Misplaced Pages

User talk:Smeat75: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:10, 11 August 2013 editLiz (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators766,262 edits Tertiary sources← Previous edit Latest revision as of 03:22, 22 March 2023 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,670,173 editsm Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <font> (2x), <center> (1x)Tag: Fixed lint errors 
(458 intermediate revisions by 99 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{archives|auto=yes|search=yes|}}

'''Welcome!''' '''Welcome!'''


Line 9: Line 11:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{help me}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> -- ] (]) 08:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC) I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{help me}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> -- ] (]) 08:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


== New Testament Scholars are Unreliable and biased ==
== Commoners in the United Kingdom ==

Regarding Christ Myth Theory - this article has the Papal Seal of Approval - an article about the Christ Myth Theory that is obviously written by believers in the New Testament - the New Testament that is steeped in mythology and made-up history. The Christ Myth theory article is awful. "Oh yes, let's write a critical article about the historical Christ, and while we're at it, let's endorse the Word of God found in the Holy Bible and discredit the false disbelievers". ] (]) 22:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

: Well, thank you for taking the time out of your day to come to my talk page and tell me that. As this is my talk page, I can go into a little rant. You and a lot of others seem to think that anybody who insists that it is the mainstream view that Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate is an undoubted historical fact is a frothing at the mouth Christian fundamentalist. That isn't why I think that, it is because I am a ROMAN PAGAN and I believe it because TACITUS says so!!!!! There is only ONE THING that we know FOR SURE about Jesus, which is that he was crucified, the historian from whom I learned almost everything I know about classical history, Michael Grant, says so and so does the greatest Roman historian, TACITUS. If he was crucified, he had to exist first, so he UNQUESTIONABLY did, it is just IGNORANT people who know NOTHING about <u>Roman history</u> who think anything else.
:I feel so much better for getting that off my chest.] (]) 23:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

** First, the "Annals" of Tacitus were first pronounced as fake when they first appeared during the 15th century - no ancient writer is aware of their existence. You can't say "Hey, here is a second century reference, or third century reference, or fourth century reference to the Annals by Tacitus". Secondly, relating to the crucifixion, which Christian of the first century mentions the name of Pontius Pilate? None of the early epistles found in the New Testament mention him within the context of the Crucifixion. You can't say the Gospels, because no Christian of the first century referred to the existence of the Gospels. The theory that the Gospels date from the first century is only that, only a theory and yet another example of New Testament scholarship bias." ] (]) 09:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

***That's what I said, ignorant people who know NOTHING about ROMAN HISTORY and ARROGANTLY imagine that they know better than the greatest classicist of the 20th century MICHAEL GRANT. Please do not continue this stupid argument on my talk page, I unfortunately waste too much time trying to keep the articles relating to Jesus and ROMAN HISTORY neutral and accurate I don't need to do the same thing on my talk page also.] (]) 12:37, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

== ARC ==

Hello Smeat. By accident I more or less stumbled my way into discovering that I was recently mentioned somewhat indirectly in a recent ArbCom case. Although I don't think we've discussed any of the issues involved directly (not that I'd want to) I'm grateful that you clarified things and managed to do it all tactfully enough not to drag me into the discussion. Although like anyone else I sometimes get in disagreements, being able to keep myself uninvolved from some of the most toxic disputes on Misplaced Pages is a large part of what keeps me mentally able to continue editing here. Although I'm not glad that two editors are no longer here on Misplaced Pages, I'm glad that I didn't see the explosions till after they were already dealt with. Thank you for your tact. ] (]) 17:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

== Buone Feste ==

<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 40em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 ); border-radius: 1em; border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix">
<div>
<div style="float:right;margin-left:0.5em;">
]
</div>



'''May you have very Happy Holidays ...'''

'''and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!'''




''Best wishes and many thanks for all your work at Project Opera, ] (]) 08:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)''
</div></div>

== 2019 ==

<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 40em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 ); border-radius: 1em; border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix">
{{User QAIbox
| title =
| image = Bachsaal Schloss Koethen.jpg
| image_upright =
| bold =
| normal =
}}
<div class="center">
<br />'''Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht'''

<big><big>]</big></big>

] for ]

]<br /><br />
</div></div>
--] (]) 10:51, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

== Christ myth theory cleanup ==

Hey smeat. I cleaned up the ] page to my satisfaction (though more can be done), but I just came to realizing the fact that the ] page is even more tedious and badly written. I've already started, though I would appreciate some help in cleaning up the article.] (]) 01:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
:Good luck, it is very very contentious. I tend to pick a few areas in articles like that and the Carrier one, mostly on scholarly reception, and concentrate on those. I think you are quite new here, I hope you don't get burnt out by having to deal with people arguing with you, I quit WP for two years for that reason, but yes I am happy to try to help you.] (]) 01:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

