Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
Otakrem here uses James Bruce [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bahr_negus_Yeshaq&oldid=724272323] Unknownwiki does the same [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tigrayans&oldid=785165585] They are both very protective of eritrea and medri bahri. [[Special:Contributions/105.158.46.208|105.158.46.208]] ([[User talk:105.158.46.208|talk]]) 13:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC) |
Otakrem here uses James Bruce [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bahr_negus_Yeshaq&oldid=724272323] Unknownwiki does the same [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tigrayans&oldid=785165585] They are both very protective of eritrea and medri bahri. [[Special:Contributions/105.158.46.208|105.158.46.208]] ([[User talk:105.158.46.208|talk]]) 13:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC) |
||
:To the person using these IP addresses - see [[WP:SCRUTINY]]. As you violating our sock puppetry policy any further posts by you should just be reverted. --[[User:NeilN|<b style="color:navy">Neil<span style="color:red">N</span></b>]] <sup>[[User talk:NeilN|<i style="color:blue">talk to me</i>]]</sup> 14:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:47, 23 April 2018
Barnstar with belated welcoming
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
For your outstanding work on Alodia which has brought the article from sketchy & unreferenced to readable & scholarly in 2017. Welcome back to Wikipedia and good luck with your efforts to delve into East African history. groupuscule (talk) 10:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC) |
- Thank you mister! While I still have plans on extending that entry, do you think it would already qualify for a "Featured Article"? LeGabrie (talk) 16:47, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- It's headed that way. I'm no expert, but one way to get ready for "Featured Article" review is first asking for comments from other editors, maybe from interested Wikiprojects (Africa, History? you can post comments on their talk pages), and also from Wikipedia:Peer review. ~ groupuscule (talk) 22:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hey, I requested a Peer Review plus I made a section on the African portal, but absolutely nothing is happenening. Do you know why?LeGabrie (talk) 18:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
- Sometimes it just takes a while for someone to find it, especially in narrow topic interests. I'm happy to take a look, if you'd like. It appears to be written well at a glance, but without some source scans, I won't be able to vouch for any of the contents. Were you looking to shoot for FA status? It's grueling, but if so, I could help prep you for that. And if you might be interested, I'm also looking for feedback on an African art museum article: Wikipedia:Peer review/National Museum of African Art/archive1. czar 02:22, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hey. Sure, I would be glad if you could take a look. For now, I would like to have it a good article, because I still have to add some chapters, which I will do in some months. Concerning the sourcse just tell me for which statements you would like to see one. I can back most of it up (Still have to eliminate some original research though). I am not sure if I can help with your article, because I have never reviewed one and I am also pretty ignorant of the whole process. I can take a look though, just as trade-off.LeGabrie (talk) 15:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- I've made a few comments at the peer review and can go more in depth once you've made basic fixes, incorporated your extra sources, removed original conclusions not taken from the sources, and reviewed against the GA criteria. Then you can nominate it for a GA review and I (or someone else) can pick it up. Feel free to take a look at mine or other articles if you have time, but no pressure. And re: ignorance, while it's helpful to be familiar with Wikipedia's manual of style, most reviews are done against some limited set of criteria that are easy to learn in a single sitting. czar 22:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hey. Sure, I would be glad if you could take a look. For now, I would like to have it a good article, because I still have to add some chapters, which I will do in some months. Concerning the sourcse just tell me for which statements you would like to see one. I can back most of it up (Still have to eliminate some original research though). I am not sure if I can help with your article, because I have never reviewed one and I am also pretty ignorant of the whole process. I can take a look though, just as trade-off.LeGabrie (talk) 15:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sometimes it just takes a while for someone to find it, especially in narrow topic interests. I'm happy to take a look, if you'd like. It appears to be written well at a glance, but without some source scans, I won't be able to vouch for any of the contents. Were you looking to shoot for FA status? It's grueling, but if so, I could help prep you for that. And if you might be interested, I'm also looking for feedback on an African art museum article: Wikipedia:Peer review/National Museum of African Art/archive1. czar 02:22, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hey, I requested a Peer Review plus I made a section on the African portal, but absolutely nothing is happenening. Do you know why?LeGabrie (talk) 18:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
