groups, especially multiple groups. SilverserenC 18:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 12
Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)
- New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
- Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
- Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
- American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco
The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/Oleogustus
Hi Silver seren: I have approved your DYK nom at Template:Did you know nominations/Oleogustus. Just letting you know that I made a minor addition to the hook (rather than going through the whole ALT process), adding the word "fatty" to the hook, because the proposed basic taste is not detected in all rancid foods. North America1000 14:44, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Northamerica1000: I'm fine with the change. It makes the statement much more clarified. SilverserenC 19:53, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- All right, and thanks for the reply. North America1000 02:50, 8 August 2015 (UTC)