== Chandos Anthems? ==

I learned something new today: that the name '']'' is common and wrong, because James Brydges became Duke of Chandos only after Handel left, and serious people call them ''Cannons Anthems'' of ''Anthems for Cannons''. What should we do, article name, texts, referring to them, etc.? Usually, Misplaced Pages prefers common name over correct name, or we wouldn't have ] ;) --] (]) 15:35, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
:Yes, "Chandos Anthems" is the common name. I think the way you have clarified the issue in the lead of the article is fine. Thanks for your work on the pieces.] (]) 16:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
:: Thank you. Found a few good sources today! --] (]) 16:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

== Census of Quirinius ==
Hi there, I can't help but notice that the "Mention in the Gospel of Luke" offers a rather one-sided perspective.
I am in no way trying to perform 'exegetical acrobatics' or to delete any arguments against the plausibility of conservative claims, but since there are arguments both in favour and against don't you think both sides could co-exist?
I am just looking for a neutral, informative page.
] (]) 05:47, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
:Please start a discussion on the article talk page if you want to discuss this so others can participate. Thanks] (]) 11:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

== In case you're interested ==

]. ] (]) 18:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

== A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process ==

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate ] that followed ] you’ve been part of.

Please fill out to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is . This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, ] 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Trizek (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=User:Trizek_(WMF)/sandbox/temp_MassMessage_list&oldid=19553910 -->


== ArbCom 2019 election voter message ==
Thanks for your mesage. Having supported the idea of a dab page I was wondering what was the best approach. I think that it has to be at ] which is the likely search term. The point is that in the UK commoner bears both the two general meanings, that of ''members of the third estate'' and ''the common people'', as well as more specific ones, which is why a dab page is helpful. But it does not make sense to have it at the present title, which should redirect to the dab. But not something I have experience in setting up and I was hoping someone else sort it. --] (]) 00:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
== With profound gratitude ==
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2019|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Dear Smeat75,


If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
A personal note to thank you so very much for your very significant effort in responding to my request for a checklist of ToDo's on ]. While I agreed with everything you recommended, I experienced a chain reaction of "Now why didn't I think of this{{"'}}s. Your notes were very in-depth and were 1.5 pages when printed single-spaced. Since you had said you had other things on your plate and would make the changes at some future date, I especially appreciated your making the time to generate such a thorough, well thought-out list so rapidly. If I've missed the proverbial "boat" on any of your suggestions, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be glad to go back to the drawing board and try again.
</td></tr>
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019/Coordination/MMS/05&oldid=926750390 -->


== ''L'Africaine'' ==
Your kind efforts have done much to counteract what have been some past bitter disappointments after having spent much time on an article, only to receive rude, crude comments and massive deletions.


Re of ]: I thought we lost this battle a couple of years ago, after the advent of ]. --] (]) 00:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
I admire the "handle" that you obviously have on the subject matter. All of your comments were encouraging rather than condemning. Being a collegiate educator, I have tried to make my comments on student papers constructive and supportive, but I haven't always had them perceived that way by the student. You have inspired me to increase my efforts in that area. With gratitude, appreciation, and respect...] (]) 19:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
:No, I succeeded in keeping them for Handel and Meyerbeer and a few others and now some blankety black has decided to remove them all, I am so outraged. ] (]) 00:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
::Thanks! I still like them, too, prefer them over those horizontal lists, inconveniently placed at the bottom of the page. --] (]) 07:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


== Restore ==
== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot ==
I have a wish which is hopefully not too hard, - it's about Monteverdi. His operas articles were created by Brianboulton whom we miss miss miss. Could the discographies please do without the template that the operas don't have? The composer's image is fine for the two late ones, - he's way too old for the others. --] (]) 22:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
:OK.] (]) 22:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
:: Appreciated. The ] three times this year were quite an experience, especially singing! I promised (myself) to make that article an FA in memory of Brian, - any help welcome. --] (]) 22:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
:::It is such glorious music, must be wonderful to sing it!] (]) 23:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
:::: Yes, and we were permitted to sing much of the psalms, while a Dunedin Ensemble was OVPP (10), and in a recent Herreweghe performance, he let the choir only sing their Gloria Patri. Thanks be to our conductor ;) --] (]) 08:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
| title = ]
| image = Winterling, Kesselbach.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
| bold =
| normal = ]
}}
:::: greetings on , enjoy --] (]) 13:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
:::::What a touching message! Thank you!] (]) 13:47, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
:::::: Today's '']'' became after yesterday's funeral. --] (]) 12:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)


== Arbitration case opened ==
] predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
{|cellspacing=10 style="background-color:transparent;"
|-
|valign=top|
;Stubs:<!--''']:'''-->
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
:]
|align=top|
;Cleanup
:]
:]
:]
;Merge
:]
:]
:]
;Add Sources
:]
:]
:]
;Wikify
:]
:]
:]
;Expand
:]
:]
:]
|}


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 ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping.


