Krobison13

.

Hi Krobison13, and Please excuse this intrusion as you have been around a bit already but if no one has said it before: Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

---

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

• Table of Contents

• Department directory

Need help?

• Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
• Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.

• Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
• The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

• Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Good luck, and have fun. FWIW, Bzuk (talk) 02:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC).

Otto Naegeli

Good job on writing Otto Naegeli. I always encourage new users to Be Bold and you did an excellent job there. Take a look at the changes I made, there were minor formatting ones, you can find them here. Otherwise, happy editing and if you ever need any help, feel free to comment here or ask me on my talk page, Sadads (talk) 17:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette

Hy please could you stop a little and go slowly ,your contributions and corrections are ok , for ex I agree on your Hamlet change but in foreign policy before it you removed essential informations ,yourself you said your informations are limited on the subject. Please stop know I'll be obliged to contact adimnistrators not against you , I trust you but for the other guy who don 't contribute anything but only make problems, Let's work together.(Aubmn)Aubmn (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I've perhaps gone overboard in a few spots, but remember I am approaching this as a reader who is trying to understand the main currents of the topic -- there is a lot of detail which I find very distracting from that goal, which is generally what encyclopedia articles try to serve. I think you might also find it more productive to put some of those details into the articles on those personages.

Ok please stop for today and tell me which change you want to make on your page here and lets work together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aubmn (talk Aubmn (talk) 19:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your positive attitude.(Aubmn)Aubmn (talk) 19:47, 19 January 2015 (UTC) Hy can we stop today,we continue tomorrow ,I 'm happy to work with you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aubmn (talk • contribs) 23:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies for the radio silence -- dealing with a bunch of family stuff over weekend & then the winter storm this week. I think we'd both enjoy working more collaboratively -- you have the extensive subject knowledge (I'm not in your league, but I certainly know a lot more now!) & I have the experience getting text sharpened. I will try post to either the public or your page before making any major changes -- anything that might remove information. I will continue to be on autopilot for grammar, punctuation & simply re-wording. Krobison13 (talk) 16:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC) when leaving comments, please make sure they are within the comment tag -- otherwise they appear in the body of the article

To clarify some confusion, I did not remove the section on MA's relationship to the Austrian monarchs, but moved it next to other material on the same timeframe. This needs a bunch of work, where your strong knowledge of the timeline would be most useful. By bringing together that key series of events (the increasing radicalization of the assembly & the interactions with Austria), it gives a good lead-in to the final stages of fall of the monarchy.

The quality of the article would go up if you would edit my changes, rather than simply reverting them complete with prior errors.

Ok no problems, actually you have done an amazing job in organization, adopting a neutral point of view in certain edits but here I disagree when you say that the reader should make their own research or reach their own conclusion. Not all readers have the skill or patience to do that ,also this is the main article about Marie Antoinette and everything concerning her should be mainly in that article. Please when you make a change do it slowly if it is a major one, discuss it with me, you have seen my cooperation was totally positive and I helped you in the events and sources. I have a lot of books about Marie Antoinette and we can work together also on the first part of the article on the events between 1774 AND 1789, there is a lot of paraphrasing from Fraser in the first section, I have her book we can work together, I"ll fill the information's and you will correct and organize. Today I have added an important event for the period, the first of 14 of July celebration, a key event in the life of the Queen plus Necker, I left the other leaders as we agreed.I 'm also going to describe a fact, the Queen political role in the constitutional process of the war declaration.Thank you.(talk)Aubmn (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Hy I thought we agreed ,I did not revert your work, why are you reverting without discussion I did what we agreed on, you told me to write(talk)Aubmn (talk) 14:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Hy, would you please talk so that we can work together to make this article better, we almost agreed on 80 per cent of the Revolution Period, let 's finish it together, I"ll give the information and we will decide together, your cooperation can produce a wonderful article, with no consensus , there will be no stable article, did I not give you the information and did not revert you in most of the cases.(talk)Aubmn (talk) 15:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

I made significant edits to only a few places, and in each case eliminating redundancy & flowerly language (appropriate for Fraser, not appropriate for an encyclopedia entry) as well as cleaning up tense/possessive/word choice issues and generally trying to prune & polish. The addition on the Bastille Day celebration is useful, but it is important that only the key facts are included & there is no repetition.

If there are regions which are mostly paraphrases, please point me to them -- any extensive paraphrasing is getting into copyright issues.

I also was pondering whether the section on the Revolution might benefit by a few further divisions -- the escape attempt is one obvious pivot point and the war with Austria another one.

My remark on the other pages was meant that there are many details in here on these personages which aren't in those other pages; either that is an indication that they really aren't such important details OR the other pages would benefit from them.

With regard to drawing conclusions, that is what readers should be left mostly on their own; if you write a good exposition of the facts, then appropriate conclusions will flow naturally. Again, this is a critical difference between a biography and a biographical entry in an encyclopedia; the former is expected to take a side and the latter suffers if it takes sides Ok let 's agree, let 's work know on the article which is not concerned with the Revolution ,Ill point out the paraphrases, about the conclusion I agree but we must put also all points of views in a neutral manner, Finally we removed a lot but there must be some information ,at least the names and the main events,do you know that we are talking about one of the main period in human history in a few lines so please know as I gave you a lot of signs of good faith, give me one and don 't revert me as I didn t revert you, work on grammar ,organization ,paraphrasing I'll tell give you the informations(talkAubmn (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC))

Hi Krobison, please be aware I have asked for dispute resolution over Marie Antoinette. Thanks, SamWilson989 (talk) 00:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Here's a link to it. SamWilson989 (talk) 00:17, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Hy Krobison, how are you, I congratulate you on the decision to wait until mediation is put in place. Don t listen to NebY, he caused all this problems. I propose that we work together, you are a novice but you are good specially in organization and grammars. This is my proposition: First promise me not to edit or remove more informations on the revolutionary period; no problems on working on grammars or organization , you already made a lot of change in that section and I adopted them, if you do that, I'll do the same not adding or removing informations on the period after 1789. Second I 'll remove today many copyright violations in the first part of the article, after that I'll give you a whole week to work alone on the first part before 1789 and I 'll help you with informations if you need them but you leave alone the revolutionary period after all the changes you made,IF YOU ACCEPT, I'LL ANNOUNCE THE DEAL ON MARIE ANTOINETTE TALK PAGE AND REQUEST THE CANCELLING OF MEDIATION, GIVE ME PLEASE TODAY YOUR AMSWER. THANK YOU.(Aubmn)Aubmn (talk) 13:37, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Let me read through this more carefully (I'm at work now). One item that could use your expertise on the subject material -- I think "In the midst of preparations for sending help to France" should be "In the midst of preparations for sending help to the American Revolutionary forces" -- am I wrong? Krobison13 (talk) 14:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean French sent forces to America not the other way round  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aubmn (talk • contribs) 14:33, 22 January 2015 (UTC) 

It's in a paragraph that is discussion Austrian relationship to France & France getting involved in AR, so I think this sentence is an error (that it refers to the time as when France was preparing aid to America) but it could be correct if around that time Austria was preparing to send aid to France (I don't believe that is the case, but European History is an area I claim little expertise in). Here is larger context; I've bolded & italicized what I think is wrong

An even bigger problem, however, was the debt incurred by France during the Seven Years' War, still unpaid. It was further exacerbated by Vergennes and Marie Antoinette prodding Louis XVI to get involved in Great Britain's war with its North American colonies.[54] In the midst of preparations for sending help to France, and in the atmosphere of the first wave of libelles, Holy Roman Emperor Joseph came to call on his sister and brother-in-law on 18 April 1777, the subsequent six-week visit in Versailles a part of the attempt to figure out why their marriage had not been consummated.

If changed, it would read as

An even bigger problem, however, was the debt incurred by France during the Seven Years' War, still unpaid. It was further exacerbated by Vergennes and Marie Antoinette prodding Louis XVI to get involved in Great Britain's war with its North American colonies.[54] In the midst of preparations for sending help to the American rebels, and in the atmosphere of the first wave of libelles, Holy Roman Emperor Joseph came to call on his sister and brother-in-law on 18 April 1777, the subsequent six-week visit in Versailles a part of the attempt to figure out why their marriage had not been consummated. Krobison13 (talk) 14:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok that's good, I'm ok with that.(Aubmn)Aubmn (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy to see you back, do you want to work together.(Aubmn)Aubmn (talk) 16:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of file formats, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NCBI. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Project SIDA (September 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Project SIDA and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Krobison13, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 TT me 13:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Project SIDA has been accepted

Project SIDA, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

LaMona (talk) 00:25, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Krobison13. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Krobison13. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Krobison13. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)