Welcome to Wikipedia, Carlstak! Thank you for your contributions. I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{ helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Marek. 69 ^talk 23:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek. 69 ^talk 01:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC) reply

I just wanted to let you know I ran into you on the James Dean page, as I was making my very first edit there. In turn you led me to the great, nice and welcoming Marek. Since you and I seem to be in the same place - discovering Wiki editing, etc, I just wanted to welcome you and send my thoughts your way. Good luck and have fun! Maybe I'll run into you again. However (and obviously) I'm not the to go to for many answers yet lol. Just extending my warm wishes. Jill333 ( talk) 22:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC) reply

As thanks for all the work on Original Town of Fernandina Historic Site. Happy Thanksgiving! :) ‖ Ebyabe talk - General Health ‖ 20:56, 23 November 2011 (UTC) reply

This is your personal opinion. You do not know the standards of Wikipedia. This can be seen on your opinions and very short internship at Wikipedia. Subtropical-man ( talk) 17:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply

How long I've been editing at Wikipedia is immaterial to whether or not my opinion is correct, and you haven't answered my question. How can you show that Barcelona is the seventh most important fashion capital in the world? What is your source for this dubious information? Your English most definitely needs improvement, as shown here: "...on your opinions". Carlstak ( talk) 17:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello. Article Valencia on the Spanish Wikipedia is significantly expanded. You well know English and Spanish, please translate this article from Spanish Wikipedia ( es:Valencia) to English Wikipedia ( Valencia, Spain). Subtropical-man ( talk) 14:03, 26 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Editors who contribute text to English Wikipedia should learn to write it correctly. Carlstak ( talk) 04:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Not really. Wikipedia is open and free project, anyone can edit. Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles. You do not need to know the language perfectly. You can enter the content (knowledge) to Wikipedia, if it is not perfectly written, another user could improve - this is idea of Wikipedia. Your English is maybe very good, but like a language of teacher, not typical "man" (as "John Smith"). Besides, it is puzzling that some articles have been months without change, and was ok. You come on Wikipedia and it turns out that everything is bad, everything you need to improve. Please see: [2]: left column is a test writen by many other users, right column is a test writen by... you. Both texts are well written. In other words, encyclopedia is not dictionary, this is bank of knowledge on specific topics, Wikipedia is open and free encyclopedia - anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles and this is official motto of Wikipedia. Subtropical-man ( talk) 14:01, 31 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak,

First of all, I have to congratulate you because of all the great job you're doing in the Valencia article: you're doing something that should have been done ages ago! However, there's a small problem with what you're doing, and it's that you haven't added a single reference. As far as I know, Wikipedia is based on the principle of verifiability, so all the information which can be challenged should be referenced (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). -- Erraticus ( talk) 22:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your response. Yes, I'm quite aware of Wikipedia's policy. You realize, I am sure, that this is a work in progress. My contributions to the Valencia article were mostly the result of laborious translation and fact-checking from the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedias.

There are plenty of references in those articles, but I haven't got around to translating and fact-checking them from Spanish and Catalan.

Would you care to collaborate in this project and contribute some in-line citations and references, if you can translate from either language? Carlstak ( talk) 23:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Ok, Carlstack, all right: my english is really very bad. As I'm going to put on the discussion the sources, we have time to make all the corrections, and it's true that someone is going to write (or correct them), because my english is awful. My best salutations, Jorge alo ( talk) 15:00, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

One thing I forgot: the article is already good, but there are some (only a few) errors and we can put it even better (and joining all the references needed). Jorge alo ( talk) 15:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I agree interely with you: the great problem it's really my english (very bad). But there are also some historic nuances that are a little difficult for me to explain. for example, Leonor Teles, by the Treaty, could not proclaim them, it was necessary a proclamation by the naturals (all people that was propietary), and who said the treaty was unfair was Juan I of Castile and a part of his counselors (I think I will arrived to that passage today, maybe). But I think that with the sources and the translations, in the end all will be clear. I'm going to work on this maybe two months, or more, and I not only agree with you on not making changes before talking about it, but I even ask you to do them, after we talked, because of my bad english (I can read more or less easy, with the diccionary help, but I'm a danger on writing. Jorge alo ( talk) 16:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

A question I forgot: I think, for what you said about your translation, that you can read well portuguese and castilian, no? Jorge alo ( talk) 16:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I welcome your contributions, Jorge, and I would be happy to collaborate with you in adding references and inline citations to the article. I travel frequently, so I may not always respond to your communications immediately, but I will usually be able to get to them within twenty-four hours.

I am not a native speaker of Castilian or Portuguese, but I read them fairly well. With time and effort I can produce good translations into English; I spend more time on fact-checking and reading sources than I do on the translation. You might find Google Translate of assistance in translating to English, it yields much better results than Babelfish. If you use Mozilla's Firefox browser, the gTranslate add-on by Pau Tomàs is especially useful and adds great functionality on any web page. Carlstak ( talk) 17:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Ok, let's work. Don't bodher with the time on answering, we have all the time on the world (I confess I have a problem with time: for me it seems that "thing" don't exist). It's enough that you read what I'm puting on the discussion page, and you can make the improvements without saying nothing to me, because as I'm going only little by little, step after step, I can easilly follow the corrections and improvements you will make on the text. Abraço, Jorge alo ( talk) 17:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC) reply

@Carlstak, there are two great errors to correct on the borders of sucession, in the end. The first, we can't separate León From Castile because, in that time, it was only a Crown. So, it´s a great mistake to say the he was a) King of Castile and B) King of León. He was King of Castile and of Leon. This article is the only one that has such border after the preceded unification of the two Crowns. Second, it's true that even João das Regras, on Cortes of Coimbra, 1385, classified John I of Castile as a pretender and as one of the possible heirs of the portuguese Crown. So, no doubt he was a recognized pretender, but, first, I think it's inedit research to say that a pretension is as tittle, and, second, a pretender can't be preceded and succeded by Kings. Logically: or he was a King preceded and succeded by kings or he was a pretender succeded and preceded by pretenders on a specific pretension. As we say in my country, we can't make the addition of oranges with apples. So, I propose the quick correction of these borders. Abraço, Jorge alo ( talk) 15:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your input, Jorge. I will address this today, as soon as I have a chance. Muito obrigado, Carlstak ( talk) 17:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC) reply

My proposition: put in the end, on the center, as it is now, a «pretension» border without any «preceded» and «succeed» spaces, so, the pretension space all alone aligned with, also in the center, but above, King of Castile and León (Lord of Molina was one of his titles, but Molina was also part of the Crown of Castile and León, so we can not and do not need to discriminate). The pretension wasn't till 1385, but till his death on 1390, and we even can wonder if his strange death had nothing to do with this (but this we can't put in the article: there is no known source). So, we can put on the «pretension border» that final year: 1390. Jorge alo ( talk) 20:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I am not prepared to change the title of the article to "John I of Castile and León", if that is what you mean, as it would be a major change that would require discussion on the talk page and general consensus.

The Crown of Castile, formed in 1230, did include León; it was definitely a union of the crowns and parliaments of the kingdoms of Castile and León upon the accession of King Ferdinand III of Castile to the vacant Leonese throne. The Spanish Wikipedia refers to him as Juan I de Castilla. Carlstak ( talk) 21:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Like this, the article don't say his pretension was a title, and also don't say he was King of Portugal. Only say that he maintained his pretension during all his life, and that is true and correct to say. Jorge alo ( talk) 20:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure what you mean, Jorge. To say that "John I of Castile assumed the title and coat of arms of King of Portugal" does not imply in English that he was accepted as such by the Portuguese. It would be awkward in this context to say he pretended to the throne, since the dispute between the different factions in support or against his pretension is already made clear in the text. I've made a faithful translation of the text in Spanish Wikipedia: "Juan I de Castilla adoptó el título y armas de rey de Portugal".

As far as I can see, the article as presently written does not refer to John the I of Castile by the title of "John I of Portugal", although there is one instance where the wording can be improved to clarify that it was the Master of Aviz who became John the I of Portugal. I am making that change now. Does this satisfy your contention? Carlstak ( talk) 21:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Ok, Carl, I'm going to try tyo explain the problems: 1) If The Crowns where unified on one, there was only one Crown and we can't put two crowns on his head: King of Castile, King of León = two times king; two Crowns. And the name of that Crown was: «Crown of Castile and León». If he was a pretender he was not preceded, as pretender, by King Ferdinand I (King Ferdinand I was pretender to what?], not succeed by King John I. Tell me, please, John I of Castile was preceded and succeed on what? Other questions: he didn't took the arms of Portugal, he tooked the arms and mixed (mezclar) them with the arms of Castile and León. The cry of his acclamation on the streets of Toledo was «King of Castile and Portugal». His title was «King of Castile and of León and of Portugal and of Toledo, etc.» On the year of 1390, a litle before the Castilian Cortes, he said what was his problem: that the Portuguese accused him of having mixed the arms and the Kingdoms of Portugal and Castile, with the loss of independency of Portugal. So, what he proposed to his counselors? This amazing thing: to give up of the Crown of Castile, to his son Henry, so the Portuguese could accept him as King of Portugal! Amazing, no?

But let's go with cool, I have already saw you are making a big effort. I thinK we can put Ayala's text translation on the note you create about John I of Castile's issue. What you say? Abraço, Jorge alo ( talk) 00:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Yes, no problem. Done. Obrigado, Carlstak ( talk) 05:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Ok, you didn't answered to the rest of what I said and I could already ask mediation, but I'm not going to do that, because I believe you are acting on good faith, and that we two can make a good work together. Also what is wrong on the text, even some great mistakes, it is not crucial. By the way, one more: what was done November and on December 1383 was not a proclamation, it was an essay of acclamation. But we have time to clarify all this, and in the end all will be proper. I begin to like very much, on the text, the paragraph of te «issue», it's powerful, no? With all that notes. I'm going to improve the reference to the book, because it's a eigteenth century critical edition of Ayala's Chronicles, made by Eugenio LLaguno de Amirola. I'm going to continue to put excerpts of Ayala on the discussion page, and, for systematic reasons, I'm not going to traduce it, already. If you want, and if you would be so kind, you can begin traduce them. I think the text speaks to much about 1383-1385 crisis and don't speak about other important matters of is reign, so I'm going to begin to refer such matters. To clean the space, when a translation on the discussion page will be integrate on the article, I will eliminate the already integrated text of the discussion page, only referring that action: «text already integrate on the article». But, before eliminate, I'm going to do a last confrontation of the castilian text (in this case) with the original, to remove some eventual errors (it's old castilian, in this case, and I can have done some little mistakes). Abraço, Jorge alo ( talk) 19:00, 8 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Jorge, I have bent over backwards to accommodate you. Part of the "problem" may be that your grasp of English is lacking, and consequently it is sometimes difficult to understand what you're saying, or just what exactly you want. I am curious about one thing: I made a faithful translation from the equivalent article on Spanish Wikipedia; why aren't you pressing for these changes there first, as that would seem more appropriate? Could it be because you know that the Spaniards might not accept them? The article is about a Spanish king, and you are Portuguese. You seem to have an agenda that is not strictly from a strictly neutral point of view; also, I gather you want to call King John I of Castile "King John I of Castile and León". That would violate the accepted convention here at Wikipedia and in the English-speaking world generally, as well as the Spanish-speaking one. I suggest you propose these changes (whatever they are, as I'm not sure) at Spanish Wikipedia and see what kind of reception you get. It is difficult communicating with you in English, and this is English Wikpedia, after all. Carlstak ( talk) 21:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Till is father all the Kings are caracterized as «king of Castile and León», in the end. From him they are caracterized two times, King of Castile, King of León, with their regnal titles divided. Why?

Soon, more four or five days, and I will also go, I hope, in Wikipedia on Spanish. But I'm going to resolve this matter, speaking of agendas, here, on english. This is a problem since 2007, lots of time before I entered Wikipédia, on 2010. I've already discussed it on Portuguese, French, English, and, as you can understand, it's time to me to finish with the question. I'm going to say something in spanish about, on Wikipédia on Spanish, but I'm going to resolve the matter here, on Wikipédia on English, with my bad english. Why? Because like that historians of all over the world that write on Wikipedia can come here, to the discussion. So, "my agenda", to this matter, it's to clarify it, once for all, and with the help of the most great number possible of Wikipedian historians. So, we can list, already, the points where we do not agree, on the discussion page, and ask the mediation of historians to resolve the matter. But, at the same time, as I already told you, I'm going to continue with the work on the sources. If you want to cooperate, very well, for me. If you do not want to cooperate, it's with you, you are free to do what you want. By the way, I do not want to call him «King of Castile and León», Castile is enough. What I do not want are his regnal titles divided, as they were two Crowns, and I also want to know on what he was preceded and succeeded by King Ferdinand I and King John I, what the three have of commun on that «pretence border». Have I made myself clear? Here are two questions, already, to ask mediation. Abraço, Jorge alo ( talk) 03:29, 9 March 2012 (UTC) reply

No, I don't know what you mean, I have no idea. Please request mediation, maybe an administrator can figure out what you want and sort it out. Não faz mal. Carlstak ( talk) 03:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC) reply

What I'm going to ask is a RFC, a request for comment, and also a request of opinion to all historians of Wikipedia en. But, obviously, I shall do so after have listed the questions that I want to put. Abraço, and good night, Jorge alo ( talk) 04:01, 9 March 2012 (UTC) reply

File:Flag of the Ainu people.png

Greetings, saw your edits at Ainu people and thought you might like to know that we just founded the Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Ainu task force. Hope to see you on the Members list! MatthewVanitas ( talk) 18:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Te felicito por el artículo sobre la historia de Málaga. Magnífico.

I congratulate you for the article about the history of Malaga. Magnificent. -- Alex320000 ( talk) 21:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Muchas gracias, Señor.

Many thanks. Málaga has a special place in my heart—it is where I first saw Andalusia. Carlstak ( talk) 02:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Please don't revert James Dean again. Discuss at Talk:James_Dean#Recent_article_revision_from_sandbox. Thanks! -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 00:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Bueno el contenido previo es un completo desastre que no se entiende nada de nada (en ningún idioma). Mi lenguaje es deficiente pero relatan coherentemente lo sucedido en América. Correcto si corrijes el lenguaje. Pero no reviertas para dejar la edición previa disparatada.-- Santos30 ( talk) 14:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

¿dónde necesitas las referencias? ¿Qué es lo que no comprendes?. Habla claro.-- Santos30 ( talk) 14:45, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

You appear to have problems with operating sock puppet accounts and edit warring. Let's have an admin take a look. Carlstak ( talk) 14:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

But what is your interest in Americas and Spain XIX?, you go to improve the language or not?, for what you need references?. Hummm -- Santos30 ( talk) 15:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

The information you're introducing is unsourced. Please provide references. Carlstak ( talk) 15:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

No problem with that, put cite required where you need and I put references. No ningún hay problema por eso ¿qué necesitas que te explique? Puedo ampliar detalles si lo deseas, señalame si hay algún punto que te ha inquietado excatamente qué es. Ve al grano.-- Santos30 ( talk) 15:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello, Carlstak. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Santos30 ( talk) 16:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:26, 30 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Dear WikiProject Spain member,

There is currently a proposal to ban articles concerning a large area of southern Andalusia from appearing on the Main Page of Wikipedia in the Did you know? section. This would affect a significant number of articles within the scope of WikiProject Spain. If you have a view on this proposal, please see Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs‎#Proposal for one-year moratorium on Gibraltarpedia DYKs. In addition, you may have a view on an alternative proposal to lift restrictions on Gibraltar-related articles on DYK - please see Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs#Proposal for lifting the restrictions on Gibraltar-related DYKs. Prioryman ( talk) 14:24, 16 February 2013 (UTC) reply

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For work on the Marbella article. keep up the good work. LibStar ( talk) 06:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Work still in progress.:-) Carlstak ( talk) 11:36, 16 April 2013 (UTC) reply

Have the book by Schubert in front of me, from 1990..do you refer to the liberal triennium in your reference to this book as the civil unrest in Spain after Napoleon? 94.211.59.112 ( talk) 14:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC) reply

I have corrected the page number of the citation to 288, part of a chronology which refers to Riego's revolt beginning the Revolution of 1820, when Goya was 74. Carlstak ( talk) 02:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC) reply

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Carlstak! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch ( talk) 00:24, 23 May 2013 (UTC) reply

This does not exist in the Arabic Wikipedia.

I am an Arab and I did not hear this term no once in My life.

Goodbye.

-- Samer154 ( talk) 19:28, 26 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Sorry, but your life experience does not count as an authoritative source. Carlstak ( talk) 20:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC) reply

After all that work you have done on the two Kindelan brothers,you deserve a light snack. Much appreciated. Viking1808 ( talk) 08:25, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much. Carlstak ( talk) 09:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello Carlstak. First of all I would like to congratulate you for your excellent work on the article History of Malaga. Being you a person concerned about the articles of Malaga, I would ask to express its opinion in this discussion, if you would be so kind. Thanking you in advance, greetings.-- LTblb ( talk) 21:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply

I thank you sincerely for your editing and your comments on the discussion. Best regards.-- LTblb ( talk) 22:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Thank you for alerting me to the situation. Carlstak ( talk) 01:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Just to give you a heads up, I reverted this edit of yours. It appeared to only be dash format changes, which doesn't seem a helpful change (and I hope your other edits aren't similar as far as only changing dash formats) Personally I disagree that any script should change the dash format at all, but changes that appear to *only* make dash format changes are really pointless - they appear exactly the same to readers in HTML anyway. So the format should be up to editors of the page. It's much easier to tell the difference between an n-dash and an em-dash in the – forms, IMHO, and if it doesn't matter to readers, what's the point of changing it? Clearly the original editor preferred it that way...

It's a very minor issue of course, so nothing too big a deal, just a pet peeve of mine that so many automated scripts consider it an improvement to change the dash format for no reason... SnowFire ( talk) 04:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC) reply

It is trivial, but I can only echo your own fears for me back at you! If the dash format doesn't matter, why go on a "crusade" to change it?

To be 100% clear, if you want to use Unicode dashes on pages you edit, more power to you, great, use the format you like. I just don't see the benefit of going to other pages you don't edit and "cleaning them up" to use a different format when it's a convention that only matters for the editors of a page, not the readers of one. My two cents. SnowFire ( talk) 18:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC) reply

You are overreacting. I didn't challenge your revert, did I? You are also quite mistaken, I have edited Revolt of the Communeros previously; as an active member of the Wikipedia Spain project, the subject is of special interest to me. I am on no crusade, I was just doing routine maintenance. Carlstak ( talk) 01:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC) reply

As I gave two substantial reasons, please dont ignore them and simply characterise the edits as "arbitrary personal preferences". Ceoil ( talk) 02:27, 31 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the reply. Your desired edit is a substantial change to long standing state of article, you should expect some reaction without any discussion or warning on talk page. Carlstak ( talk) 03:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC) reply

You are not correct..he is not a designer nor a builder he is a golf course superintendent-- Allochek ( talk) 11:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Corrected text. It's not clear Chennault even still lives in New Smyrna, your own link says he's from Miami Beach. Carlstak ( talk) 02:32, 21 September 2013 (UTC) reply

So be it. Although Americans more understandable - superintendent. Lives and here and there, but more in New Smyrna (parents, sister).-- Allochek ( talk) 21:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak. I should be the last guy to comment about an article on a user's talkpage. I find such visits unnecessary and perhaps annoying. But I felt that I should comment here to let you know that you make some very good points with which I agree completely. However I think that some comments regarding the other editors should not be given so much emphasis because they detract from the other excellent points which you are making. This is not meant as criticism but given that I support your points I think the discussion could be helped if we stayed focused on the article issues. Sorry for the trouble. Best regards. Δρ.Κ.  ^{λόγος πράξις} 15:42, 18 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your advice. I will temper my comments. Carlstak ( talk) 15:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much Carlstak for considering my comments. I'll read the replies a bit later at the article talk and try to comment. All the best. Δρ.Κ.  ^{λόγος πράξις} 16:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC) reply

The article Curse of James Dean's car has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to be original research.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. reddogsix ( talk) 01:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC) reddogsix ( talk) 01:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC) reply

These look like great edits you are doing, but it'd be appreciated if you could uncheck the minor edit box unless your edits are genuinely minor. Thanks a lot, -- John ( talk) 20:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

It would be helpful if you mentioned exactly which edits you think should have been marked minor, as I have no idea which ones you mean. If you look at my contributions, you'll see that I don't mark all my edits as minor, by any means. Surely you realize that sometimes the "minor" designation is subjective. Carlstak ( talk) 20:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Certainly. Here is an example. -- John ( talk) 20:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Well, since I simply edited the lede to conform to WP policy, I didn't consider it a non-minor issue. Carlstak ( talk) 20:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions. Examples include typographical corrections, formatting and presentational changes, and rearrangements of text without modification of its content. A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. It needn't be a big deal, but in my judgement, that edit fell outside the area recommended. When you don't mark as minor, it's more likely others will review your work, something most editors welcome. -- John ( talk) 20:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

There's no need to make a mountain out of a dunghill. As I said, a cursory check of my contributions history shows that I strive to do just what you say. Now, don't you have better things to do? Carlstak ( talk) 21:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

See, this isn't a minor edit either. As I said it needn't be a big deal, but at this stage I am asking you nicely, as an admin, not to mark edits like that as minor, for the reason I gave above. Will you try to go along with that, please? -- John ( talk) 21:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Adding a source to a page is a non-minor edit? That's news to me. I will not tick the minor edit box in future, but I am surprised; you are the first editor to ever bring this up after thousands of edits I've made. By the way, I've always noted in the summary when I add a source, so that other editors would be alerted. Carlstak ( talk) 21:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks, that's great. Some editors (though not me) have checked a box that means they don't see edits marked minor in their watchlist. I'd save it for extremely minor typos and formats; use "A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute" as your yardstick, and bear in mind that people here are capable of disputing extremely minor changes, as you'll know if you've been here a while. Take care and let me know if I can ever be of any help to you. -- John ( talk) 21:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC) reply

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:04, 9 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:33, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Nikkimaria ( talk) 19:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, Carlstak. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Please join the discussion about the fate of this article. 98.174.223.41 ( talk) 20:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello: it's a violation of our WP:AGF policy to accuse me of being a "POV warrior." [3] The information you added to the Independent Institute article is in clear violation of a number of Wikipedia policies, including WP:NPOV and WP:RS. Please keep your edit summaries civil. Safehaven86 ( talk) 01:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC) reply

There was nothing uncivil about my edit summary. I did not add the material you objected to and reverted initially . I merely added sources to it. After your revert with its accusatory summary, I restored some of the content and reworded part of it. Please spare us the lawyering. Carlstak ( talk) 01:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Per Wikipedia:No personal attacks, "Comment on content, not on the contributor." My edit summaries stated "Greenpeace is not WP:RS" [4] and "The language here is incredibly biased and violates WP:BLP, it's also a huge WP:COATRACK." [5] Both of those edit summaries are clearly about content, and not about contributors. Your edit summary stated "Partial revert of whitewash edit and removal of sourced content by POV warrior." [6] That's a pretty clear violation of WP:NPA. Please don't do it again. Safehaven86 ( talk) 02:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Please leave me alone. I didn't revert your revert. You have a zest for this sort of thing. Keep it on the article talk page. Carlstak ( talk) 03:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your numerous edits on Mauricio González-Gordon y Díez. I have had the article nominated for GA since May and I hope it will succeed. Since it is now one of the five oldest unreviewed GA nominations I suppose someone will take it up soon. Crispulop ( talk) 23:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your notice. I will pay special attention to the article when time allows; it would be very nice to see it become a GA. Fingers crossed. Carlstak ( talk) 00:55, 6 November 2014 (UTC) reply

It has been promoted to GA. Thank you for your contributions. Crispulop ( talk) 19:27, 7 November 2014 (UTC) reply

My pleasure. Congratulations. Carlstak ( talk) 00:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, Carlstak. My English is not very good, but I fear that your recent in the article Hephaestion does not flow completely well: maybe there is one 'that' too many ("and that this concept was ..."). I wonder whether you could take a look at it again. Thank you. Cheers.-- Jeanambr ( talk) 14:09, 22 November 2014 (UTC) reply

I appreciate your suggestion, and have amended the text to flow better, I think. Admittedly, the sentence was unwieldy, but the previous version made no sense in English. I hope this new version satisfies your concerns. Carlstak ( talk) 00:56, 23 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Thanks.-- Jeanambr ( talk) 05:02, 23 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to my grandfather, George J F Clarke's entry. It is very difficult to find information on him without going to St. Augustine or Fernandina (or Cuba) and your updates over the past year have made my life so much easier. Pynomrah ( talk) 14:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the beer, my favorite beverage. I am very pleased that a descendant of the distinguished George J. F. Clarke has found the article useful. I think he is one of the heroes of Florida history, and have long had a special interest in the story of the Clarke family in Florida, as I lived for many years at the site of their plantation on the Matanzas River. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 16:23, 21 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC) reply

We should put our heads together about the John Horse article. It seems like you've got a lot of information and your edits have all been really helpful. Thanks. Swmirsky ( talk) 16:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your offer, Swmirsky, I will be happy to collaborate, not sure how you want to go about it. I have good researching skills, and a lot of experience finding sources for Wikipedia. I've already ordered some books on this subject, and when I receive them may add some material to the article. In the meantime, I'll continue fact-checking your welcome additions and adding sources. If you have any ideas to propose, please let me know. Carlstak ( talk) 16:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC) reply

You've been doing great work, you just need to watch out for self-published books. Thanks for your thanks! Dougweller ( talk) 17:01, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the compliment. For some reason, the subject, John Horse, attracts a lot of self-published or vanity press authors. I've run across quite a few of them, but this one got away from me. Carlstak ( talk) 18:00, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms, or shield of San Salvador.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 02:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk), on behalf of National Names 2000 10:31, 12 May 2015 (UTC) reply

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Dear Carlstak,

I just wanted to say I am happy we can work together in a helpful and friendly manner. It's been a while since I've been on wikipedia and my previous time here was occasionally tainted with user-conflict, but now that I've returned I would like a new air of cooperation and good spirit. I look forward to working with you and to the articles we will make better.

Cheers, Cristiano Tomás ( talk) 23:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC) reply

My sentiments exactly, Cristiano.

Best,

Carlstak ( talk) 00:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC) reply

You should have received an email a couple of weeks ago regarding MIT Press Journals - could you please either fill out the linked form or let me know if you didn't get the email? We'd like to get these processed soon. Nikkimaria ( talk) 20:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi! I would like you to take a look at the ongoing debate on the origin of the word Canada in the article Canada. Your unbiased opinion would be appreciated.J Pratas 18:32, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, though it's better written (how rare!) I have some concern about factual accuracy since bda is used to shape history according to his own POV. -- Vituzzu ( talk) 20:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC) reply

I haven't looked at his prior history, Vituzzu, but this edit seems sound, and I don't detect any NPOV problem. Do you see any particular issues to be addressed there? I will fact-check it and add appropriate sources. Carlstak ( talk) 20:38, 20 September 2015 (UTC) reply

I simply have to assume bad faith dealing with all of his edits, if you'll deeply check them it will work for me ;)

-- Vituzzu ( talk) 08:28, 21 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Carlstak, I want to thank you that you've been improving many of the articles I posted, improving the references and correcting the spelling of the articles to make them more understandable. As you collaborated in many of the articles I posted, in the verification of sources (and orthographic), I would like to ask your help to check references of the article about Francisco del Moral y Sánchez, governor of Florida, that I posted long ago, but I included more inform in last weeks, because I'm not entirely sure if I understand some of the things explained by some of these sources, if it is possible to you. Thank you.-- Isinbill ( talk) 23:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Isinbill, it will be my pleasure to assist as soon as I get a chance. I have already been doing some work in a text editor on your Gonzalo Méndez de Canço article, but I will be happy to put that on hold to work on Francisco del Moral y Sánchez. I just need to finish editing and finding sources for a few paragraphs of the Salé article that Vituzzu is referring to above. Carlstak ( talk) 00:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you then for your help!-- Isinbill ( talk) 17:14, 26 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi! I would not want to abuse your help, but I also need improvement the articles of Juan de Salinas and Luis de Rojas y Borja, both in the orthography and in the information. I only included the information I found, but I think it would useful if someone could find more information (al least to the article of Juan de Salinas). You was the one who most improved my articles, and so, if it is not uncomfortable for you, I also would like to have your help for these items. Thank you!-- Isinbill ( talk) 13:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC) reply

@ Isinbill:, I will be glad to lend a hand, and will work on them when I get a chance. Carlstak ( talk) 16:19, 3 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Carlstak.-- Isinbill ( talk) 16:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Section "Enough is enough" should not be on the discussion page of the article of Juan Leal, but on my talk page, because it speaks of my articles as a whole, not only the article of Juan Leal. I moved the commentary to my talk page (although still there a copy in the talk page of Juan Leal) and my answer I left it on that page.-- Isinbill ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Because you didn't deleted your commentary in the Talk Page of Juan Leal's article, I also answered there. -- Isinbill ( talk) 14:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC) reply

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) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
A very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones, and a joyous and prosperous 2016. All the very best from your friends: Cliftonian, Mrs Cliftonian and the two little Cliftonians. —   Cliftonian  (talk)  20:56, 19 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much, and the same to you and yours, Cliftonian.

Best wishes,

Carlstak ( talk) 01:27, 20 December 2015 (UTC) reply

What material do you believe I removed? – Smyth\ ^talk 18:51, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Oops. My mistake. I have reverted my revert. Apologies. Carlstak ( talk) 21:14, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks. – Smyth\ ^talk 21:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Please don't cause disruption and edit aggressively at the Billy the Kid article. I have been working to bring this article to GA status for over a week. Edit warring and other disruption there could put a serious halt to it being considered for and passing GA. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 18:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC) reply

@ Winkelvi: I am not edit-warring or being disruptive, these are bold edits, but not aggressively made ones. WikiDan61 agreed with my edits, and reverted yours. I don't think I've reverted any of yours since, and I actually agree with most of the subsequent changes you made, but I wouldn't quibble about the ones I don't agree with. I am making edits from a sincere desire to improve the article. You have accused me of "poor editing and word choices", but you reverted corrections I made that any conscientious copy editor would have made, including corrections of obvious grammatical errors, i.e., not capitalizing "Supreme Court", leaving the second "s" out of "in various ways", "Unknown to the Bonney", "found guilty for the murder", "-nickname, Brushy Bill -", "to consider Bonney's death can be officially certified" and writing "in February 8, 1981" instead of "On February 8, 1981". I also caught the "Before 1877, McCarty had his horse stolen" error, where the the source referred to clearly says "in 1877". In fact, I would characterize these and other errors then in the article as "poor editing and word choices". It is not as if I am some rogue editor looking for a fight. If you look at the talk page as well as the history of the Gregor MacGregor article, which is a featured article, you will see that my edits and suggestions to improve the article were welcomed. Carlstak ( talk) 18:39, 17 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Buenas, compañero.

Te solicito que votes en la discusión de los artículos de Basque Country (autonomous community) y Valencian Community para elegir el mapa localizador de ambas comunidades autónomas, apoyando el tipo standar para todas las regiones del país. Algunos usuarios nacionalistas o abiertamente independentistas quieren añadir un mapa sesgado en el que no aparece todo el país (en el caso de Euskadi) o que aparece como si fuese una nación de la Unión Europea (en el caso de la Comunidad Valenciana). Esto es inadmisible.

Te pido que añadas "support" y tu firma en la opción Satesclop's red map. Mil gracias por adelantado. Satesclop 03:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC) reply

There is a discussion regarding merging History of Punic-era Tunisia: chronology and History of Punic-era Tunisia: culture into History of Carthage being held at Talk:History of Carthage#Merge. You are being approached as you are a recent or significant editor of one or other of the articles, or because you have expressed interest in the merge previously. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 19:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your edits... I am going to revert the change from normal to "curly" x, in line with the WP IPA guide for German. Note that Wiktionary is not a "Reliable Source" in the official sense, because it is no more reliable than WP (so a sly insert of any nonsense into both would mean they were preserved for ever!) But please see, and if possible comment on my earlier comment about this at talk:Johann Sebastian Bach#Pronunciation footnote for name. In English, I suspect the pronunciation varies hugely from place to place, and by individual, but I have always heard "Ba:x"; a list of all the possibilities could get out of hand... (Please reply here!) Imaginatorium ( talk) 17:00, 2 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Imaginatorium, I appreciate your concern, and agree with your points. I'll take a look at that after lunch. Carlstak ( talk) 17:06, 2 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia seems to have an inconsistent policy on date ranges. The clearest policy is MOS:DATERANGE which says:

the range's end year is usually abbreviated to two digits:

  •   1881–86;  1881–92 (not 1881–6;  1881 – 86)

but this conflicts with other advice (e.g. I can't find it now, but I'm sure I've seen 1881–1892 recommended when expressing someone's lifespan or a series of football seasons).

As for defence vs defense at Belém Tower, I'm well aware that defence is the British spelling (I'm British myself) but I've been editing a few articles on Lisbon subjects today and most of then either use a mixture of American and British spellings and phrases, or wholly American, so I was trying to follow MOS:RETAIN. Unlike other Lisbon articles, Belém Tower does, however, seem to use mainly British spellings (despite a few Americanisms like "protested the site's degradation"), so defence is perhaps better here. WP:ENGVAR is a bit of a minefield when there are no "strong national ties" to the topic; even though my preferred style is British, I'd rather an article was written consistently in US English rather than a mixture of the two. Dave.Dunford ( talk) 14:54, 6 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, Dave.Dunford. Yes, I could have sworn that I saw the "1881–1892" format recommended in some policy page as well. Regarding the British spellings, I did a lot of editing on the "Belém Tower" article to fix the very rough state of English it was in. I have a special interest in Spanish and Portuguese subjects, and have translated a good bit of material from Spanish and Portuguese, usually into British English. I translated most of the text of History of Lisbon, using British English throughout, even though I am in the US, out of respect for my Portuguese colleagues on Wikipedia, who prefer to use British English and have set the precedent in many articles that needed work. It does seem more appropriate, given that England (then later, Great Britain) and Portugal have perhaps the oldest political alliance in the world. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 15:26, 6 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, can help improve these articles thanks: Romería Regional de San Benito Abad and Romería del Socorro.-- 83.55.92.56 ( talk) 13:21, 14 June 2016 (UTC) reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nigel Ish ( talk) 14:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from St. Augustine, Florida into History of St. Augustine, Florida. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{ copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa ( talk) 14:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the reminder, Diannaa; I got in a rush and forgot to add attribution in the edit summary. I looked over other edits where I've copied content and moved it to a new article. I found two (at least I didn't neglect to mention the fact in the respective edit summaries), and added attribution templates to their talk pages: Talk:Towns of the Costa del Sol and Talk:Municipal districts of San Salvador. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 15:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi! I left you a message on the talkpage of Chiadma, link. Alhaqiha ( talk) 16:35, 29 July 2016 (UTC) reply

You should post this information:

• "This of yours, where you removed the reference to the Berber language in the statement " Arabic, along with Berber, is one of two Morocco's official languages", and changed it to "Arabic, is one of two Morocco's official languages" shows that you seem to be promoting an Arabist agenda at the expense of the rightful inclusion of the contributions of Berber culture."
  

..on EdJohnston's talk page. More evidence of Alhaqiha's POV/anti-Berber editing. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:58, 31 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Done. Thanks for the suggestion, Kansas Bear. Carlstak ( talk) 21:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello sir If you have time Can you check this article ?
And compare [ [7]] to this
What is the reliable version ?
Again Alhaqiha reverted it and claiming that Reverted sock-edits, added sources and categories to the page.
My greetings :) 105.155.222.59 ( talk) 17:46, 2 August 2016 (UTC) reply

My bad i didnt read before that suggest yours, but i can't fix all "mades" in article related on buildings developed by me, but i wont made that wrong spell again. thanks for help with that and your contributions.-- Vvven ( talk) 01:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC) reply

No worries, my friend. Your edits have been good, and I'm keeping an eye on the finer points. Best,

Carlstak ( talk) 02:45, 26 September 2016 (UTC) reply

A really thank you for your contributions

I am just a simple wikipedian user, not administrator, but i would want give you a kind of gratitude, for the important work you do within wikipedia, a neccesary work. i hope you has the same energy in the good things of the life, girlfriends, sons that there no comparison in importance. i hope you have a beautiful life if not get it.

	I want to give this a kind of gratitude for the important work you do in wikipedia, a hard work, without your edits do not understand anything, with this I mean that you are a great support.

-- Vvven ( talk) 05:08, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Vvven, very kind of you, and much appreciated. Carlstak ( talk) 11:55, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Valencia

Last contributions yours again was outstanding. bravo! -- Vvven ( talk) 22:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Carlstak gives me a suggestion, do you think the images in the article of Valencia are correct?. dont gives a bad impression?, i mean specifically with the culture section. whether that could be like a model for other cities articles i could do in a future, those images could bother to the readers? help me with that smallness hehe. please, a pleasant greeting to you.-- Vvven ( talk) 21:48, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Your photos are quality images, Vvven, very nice ones. In future we need to avoid crowding too many of them into a section, and reducing the px is not really a solution. It is recommended to not change the default px of thumbnails, as per WP:IMAGESIZE. I've changed the sizes to default and redistributed them in the sections. I think they are a worthy addition to the article. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 12:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi, please be more careful of context when changing hyphens etc. as I just found 7 errors you introduced with these edits. Also please consider not changing hyphen types with scripts, as there are several editors doing this but to different types of hyphen so articles go back and forth with these types of errors creeping in. Cheers KylieTastic ( talk) 19:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Beg pardon, KylieTastic, hyphens and dashes are not the same thing; MOS guideline is to use en dashes rather than hyphens for dates. I've fixed hundreds of errors here in my last few edits, and you focus on seven machine mistakes, and ignore all the work I've done. Unbelievable. You really take the cake. I'm not done yet, anyway, I'll put a "working" tag on the article as I edit. Sheesh. Carlstak ( talk) 19:19, 6 October 2016 (UTC) reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Hispanos de Spanish and Mexican origin. Since you had some involvement with the List of Hispanos de Spanish and Mexican origin redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD ( talk) 15:11, 12 October 2016 (UTC) reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Hispanic-Americans of Spanish and Mexican origin. Since you had some involvement with the List of Hispanic-Americans of Spanish and Mexican origin redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD ( talk) 15:14, 12 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao ^{Che dicono a Signa?} _{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:45, 6 November 2016 (UTC) reply

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak, re: this, in case my edit summary wasn't great, I totally get why you reverted--good watchdogging. I was concerned as well, but I figured out that editor Hike removed the convert template because the parameter he's using automatically converts metric to imperial, so {{ convert}} wasn't necessary, and the geo coordinates that he removed were 00s, so they're not particularly useful. Hope that helps. Regards, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:40, 24 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the explanation, Cyphoidbomb, very kind of you. Missed the automatic convert as I was performing the morning ritual of coffee and going through my watchlist. Will keep an eye out for that sort of thing in future, especially since I reverted a similar edit by Hike395 at another article (and self-reverted, thanks to you). Best regards, Carlstak ( talk) 01:22, 25 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak,

I never revert edits, however my edit/reference comes from britishlistedbuildings.co.uk, which is a well respected online listing of British Listed Buildings, and they have used as a source Cadw. It states that "In the mid C19 the Hall was occupied by the eminent Professor of History, E A Freeman". Therefore my edit "He lived in Llanrumney Hall, Cardiff in the mid 19th century" was well referenced, while "After some changes of residence, Freeman bought a house called "Somerleaze", near Wells, Somerset, and settled there in 1860" has no references at all. SethWhales ^talk 17:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Seth Whales You didn't notice that I self-reverted with an "Oops, my mistake," at 15:02? Carlstak ( talk) 17:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Sorry I didn't notice. Thanks for letting me know. SethWhales ^talk 19:44, 22 January 2017 (UTC) reply

No problem at all. I was chagrined when I saw that I'd too hastily reverted your edit, which certainly improves the article. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 20:05, 22 January 2017 (UTC) reply

...for your very thorough revision of Alfonso VI of León and Castile. If you have the time, could you go over Leonor Teles? I did but could have overlooked some other errors. Many thanks, -- Maragm ( talk) 06:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC) reply

My pleasure, Maragm. I will be be delighted to work on the Leonor Teles article as time allows. Thank you for your work on Aldebaran69's translation. All the best. Carlstak ( talk) 12:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Once again, much appreciate your excellent and thorough work on Alfonso VI and the Portuguese "Lucrecia Borgia". Regards, -- Maragm ( talk) 18:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Aldebaran69 and you did most of the work, Maragm, and made things easy. It has been a pleasure working with you. Carlstak ( talk) 19:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi Ed, I am now learning English, I will correct all the defects that the page has, as I develop my language skills, I hope you give me a few weeks to fix it, I need to reverse it to start fixing it, if you allow me and if you want you can help me a little bit-- Vvven ( talk) 15:56, 25 February 2017 (UTC) reply

People like Hervey de Glanvill were Normans aka "Anglo-Normans" aka "Norman French". Remember 1066? Richard II (1377-1399) was the first King of England since William who was fluent in English (it probably still wasn't his first language though). To refer to Norman crusading knights who spoke Old French and who called themselves "Franks" as "Englishmen" is - yes - an anachronism. ZinedineZidane98 ( talk) 18:28, 14 March 2017 (UTC) reply

ZinedineZidane98, I was trying to draw an analogy, but didn't bring it off, I suppose. I get your point, but consider: The WP article on the Franks says that "In the Middle Ages, the term "Frank" was used in the east as a synonym for "western European". According to the sources given, this is true. However, for us to call all of the knights in that group "Franks" is an anachronism. We could say that those knights from Flanders, Frisia, and France were "Franks", but we today would not call the Norman knights from England and Scotland "Franks" also. After all, the Norman knights from England and Scotland were the descendants of Norse raiders who acquired territories in France. We would not call them Franks. Carlstak ( talk) 19:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC) reply

I am going to put to the article a complete bibliography, I ask you to later review the sources and stop reversing the edition of this important article-- Vvven ( talk) 23:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Vvven, you should not upload this material to mainspace before all the necessary work is done. This has been explained to you previously. You can work on it in your sandbox, as per WP policy. Let me know when you've made some progress on it, and I will take a look. You can't expect other editors to do all the work that needs to be done. First, you should make sure your text is not violating copyvios, then you should find reliable sources. You know how to do these things, and it's your responsibility. If you get your text in decent shape, with sources, I will copy edit it and fix the English. Good luck. Carlstak ( talk) 01:26, 25 March 2017 (UTC) reply

The sources are reliable my friend and there are not copyright violations and thanks for want to help fix the English.-- Vvven ( talk) 01:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Is a good text that notably helps in the quality of the article-- Vvven ( talk) 01:40, 25 March 2017 (UTC) reply

It might if you were competent at writing English. You're not, and you are flouting WP policy. Carlstak ( talk) 02:44, 27 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm already adding references-- Vvven ( talk) 14:54, 25 March 2017 (UTC) reply

EastFloridaHistorian, You are trying to impose a revisionist view of the history of Florida not supported by the peer-reviewed academic literature on the subject, as indicated by some of your edit summaries. For example, your summary, "Tried to remove discriminatory rhetoric against Native Floridians. FYI: It's good to be sensitive and respect other people's cultures", ignores the Spanish natives of Florida, the Floridanos, many of whom were members of families that had been in Florida for hundreds of years before the events of the so-called "Patriot War", and were most certainly "native Floridians". Being "an 8th generation Floridian" has no bearing on the correctness of your edits to the content of this article. Information added can be challenged, as you did concerning the year of Harris's killing, and must be supported, as per WP policy, by reliable sources. The neutral point of view "stuff" is also WP policy, not a personal preference. We are not here to "fight" over what content is included in the article. That is what the article talk page is for. Carlstak ( talk) 15:56, 9 May 2017 (UTC) reply

EastFloridaHistorian, you can stay off my talk page. You came here recently and were rude and disrespected me on my own talk page, and before I'd made up my mind what to do about it, you removed my reply, along with your comments. I don't have the time or the inclination to engage a person like you here. The religious sentiments you express are out of place, given your aggressive behavior here, in edit summaries you've made, and at Talk:Republic of East Florida. Your general rhetoric sounds to these ears like that of a white nationalist crusader. I get to decide what stays on my talk page, so I'm removing your last remarks and please stay away. Carlstak ( talk) 02:23, 15 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi. I do not care if a text I reverted into António de Oliveira Salazar article stays or not, so I will not re-revert (also I rather discuss than revert multiple times). But I ask you not to remove the exact same text for two contradictory reasons, it confuses editing. You removed it first as unsourced and now for following the source too closely, thus a copyright violation. As I said, I don't care if the text stays or not, and the second reason maybe correct. So I simply ask you to be careful when providing reasons; no problem, it happens, certainly. - Nabla ( talk) 21:58, 29 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Sorry for the confusion, Nabla; I may have read the added text too hastily the first time I reverted. However, even if the IP hadn't copied the text from its source verbatim, which is the argument I should have used then, the words "seething and upstaged" (copied) together are unencyclopedic in this context, and the text was incorrectly punctuated (likely because of their copying-and-pasting), which yielded run-on sentences. I imagine that's why I misread it as unintelligible. Carlstak ( talk) 22:13, 29 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert ( talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Thank you for your patience regarding both my ignorance and lack of knowledge Hoveldowns ( talk) 04:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, Hoveldowns. All the best. Carlstak ( talk) 04:43, 28 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak. It usually takes about 24 hours for template edits to appear on the article pages. Sometimes longer. Let me know if this helps. -- M2545 ( talk) 16:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Ah, thank you very much. Carlstak ( talk) 16:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Spread the WikiLove; use {{ subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Thanks, Winkelvi. Best wishes and same to you. Carlstak ( talk) 17:10, 21 December 2017 (UTC) reply

SPI: [8] -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 17:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Good. Carlstak ( talk) 17:11, 24 December 2017 (UTC) reply

It's the same guy, across the board. The IP, too. Looking at the bio of the attorney who has the photo tells a similar story. I wish people would just do this kind of thing the right way. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 17:46, 24 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Wouldn't that be nice? The guy gets emotionally carried away, not a trait one would want his lawyer to have. Carlstak ( talk) 17:53, 24 December 2017 (UTC) reply

I've read some articles on Frank Abrams and the photo. In the articles he's quoted as saying the photo "might end up at an auction house" in the future. My guess is he's trying to use Wikipedia as encyclopedic proof the photo is documented as real should the auction house scenario become a reality. Just a theory, of course. Thanks for standing firm on this. What a waste of good time that had to be spent. Merry, merry to you! -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 23:42, 24 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Yes, I thought the same thing. I would hope he's learned something from this episode, but I doubt it. He'll probably just double down, at least in his own mind. Best, Carlstak ( talk) 00:09, 25 December 2017 (UTC) reply

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thanks, I'm still recovering from Festivus. Carlstak ( talk) 23:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Good afternoon, I would like to ask for your help to edit a Draft: Israel Lucas Góis Monteiro, if I help? several references follow.

Let's put this article on the air.

https://exame.abril.com.br/blog/instituto-millenium/no-mercado-de-acoes-o-maior-erro-e-querer-dinheiro-pra-amanha/

https://financenews.com.br/2017/09/em-2018-teremos-uma-entrada-grande-de-chineses-e-americanos-no-brasil/

http://blog.maxieduca.com.br/bolsa-valores-empreendedorismo/

http://www.folhadelondrina.com.br/economia/otimismo-chega-ao-mercado-de-fusoes-e-aquisicoes-993518.html

http://www.matogrossoeconomico.com.br/noticias/milionario-brasileiro-vai-investir-r-10-milhoes-em-startups-do-agronegocio/16519

http://www.jornalpontagrossa.com/2017/10/brasil-milionario-paranaense-esta.html

http://abvcap.com.br/sala-de-imprensa/noticias-imprensa.aspx?c=pt-BR&id=3841

http://www.jornalmeuparana.com/portal/ver_noticia.php?ver=14278

http://www.infomoney.com.br/blogs/investimentos/alem-do-dinheiro/post/7099448/empreender-sonho-possivel

http://thebrazilianfinancial.com/entrevista/

https://www.jornalempresariall.com.br/noticias/gerais/milionario-paranaense-vai-investir-r10-milhoes-em-startups-do-agronegocio

https://www.folhageral.com/empresas-e-negocios/2017/12/investidor-milionario-cria-maior-empresa-de-relacoes-com-investidores-da-america-latina/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by WksBolteditor ( talk • contribs) 13:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I have a long to-do list of other projects. Carlstak ( talk) 00:01, 9 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, I noticed your recent cleanups and improvements to the article on Nathan Bedford Forrest, and as you commented there's been "quite a show" going on there. I've stumbled into the fray as a result of a WP:3O request, but it is way more complicated than a two-editor dispute over content. I suspect the article has a POV problem, but I do not have the topic-knowledge necessary to assess that properly. There's probably also an article ownership issue. Several editors (most recently Deisenbe who called me in) have raised issues on the Talk page, only to be firmly told that "There is no dispute". Which kind of suggests there is one. I'd like to get the article properly reviewed for NPOV -- I'm not asking you to do that yourself (unless you'd like to ) but if you support the idea, would you consider keeping an eye on the article to see if we can keep a POV-check tag in place without it getting reverted? Thanks FrankP ( talk) 10:59, 26 February 2018 (UTC) reply

FrankP, I agree that the POV tag should remain in the article till these issues are resolved. I will keep an eye on it, and will evaluate each section as time allows (I have a big real-life project going now). The entire article, being one about such a disputed subject, certainly needs many more citations from reliable sources. I will work to improve it. Carlstak ( talk) 12:46, 26 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Would you accept this as a source? http://tennessee-scv.org/ForrestHistSociety/quotes.html

Also Williams, Edward F. (1969), Fustest with the mostest; the military career of Tennessee's greatest Confederate, Lieutenant General Nathan Bedford Forrest Memphis, Distributed by Southern Books

deisenbe ( talk) 12:08, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply

I think that's ok as a source, deisenbe; I just hesitate to reinforce the incorrect colloquial version, even with the clarification. To my ear, it sounds a bit too cutesy to have actually been used much by troops.

I'm old enough that when in 1965 I went to see the Cyclorama in Atlanta, there were still several widows of Civil War veterans alive, and many people in their eighties were the children of Civil War vets. I grew up among Southern people who spoke with thick accents, the older ones of whom still told handed-down stories about the war, and I never heard any speech that included phrases similar to this so-called "cracker Southern dialect".

If you really want to use it, though, I won't object. Carlstak ( talk) 12:39, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak, to see if you can please take part in this discussion in the Colombia article i added the tourism section and put better images in the article and the user User:JShark has reverted my editions ten times, I appreciate that you help solve this.-- ILoveCaracas ( talk) 23:28, 20 March 2018 (UTC) reply

I want a concensus. The other user just told me that he didn't care about the opinions of the other users. -- JShark ( talk) 23:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC) reply

See the following message from the user ILoveCaracas ( talk

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Colombia&diff=831508383&oldid=831508165 Revision as of 23:10, 20 March 2018 (edit) (undo) (thank) ILoveCaracas (talk | contribs) (i dont care if portugal is a featuring artcile, try to delete that images there before that block you)

Please use Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. As a first step, I suggest Wikipedia:Third opinion. -- JShark ( talk) 00:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I'd rather not get involved. Carlstak ( talk) 00:09, 21 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Needs fixing also on Maroons (people). Thanks. deisenbe ( talk)

Thanks for the notice. Will do soon. Carlstak ( talk) 20:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC) reply

 Done.

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
• updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Palapa (structure), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tagalog ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 5 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Would you let me put "in the middle of nowhere" (in quotes) back in? It is accurate, metaphorically, and makes the point better than "quite isolated". deisenbe ( talk) 13:05, 6 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Sure, deisenbe. I changed it because it seemed redundant to say "as isolated as could be" and "in the middle of nowhere" in the following sentence. Could you leave the quote marks out, though? I don't think they're necessary and look out of place in the context. By the way, all the work you've done on this article (and many others, of course) is appreciated. Thanks, Carlstak ( talk) 11:47, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

that of the floors are translation errors as I speak Spanish I think that some seem to be like that but that are not, that's why you are helping us all of who edit in wikipedia, and you do it very well-- ILoveCaracas ( talk) 23:53, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply

I’m working on him. Just got an article. Give me a couple of days. deisenbe ( talk) 14:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Sure thing, Deisenbe, no problem. Carlstak ( talk) 15:09, 3 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I’d like to know your evidence for Hidlis or Hildis. Owsley never uses that form and I’ve got the article in front of me. deisenbe ( talk) 10:40, 8 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I have Jstor access and downloaded their PDF of Prophet of War: Josiah Francis and the Creek War. On the first page of the file, p. 273, Owsley spells it "Hildis"; on pp. 285 and 289 he spells it "Hidlis". These are the only instances of either in his text (at least in this pdf, and not counting the spelling in footnotes). Carlstak ( talk) 13:40, 8 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I don't know what text you're looking at, but I logged into Jstor again and checked the online preview of those pages, same results. In the first sentence of the article, Owsley spells it "Hildis"; on p. 285 he spells it "Hidlis", and on p. 289, he writes, "The English always referred to him as Hidlis Hadjo, which, according to Theron Nuñez, meant "crazy medicine". Carlstak ( talk) 14:28, 8 May 2018 (UTC) reply

You’re right and I was just going to leave you a note saying I was wrong. Since I don’t have access to a digital version, would you see if he ever uses Hillis? deisenbe ( talk) 20:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Sure, my friend. Will check when back from beach walk. Carlstak ( talk) 22:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I searched and found no instance of the spelling Hillis. Haven't finished reading the whole thing, but it's a great article. Carlstak ( talk) 00:49, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Hidlis and Hildis seem unlikely to be correct, because he would have noted the change in spelling. So one’s a misprint. Any idea which? Which is used more? deisenbe ( talk) 01:16, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Actually, several university-published sources spell it "Hildis": American Indian Medicine Ways: Spiritual Power, Prophets, and Healing, Native American Spirituality: A Critical Reader, Deerskins and Duffels: Creek Indian Trade with Anglo-America, 1685-1815, and Restoring the Chain of Friendship: British Policy and the Indians of the Great Lakes, 1783-1815. "Hidlis" has more sources. I don't think either was a misprint, I think Owsley deliberately used both variants. Reliable sources use one or the other, but "Hidlis" is more commonly used among them; Owsley and Smith's authoritative Filibusters and Expansionists: Jeffersonian Manifest Destiny, 1800-1821 spells it "Hidlis". Carlstak ( talk) 01:57, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Just as an aside, the Bulletin published by the Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology in 1907 gives the corrupted spellings "Hillishago" and "Hillishager" as variants also. "Hillishago" was used mostly in the mid to late 1800s and early 1900s; "Hillishager" was given in a few sources as among the variants of Hillis Hadjo. Carlstak ( talk) 14:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

P.S. Are you familiar with Negro Comrades of the Crown: African Americans and the British Empire Fight the U.S. Before Emancipation? It has an interesting discussion of the Negro Fort and is an illuminating source of information about the relationship between African Americans and the British. Carlstak ( talk) 14:53, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I see that you have contributed most of the text in this article. I wrote a blog post on the subject last year ( The Spanish Mission Trail), and hope to add some of that material to the WP article. There are some differences in details, which I'll be happy to discuss with you if any issues arise. - Donald Albury 10:00, 9 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi Donald, I would be delighted if you added to the article; I have great respect for your work, having seen your contributions to (and creation of) many of the articles on my watchlist. I've wanted to add to it myself, but there are so many other articles that need attention. May I request that you place the draft in your sandbox before sending it to mainspace, if that is agreeable? I know it will be of high quality (as is your blog post); I would like to review it and perhaps make some additions to it myself, subject to your review, of course. Thank you very much. Carlstak ( talk) 14:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I'll put up a draft after I get the sources sorted out. I didn't bother with page references in the blog, so I'm having to search through the sources, including a very long dissertation. Thank you for the expansion of Panton, Leslie & Company. I've always thought I should get back to it, but it never rose high enough on my todo list. Have you ever looked at what was there before I rescued it? - Donald Albury 11:45, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

I hadn't and just took a look. "Panton was a Muskogean merchant" is funny. Carlstak ( talk) 14:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Fort Mose Historic State Park ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mandinka

Francisco Menéndez (creole) ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mandinka

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC) reply

A couple of your emendations I disagree with and would like you to refonsider:

• Animal husbandry (domestic animals) he particularly disapproved of, to the point of slaughtering his own livestock (and burning his house) —- adding the word “livestock” is unnecessary, I don’t see how it adds anything and it makes the sentence weaker.

• St. Marks on Jackson's orders. — I don’t think “by Jackson” would be taken as meaning that Jackson hung him himself. Your revision makes it weaker, as I see it. deisenbe ( talk) 20:08, 13 May 2018 (UTC) reply

These are minor changes and I take your point about "on Jackson's orders", so I've reverted my edit of that.

Regarding your first point, I've changed the sentence to: "He particularly disapproved of the husbandry of domestic animals, to the point of slaughtering his own (and burning his house) when he decided".

My reasoning for adding "livestock" in the first place was that regardless of the intended meaning in your expression: "Animal husbandry (domestic animals) he particularly disapproved of, to the point of slaughtering his own (and burning his house)", the word own, by the rules of English grammar, doesn't modify "domestic animals", because those words are segregated by parentheses; rather, they modify "animal husbandry", which doesn't make sense. Also, the construction, "Animal husbandry (domestic animals) he particularly disapproved of" is a little awkward in English. I think my new emendation neatly resolves both "problems". It has the extra benefit of disposing of the slight redundancy of having two sets of parentheses so close together in one sentence. I hope you agree. Carlstak ( talk) 21:34, 13 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Good idea on using the full quote. However, it's absolutely fine to apply markup like foreign-language or words-as-words italics to clarify quotations and normalize article-wide style; that's well within the range of MOS:CONFORM.  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  13:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, SMcCandish. Am I missing something? The content that was within quotes before my edit said, "Latinx elides long-standing struggles to have inequality recognized and remediated." That's not at all what the source says. Carlstak ( talk) 17:22, 25 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Maybe I'm missing something then, and misunderstood your comment. :-)  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:19, 28 July 2018 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Osceola, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scottish ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC) reply

(English below)

Olá. A Wikimedia Portugal é uma associação portuguesa sem fins lucrativos, fundada em 2009, reconhecida pela Wikimedia Foundation como "chapter" de Portugal. A nossa missão é, em geral, contribuir para a disseminação generalizada do saber e da cultura, através do incentivo à recolha e criação de conteúdos isentos de restrições de utilização, modificação e distribuição, e da difusão dos mesmos; e em particular, promover e apoiar os projetos da Wikimedia Foundation, entre os quais a Wikipédia, com ênfase para os projetos nas línguas faladas em Portugal, o português e o mirandês.

Gostaríamos de contar com o apoio de (e reciprocamente apoiar) todos os voluntários naturais, residentes ou simplesmente interessados em Portugal. Embora fundada em 2009, a associação teve um largo período de inatividade, que estamos agora a ultrapassar. Vimos por isso convidá-lo, caso nisso tenha interesse, a inscrever-se como associado da associação, demonstrar apoio à existência de um "chapter" em Portugal, e a envolver-se em atividades futuras inscrevendo-se na lista de distribuição de email. Recentemente, a Comissão de Afiliações da Wikimedia suspendeu o apoio à Wikimedia Portugal, pendente, entre outras coisas, do apoio da comunidade de editores portugueses. [9]

Agradecemos desde já!

Hi! Wikimedia Portugal is the Portuguese chapter of Wikimedia, founded in 2009 and recognized by the Wikimedia Foundation. Our mission is to contribute to the general dissemination of knowledge and culture through the incentive to the collection and creation of content without restrictions on use, modification and distribution, and promote their difusion; we promote and support the Wikimedia Foundation projects, among which Wikipedia, with emphasis on projects in Portuguese and Mirandese.

We would like however to count on the support of (and in turn ourselves support) all volunteers that are citizens, resident, or simply interested in Portugal. Despite being founded in 2009, the chapter has gone through a long period of inactivity that we are trying to overcome. We have sent you this message to invite you, if you are interested, to enroll as associate to the chapter, demonstrate your support to the existence of a chapter in Portugal, and get involved in the discussion of future activities by registering in the mailing list. Recentely, the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee suspended support to Wikimedia Portugal pending, among other things, the support from the community of portuguese editors. [10] GoEThe ( talk) 14:19, 2 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Carlstak, you are absolutely right that I have made some serious mistakes which you have corrected me on, and I’m very grateful. And that my credentials are largely (not completely) irrelevant. And that I tend to shoot my moouth off about things and get riled up, sometimes unnecessariliy.

Here is where I am at. If you look at my most longest recent article, America Is Hard to See (play), you’ll see I cite all sorts of sources. Or Angola, Florida. Or Texas Confederate Museum. All of which are entirely my work.

Actually I’ve been criticized in a review for using too much documentation (in my book _A Study of “Don Quixote”,_ in Spanish _La interpretación cervantina del “Quijote”_). I could dig out the reference.

My problem is that I have a lot of knowledge but not much ability to check sources on the sort of topic like Reconquista. I live in a retirement community and my resources are limited to the Palm Beach County Public Library and whatever electronic resources I can access. I have the WP Ebsco access and have applied for others. I get some electronic resources through the public library. Interlibrary loan can get me an occasional book or article, I’m using one right now (The Maroons of Prospect Bluff and Their Quest for Freedom in the Atlantic World, isbn 9780813044544). That can take weeks and the limit is five active requests at one time. The local universitty libraries, Florida Atlantic University and Lynn University, don’t have much of what I need, and I cannot borrow things without paying. In fact the closest library where I would have the resources I need is at Florida State, where I used to teach, and that’s a 10 hour drive. The University of Miami (over an hour) and University of Florida (5-6 hours) libraries would help some but not totally. And I’ll admit that it’s a lot of work, I’ve already done tons of it, I’m retired, and I do what I feel like. I’ve paid my dues.

Something like Reconquista I care passionately about. It’s a vitally important article, as I see it. It has a lot of things wrong with it, as I see it. So rather than do nothing, I make undocumented edits and people like you hopefully catch the mistakes. Actually I make undocumented edits and original research all over the place, most of it never challenged. Here’s an example: Miguel de Cervantes. I was the editor for 8 years of the journal of the Cervantes Society of America, which shows that I must know quite a bit about Cervantes, but not that I’m infallible or that my memory is perfect. I believe Cervantes was an accountant (not a dignified profession then) for part of his life. He worked as a purchasing agent and tax collector and had to keep accounts. He was friends with two bankers. In his works there are a lot of figures and computations. Cervantes knew multiplication which was not a common skill then or taught in school (you had to learn it from a book). There is no published source that I can cite to support my contention that he was an accountant. I could write one, and probably get it published, but that is a lot of work and it would be read by maybe 20 people. If I just go ahead and make the edit to the Cervantes article, I reach a much larger audience of people with much less effort. I am quite convinced that I am doing much more good than harm. But I’m grateful for any errors you catch. deisenbe ( talk) 11:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Deisenbe, for your considered response, it's much appreciated. I felt obligated to respond when you complained on the talk page that "I have basically wasted a lot of time with corrections that got taken out." Carlstak ( talk) 14:37, 8 August 2018 (UTC) reply

I didn’t mean your corrections, which are thoughtful and explained. deisenbe ( talk) 16:31, 8 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the clarification, Deisenbe, but I got your meaning the first time. I meant that I felt obligated to respond on behalf of those WP editors who have reverted your unsourced edits, to whom your complaint seemed to be addressed. Carlstak ( talk) 16:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC) reply

My apologies, my attempt to merge after an edit conflict did not work correctly. If I could impose on you: I’m writing on a pad, and I am not competent with it yet. If I try to fix it, it’ll likely get worse. Could you put your section back in for me? Qwirkle ( talk) 14:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC) reply

PS: Either I've fixed this, or perhaps it never was a real problem, but an artifact of editing on one server vs. another, but if there is still a problem, then It still needs to be fixed. Qwirkle ( talk) 16:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the notice, Quirkle, but I'm not sure where you mean. Could you show me the diff link, so I know what you're talking about, even if it's fixed? I'm working on an all-consuming real-life project now, and I have less than an hour online tonight, so I don't have a chance to ferret it out. I'm glad you're making needed corrections to "Negro Fort" and "Prospect Bluff Historic Sites". Carlstak ( talk) 03:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Can’t find it either. It was connected with this , I think . Started edit, came up with edit conflict, selected own version to work from, slid the screen...and blame, edit accepted, without me hitting publish...at least not deliberately. Qwirkle ( talk) 14:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Still not sure, Quirkle. Could it be the duplication of the post I made that started,"Quirkle's changes are correct, respect WP policy, and improve the article."? It's there now, and the dupe was deleted. Carlstak ( talk) 03:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Dunno. That might be it; all I knew for sure is that I added material, and saw the total size shrink, never a good sign. If there’s no problem, though, feel free to nuke this forthwith. Qwirkle ( talk) 03:51, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Okay, thanks for the notice. Carlstak ( talk) 11:09, 24 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Do what you want, but by reverting all the editions without a solid reason (since you know that valencian is not a language, but a dialect), you are discouraging people to participate in wikipedia. Imposition is never a good argument. 176.167.249.39 ( talk) 18:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC) reply

You're just nit-picking. No one's saying that Valencian is a language; even as a dialect of Catalan, it's still a Valencian word. You seem to have a habit of misrepresenting things—you, among other IPs, are the one who changed the stable version of the text, not me. Carlstak ( talk) 03:00, 6 September 2018 (UTC) reply

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC) reply

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused. reply

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Great job on the Salvador Jose de Muro article. Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 17:51, 23 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Barkeep49; the feedback is much appreciated. Carlstak ( talk) 18:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Gullah.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{ bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page. reply

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC) reply

I suggest you rad the talk page, then the soruce. Slatersteven ( talk) 10:28, 24 December 2018 (UTC) reply

I just noticed these charts have been added all over the States articles. Even GA articles were WP:PROSE is normally followed....look at Massachusetts#Politics just horrible text sandwich for a chart with little value. Wonder if we should start a wider talk see if others see value in federal results in State articles.-- Moxy ( talk) 15:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC) reply

I'm all for it if you want to start the process. Carlstak ( talk) 15:50, 19 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Please feel free to tweak. ... Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States#‎Federal election charts in State articles.-- Moxy ( talk) 16:11, 19 January 2019 (UTC) reply

Always revert. There's no source and it gets added to various articles. I've no idea why. Doug Weller talk 16:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC) reply

I'll keep an eye out for it. Carlstak ( talk) 22:54, 23 March 2019 (UTC) reply

I appreciate the removal of my edit to the article. I am new to the process and agree that the factoid does not belong in the intro. The problem remains that the unsourced statement that he was declared by JPII to be patron saint of the internet remains and is used a source elsewhere on the internet. I do have references for it not being declared prior to JPII death. Perhaps a subheading on the article under "legacy" discussing the Internet hoax? ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]} Savagedoc ( talk) 15:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, Savagedoc. I don't have time at the moment to check your sources, which are not available to me, but personal websites are generally not to be used as sources on WP. Pertinent journals published by respectable institutions are fine. This reliable, academic source I found says, "In 1999, Roman Catholic Internet surfers promoted naming St. Isidore of Seville, a seventh-century bishop and the author of the twenty volume proto-encyclopedia Etymologiae, the patron saint of the Internet... In any event, the Vatican announced in 2001 that it was seriously considering naming Isidore the patron saint of Internet users and computer programmers." ^[5] The Encyclopedia of Monasticism says, "In 1999 after much study, the Pontifical Council for Social Communications declared Isidore of Seville to be the patron saint of the Internet." ^[6] Saints Preserved: An Encyclopedia of Relics says, "Saint Isidore of Seville is the patron saint of the Internet. Feast day: April 4." ^[7] If you would like to work up a bit to include in the article, these reliable academic sources are suitable as references. I agree that the legacy section would be the place for it. What do you propose? I won't be able to review until this evening, about 12 hours from now. Carlstak ( talk) 12:11, 5 April 2019 (UTC) reply

Just because something is famous, doesn't mean it should be poorly sourced. For more information, see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons: "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Ref-checking ( talk) 18:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC) reply

Thanks, but you seem to have misinterpreted my comment, and ignore the fact that I added three reliable sources. I made the comment and left the link to the clip so that interested readers could watch it. The WP policy you quote, with which I am familiar, doesn't even apply anyway, because James Dean is not living or recently deceased. It's not that important to me, but the clip is not contentious and readers might like to see it. Your time would be better spent assisting in finding reliable sources rather than adding tags. Carlstak ( talk) 18:58, 12 May 2019 (UTC) reply

Let's talk about the etymology of Hidalgo.

This argument has bothered me for years, more than the existence of WP.I am aware that the popular notion is that the word is a contractionof hijo de algo, and that this ideation is reflected in the likes of Encylopaedia Brittanica, but I have had issues with Brittanica as it is politically (religiously, ideologically motived),just like many editors on WP.

As you know hijo de algo means son of something, and the turn of phrase is nonsense in both Spanish and English translation, and that is not "original research". Son of something is stating that a man is son of an object. Others are aware of the nonsense and have tried to assert that it means son of somebody. Then along comes others who rationalize and obfuscate claiming that something means "riches".

The only problem with hijo del Godo. Is the "del",we need to discover where "al" enters into the etymology, and I hold that here we have an influence that shows up in the Spanish language in many forms.. Arabic. Al is Arabic for "of" or "of the", You see that in Arabic names e. Muhammad al Tikriti. In other words hijo de al godo, a mixed language phrase, which is not uncommon in the Spanish language see Algeciras, and that is one case. With your background and knowledge I am sure that you can find many other mixed Arabic and Spanish words and phrases.

OK I can see where someone could claim that this statement is "orginal research" But we really don't have much to explain the etymology of hidalgo as son of something insults and assaults reason and language. Oldperson ( talk) 19:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Oldperson, I was looking at the raw markup and didn't notice that your edit added hidden text, but in any case, your comments were not written in correct English: you misspelled "Britannica" and "usage", you omitted necessary spacing between words, as when you wrote the nonsensical words "On the other hand it to claim that hidalgo" with no space after the previous sentence, as well as multiple other instances of omitting spaces. It's not the responsibility of other editors to fix sloppy editing. Your contributions to WP (even in hidden text), need to be written in correct English. Any visible text in the article that makes possibly controversial assertions about disputed matters would need to be supported by reliable sources. Carlstak ( talk) 02:28, 22 August 2019 (UTC) reply

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Hi, Carlstak, just saw your intervention here. Thanks for that. The editor called me a troll and reverted on every page where I undid his unsourced edits, but subsequently did add sources, which is what matters. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 11:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC) reply

You're welcome, Rui. Glad to have been of service. Carlstak ( talk) 18:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your help with Parris Island and for your kind comments. For the record, I've added a little explanation also to the Port Royal Island article (as well as the old map from there - it usefully shows the 'Paris Island' spelling). Davidships ( talk) 20:50, 4 November 2019 (UTC) reply

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 {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

		The Surfing Barnstar
		For your work on Surf culture.-- evrik ( talk) 22:07, 8 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Thank you, evrik, very kind of you, and I must say that's a cool barnstar. I don't feel that I deserve it, yet, though. I'm sure we can get the article into top form—surf culture is an important subject and deserves first-class coverage. I'm working on the Spirituality section right now; I've found a good bit of material that I need to read. I may be able to get at least something up tonight. Carlstak ( talk) 22:46, 8 January 2020 (UTC) reply

• FYI - As part of the clean-up effort, I just cleaned up Glossary of surfing. -- evrik ^{( talk)} 21:29, 10 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Cool, but don't change anything on my talk page like the reflist template you just removed. It was added by another user, and it's just as well that it's gone, but it's rude to arbitrarily change a user's talk page that way. Carlstak ( talk) 21:42, 10 January 2020 (UTC) reply

FWIW, I didn't remove anything. I added the template because the references were showing up her at the bottom. -- evrik ^{( talk)}

Not a big deal, but it was jarring to see my talk page changed that way. I'm not at all upset about it, it just would have been less surprising if you had mentioned it your edit summary. Peace. I'm still reading and working on the "Spirituality" section; I've found a lot of stuff and it may take a couple days to digest it, write something up, and organize the references. I applaud your energy and zeal to get surf-related articles in shape. Everywhere I look, I see more work to be done. Carlstak ( talk) 21:58, 10 January 2020 (UTC) reply

The user Melroross is vandalizing again the Spaniards article.

He has erased all the content of the Lead and is copying all the content of the article “Genetic history of the Iberian Peninsula” and pasting it in this article. Basically he is removing content with sources and converting the article in an entirely genetic article. NormanGear ( talk) 14:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC) reply

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team reply

Thanks for copy editing Goths. Currently Krakkos has gotten both of us blocked form editing. I think when you de-linked [[Herwig Wolfram]] you accidentally created "Herwig WolframHerwig Wolfram".-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 06:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Got it, thanks. Carlstak ( talk) 06:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi User talk:Carlstak, your zealous eye for detail is appreciated. However, I suggest you moderate your rants- the comma may not be used in the American variant of English as it is in England but that doesn’t make it an error. Also, the Suebians were never in Catalonia- the Franks were. I added that very useful piece information which you had removed. Looking forward to a continued and productive cooperation Melroross ( talk) 13:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC) reply

I beg your pardon? There was nothing rantish about my edit summary, and I assume you're talking about where you wrote "The Suebians of Northern, central Portugal, Galicia; were the most numerous of the Germanic tribes." which uses a comma and a semicolon incorrectly. Your writing in English is fairly good, but it's obviously not your first language, so please don't lecture me about proper punctuation in my native tongue. Perhaps you thought I was ranting because of my comment about the "useless info" added to unknown parameters; I don't know if you added that or not, but if you did, you should have noticed the ugly red warnings in preview mode concerning them, and you certainly should know better by now than to wikilink the names of very well-known countries. Also, the reason I removed the bit about the Frankish kings was that I had no idea what you meant by "along with Catalonia with the Frank kings" (nor would anyone else), which, as I said, makes no sense. If you need help composing in proper English, please give me a shout.;-) Carlstak ( talk)

Good morning Carlstak, first of all I hope you will accept my apology for my mistakes in editing, and for your work in correcting my writing errors in English. It was certainly a bad job and I regret it. I agree with what you've written: it's not our place to make value judgements that violate neutral-point-of-view, because I myself have corrected edits of other users who had made the same mistake, I certainly didn't have a good day.

I'll be more careful in the future.-- REKKWINT ( talk) 12:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Thank you, REKKWINT, for your kind note. It's refreshing to hear such a gracious reply. I wish you all the best, and happy editing. Carlstak ( talk) 20:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Carlstak, What was really nice was your answer. With best wishes. -- REKKWINT ( talk) 22:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Leningrad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Front ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

I'll be online again tomorrow. Good night. -- evrik ^{( talk)} 04:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello, Carlstak! I'm Ed6767. I noticed you have been using Twinkle and was wondering if you'd like to beta my new tool called RedWarn, specifically designed to improve your editing experience.

RedWarn is currently in use by over 80 other Wikipedians, and feedback so far has been extremely positive. In fact, in a recent survey of RedWarn users, 90% of users said they would recommend RedWarn to another editor. If you're interested, please see the RedWarn tool page for more information on RedWarn's features and instructions on how to install it. Otherwise, feel free to remove this message from your talk page. If you have any further questions, please ping me or leave a message on my talk page. Your feedback is much appreciated! Ed6767 talk! 03:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reverting my edit on White privilege, which I'd made in error and then (uncharacteristically) forgot to proofread. Of course, "is" is much better than "refers to". NightHeron ( talk) 10:57, 22 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for this, NightHeron. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 11:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC) reply

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		I hereby gift you the Copyeditor's Barnstar, for your unwavering commitment at fixing the broken english from this humble servant.:) Asqueladd ( talk) 22:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Asqueladd, I consider this a high compliment coming from such an excellent editor as yourself. Best regards, Carlstak ( talk) 02:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak, you have greatly improved my editing in Battle of Covadonga, and I really appreciate that. I feel bad about giving you a lot of work again. Sorry Carlstak.

Finally just a comment, my link was to a PDF with an index, this is true, but the PDF has 11 pages, and page number 8 corresponds to the page that interests us which is number 5 of the document written in the newspaper El Museo Universal by F. Navarro Villoslada. This is visible at least with Acrobat Reader in Windows, wich it displays a column on the left with thumbnails of each page.

Regarding more editions in English I think I'm going to rest for now, well that's all.Greetings.-- REKKWINT ( talk) 11:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, REKKWINT. Hmmm, I don't know how the pdf appears in Acrobat Reader; I use Foxit Reader in Windows because it's less vulnerable to malicious code being inserted. Only the index page appears in the file in my browser, and there is the only the one thumbnail visible. I have reverted the last edit you made to the article, see my edit summary. Carlstak ( talk) 11:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC) reply

You say: "the acute accent is on the a in the text, which I merely copied and pasted from the Google plain text download—-it is present in the original text of the magazine..." that's true. I found it hard to believe it was your mistake, but I want to give you an explanation: The notification of your reversion arrives when I'm reading the PDF, (it's very casual that this has happened, and it's true), then that's why I just realized at this moment that "á" is in the original article, and appears many times, it must be Spanish spelling from the SXIX, I think, and when I was going to reverse my own edition I see that you have already done the reversion. It's a shame. I'm so Sorry, that's all and I repeat that shortly my reversion would have appeared in the history page. Well I wish you good editions, and improving WP every day. Thanks.-- REKKWINT ( talk) 13:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC) reply

No worries. Well, I have a compulsion to fix typos and other errors, but I'm certainly not immune to making a mistake myself now and then. Carlstak ( talk)

This edit [11] seems to have upset you, so perhaps a quick explanation should be forthcoming.

The edit prior to yours added unreferenced material, and your subsequent followup edit slightly modified that unreferenced material. Your edit had to be reverted before the previous edit could be dealt with. Hopefully you understand. SolarFlash ^Discussion 18:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, SolarFlash. To be clear, the first edit I made affected only content already in the article, and altered nothing in the changes user Stephanieconn made.

I'm glad you brought this up, because after reading the given source, I don't see how her edit could remotely be deemed adding "unreferenced" material by changing "they were largely illiterate" to "many were illiterate in their native tongue", a statement which would seem to logically follow from this on page 52 of the report, Gaelic Nova Scotia: An Economic, Cultural, and Social Impact Study, by Michael Kennedy: "Gaelic literacy was actually lost following the advent of the new compulsory English educational system but not effectively replaced with English literacy."

I would note also that your edit restored her amusing typo "perdisted", so given these facts, it seems to me that you reverted a bit too quickly. Carlstak ( talk) 19:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC) reply

As far as I am aware you use a possessive to show the relationship or (chain of) from the name, "Hawkins financial reforms of the Navy upset many who had vested interests." Why would you employ a possessive on that sentence? The sentence is describing an action, not a relationship. So I am confused by the English here, it seems different to what I was taught. Govvy ( talk) 18:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC) reply

As I understand it, you are using the name "Hawkins" as part of an adjectival collocation (adjective+noun) in "Hawkins financial reforms", which, while perhaps technically correct, seems more confusing to me than the possessive with apostrophe denoting that the reforms were a result of his agency, as if they belonged to him. Carlstak ( talk) 18:30, 9 August 2020 (UTC) reply

His agency? He is still working for the Queen know, I don't know, looks more confusing to me with the double s. Govvy ( talk) 19:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC) reply

By agency, I mean "action or intervention producing a particular effect." I would also refer you to MOS:POSS: "For the possessive of singular nouns, including proper names and words ending with an s, add 's". Carlstak ( talk) 19:24, 9 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello Carlstak, I want to inform you that I have edited Visigoths and Goths, including the paragraph according to Joseph F. O'Callaghan. I have quoted you in the history of the page. Greetings .-- REKKWINT ( talk) 21:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for catching the typo, REKKWINT, and for your kind notice. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 21:17, 13 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstack, thank you for your good advice. It's incredible forty five editions for a ridiculous number of images. I've had a lot of work but I can't stand vandalism. You know I have been about to employ the following method: a slight modification in thr first vandalic edition and with this we managed to undo all the subsequent changes, but I have been careful, when seeing intermediate editions made by you, this ruled out that option. I am sure he has made forty-five editions believing that he would make the reversal as difficult as possible. He may be a vandal but he knows the WP edition, he has even made links, and modified some code text.

Thank you for your good advice, and also for your spelling corrections when I make a not quite correct edition. You show a lot of patience,and a lot of interest in improving WP by keeping an "encyclopedic spirit" at all times, but one thing is certain, in the end there are some good editions that add new content that did not appear in the various articles in which we have both intervened

I will study what you tell me about menu buttons to automate common tasks and WP:ROLLBACK,it's very interesting. Greetings -- REKKWINT ( talk) 23:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC) reply

I suspect the IP is someone's sockpuppet, but it's best not to call him a vandal. Using Twinkle is very simple—once you enable it by ticking the box under "gadgets" be sure to hit the "save" button at the bottom of the page. Also, you'll see a "preferences" link next to the Twinkle listing, you can further define how you want the tool to perform there. You've made quite a few good edits; I've noticed that you have a tendency to place refs before punctuation, rather than after. Please be sure to check that you've placed commas or full stops (periods) in front of the ref markup before you hit "publish". Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 03:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Per an online dictionary:

unwilling/ (ʌnˈwɪlɪŋ) / adjective 1. unfavourably inclined; reluctant 2. performed, given, or said with reluctance

So I meant it in the second sense. 😊 Anythingyouwant ( talk) 03:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC) reply

I am not an historian or scholar, by any means. However, I do enjoy reading historical articles, here on WP. I am fairly astonished, and dismayed, by the so-called improvements made to the article. I have watchlisted, obviously, and can add my voice to disapprove, at the very least, the poor English in the "improvements". Thanks for your edits, so that Andrew Lancaster is not a lone voice crying in the wilderness. Best, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Tribe of Tiger, I really appreciate your moral support. I don't mean to be short, but I have to go to work. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 13:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC) reply

No worries! Perhaps, now that the three of us have said.."we realize that you did not intend to deceive", it may pave the way for a better dialogue. It makes me rather nervous when a "new editor" wishes to force wholesale changes on a fairly stable article. I certainly do not have the experience or knowledge that you or User:Andrew Lancaster possess in the topic area. But it is a better choice to make small changes, relying on consensus. However, here on your talk, I feel free to say that I was appalled, not only by the "English", but by the rather weird new images that were added. I felt as though I were entering Mordor, of Tolkein fame. Regards, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 05:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, Tribe of Tiger. Haha, I agree about the images, they really were weird and lent a dark aspect to the page. Sechinsic is deluded about the quality of his writing in English, and his calling us "impolite" is absurd, considering that he wants to impose his version of the article on everyone else (meaning the whole world—shudder). I must say that I don't have the expertise in this particular subject that Andrew Lancaster does, so my contributions would be mostly in copy editing and fact-checking. I do have well-developed research skills that can be applied. Carlstak ( talk) 14:02, 2 September 2020 (UTC) reply

I think editing has started again on this article and so far things like style and structure are probably more to the point than details in the content. So continuing input would be good from both of you. When it comes to those types of issues, it is always awkward if there are only two editors. It is a shame Sirfurboy is not active any more!-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 21:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC) reply

That is a shame about Sirfurboy. Every voice of reason is needed. Carlstak ( talk) 01:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Yes, the new edits look good! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 21:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC) reply

They do look good. Carlstak ( talk) 01:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC) reply

I recently undid an edit of yours in this article, which you then undid. This was fine with me, I went to the talk page to continue discussing what we had begun and discovered that much of what we were discussing had been slash & burned by an annon editor, certainly not me. So I started a discussion on the talk page and hope to see you there. One of the points we were discussing was the cultural appropriation issue, I have the book, the source used and would like to post the entire paragraph because, it's late and I can't exactly remember why, but it seemed relevant. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 06:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the notice, Carptrash. I will join the discussion once I'm fully awake. Carlstak ( talk) 14:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

A good idea, and I added "sober" to my list of "what I need to be to edit" many years ago. Carptrash ( talk) 16:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Hey. Thanks for the vote of confidence at 'Confederate Army' Talk. "I'll be back."

I'm actually a Key West Conch on my mother's side, my olive complexion is attributed to a Brazilian sailor married into the English family in Bermuda. For the Spanish-speaking scholar, previously I’ve referenced Miami editor Frank de Verona at the Hispanic Presence in the United States: Historical Beginnings, and the master’s thesis on “The Role of Spain in the American Revolution: An Unavoidable Mistake” by Jose I. Yaniz.

- I've a trace of Algonquin-Powhatan from my father's side, known due to the Jim Crow era "one-drop" rule excluding anyone of native descent from voting, excepting only descendants of the Christian convert and 'princess' "Pocahontas", as her son returned to serve on the Royal Governor's Council and marry into the great landowning families. (Sorry, not me. I'm a 'by-my-bootstraps' school teacher with one single-family VA-loan home mortgage.) To my knowledge that 'drop' is not enough to qualify for membership in any federally or state-recognized tribal organization.

Indians split within languages, nations and tribes; Neutrality was impossible to maintain in the Revolution

Col. Joseph Brant, GB Iroquois Mohawk led Seneca in war Col. Joseph Cook, US Iroquois Mohawk led Oneida in war

- I noticed your interest in Indigenous Peoples of North American. At the American Revolutionary War article down in the "Participants" section, American Indians, I've replaced the image of an artist's conception showing two dozen Revolutionary War uniforms worn on figures in a winding queue (huh?), with two portraits of Native Americans, notable in that they both held regular Army commissions, and were native war leaders of two different Iroquois tribes. One was also a British colonel, and one was also an American colonel ... with some context in the captions.

- The 'Indigenous' Project ranks the ARW article as "Low-importance", but could you give it a once-over, and perhaps contribute to the American Indians sub-section. I'm not trying to start trouble here, lots to handle to keep the scope of the "ARW" article from being hijacked into Euro great power-only contests (Mahan's "War of 1778" between Britain and the Bourbons), including Saintes, Jamaica, Gibraltar, and the Indian sub-continent Second Mysore War, all without the knowledge or consent of Congress.

- The page-consensus has been to leave the "Indian" term as an archaic expression of contemporaries among the Europeans, native colonials, and including bi-lingual indigenous traders, weroances, and sachems as used in their English-, French- and Spanish-language communication. I hope that is a good-enough rationale for maintaining the page-consensus.

- Please help me sort out the top-hat links to related Native American articles using 'Indigenous' Project conventions/protocols. There are five lines of links to ten related articles, creating a 'wall-of-text'. I've never seen anything like it, and it's like a sign on the article "kick me". Another wp:editor partner and I have undertaken to try to elevate the article status to "Good Article", an ongoing "struggle" for four months to date ... Sincerely - TheVirginiaHistorian ( talk) 07:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi VirginiaHistorian, that's quite an interesting personal history you have; you may have noticed that I am part Cherokee myself. It seems we have many shared interests—I wish I had the time and energy to jump in and assist, but I'm working on creating or expanding four different WP articles, not to mention monitoring and commenting on talk pages, plus keeping an eye on my watchlist. On top of everything I own and operate a business. I have a vast backlog of texts to read, but I couldn't resist taking a look at Yaniz's paper, and what I see so far looks very good. Thanks for reaching out, perhaps in future I'll be able to help; in the meantime I expect I'll see you around the talk pages. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 17:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Understood. I did post my "titled two-portrait image" above. I altered the captions for a more indigenous focus  Done, removing the broader "with (Seneca,Oneida) allies" for "led (Seneca,Oneida) in war",  Done ... probably should link the tribes (to their respective American Revolution sections) ...  Done ... also, 'Iroquois' and 'Mohawk' to their respective Am.Rev.secs...  Done, and not to forget the visually impaired such as my occasional classroom students with their laptops, reading the related Wikipedia article to keep up during class, and to complete in-class assignments ... link all terms in image " alt= " coding to appropriate sub-sections for 'Iroquois', 'Mohawk', 'Seneca' and 'Oneida' in the Am.Rev.  Done.

An aside re: the ARW Onieda: (a) they provided scouts (I cannot find any Euro-ethnic army prior to the American Civil War, winning a battle east of the Mississippi River without Native American allies.), AND (b) famously among military historians, the Oneida supplied corn to Washington's Valley Forge at a crucial starvation juncture over a few weeks when neither Congress nor their states could deliver even subsistence rations to their Continental "[State] Line" regiments. Cheers! TheVirginiaHistorian ( talk) 12:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC) reply

So happy to have you aboard. I'm here if you need help. ~ Elias Z. ( talkallam) 06:03, 14 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Elias. Carlstak ( talk) 14:52, 14 September 2020 (UTC) reply

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC) reply

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply

I was wondering if you had checked the edits made to Bernardo de Gálvez such as [13] [14] and the number of other edits by the same editor?

Do these edits seem reasonable? Are they supported by sources?

The reason for asking is that the editor in question puts out a large number of edits, often on relatively unrelated subjects, and with very short time intervals between edits. This does not seem to fit with using sources before making changes. Some edits have value (correcting clear errors) but many appear questionable. These characteristics are similar to those of User:Snagemit. Hence the concern. As I am not familiar with the subject matter of this article, it seems sensible to ask an editor who does know the subject.

Thanks, ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 09:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks for pointing this out, ThoughtIdRetired. I've reverted the substantial changes he made to the article because while they seem to look mostly okay, some of the text no longer aligned with the given sources. I'll take at look at changes he's made to other articles to see how they look in this light when I get a chance later today. If he is a sockpuppet of indefinitely blocked User:Marshalb, I'll ask for a check user investigation. Thanks again. Carlstak ( talk) 11:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Regarding the width of the Utah monolith, equilateral triangles are shorter than they are wide:

The width and depth would only be the same if two of the angles were 45 degrees, but that's not the case here: there's a photo in the article that shows it to be a 60 degree equilateral. -- Lord Belbury ( talk) 13:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Of course you are correct, Lord Belbury. I've self-reverted. Thanks for the correction, and my apologies. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 22:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC) reply

The article has a source saying Columbus never called them anything like Indios. -- Doug Weller talk 17:03, 28 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Aha. Thanks, Doug, I always feel a sense of relief when I see that you're watching an article. 17:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history " Military Historian of the Year" and " Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rus' people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Björkö.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

		The Doo-wop Barnstar
		For your excellent expansion work at the doo-wop article, giving the reader a much better representation of historic factors. Binksternet ( talk) 07:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you, Binksternet. I'm honored.

All the best,

Carlstak ( talk) 13:18, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rus' people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yaroslav I.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Dear Carlstak,

I´m working in the biography of Draft:Juan Cabrera Garrido. After submission, I was kindly adviced to introduce new quotes and footnotes to the biographical information to improve it. So I did, but then there came a problem with "verifying claims because of a language barrier". At that point I tryed to obtain help from the WikiProject Biography but, after a couple of months, I haven´t received any feedback... That is whay I write to you, in order (if possible) to ask for help and advice about how to continue.

Thanks a lot in advance and regards! -- Tulkas76 ( talk) 11:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi Tulkas76, I'm sorry that you were unable to get help from the WikiProject Biography. Your draft looks quite good to me. It's got 34 citations, so I can't see what the problem is with inline citations. Even though the article is a biography of a living person, it doesn't appear that it makes any statements that should present a problem. I think the reviewer is being overly strict, but I'm not an expert in these matters. It seems ironic that your excellent submission was declined when Wikipedia is littered with countless unsourced stubs about trivial subjects such as manga titles.

I have to go to work soon, but I will take a look this evening when I return home. One thing you could do in the meantime is to move punctuation such as commas and periods (full stops) from after the citations to before them, per MOS:CITEPUNCT, which says "All ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies... and are placed after adjacent punctuation, not before". Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 12:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak. Thank you very much for yor quick response and your kind words and advices. I´ll beguin to introduce the changes inmediately. Regards, -- Tulkas76 ( talk) 17:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Tulkas76, I've looked again at your draft; it could use a little copy editing (I'm too tired to do it ;-), but I still think it's quite good. I really don't know why it was declined—I suggest you post a message like the one you left me on DGG's ( talk ) page. He's a knowledgeable reviewer, and might be able to help you. Best of luck—you deserve it, I know you've worked hard on that draft. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 03:01, 2 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Tulkas76 I've given you some advice on your talk page. DGG ( talk ) 09:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Dear Carlstak. Thank you again for your very encorouging words and your valuable advices. Best regards, -- Tulkas76 ( talk) 10:17, 2 March 2021 (UTC) reply

From the anon editor that got nervous about anti-semitism:

Just wanted to thank you for letting the final revision on doo-wop stand. I know you have done a lot of research on this part of history for music you're passionate about. I hope you can kind of see where I was coming from an audience looking at these articles for the first time. It wasn't a question of whether each individual piece was factually correct, but it's been said that propaganda is as much about emphasis as content. The narrative of "jews in control" and being especially greedy is super dangerous.

I may have overreacted -- especially by removing the entire sections as a first edit for an issue I could have brought to the talk page. I stayed anonymous because it can be genuinely risky engaging in some of these conversations when you don't yet know who you are engaging with. That said, I can see how it could look like idiotic vandalism.

Thank you for your work -- I'll stop messing with these pages. I hope at some point you'll be willing to take a read-through of what you wrote and ask how a layperson would engage with that content (say, someone who hasn't read a ton of work by Jewish and Black Authors and is looking to confirm biases they might hold) and ask yourself about the impact of those words on the audience reading them.

But if you don't, that's fine too. It's clear by now how much work you've put in and it's not fair to continue making you feel as if you're being accused of doing that work poorly or in bad faith. Thanks for all the time you volunteer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.200.125.197 ( talk) 18:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Dear anonymous editor, I truly appreciate your kind and considered words; I think it's uncommonly generous and downright noble of you to write this. I do understand where you're coming from, and I know from my own experience that conversations on this subject can be dangerous—I've gotten death threats for making what I thought were rather innocuous statements about the South's role in the Civil War. Please allow me a little time to emotionally detach myself from what I wrote and then I will review it with your concerns in mind. You're right that I am passionate about the subject, and it's always nice when someone notices and acknowledges the work I've done. All the best, Carlstak ( talk) 01:23, 12 March 2021 (UTC) reply

You are recipient no. 2556 of Precious, a prize of QAI. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:09, 15 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much Gerda. Wikipedia is lucky to have editors like you who contribute in so many ways, and spread the wikilove. All the best, Carlstak ( talk) 00:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak, did you read my last update to the edit I undid? Because I never mentioned anything of this sort-"their potential to treat drug dependence, anxiety or mood disorders." I only updated the information, under research, to only include the types of expiremental research being done on animals. As it is research, and did not include anything about how it relates to medicine or therapy. Simply, unbias, real research, under research. How does this violate anything? I don't want to sound rude, I just don't understand how this is something you deem unworthy of being noted? Is it not research? Jmorales96 ( talk) 03:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Jmorales96, you cited a biomedical article, "Psilocybin lacks antidepressant-like effect in the Flinders Sensitive Line rat", which is not a review of the research per WP:MEDRS, to support your statement "psilocybin is being used for research in animals". Animals are being used for this purpose because it would be unethical to use human subjects. The researchers "investigated whether the administration of psilocybin had an antidepressant-like effect in a rat model of depression", clearly for possible human medical applications. You altered the part of the text which contained the "their potential to treat drug dependence, anxiety or mood disorders" bit, removed the source it cited, which was a review and met WP:MEDRS, and replaced it with a source which is not a review, and does not meet WP:MEDRS standards. I think you need to read this content guideline. It says, "For this reason, all biomedical information must be based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources..." Carlstak ( talk) 04:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Carlstak, I am sorry if it seems I was in an edit war. This was not my intention, before undoing the edit, I revised said edit. It was to my belief that revision of my own edit would satisfy the necessary requirements to be a part of the article. I took out the information I provided from the journal that conveyed use in medicine and therapy for humans. I simply wanted to add under the title "Research" the research that has been done using psilocybin. I apologize if this irritated anyone. I would also like to mention that I might have accidently removed the part stating-"their potential to treat drug dependence, anxiety or mood disorders." This was not my intention. Jmorales96 ( talk) 07:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Dear Carlstak, I have started an RfC on the article Goths that may be of interest to you, see Talk:Goths#RfC.-- Berig ( talk) 21:01, 31 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks Berig, I'll check it soon as I can. Carlstak ( talk) 01:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Man that one ran off the rails. Unfortunately, those two editors have been at this for many years now. Given the prolix nature of both, think of the number of articles they could have independently cleaned up were it not for the near permanent "stall" their mutual antagonism generates. They have both written dissertation's worth to (well, at) one another over time. Thanks for weighing in on this RfC discussion nonetheless, as your level head and pragmatic approach are always helpful. -- Obenritter ( talk) 17:42, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Appreciated, Obenritter. It really is a shame. All that wasted mental energy and time. Carlstak ( talk) 18:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Two years ago, we held an RfC to decide if the Estado Novo regime should be considered Fascist or not, no consensus was reached, so it was decided that the status quo would be maintained, and the status quo was that it was indeed a Fascist regime:

/info/en/?search=Talk:Fascism_in_Europe#Should_the_Estado_Novo_regime_in_Portugal_be_considered_a_Fascist_regime?

This also means of course that Salzar should be considered a Fascist ruler.

But despite this, the user JPratas has continued to make edits that go against what was decided and imposing his POV on many pages, including this one, a few months ago he was even threatened with being blocked if he continued to do this on the Fascism in Europe page, see the last comments on the section:

/info/en/?search=Talk:Fascism_in_Europe#Portuguese_Estado_Novo_is_not_considered_fascist_by_the_majority_of_academic_source

So as you can see, I'm not the one disrepecting WP:BRD, JPratas is, he is the one that is going against what was decided. -- 201.20.66.11 ( talk) 04:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply. I know that this has been a point of contention for years, and probably will continue to be. I also know that JPratas is passionately committed to his point of view, and will defend it to the death. I will yield to whatever the community has decided on the Salazar article, but I'm not sure what that is. I'm already involved in a horribly contentious discussion at another article, so I have no appetite to get involved in this one; I'm withdrawing from this argument and will let you and other editors sort it out. Carlstak ( talk) 13:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

What's your source for Salazar's 1.75 m height ? — AnnaBruta ( talk) 14:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply

I wanted to suggest adding a page on Juan Jose Eligio de la Puente y Regidor.