All content, links, and diffs from the ] and the ] are being read into the evidence for this case.
If you have '''feedback''' on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on ]. Thanks from {{User0|Nettrom}}, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- ] (]) 04:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org
==Pliny page==
Hi, That Pliny page needs serious help... I think it deserves a 50% rewrite really. I have been doing my best to avoid it, but it just uses Sherwin-White and overall is just hard to read. Some class project threw some material there I think. I don't know if you have time, but if you can do more than minor fixes will be good. Thanks. ] (]) 00:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


For the Arbitration Committee, ] (]) 05:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for April 4==


== Arbitration ==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to ]. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>


Hi Smeat. Long time no see. Read your comment at arbitration and can't help but wonder--you don't like the quote I used to sum up the biblical views on homosexuality in the ethics article--so how would you go about discussing it? I'm asking sincerely. It's difficult and I struggled with it. It's an unavoidable discussion in biblical ethics, don't you think? The one quote seemed better to me than all the Bible quotes which I thought was my other option. There wasn't dissenting opinion within the Bible or Christianity at the time either. I did just present it. I didn't offer an opinion on it. If you have a creative idea I would be honored if you would share with me a better way to discuss such a difficult subject as biblical views of homosexuality. I would like to find a neutral way to do so without offending--but there it is--offensive in its nature. What would you Do? ] (]) 21:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
:] (]&nbsp;|&nbsp;])
:Hello, I'm afraid I find that very hard to answer as I would be unlikely to edit on the subject. I know I wouldn't ever put in a quote like " Same-sex attraction spelled the estrangement of men and women at the very deepest level of their inmost desires" which is not even something that relates directly to a Biblical passage. Maybe the article ] could help, I haven't ever looked at it.] (]) 22:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
::added a link pointing to ]
::I saw the quote as a summary--a shortcut--that prevented me from having to quote all the Bible verses directly which I didn't really want to do. That made it seem like an improvement to me. Clearly you found it highly offensive, and since my goal was to lessen the offense, not increase it, I am floundering a bit. It's frustrating because it seems as if there is no non-offensive way to discuss this aspect of biblical ethics--and yet it's there and would have to be discussed at some point. Anyway, thanx for answering. I'm sorry about any former problems we had. Please forgive my former defensiveness. I was harassed for a couple of years before deteriorating into a crazy person. I am sorry for any way that I hurt or offended you when I was going off the rails. I never actually thought anything but good of you directly or personally. I'll take a look at that article--though they would be compelled to quote all the scriptures--and maybe that's the right answer. Anyway, thanx again. ] (]) 04:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)


::: Since I know there was some misunderstanding between us when I ran screaming from Misplaced Pages, I wanted to come here and let you know I posted something about it on ] in the second section down on harassment. I just wanted you to know it wasn't just me and it wasn't all in my head, it was real, but it was never about you. ] (]) 03:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
:] (]&nbsp;|&nbsp;])
::::Thanks for the message. ] (]) 14:32, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
::added a link pointing to ]


== Need an opinion on a draft ==
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 17:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


Hey,
== "Illegal religion" ==


Could you check this draft and tell me what do you think about it? ]
Hey, Smeat75, I think I may've been the one who placed For background, see '']''. I don't want to go on and on about this at the article's talk page, but will do so here because I hope it isn't too presumptuous to assume your interest.


] (]) 18:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
To summarize the sources at '']'', the phrase "illegal religion" by contrast implies that under Roman law, certain religions were illegal (presumably meaning their practice was banned). There are extremely few instances of bans placed on entire religions; most of the time, religions were suppressed through restrictions (on who could be priests, for instance, or how many people could gather at one time; the '']'' in the 2nd century BC, for instance, severely limits but does not ban the cult of Dionysus). I won't ], who were indeed banned, oddly enough by Claudius, but only after other measures to constrain their influence presumably failed. There were various edicts that penalized Christians, but if from the outset ("from its first appearance" in the wording of the article) Christianity had been banned and declared an "illegal religion", none of these later, stricter edicts would've been needed. The ] also shows that Christianity was not an "illegal religion" from its inception to the time of Constantine—and that's according to Eusebius and to modern papal historians. The Romans seem not even to have recognized the followers of Christ as a religion separate from Judaism at first, so how could Christianity have been illegal from the start? The phrase ''religio licita'' in its sole occurrence is Tertullian's description of the status of Judaism under Roman rule, and not a term of Roman law.
:Replied on your talkpage.] (]) 02:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


==Disambiguation link notification for June 4==
I know Frend makes this statement almost word for word, but it conflicts with the rest of the Great Persecution article, not to mention with fact and Frend himself, who observes on p. 505 of "Genesis and Legacy" that for a 30-year period leading up to Domitian, "there was no further state intervention against Christians". If Christianity had been banned, for instance, there could've been no Christians in the Roman army to become military martyrs. But obviously, during the "Little Peace" Christians must've been permitted to swear modified oaths of loyalty and join the army, or there would've been no Christians in the ranks to confront with the new Imperial zealotry of Diocletian. Christians studied at the Roman law school in Beirut in the 3rd century; this was an imperially sponsored institution for the purpose of producing jurists, so Christians could hardly have been "illegals", to use a charmless term. Frend seems unable to see past the persecution narrative in making generalized statements, even though phase-by-phase he'll point out that decades went by without official edicts or actions from the central government.


Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages ] and ] (&nbsp;|&nbsp;). Such links are ], since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. <small>(Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].)</small>
So that is why I asked for a clarification, or perhaps what I'm asking for is that the article not contradict itself by using this imprudent statement from Frend as if it were fact. The rest of the article takes the position that persecutions originating from the central government were limited to certain periods, and that there was a patchwork of edicts that placed certain requirements and restrictions on Christians at times, not a blanket policy of exterminating Christianity. As noted in '']'', there was no such thing as an official status under Roman law as ''illicita'' or ''licita'' for religions: religious tolerance was situational or a diplomatic strategy. ] (]) 22:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:Thanks for replying at my talk page, where I've continued the conversation. ] (]) 11:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 08:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for April 13==


== I don't need to be warned about DS on American politics ==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (]&nbsp;|&nbsp;]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>


It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 14:33, 13 April 2013 (UTC) Or about the 1rr rule, now that I have started editing articles about Trump's stunt outside St John's Episcopal Church. I know, I know. ] (]) 21:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)


== Upper Lima 65 == == GroveOnline ==
I just wanted to make you aware that this editor, with whom you've had a number of editorial disputes has been recently blocked as a sock puppet of banned editor Dalai Lama Ding Dong. As such, any and all of his contributions can and should be undone. ] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 05:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


I was sad to read your posting to ] at 15:02, 3 July 2020 (). It is not the intention of anyone who has been working on the template to make life difficult for anyone else. The idea is to make it easier.
==Plagiarism RFC==


If "doi" means nothing to you that is fine (it didn't for me until recently), but it means something to people who have recently been studying and need to cite an online journal. All it represents is a garanteed permanent way to link to an article on the net, because ordinary urls can change at any time.
It actually slipped my mind. Do you want to start it? ] (]) 05:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
: I will if you like but you are a much more experienced editor than I am and more familiar with all these procedures and so on, also as I say what concerns me is not plagiarism so much but the fact that copying from hundred year old books creates crap articles.] (]) 05:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:: That is indeed the basic problem, not to mention they are very hard to change when each line is not sourced to the original (weak, dated) source. I'm pretty busy for about two weeks but will see about launching something at that point. best, —Tim. /// ] (]) 16:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


I have logged into Grove Music online and looked up ''Traviata, La (‘The Fallen Woman’)'' by Roger Parker. The url is:
==Disambiguation link notification for May 3==
https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.O005794
in addition it says:
Published in print: 01 December 1992 Published online: 2002


I have edited the Misplaced Pages article ''La traviata'' to include this information in the GroveOnline template () to let you see how you can augment the GroveOnline template to include links to the Grove article.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (]&nbsp;|&nbsp;]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>


If you include the publication date of the Grove article then there is no need to include "access-date" (which is the date you accessed the article), but if you do include the "access-date" and there is a url parameter in the templaöte no red warnin
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 11:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
g will appear. However "access-date" is not a subsitute for the "date" within the article as it is the true publication date.


If you do not want to include the first publication date (assigned to the "orig-year" parameter) then don't include it. I think a nice to have, but it is no where near as important as "date".
== Philip K. Dick ==
Hi - per this edit , allow me to share my views, if you don't mind. The {{cl|20th-century American novelists}} cat is intended to diffuse fully the {{cl|American novelists}} cat - which means, all novelists - sci fi or otherwise - would be in that cat (or the appropriate century) - so there shouldn't be a case where there is a novelist anywhere in the tree who *isn't* in one of the novelist-by-century cats. But this also means that it is not a promotion - there is no special prize for being a "novelist" as opposed to a "sci-fi" novelist - I think the current moves to remove that particular form of ghettoiziation are healthy on that point. I think the next step would be to remove him from {{cl|American novelists}}, but I've been beat up for doing such things so am trying to slow down...--] (]) 18:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
:As long as he is not categorised solely as a sf writer I do not mind. PKD wrote some non-sf novels and his greatest works transcend genre.] (]) 20:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::Actually, in the new scheme which is sort of happening, *all* novelists will be categorized as novelists - and then, in addition, as genres. To me, that makes more sense - it's never really fair to say a given author is *only* in a given genre - as an exclusive - they can be writers of that genre, but they are also just plain novelists, right? In any case, PKD will remain safely in {{cl|20th-century American novelists}}, which is rapidly becoming *the* place to be. --] (]) 21:24, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


I hope this is of some help. -- ] (]) 17:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
== ] ==
:Thanks for the message and advice. ] (]) 17:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


== Royal family ==
Here's another one that Butler declared "wholly fictional" and the ''Catholic Encyclopedia'' decided had little or no historicity, and yet our article makes a much more enthusiastic endorsement. Not really what Misplaced Pages should be in the business of doing! I looked at the '']'' entry (which the ''CE'' noted as the source), and have no idea where the supposed dialogue comes from. I don't have time to fix it properly, but am interested because he's identified as a ''mimus'' and I have a draft on that mode of performance that I'll get around to posting some day. Anyway, I'm here because if you see any sources on this figure (who is conflated with ]), I would welcome a note. ] (]) 15:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
: Hi, the long story about the conversion onstage, etc., is a re-telling of the seventh century "Acts of Genesius" and the source is a sub-page of one of the references in the article. The bit about how Roman actors held degraded positions and did not perform the great tragedies very often, but instead did lewd and naughty things onstage comes from another subpage of that site. It seems that, as with a lot of these stories, there was a name in a martyr's list and a church built in the martyr's honour at a fairly early time, but entirely fictitious stories developed / were made up / got mixed up with other martyrs over the hundreds of years before the "Acts" were composed. Yes, that article needs to be redone - there are so many that do! (sigh)] (]) 18:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
::Actually, the 7th-century ''Acta'' account says very little, as the ''CE'' recognized. My guess is that the Society of St. G. website has lifted this material from the fictional treatments that are mentioned in the article—I mean, the modern treatments that consciously developed the story as stage drama. If I get a chance to work on the article, it would be interesting to learn more about those. ] (]) 19:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


Because i know them all and in that template all members of royal family. Because they don't have article doesn't mean that they don't exists. I removed HRH but rest of template i return. <sup>] ]</sup> 21:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
==]==
:We as WP editors are all anonymous, we don't know who each other are. "I can vouch that these people exist even though they are not sourced because I know them personally" is not a way to ] information - "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Misplaced Pages articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources." Having unlinked entries in a navbox is a direct violation of ]. However, I don't feel like fighting about it at the moment.] (]) 10:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
I quoted you in the ''Blindingly Obvious'' and I hope I did not hang you out to dry, but what you said made a lot of sense to me. I thought a heads up would be appropriate. Thanks again for your contribution to our topic! Cheers - ] (]) 16:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


== Deposed ruling families ==
==Disambiguation link notification for May 20==


Queen Victoria and her first born Victoria, Princess Royal, always used to refer to various royal '''positions'''.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (]&nbsp;|&nbsp;]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>
They were not just "titles ", they were '''jobs''', the holders had to '''do stuff ''', no matter how minor, like maybe open a hospital or go to a garden party once a year. Germany and Austria abolished the '''jobs''' so the titles that went with the jobs NO LONGER EXIST. I am not anti royal, I think it's quite a pretty and harmless tradition on the whole, I am anti delusional monarchist fantasies.
How nice to have this talk page where I can vent. ] (]) 23:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
:I am amazed and gratified to see that ''' things have really changed ''' since I tried to deal with this issue years ago. Lots of editors now agreeing that descendants of deposed ruling houses do not keep their titles through all eternity! Thanks everyone!] (]) 21:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


== I don't like arguing and conflicts ==
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 00:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


Which makes me wonder why I'm here. ] (]) 22:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
==Disambiguation link notification for June 23==


== Why I edited WP ==
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (]&nbsp;|&nbsp;]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small>


This has become the site everyone turns to all over the world for information. I would never have created such a thing, but there we are, it is reality. I feel my time here is about up and I am going to be kicked off because I just won't accept the composer templates being deleted. I suppose all my work on the Handel articles which were TERRRIBLE, a DISGRACE, until I wrote or re-wrote them, is not going to be reverted. Imagine thousands of people all over the world turning to this site to help their enjoyment of the Handel opera or oratorio they were attending and it told them nothing useful. That's they way they were, they are better now because I did a lot of work of them but I don't feel this is at all appreciated or recognized here, although it has been elsewhere. I also created lots of articles about opera singers, new and old, including ], ], ], nobody cares, they just want to mess up the articles I created or worked on, that's the way I feel. Makes me very angry. Plus the articles I have written or maintained about the history of early Christianity, and created or re-wrote lots of article on Meyerbeer operas. This isn't good for me, too much fighting and bossy, aggressive people.] (]) 01:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 11:19, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


: Smeat, I am sorry to see you angry at a group of people that might include me. Here I thought we got along well for years. Wrong? Did you hear the message that half of our readers - those on mobile devices - don't see Handel's image as long as it is in the template container, nor the container? How do you feel about that? Wouldn't it be better to show the image separately? Did anybody nominate Handel's side navbox for deletion, or Meyerbeer's? Didn't many of us show respect for one editor's special wish for two topics? --] (]) 08:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
== Your evidence ==
::No I am not angry with you Gerda. We have worked together well and without conflict.] (]) 14:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
::: Good to know. What about the other questions? --] (]) 14:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
::: Niikimaria advised me to ask about ]. It is now the only Donizetti opera using the sidebar. Is that necessary, knowing that mobile users will not see its image? --] (]) 18:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
::::She advised you to ask me? That is not necessary, I haven't edited WP in a while, I can't deal with arguing and conflicts with everything going on in the world.] (]) 22:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message ==
I posted your evidence on the talk page . If you do not want it there, please forgive me and remove it. ] ''']''' 23:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
:Thanks!] (]) 23:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2020|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. 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 ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
== Tertiary sources ==


If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
I have responded to your comments at ]. As I said there, I believe it is in your own best interests to not only read the various content guidelines, but also more than a few of the ''conduct'' guidelines, and I sincerely hope that you do read both. ] (]) 00:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
</td></tr>
:I have commented at Ret. Prof.'s talk page. Let me be honest. At no point in this conversation have you indicated exactly where you believe the source is not used as you believe fit. Also, you seem perhaps constitutionally incapable of understand that wikipedia guidelines to not support the contention that, basically, each and every word spoken by a person who generally meets reliable source is necessarily RS itself. Personally, I would have no objections to having a further, serious, instance of harassment to raise against Ignocrates, given his fairly well-documented history of POV pushing, and believe that there is a very real chance that this might bring about an even stiffer sanction against him than might otherwise be given. But you might also read ], which I believe is probably relevant here as well.
</table>
:Like I have said elsewhere, if you have any specific instances where you believe guidelines have not been met, please produce them. To date, you have not done so, and that itself is less than optimal. Otherwise, if you are willing to face the potential consequences of such an RfC/U against yourself, by all means feel free to do so. ] (]) 15:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2020/Coordination/MMS/05&oldid=990308339 -->
::I say, go for it. ] (]) 16:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 03:22, 22 March 2023

Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5


Welcome!

Hello, Smeat75, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Lindert (talk) 08:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

New Testament Scholars are Unreliable and biased

Regarding Christ Myth Theory - this article has the Papal Seal of Approval - an article about the Christ Myth Theory that is obviously written by believers in the New Testament - the New Testament that is steeped in mythology and made-up history. The Christ Myth theory article is awful. "Oh yes, let's write a critical article about the historical Christ, and while we're at it, let's endorse the Word of God found in the Holy Bible and discredit the false disbelievers". Dickie birdie (talk) 22:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, thank you for taking the time out of your day to come to my talk page and tell me that. As this is my talk page, I can go into a little rant. You and a lot of others seem to think that anybody who insists that it is the mainstream view that Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate is an undoubted historical fact is a frothing at the mouth Christian fundamentalist. That isn't why I think that, it is because I am a ROMAN PAGAN and I believe it because TACITUS says so!!!!! There is only ONE THING that we know FOR SURE about Jesus, which is that he was crucified, the historian from whom I learned almost everything I know about classical history, Michael Grant, says so and so does the greatest Roman historian, TACITUS. If he was crucified, he had to exist first, so he UNQUESTIONABLY did, it is just IGNORANT people who know NOTHING about Roman history who think anything else.
I feel so much better for getting that off my chest.Smeat75 (talk) 23:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
    • First, the "Annals" of Tacitus were first pronounced as fake when they first appeared during the 15th century - no ancient writer is aware of their existence. You can't say "Hey, here is a second century reference, or third century reference, or fourth century reference to the Annals by Tacitus". Secondly, relating to the crucifixion, which Christian of the first century mentions the name of Pontius Pilate? None of the early epistles found in the New Testament mention him within the context of the Crucifixion. You can't say the Gospels, because no Christian of the first century referred to the existence of the Gospels. The theory that the Gospels date from the first century is only that, only a theory and yet another example of New Testament scholarship bias." Dickie birdie (talk) 09:52, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
      • That's what I said, ignorant people who know NOTHING about ROMAN HISTORY and ARROGANTLY imagine that they know better than the greatest classicist of the 20th century MICHAEL GRANT. Please do not continue this stupid argument on my talk page, I unfortunately waste too much time trying to keep the articles relating to Jesus and ROMAN HISTORY neutral and accurate I don't need to do the same thing on my talk page also.Smeat75 (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

ARC

Hello Smeat. By accident I more or less stumbled my way into discovering that I was recently mentioned somewhat indirectly in a recent ArbCom case. Although I don't think we've discussed any of the issues involved directly (not that I'd want to) I'm grateful that you clarified things and managed to do it all tactfully enough not to drag me into the discussion. Although like anyone else I sometimes get in disagreements, being able to keep myself uninvolved from some of the most toxic disputes on Misplaced Pages is a large part of what keeps me mentally able to continue editing here. Although I'm not glad that two editors are no longer here on Misplaced Pages, I'm glad that I didn't see the explosions till after they were already dealt with. Thank you for your tact. Alephb (talk) 17:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Buone Feste


May you have very Happy Holidays ...

and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!



Best wishes and many thanks for all your work at Project Opera, Voceditenore (talk) 08:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

2019


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

a time for thanks and praise

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Christ myth theory cleanup

Hey smeat. I cleaned up the Richard Carrier page to my satisfaction (though more can be done), but I just came to realizing the fact that the Christ myth theory page is even more tedious and badly written. I've already started, though I would appreciate some help in cleaning up the article.Wallingfordtoday (talk) 01:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Good luck, it is very very contentious. I tend to pick a few areas in articles like that and the Carrier one, mostly on scholarly reception, and concentrate on those. I think you are quite new here, I hope you don't get burnt out by having to deal with people arguing with you, I quit WP for two years for that reason, but yes I am happy to try to help you.Smeat75 (talk) 01:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Chandos Anthems?