- It's headed that way. I'm no expert, but one way to get ready for "Featured Article" review is first asking for comments from other editors, maybe from interested Wikiprojects (Africa, History? you can post comments on their talk pages), and also from Wikipedia:Peer review. ~ groupuscule (talk) 22:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Please stop Canvassing (Medri Bahri)
It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Medri Bahri. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Please stop canvassing for Medri Bahri Uknowofwiki (talk) 00:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC) • contribs)
- You can ignore the above. --NeilN talk to me 00:19, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
- I stand by Warning to LeGabrie about his Canvassing Violation per WP:Canvass. Uknowofwiki (talk) 01:22, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Discussion in the RfC
Please discuss in the RfC on the Medri Bahri Talk page before making anymore edits to the Dates of the article. Uknowofwiki (talk) 22:03, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Daju kingdom
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Daju kingdom you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 21:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- Several comments and suggestions on the review page for you to consider. It is looking good so far. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:11, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Thanks mate. Just fixed the stuff as by your proposals.LeGabrie (talk) 22:31, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- That was swift. Thanks. A nicely put together article. One of my easier assessments. I will give it another look over in the morning, but it seems solid so far. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- All done. Good work. Congratulations. An educational one to assess. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Well, that was easy and quick. Motivates me to get more articles ready for a GA-nomination. Thank you very much for your time and effort! LeGabrie (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- All done. Good work. Congratulations. An educational one to assess. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- That was swift. Thanks. A nicely put together article. One of my easier assessments. I will give it another look over in the morning, but it seems solid so far. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Thanks mate. Just fixed the stuff as by your proposals.LeGabrie (talk) 22:31, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
The article Daju kingdom you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Daju kingdom for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 10:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Sultanate of Dahlak
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sultanate of Dahlak you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
The article Sultanate of Dahlak you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sultanate of Dahlak for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 21:41, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- I have just started to look at this for DYK? and hit a problem! "today a popular destination for divers" is not in the article. Possibly you could add this as a sentence at the end of "Demise"? So long as you can reliably cite it. Or change the hook to leave this out? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- User:Gog the Mild I took that part from the Dahlak archipelago entry. Is it required that the DYK is based just on one entry? Including the diving-thing in the entry for the Dahlak sultanate would be out of place. LeGabrie (talk) 11:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- I had to check that. Unfortunately, no. From the "rules": "The hook fact(s) must be stated in the article, and must be immediately followed by an inline citation to a reliable source" Gog the Mild (talk) 12:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- User:Gog the Mild But technically speaking, our hook could be applied to both the Dahlak sultanate as well as the Dahlak archipelago, right? LeGabrie (talk) 12:31, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- User:Gog the Mild Reworked it. LeGabrie (talk) 17:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- User:Gog the Mild But technically speaking, our hook could be applied to both the Dahlak sultanate as well as the Dahlak archipelago, right? LeGabrie (talk) 12:31, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
tIP
Authorityofwikipedia/unknwnwiki is a sock of otakrem [1] i suggest opening sockpuppet case so he can be banned. 201.1.194.105 (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
usually they tag authors in the edit summaries for ex. [2] Alexander butavich is what caught my attention [3] user:crumpplint sock of otakrem does the same author tag but mentions james bruce. if u keep looking u might find more things. 188.26.145.90 (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Let me add writing similarities, Otakrem/AuthorityofWiki like to bold quotes in talk page discussion see here, [4] ..... [5] 188.26.145.90 (talk) 18:26, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Otakrem here uses James Bruce [6] Unknownwiki does the same [7] They are both very protective of eritrea and medri bahri. 105.158.46.208 (talk) 13:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
- To the person using these IP addresses - see WP:SCRUTINY. As you violating our sock puppetry policy any further posts by you should just be reverted. --NeilN talk to me 14:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC)