Beaest

Welcome!

Hi Beaest! I noticed your contributions to Ludovico Sforza and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Longhair\^talk 10:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

@Longhair I followed the instructions but I cannot activate VisualEditor, it does not appear in the blessed features list of the preferences. Beaest (talk) 11:42, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't use Visual Editor. Perhaps try for some assistance at the links above? -- Longhair\^talk 00:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Beaest. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Qwerfjkltalk 09:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Bona Sforza

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

Next time please discuss your changes and stop disruptive editing. It is not about the source, but how unprofessional it is. Evidently, it looks like vandalism. [[User:|Merangs]] (talk) 12:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Merangs: If you tell me where the mistakes are, I just correct them. I corrected the ones I found. --Beaest (talk) 13:06, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Separate article for Siege of Novara 1495?

Hello Beaest,
It's nice to work with you on Italian War of 1494–1495. The additions you have made, especially about the Siege of Novara in 1495, and the role of Beatrice d'Este in it, are very interesting. However, as you pointed out, few modern historians mention it. I could hardly find any information on it apart from what you have provided at Italian War of 1494–1495#Siege of Novara, and in related articles about Beatrice d'Este#The siege of Novara, Ludovico Sforza#The siege of Novara and Louis XII#Early wars. On the other hand, there is a lot of overlap in information in these four sections, and the long quotes are a bit detailed for articles that are not primarily about the battle itself. What do you think about creating a separate article for the Siege of Novara itself, where you can put all the details you can find, and link to this article from these four sections, as well as from other pages and the Template:Campaignbox Italian War of 1494–1498? That way, you've got all the space you need to devote to the details of the battle and the people involved in it, to give them the place in history which they arguably deserve. If you like, I can help you with setting this article up. I've got a lot of experience in writing about military history and women's history, which may come in handy. Please let me know what you think. Ciao, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@Nederlandse Leeuw It is fine for me. But I usually write first on Wikipedia Italy and then translate into English. I also wanted to create an Italian voice for the siege of Novara but I have not been able so far because I am busy with the summer exams at the university. At the moment I could only copy and paste (as I did yesterday from the Italian voice), but not dedicate myself to writing new parts. As for the sources, dates, editors and all the information I have already entered in the bibliography, you can look at them from there. I do not understand how it is possible that contemporary historians do not deal with the siege of Novara, since it was a substantial part of the war. Beaest (talk) 09:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for that response! I understand your way of editing in your native language first, and then into English, especially if most of the sources are in Italian (I do the same with Dutch Wikipedia). I also understand that you are busy with exams. I already thought that you are a student (may I ask what you are studying?), your style is very similar to mine when I started writing Wikipedia articles as a history student. :) How about you create this article by copypasting texts that you have already written, and I will add new parts using new sources (mostly from modern historians in English; I've already found some)? That seems to be a good way of working together. You get the credits for the work you've already done and don't have to spend too much time on extra research, and I can make some improvements to it. (Hopefully, I'll also find out why modern historians don't seem to pay much attention to the Siege of Novara). Please let me know what you think. Ciao, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:29, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@Nederlandse Leeuw Okay, will I create the new page or you?

I am enrolled in classical literature and at the moment I am preparing for the medieval history exam. There are several explanations for the fact that contemporary historians are not interested in these events. The first is perhaps a question of "fashion", as if there had been a break around the middle of the last century and the new historians do not speak of Novara because their predecessors did not speak of it. Otherwise the new scientific spirit, very different from romantic historicism, fails to explain Ludovico's nervous breakdown by not taking into account the feelings of the various characters and therefore preferred to cut the whole story directly. As for the fact that Beatrice was cut off from history, this depends on the fact that during the twentieth century many praises were paid to her older sister Isabella that, in order to make Isabella appear divine and perfect, the writers did not hesitate to paint Beatrice as an incapable fool, so much so that even Alberto Angela in a document of a few years ago, after having abundantly praised Isabella, dismissed Beatrice as Ludovico's "pleasant" wife in two minutes, and then went back to talking about Isabella. In short, having now the reputation of being stupid, probably no historian believed her to be truly capable of reversing the fate of the war, nor of influencing her husband. Yet all contemporary historians and chroniclers agree in recognizing her influence on her husband and her presence everywhere, so much so that she even participated - the only woman - in the Vercelli peace negotiations. Where was Isabella instead? At home to knit.