I learned something new today: that the name Chandos Anthems is common and wrong, because James Brydges became Duke of Chandos only after Handel left, and serious people call them Cannons Anthems of Anthems for Cannons. What should we do, article name, texts, referring to them, etc.? Usually, Misplaced Pages prefers common name over correct name, or we wouldn't have The Flying Dutchman (opera) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:35, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, "Chandos Anthems" is the common name. I think the way you have clarified the issue in the lead of the article is fine. Thanks for your work on the pieces.Smeat75 (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Found a few good sources today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Census of Quirinius

Hi there, I can't help but notice that the "Mention in the Gospel of Luke" offers a rather one-sided perspective. I am in no way trying to perform 'exegetical acrobatics' or to delete any arguments against the plausibility of conservative claims, but since there are arguments both in favour and against don't you think both sides could co-exist? I am just looking for a neutral, informative page. 92.109.57.20 (talk) 05:47, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Please start a discussion on the article talk page if you want to discuss this so others can participate. ThanksSmeat75 (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

In case you're interested

Talk:The_Bible_and_violence#Using_the_Term_"Violence"_Accurately. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 Misplaced Pages 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 2019 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) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

L'Africaine

Re your restore of Template:Meyerbeer operas: I thought we lost this battle a couple of years ago, after the advent of Template:Infobox opera. --Robert.Allen (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

No, I succeeded in keeping them for Handel and Meyerbeer and a few others and now some blankety black has decided to remove them all, I am so outraged. Smeat75 (talk) 00:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! I still like them, too, prefer them over those horizontal lists, inconveniently placed at the bottom of the page. --Robert.Allen (talk) 07:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Restore

I have a wish which is hopefully not too hard, - it's about Monteverdi. His operas articles were created by Brianboulton whom we miss miss miss. Could the discographies please do without the template that the operas don't have? The composer's image is fine for the two late ones, - he's way too old for the others. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

OK.Smeat75 (talk) 22:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Appreciated. The Vespers three times this year were quite an experience, especially singing! I promised (myself) to make that article an FA in memory of Brian, - any help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
It is such glorious music, must be wonderful to sing it!Smeat75 (talk) 23:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes, and we were permitted to sing much of the psalms, while a Dunedin Ensemble was OVPP (10), and in a recent Herreweghe performance, he let the choir only sing their Gloria Patri. Thanks be to our conductor ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
February flowers
Alte Liebe
greetings on Handel's birthday, enjoy --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
What a touching message! Thank you!Smeat75 (talk) 13:47, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Today's Alte Liebe became especially meaningful after yesterday's funeral. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

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 Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas (talk) 05:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration

Hi Smeat. Long time no see. Read your comment at arbitration and can't help but wonder--you don't like the quote I used to sum up the biblical views on homosexuality in the ethics article--so how would you go about discussing it? I'm asking sincerely. It's difficult and I struggled with it. It's an unavoidable discussion in biblical ethics, don't you think? The one quote seemed better to me than all the Bible quotes which I thought was my other option. There wasn't dissenting opinion within the Bible or Christianity at the time either. I did just present it. I didn't offer an opinion on it. If you have a creative idea I would be honored if you would share with me a better way to discuss such a difficult subject as biblical views of homosexuality. I would like to find a neutral way to do so without offending--but there it is--offensive in its nature. What would you Do? Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm afraid I find that very hard to answer as I would be unlikely to edit on the subject. I know I wouldn't ever put in a quote like " Same-sex attraction spelled the estrangement of men and women at the very deepest level of their inmost desires" which is not even something that relates directly to a Biblical passage. Maybe the article The Bible and homosexuality could help, I haven't ever looked at it.Smeat75 (talk) 22:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
I saw the quote as a summary--a shortcut--that prevented me from having to quote all the Bible verses directly which I didn't really want to do. That made it seem like an improvement to me. Clearly you found it highly offensive, and since my goal was to lessen the offense, not increase it, I am floundering a bit. It's frustrating because it seems as if there is no non-offensive way to discuss this aspect of biblical ethics--and yet it's there and would have to be discussed at some point. Anyway, thanx for answering. I'm sorry about any former problems we had. Please forgive my former defensiveness. I was harassed for a couple of years before deteriorating into a crazy person. I am sorry for any way that I hurt or offended you when I was going off the rails. I never actually thought anything but good of you directly or personally. I'll take a look at that article--though they would be compelled to quote all the scriptures--and maybe that's the right answer. Anyway, thanx again. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Since I know there was some misunderstanding between us when I ran screaming from Misplaced Pages, I wanted to come here and let you know I posted something about it on ] in the second section down on harassment. I just wanted you to know it wasn't just me and it wasn't all in my head, it was real, but it was never about you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. Smeat75 (talk) 14:32, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Need an opinion on a draft

Hey,

Could you check this draft and tell me what do you think about it? Draft:Jasleen Kaur harassment controversy

Amazingcaptain (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage.Smeat75 (talk) 02:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Presidency of Donald Trump, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lafayette Square and St. John's Episcopal Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't need to be warned about DS on American politics

Or about the 1rr rule, now that I have started editing articles about Trump's stunt outside St John's Episcopal Church. I know, I know. Smeat75 (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

GroveOnline

I was sad to read your posting to WP:ANI at 15:02, 3 July 2020 (diff). It is not the intention of anyone who has been working on the template to make life difficult for anyone else. The idea is to make it easier.

