Rjdeadly
|
Hi I've noticed that you have done a lot of work in May on Roman sites in Spain. I think this page of information needs to be moved to Archaeological Park of Segobriga which links to List of Roman sites in Spain. I may do this in a day or so if that's okay with you. I haven't edited Wikipedia for a while but I thought I might do something on this as I have some photos. SuzanneKn (talk) 14:48, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
- Just seen your comment. I think Segobriga is important enough to need its own page, like the Spanish one, without the need to include "Archaeological Park" in the Title. I will add to it soon. I have no objection to including the material in Archaeological Park of Segobriga. --Rjdeadly (talk) 17:43, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Translations
editHello. It seems you're interested in having some articles on locations in Spain created here on English Wikipedia. If the articles are already on Spanish Wikipedia and you'd like to recommend that others use those as the basis for articles in English here, a couple of ways to go about that are explained at WP:Translation. If you want to take the approach you were taking, you should at least create proper stubs in English. If you do that, then the {{Expand Spanish}} template acts as a suggestion to anyone who might be inclined to expand the stub that they might borrow material from the Spanish version if they are so inclined. If you add no content on your own, it's as though you're giving out assignments for others to do for you. :-) —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
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) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 19
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Limnaia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stratos. 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) 09:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 27
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicopolis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Odeon. 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) 10:07, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 3
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicopolis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colonia. 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) 11:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 11
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
- Daphnous
- added a link pointing to Agios Konstantinos
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 28
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Delphi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hellenic. 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) 10:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 10
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Delphi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hieron and Syracuse. 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) 10:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 26
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 09:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 3
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aqua Augusta (Naples), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantine. 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) 10:27, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 27
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orchomenus (Boeotia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dromos. 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) 10:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 3
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tarquinia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colonia. 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) 09:54, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
A page you started (Insula (Roman city)) has been reviewed!
editThanks for creating Insula (Roman city), Rjdeadly!
Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
I've added some extra sources and linked to the meaning of an apartment building.
To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
edit
Hello, Rjdeadly. 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)
Copy-pasting from Wikipedia
editHi! I noticed that you copy-pasted material from Rome into Founding of Rome with the parent page in read-only mode. The citations are therefore merely numeric, and empty per this diff]. Obviously, you didn't thoroughly check the results of your edit. You also performed the copy-paste without acknowledging the Wikipedia source. I really would prefer not to kick up a fuss about this at administrative level, as you do good work here; but you've been politely informed about this and similar copyright issues on several occasions by others, myself included, and have been briefly blocked for breaches in the not-too-distant past. You were unblocked on the understanding that you undertook to comply with policy. Please fix things up at Founding of Rome, take the relevant policy more seriously, and edit with more care in future. Thanks in advance for dealing with this. Best, Haploidavey ([[User talk:|talk]]) 16:39, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Haploidavey: Ok I've explained the text copying on the relevant talk pages, but I don't know how else to comply e.g. to modify the edit summary for the Founding of Rome as it's too late for that nowRjdeadly (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping, and the rapid response. Of course, once you hit "save", that's that -- whatever you've done is in the history, "warts and all" -- but you've done the right thing in crediting the source on the talk-page. The citation problem remains, and must be addressed. I suggest you open both Founding of Rome and the Rome article in edit mode, and replace the relevant Founding of Rome content complete with fully embedded inline citations. Then carefully check the refs, giving full titles etc if these have been truncated (which is likely). Complete the edit summary (including acknowledgment of source), hit save, et voila! you've made good. Hope that's clear. Haploidavey (talk) 08:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Haploidavey: Thanks. Hope that's ok now Rjdeadly (talk) 10:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- Pretty much OK, apart from the Coarelli reference, which should be written in full, with page number, for the first use under "References". Although Coarelli is also under "Further reading", that's a slightly different issue (it suggests reading the whole work, not just the particular page used in the references. It would also be helpful to include the relevant page number for Heiken, G., Funiciello, R. and De Rita, D. (2005). Cheers. Haploidavey (talk) 10:57, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- Now you are asking me to further improve the originals, as the Coarelli reference was not written in full for its first use, neither was relevant page number given for Heiken. Perhaps someone else can help.Rjdeadly (talk) 13:58, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- Well, one can ask, and every little helps. But as you say... Haploidavey (talk) 14:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, call me cynical but I have yet to see much major support on improving some of the very poor pages on similar subjects in the last few yearsRjdeadly (talk) 16:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 8
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stoic. 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) 10:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 6
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lancaster, Lancashire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albinus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Roman Walls & Limes
editHi, you seem to be systematically emptying categories of the articles. You seem to have a preference for Category:Roman defensive walls in Britain. Why is this? What's your problem with categorising walls / limes by Roman province? Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
- Roman Walls is a nonsensical category. There are many thousands of Roman walls most of which do not warrant a description nor certainly a category. What is meant by walls in these pages is "defensive walls" so the correct description should be used. "Limes" is word that is obscure and has a specific meaning and context, mainly applying to the border in Germany. The use of this word elsewhere is a bizarre invention. "Defensive wall" is clear, obvious and better. Rjdeadly (talk) 19:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
edit Hello, Rjdeadly. 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
edit Hello, Rjdeadly. 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)
October 2019
edit
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Motya. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- It is not my personal view as the quality of this sculpture is well documented in the references (and others) given. You seem to think there is no difference between a superb sculpture and a lump of stone, and no way of judging the quality of pieces of art. Is the Mona Lisa just a piece of cloth and paint? Rjdeadly (talk) 11:49, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
edit| | 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 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 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 |
Disambiguation link notification for December 27
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lunt Roman Fort, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Principia (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) 09:15, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Category:Etruscan history has been nominated for merging to Category:Etruscans
edit
Category:Etruscan history has been nominated for merging to Category:Etruscans. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 11:38, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 18
editAn automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Colebrooke, Devon
- added a link pointing to Agger
- Viroconium Cornoviorum
- added a link pointing to Agricola
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
edit| | 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 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 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 |
Villa Guilia (Ventotene) moved to draftspace
editAn article you recently created, Villa Guilia (Ventotene), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 TT me 16:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 11
editAn automated process has detected that when you recently edited House of the Prince of Naples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atrium.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
edit| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
Disambiguation link notification for April 21
editAn automated process has detected that when you recently edited Avellino, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forum.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Villa Guilia (Ventotene)
edit
Hello, Rjdeadly. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Villa Guilia (Ventotene), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 6
editAn automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cortona, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atrium.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
November 2022
edit Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Melania the Younger. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 12:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Villa Giulia (Ventotene) has been accepted
edit
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Theroadislong (talk) 21:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC)AfC notification: Draft:Roman villa of Quintus Axius has a new comment
edit Your submission at Articles for creation: Roman villa of Quintus Axius has been accepted
edit Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Rusalkii (talk) 20:11, 25 November 2022 (UTC)- Great article, thank you! Have you considered submitting your new articles to WP:DYK? Rusalkii (talk) 20:50, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Didn't know about WP:DYK, I'll take a look. Rjdeadly (talk) 21:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
editHello, Rjdeadly. Thank you for your work on Villa of Domitian (Sabaudia). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:56, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome09:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC) Rjdeadly (talk) 09:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Ways to improve Via Flacca
editHello, Rjdeadly,
Thank you for creating Via Flacca.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
I've tagged the article for needing additional citations. There are some studies on Google Scholar and Books on Google Books that may help. Otherwise, interesting article!
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|The Night Watch}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
edit 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) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Thank you!
editGreetings! Thank you so much for the wonderful work in expanding the interesting article Aquae Cutiliae by adding rare information and photos. Thirukannan (talk) 03:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
editHello, Rjdeadly. Thank you for your work on Roman villa of Ossaia. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 22:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome Rjdeadly (talk) 14:08, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
editHello, Rjdeadly. Thank you for your work on Sanctuary of Hercules Victor (Tivoli). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
February 2023
edit
Hello, I'm Ppt91. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Sabaudia, but you didn't provide a source. Please include a citation to a reliable source. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ppt91 (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
The article Mirebeau (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:02, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Giallo antico moved to draftspace
editAn article you recently created, Giallo antico, is not suitable as written to remain published. While it appears to be notable, it needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. There are large sections which are wholly uncited. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. I did this rather than removing the uncited material in the article, which I felt would be more disruptive. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask on my talk page. When you have the required sourcing (and every assertion needs a source), and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Or feel free to ping me to take another look.Onel5969 TT me 12:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- I find it bizarre that the equivalent page on Italian Wikipedia https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmo_giallo_antico from which the page is derived has been there for many years, yet it has the same number of references. Why do you have different criteria for their pages?
- Also there are many english wiki pages with very few references and have been there for many years. Rjdeadly (talk) 10:48, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Villa of Trajan moved to draftspace
editAn article you recently created, Villa of Trajan, is not suitable as written to remain published. While it appears to be notable, it needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. There are large sections which are wholly uncited. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. I did this rather than removing the uncited material in the article, which I felt would be more disruptive. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask on my talk page. When you have the required sourcing (and every assertion needs a source), and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Or feel free to ping me to take another look.Onel5969 TT me 10:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Giallo antico has been accepted
edit Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
– Joe (talk) 09:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Your submission at Articles for creation: Villa of Trajan has been accepted
edit Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
– Joe (talk) 09:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Recent edit reversion
editIn this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.
I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 13:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Sphilbrick
- As I said in one of the first edits, most of the material added was translated text from https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elea-Velia. Other material was from elswhere but should not be copyrighted. So there should be no reason for you to revert it :Rjdeadly (talk) 15:23, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia. I do see that one of your edits did identify that it came from another Wikipedia article. While that notification didn't meet the best practices, I should have noticed that and simply asked you to do the attribution correctly in the future. Thanks for bringing this to my attention — I have restored the version. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I moved Temple of Hera, Agrigento to draft space
editHello @Rjdeadly,
Hope all is well. I draftified Temple of Hera, Agrigento-- I am not very sure if the state of the article is good enough to go up to the main space. I think it will be nice to have more citations and formatting.
Kindly let me know if I have made a mistake. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 15:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- @TheLonelyPather
- I don't understand why you've done this. I've effectively changed the name of the article from Temple of Hera Lacinia, because this title was wrong, to Temple of Hera, Agrigento, by moving the contents to the new page, as I explained already. The original article has been a wiki page for 10 years and, although poor, was considered acceptable all that time! So why on earth should the contents be judged "not good enough" now? I even improved the contents by adding one reference.Rjdeadly (talk) 17:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the mistake. I will move Temple of Hera, Agrigento back to main space. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 23:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- @TheLonelyPather OK thanksRjdeadly (talk) 09:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- @TheLonelyPather
November 2023
edit
Your recent editing history at Punic people shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Skitash (talk) 14:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Roman pronunciation
editIn the page "roman empire" you reverted my edit by claiming that roman pronunciation is unknown, even though indicating long vowels was a practice common among the ancient romans themselves by use of the apex. I do not wish to revert it back to my revision, as that would go against wikimedia's rules. But please, tell me why you believe it is that way when the classical pronunciation is accurately known today. Ελίας (talk) 19:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ελίας Where is your evidence that "indicating long vowels was a practice common among the ancient romans themselves..."? It was rather rare and limited to some classes and examples, and furthermore as the Wikipedia article Latin phonology and orthography states: "Latin phonology continually evolved over the centuries, making it difficult for speakers in one era to know how Latin was spoken before then" and modern scholarship is at best a reconstruction of Classical Latin's phonemes.Rjdeadly (talk) 21:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's not because a practice was rare that it didn't exist. Also, even though latin phonology evolved over time, the long and short phonemes have distinct reflexes in the romance languages, with the exception of /a/. Thus, not only is the reconstruction reliable and easily reproduced, it is also necessary to distinguish otherwise identical forms and to indicate proper pronunciation. Ελίας (talk) 22:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ελίας No-one said it didn't exist, but "..a practice common among the ancient romans.." is not justified. The Romance languages are far from ancient Latin. Rjdeadly (talk) 12:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- I know, but this was just to illustrate my point. If these phonemes have different reflexes in romance languages, then it's proof of their importance. Ελίας (talk) 12:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ελίας That does not mean that "..the classical pronunciation is accurately known today". Rjdeadly (talk) 12:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- I know, but this was just to illustrate my point. If these phonemes have different reflexes in romance languages, then it's proof of their importance. Ελίας (talk) 12:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ελίας No-one said it didn't exist, but "..a practice common among the ancient romans.." is not justified. The Romance languages are far from ancient Latin. Rjdeadly (talk) 12:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's not because a practice was rare that it didn't exist. Also, even though latin phonology evolved over time, the long and short phonemes have distinct reflexes in the romance languages, with the exception of /a/. Thus, not only is the reconstruction reliable and easily reproduced, it is also necessary to distinguish otherwise identical forms and to indicate proper pronunciation. Ελίας (talk) 22:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
The article Tiermes (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title and no other topics can be found within a reasonable time.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
edit 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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Roman forts in Bulgaria
edit
A tag has been placed on Category:Roman forts in Bulgaria indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Cut-and-paste moves
edit Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Bersobis a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Pppery I tried the "Move" but it didn't allow it because there was some message about not allowing moves to names with parantheses Rjdeadly (talk) 22:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 16
editAn automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kladovo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pontes.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:03, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
The article Argamum has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
not notable
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 13:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
@Aunva6:Not notable???? Just read the article, if that's not notable, what is? They is plenty of rubbish in Wkipedia that should be deleted.Rjdeadly (talk) 15:37, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
CCI Notice
editHello, Rjdeadly. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. Thank you. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- @GreenLipstickLesbian You don't say what it refers to so I have no clue. Rjdeadly (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, Rjdeadly.
- While the edit that prompted me to start looking was this one, which contained both close paraphrasing of a source and an unattributed copying from another Wikipedia page, I filed the request upon seeing that you were previously blocked for copyright violations and then, since your unblock, been warned at least five times for continuing to insert copyright violations into articles. [1][2][3][4][5]. Do you have any further questions? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 10:21, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Just wanted to let you know that we have opened the investigation. The4lines |||| (Talk) (Contributions) 03:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
July 2024
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. MER-C 16:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Rjdeadly (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I apparently closely paraphrased a source which I tried to avoid and which I am sorry for, but how close a paraphrase is to a source is sometimes not easy to judge when including the key points. The unattributed copy from another Wikipedia page is also regrettable and something which I usually avoid but I must have made an error this time, but given that it is the public domain it doesn't seem so serious. Given the many significant contributions to improving pages, of new pages and many new images I've contributed over the years it seems to me that banning me is harsh and gives me no credit for many 100s of hours of input Rjdeadly (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Copyright violations potentially put Wikipedia in legal jeopardy, so we must take such matters seriously to protect the project. Your good contributions don't outweigh the violations. This isn't your first offense. 331dot (talk) 22:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.