| Revision as of 07:45, 26 October 2016 editEdelseider (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,917 edits →Palais Rohan, Strasbourg: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:20, 27 October 2016 edit undoRyn78 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,583 edits →Malleus Maleficarum: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 411: | Line 411: | ||
| Hello, Vami IV. Thank you for reviewing the GA-candidacy of this article. Let me be a bit more clear about the date 1871. In that year, the city of Strasbourg, which had been a French city since 1681, became a German city again. Until that date, the Palais had always belonged to French families or administrations - in 1870, it was a propriety of the ]. In 1871, it came under the administration of the ] and, for a time completely lost its status both as a palace and as a monument to French art and governance. So this date is indeed a significant turn in the history of the Palais. Regards, --] (]) 07:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC) | Hello, Vami IV. Thank you for reviewing the GA-candidacy of this article. Let me be a bit more clear about the date 1871. In that year, the city of Strasbourg, which had been a French city since 1681, became a German city again. Until that date, the Palais had always belonged to French families or administrations - in 1870, it was a propriety of the ]. In 1871, it came under the administration of the ] and, for a time completely lost its status both as a palace and as a monument to French art and governance. So this date is indeed a significant turn in the history of the Palais. Regards, --] (]) 07:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC) | ||
| == Malleus Maleficarum == | |||
| Thank you for commenting on the ] article. The best way to help improve the article is by reverting Asterix's nonsense back to a more balanced version which has both sides represented. I tried to restore some balance in my last edit today. The main difficulty is that Asterix sits online all day reverting any changes while stuffing the article with more dubious authors, which made it impossible for me alone to win the revert war that he wanted to fight. Multiple people could finally make headway against him (but keep in mind the 3RR rule, of course, and report him if he violates it himself). ] (]) 05:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:20, 27 October 2016
| Vami_IV
| ||
|---|---|---|
{{coordinates missing}}Hi. I'm writing to users who have used the "coordinates missing" template in the last year. Could you please use the standard template "coord missing" instead? While the "coordinates missing" template is a redirect to the "coord missing" template, and thus works fine in articles, using "coord missing" directly makes a number of automated bot workflows work better by eliminating the overhead of having to track down the uses of "coordinates missing" to eliminate the redirects. Thanks, -- The Anome (talk) 12:28, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
StubsHallo, Please don't add stub categories directly as you did to Schloss Waldenburg, but add a stub template (eg {{BadenWurttemberg-struct-stub}}. The template adds the displayed message as well as categorising the article. I've fixed this one. Thanks. PamD 17:19, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Un-redirected this page for future usageWhat do you mean?Xx236 (talk) 07:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Sorting Criteria in Template:Castles in Baden-WürttembergHave you seen my comment in: Template_talk:Castles_in_Baden-Württemberg? Would you care to give your opinion there? --Wuselig (talk) 23:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC) Thank you!Thank you for my medal! It's nice to know that my efforts are helpful to others. Good luck with Operation Stuttgart. We enjoyed our visit there several years ago.Jllm06 (talk) 20:48, 28 July 2016 (UTC) BarnstarThank you for the barnstar. I never expected one for my minor edits, however numerous. It was quite a surprise (a good one). Best of luck in your editing and all your pursuits. Finetooth (talk) 03:05, 30 September 2016 (UTC) SMS Württemberg (1917)Hi Vami IV. I appreciate your enthusiasm with the article, but it's a long-standing practice that unfinished ships don't warrant articles, since there isn't all that much that can be said about them (though there are exceptions like Japanese battleship Tosa). This is an example of just about the best I could do on SMS Sachsen (1916) - sure, it looks like a halfway decent article, but it's about 90% boilerplate text, with only a couple of sentences about the ship itself. That material is better covered in the main class article, rather than needlessly duplicating text. If the ships had been expended in weapons tests or something like Tosa, then there would be justification for an article. But if the sum of the unique text is basically "the ship was laid down on X, launched on Y, and scrapped in Z", there really isn't a need for a separate article. Thanks, and let me know if there are any other projects I can help with. Parsecboy (talk) 12:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 2 October
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 3 October 2016 (UTC) A beer for you!
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have. 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. If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | ||
Hello, I'm 
Palais Rohan, Strasbourg
Hello, Vami IV. Thank you for reviewing the GA-candidacy of this article. Let me be a bit more clear about the date 1871. In that year, the city of Strasbourg, which had been a French city since 1681, became a German city again. Until that date, the Palais had always belonged to French families or administrations - in 1870, it was a propriety of the Second French Empire. In 1871, it came under the administration of the German Empire and, for a time completely lost its status both as a palace and as a monument to French art and governance. So this date is indeed a significant turn in the history of the Palais. Regards, --Edelseider (talk) 07:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Malleus Maleficarum
Thank you for commenting on the Malleus Maleficarum article. The best way to help improve the article is by reverting Asterix's nonsense back to a more balanced version which has both sides represented. I tried to restore some balance in my last edit today. The main difficulty is that Asterix sits online all day reverting any changes while stuffing the article with more dubious authors, which made it impossible for me alone to win the revert war that he wanted to fight. Multiple people could finally make headway against him (but keep in mind the 3RR rule, of course, and report him if he violates it himself). Ryn78 (talk) 05:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)