If "doi" means nothing to you that is fine (it didn't for me until recently), but it means something to people who have recently been studying and need to cite an online journal. All it represents is a garanteed permanent way to link to an article on the net, because ordinary urls can change at any time.

I have logged into Grove Music online and looked up Traviata, La (‘The Fallen Woman’) by Roger Parker. The url is:

https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.O005794

in addition it says:

Published in print: 01 December 1992 Published online: 2002

I have edited the Misplaced Pages article La traviata to include this information in the GroveOnline template (Revision as of 16:39, 3 July 2020) to let you see how you can augment the GroveOnline template to include links to the Grove article.

If you include the publication date of the Grove article then there is no need to include "access-date" (which is the date you accessed the article), but if you do include the "access-date" and there is a url parameter in the templaöte no red warnin g will appear. However "access-date" is not a subsitute for the "date" within the article as it is the true publication date.

If you do not want to include the first publication date (assigned to the "orig-year" parameter) then don't include it. I think a nice to have, but it is no where near as important as "date".

I hope this is of some help. -- PBS (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the message and advice. Smeat75 (talk) 17:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Royal family

Because i know them all and in that template all members of royal family. Because they don't have article doesn't mean that they don't exists. I removed HRH but rest of template i return. 21:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

We as WP editors are all anonymous, we don't know who each other are. "I can vouch that these people exist even though they are not sourced because I know them personally" is not a way to WP:VERIFY information - "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Misplaced Pages articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources." Having unlinked entries in a navbox is a direct violation of WP:EXISTING. However, I don't feel like fighting about it at the moment.Smeat75 (talk) 10:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Deposed ruling families

Queen Victoria and her first born Victoria, Princess Royal, always used to refer to various royal positions. They were not just "titles ", they were jobs, the holders had to do stuff , no matter how minor, like maybe open a hospital or go to a garden party once a year. Germany and Austria abolished the jobs so the titles that went with the jobs NO LONGER EXIST. I am not anti royal, I think it's quite a pretty and harmless tradition on the whole, I am anti delusional monarchist fantasies. How nice to have this talk page where I can vent. Smeat75 (talk) 23:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I am amazed and gratified to see that things have really changed since I tried to deal with this issue years ago. Lots of editors now agreeing that descendants of deposed ruling houses do not keep their titles through all eternity! Thanks everyone!Smeat75 (talk) 21:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't like arguing and conflicts

Which makes me wonder why I'm here. Smeat75 (talk) 22:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Why I edited WP

This has become the site everyone turns to all over the world for information. I would never have created such a thing, but there we are, it is reality. I feel my time here is about up and I am going to be kicked off because I just won't accept the composer templates being deleted. I suppose all my work on the Handel articles which were TERRRIBLE, a DISGRACE, until I wrote or re-wrote them, is not going to be reverted. Imagine thousands of people all over the world turning to this site to help their enjoyment of the Handel opera or oratorio they were attending and it told them nothing useful. That's they way they were, they are better now because I did a lot of work of them but I don't feel this is at all appreciated or recognized here, although it has been elsewhere. I also created lots of articles about opera singers, new and old, including Anita Rachvelishvili, Michael Spyres, Ekaterina Semenchuk, nobody cares, they just want to mess up the articles I created or worked on, that's the way I feel. Makes me very angry. Plus the articles I have written or maintained about the history of early Christianity, and created or re-wrote lots of article on Meyerbeer operas. This isn't good for me, too much fighting and bossy, aggressive people.Smeat75 (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Smeat, I am sorry to see you angry at a group of people that might include me. Here I thought we got along well for years. Wrong? Did you hear the message that half of our readers - those on mobile devices - don't see Handel's image as long as it is in the template container, nor the container? How do you feel about that? Wouldn't it be better to show the image separately? Did anybody nominate Handel's side navbox for deletion, or Meyerbeer's? Didn't many of us show respect for one editor's special wish for two topics? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
No I am not angry with you Gerda. We have worked together well and without conflict.Smeat75 (talk) 14:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Good to know. What about the other questions? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Niikimaria advised me to ask about Pia de' Tolomei (opera). It is now the only Donizetti opera using the sidebar. Is that necessary, knowing that mobile users will not see its image? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
She advised you to ask me? That is not necessary, I haven't edited WP in a while, I can't deal with arguing and conflicts with everything going on in the world.Smeat75 (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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 Misplaced Pages 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) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)