Please put this discussion on watchlist because if I answer on my mobile I can't mention you, so the notification won't reach you. Beaest (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I propose that you create the page, then you will be credited for creating it, which I think you deserve.

Interesting, it seems that our areas of education and interest overlap a lot! I wish you good luck on your exams. Your observations about the attention paid to Novara and Beatrice are fascinating. It's curious how writers' apparent elevation of Isabella was coupled with a degradation of Beatrice. Do you have any idea why writers would be motivated to portray Isabella as 'divine and perfect'? Might it have to do with the Mona_Lisa#Isabella_d'Este_Theory? People who believe she is the real person behind the Mona Lisa, arguably the most famous painting in the world, might be tempted to overpraise Isabella in accordance with the painting's fame. Incidentally, the 2020 Carolyn James book that I just added contains valuable correspondence between Isabella and her husband Francesco II Gonzaga, and occassionally also mentions Beatrice; although Carolyn seems to not take a side in the apparent Beatrice-Isabella fame contest, she does not mention Beatrice at the siege of Novara. All we read is that Isabella's husband was appointed as the commander-in-chief of the League of Venice, tasked with retaking Novara from Louis d'Orléans. Even though her book is admittedly focused on Isabella and Francesco's marriage, Carolyn thus seems to follow the established pattern of erasing Beatrice from the siege of Novara.

Good idea, I put your talk page on my watchlist. Ciao, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

In Italy, only two people of the Renaissance are very famous, namely Lorenzo de 'Medici and Isabella d'Este. This is not because they were two exceptional people, but because historians have been concerned with enhancing them above all, to the detriment of others. Lorenzo did not have all this power that people believe: just think that the archfamous peace of Naples, for which he is still acclaimed today as the king of diplomacy, was a substantial failure. Florence, on the point of being conquered by the Neapolitans, was not saved by the peace of Lorenzo, but by the arrival of the Turks who besieged Otranto and forced the king of Naples to recall the army from Tuscany. Is this what Lorenzo's biographers say? No. Very few historians recognize his failure. I can say the same for Isabella: she was undoubtedly a great patron and she was valued by historians precisely for her role as a patron woman. But apart from collecting works of art, what did she do that was great? They praise her because she was regent of Mantua for two / three years, but they do not say that practically all of her wives were regents of their states in the absence of their husbands. It would have been exceptional for a woman to govern her state in the presence of her husband, as did Eleonora d'Aragona, mother of Isabella, for example. Yet everyone talks about Isabella, not Eleonora. From this a vicious circle followed, because having made known only Isabella in Italy and abroad, contemporary authors continue to write rewrite biographies about her, recycling the same material, to have a guaranteed income, and do not let others know. women. Therefore they could not praise Beatrice as head of state, because Isabella had to be the excellent housekeeper, they could not praise Beatrice as the head of fashion (and she was already so long before her elder sister!) Because Isabella had to be the one copied by all the noblewomen, nor would they ever have been able to recognize Beatrice's courage and her part in reviving the course of the war, because Isabella, on the contrary, was a fearful woman, I do not know that she has never militarily supported her husband or set foot in a military camp. Their tactic was therefore to belittle Beatrice and hide her qualities in order to make Isabella look like the queen of the Renaissance and profit from it. Anyway, in an hour or two I'll create the siege page so we can work on it. Beaest (talk) 11:22, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Italian War of 1494–1495, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roma. 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) 09:05, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)