He was a prominent St Augustinian during the transition of control from Spain to the British in the 1760s. He is credited with the creation of the map detailing St Augustine's fort and city as it was in 1763.

He is the great-grandson of Spanish Florida Governor Juan de Ayala y Escobar. (Through Ayala's daughter Francisca).

Information regarding him can be found here: ^[1]

Some additional information can be found in the History of Cuban Families volume 5 page 90 (99 of the pdf): ^[2]

Also, on page 87 (96 of pdf) there is information regarding Jose Eligio de la Puente y Castillejo, who marries Francisca de Ayala y Diaz-Mexia. Their son Antonio is Juan Jose's father.

The map he created: ^[3]

Actually, after finding this link...I just noticed you posted it...but you have his name misspelled. It is Eligio, not Elixio. Also, should be Jose not Joseph.

Also, it is misspelled in the article/caption of the map here as well: ^[4] When abbreviating his name, it should be Eligio de la Puente, not Puente by itself.

Disclosure: I have conflict of interest, as I am a descendant of Juan Jose Eligio de la Puente y Regidor. Thus, I would prefer to have someone without a COI fix the spelling and if possible, create a page for him.

Thanks

Lavakatana ( talk) 15:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your suggestion and corrections, Lavakatana. I don't have time to take care of this at the moment, but tonight I will address these points. I think creating an article on Juan José Eligio de la Puente y Regidor is an excellent idea, but I would need a little time to get something together, because I have a real-world project going on now that takes most of my time. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 19:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Your ancestor signed his name as "Juan Joseph Elixio de la Puente" on the Plano de la RL. Fuerza Baluartes y Linea de la Plaza de SN. Agustín de Florida", as you can see here; so that is the name I used. Apparently he signed his name in various ways. I will write more about this tomorrow when I get a chance. I have to go to bed now.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 03:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks for taking a look at it. I will consult the elders regarding his use of "Elixio" instead of "Eligio" on the map. I know that he gets referred to as "Puente" quite often in most english-based sources, but "Eligio" would be the one word shortening for his last name. Just gotta convince all the Florida Historical Societies of that, rofl. COI Disclosure and Lack of Source Material: but family legend is there were two "Eligio" families in the same town/area, so we started to use "de la Puente" to distinguish between the families. Thus, Eligio is the "important" part of the name. I know wiki article creation and editing is a lot of work, so just know I do appreciate your work on this time period/geographical area. (Sidebar/theorycrafting: I am curious to find out if he signed treasury documents in the same manner or if it was just for the map). Lavakatana ( talk) 17:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply

I'm glad you brought this up, Lavakatana. I've collected some info on the architect and engineer Mariano de la Rocque, who made the Plano Particular de la Ciudad de San Agustin and other maps and plans to do with Florida, so creating an article on Juan José Eligio de la Puente will dovetail nicely with that project. Please keep me informed of any new information or sources;

I think whether or not he signed treasury documents in the same manner is a very pertinent question, and this may be something we can answer. Charles Tingley at the St. Augustine Historical Society Research Library has an encyclopedic knowledge of St. Augustine history; if anyone would know this and sources for it off the top of his head, it's him. You could even call the library yourself and speak to him, if you're so inclined. The phone number is (904) 825-2333. My interest is picqued; I would start working on this right now, but all I have energy for now is cooking supper, drinking some wine, and maybe a little light copy editing.;-) Best regards, Carlstak ( talk) 01:11, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply

So, after some more digging. There are microfilms of his letters/reports to the Governor of Cuba during the exodus process. I have not been able to find digitized copies, but there are microfilms at the Yonge Library at UF. It will be a month or two before I will be able to get back to Florida for a peak at them (Maybe one of the other family members might pop in before I can). On the St. Augustine Historical society catalog, they have the record for him as Eligio, with alternatives of Elixio and Elizio. ^[5] So, now I gotta also figure out where that Elizio comes from! Haven't contacted Tingley yet, but will shortly. I'll keep compiling what I find on this thread for now, I'll stick to more credible and/or sourced stuff until I can get to the actual source stuff myself. ^{[6] [7]}

( ^[8] I haven't gotten through this paywall yet, but will shortly). Lavakatana ( talk) 19:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply

The plot thickens! Good to know that you're doing this, Lavakatana. The research library has some of the Yonge collection on microfilm, and you can use the microfiche readers there when you go. There may very well be documents signed by Eligio among them. Wish I were able to do more now; your enthusiasm is inspiring. Carlstak ( talk) 03:03, 30 April 2021 (UTC) reply

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks so much for the polishing up of the History of slavery in Virginia article! It practically sparkles now. Excellent job! – CaroleHenson ( talk) 03:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Carole, very kind of you. I'm not done, though. I only have about an hour nightly to copy edit until the weekend, so any more minor changes I make will be incremental. Kind regards, Carlstak ( talk) 12:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Excellent! Thanks so much!– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:12, 27 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak: Its true, infobox can give problems, but in your restoration on the Visigoths page, which I thanked, I have now realized that the image "pair of eagles fibulae" has disappeared, so that the page isn't correctly restored I beg you to try get back that image. Thank you. REKKWINT ( talk) 12:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Done. Thanks for pointing out the omission, REKKWINT. I don't know what was going on with the template, but it seems to be working properly now. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 15:36, 4 July 2021 (UTC) reply

thanks Carlstak the Visigoths page has been perfectly restored to its original state. Thank you for your work. Thanks for improving WP. REKKWINT ( talk) 18:25, 4 July 2021 (UTC) reply

My pleasure. Glad I could restore your work.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 18:38, 4 July 2021 (UTC) reply

I disagree with you re respecting use of hyphen instead of en dash. The point is what helps the reader more. An en dash makes it more readible. Faithfully conserving a hyphen between numbers serves no purpose that I can see. Many people don't use en dashes because they never heard of them, or don't have them. deisenbe ( talk) 16:56, 12 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi Deisenbe, it doesn't really matter to me either way; I can't find anything in the MOS about that specific use of a hyphen, so I'll self-revert per your comment. Regarding what you say about people not using en dashes because they don't have them, I assume you're talking about WP editors, who should know that they can click on the en dash character in the row at the bottom of any editing page above the edit summary box. For some reason, some editors refuse to use it, forcing other editors to waste time fixing their hyphens. Cheers, Carlstak ( talk) 17:26, 12 July 2021 (UTC) reply

	Barnstars for Sam Houston articles
	The Teamwork Barnstar is awarded when several editors work together to improve an article, in this case Sam Houston and Native American relations. The Copyeditor's Barnstar is awarded for excellence in correcting spelling, grammar, punctuation, and style issues. – CaroleHenson ( talk) 15:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Carole, I appreciate it. Copy editing is my pleasure.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 15:17, 15 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC) reply

I would like to discuss about reliable sources for cryptozoology. I pointed out here two academic papers about two purported cryptids; check also this reference for Lusca; surfing the Net I found this book and this one, but I suspect they could be fringe as well. Best regards and thanks in advance.-- Carnby ( talk) 07:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC) reply

The paper about the Ningen looks interesting, although I just scanned it, not having time to read it at the moment, and appears to be reliably sourced. I see no reason why it couldn't be added to the article. The article about the canid is merely a report about an unidentified canid, possibly a new species, which would not be a cryptid—the word "crytid" isn't mentioned. Fodor's Caribbean and the Bahamas is a travel guide, which is not a reliable source for WP. Cryptozoology A To Z and Encyclopedia of Cryptozoology: A Global Guide to Hidden Animals and Their Pursuers may be acceptable as sources, but I'm not sure—you should ask Bloodofox about them. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 11:49, 16 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Thank you.-- Carnby ( talk) 12:29, 16 September 2021 (UTC) reply

I thought it might amuse you to know that, for reasons unknown to me, Safari on my phone has decided to make your editing history into my go-to page when I want to check on Wikipedia.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 13:01, 15 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Haha. That's pretty bizarre. I used to use Itunes rather than streaming all my music like I do now. I would minimize the player in the taskbar and play my go-to reggae online radio station, and could see the name there of the song currently playing. It was too weird how the title of every song seemed to reflect whatever I was typing, or even thinking about. Of course, everyone I tried to tell this to thought I was delusional. All my friends accept it as a given that I'm insane anyway, so it didn't really change our relationships.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 16:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC) reply

I hope you join in the discussion on the article talk page! Ghmyrtle ( talk) 16:44, 21 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the notice, Ghmyrtle; I was already on my way.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 17:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC) reply

RE: This edit I thought I successfully went around that by first archiving the relevant files on the Wayback Machine (web.archive.org).

From this revision I checked the links and all seem to point to the Wayback Machine. See if the Wayback links I set up work on your end. WhisperToMe ( talk) 03:06, 4 December 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your reply, WhisperToMe. I checked all the links, and you are correct. I must have been looking at a previous version. I don't have any objections to your re-adding the content, but is there any way to link those pdfs without filling the source code page with all those incredibly long amazonaws.com web addresses? It just seems excessive. Carlstak ( talk) 04:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC) reply

I think tinyurl links are blocked and I'm trying to see if the Wayback Machine supports a shortened URL of some kind. I am able to link to archive.is pages but they are only static images. I think the crazy long URLs mean that directly accessing the content requires a generated token and that's reflected in the URLs I was able to save. I could look around and see WhisperToMe ( talk) 04:48, 4 December 2021 (UTC) reply

That would be appreciated. 17,227 bytes is a lot of code for nine pdf links in an article with only 10,000 bytes of other content. I'd look myself, too, but I'm working on translating an article from Catalan WP. Carlstak ( talk) 04:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC) reply

I believe you are mis-reading MOS:CENTURY. The second bullet point says use Arabic numeral OR words. The section give examples using words i.e. nineteenth-century. Furthermore, MOS:NUMBER says to use words for number 1-9 or others that can be expressed as one to words. MB 15:04, 12 December 2021 (UTC) reply

No, I'm not misreading it; either style is correct, and you are changing it to your personal preference, inconsistently, against established precedent of the articles. Carlstak ( talk)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 ( talk) 14:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC) reply

Hey, I'm a main writer of the article, and given that I have seen you quite a lot on Elon article's talk page, I really do believe that you would be able to see if the article is too positive or not. Should I tone the article down a little? CactiStaccingCrane ( talk) 12:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your message, CactiStaccingCrane]; I don't have time to look at it now, but will review it this evening EST. Carlstak ( talk) 13:07, 11 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot! Your comments will be appreciated! CactiStaccingCrane ( talk) 13:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC) reply

CactiStaccingCrane, I got distracted by the SpaceX article when I took a look at it and saw some things that needed fixing. Edited at odd moments while cooking and eating and reading news. Didn't have time to even finish a cursory reading of that article, and I've barely started reviewing the Elon Musk article. I will take a look tomorrow, but I don't have much time because I'm wrapping up an offline project and starting another. I do thrive on this sort of mad jumping from subject to subject, though—since I'm hyperactive. I still have a lot of work to do on the Columbus article.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 04:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Don't feel rushed lol! I just added a few more section to the article after watching a ton of YouTube videos. CactiStaccingCrane ( talk) 04:46, 12 January 2022 (UTC) reply

i am not blocked. who even are you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.149.166.67 ( talk) 13:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC) reply

I've no intention to soapbox the deletion of "the" Southeastern United States. I'm merely noting the worldwide trend away from it. Me: old dog with new trick. You: change it back to "the" if it bothers you that much. (Substantively speaking, it's no big deal.) Afterward, I encourage you to check the trend away from the "the" convention, including U.S. based journalistic usage and worldwide scholarly usage. BTW, I routinely say I'm from the midwestern United States but I still conventionally say I'm from the United States. Go figure. Cheers. -- Kent Dominic·(talk) 15:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

I still disagree with your change, and I'm reverting it. It's not standard spoken English; for example, the Encyclopedia Britannica uses "the United States". Carlstak ( talk) 18:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

No sweat about the reversion to old school wording. Grammar isn't a science, and I'm no prescriptivist, but the syntax of "in the United States" has always differed from "in the Southeastern United States." Don't take my word for it. See for yourself:

• re "in southeastern United States"
• re "in southwestern United States"
• re "in northwestern United States"
• re "in southwestern United Sates"
• re "in midwestern United States"
• re "in southern United States"; etc.

Separately, just plain "in United States" predates modern usage, but worldwide convention outside the U.S. is trending toward dropping the "the" in "the U.S." altogether. Don't blame me. I didn't start it and I'm not yet on that bandwagon. I'm just saying. -- Kent Dominic·(talk) 20:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

In my idiolect, I do not use "the" with some regional names, such as "New England" or "South Florida", but I do say "the Florida Panhandle", "the Mid-West", "the South", "the Southeastern United States", etc, when they are used as nouns. Terms such as "midwestern" and "southern", when used as adjectives, may not require a definite article, but I find the examples you cite above to be awkward. - Donald Albury 21:50, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

So do I. This strikes me as one of those contrarian campaigns, one might say a crusade, to enforce what is presently outlier usage in the US. The article is written in American English, not schoolmarmish dialect. Carlstak ( talk) 01:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC) reply

I’m with both of you. Doug Weller talk 21:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply your comment was too long; I specifically found Eccekevin's three paragraphs oversized. Anyways, I appreciate both versions of your reply. Kudos for all your work on the page. UpdateNerd ( talk) 13:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC) reply

No worries; the first iteration of my comment did have unnecessary words, and people are more likely to read all of the shorter version. Thanks for the kind words, positive feedback helps keep the spirits up. Take care. Carlstak ( talk) 18:22, 11 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Yes, concise is always better if you want to actually be read! By the way (it's nothing but...) please make sure to always sign your talk page comments! :) UpdateNerd ( talk) 09:51, 12 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello Carlstak, and thanks for your contributions to the encyclopedia. I noticed that this edit of yours to Confederate States of America removed sourced content and reinstated a recent change to the wording of the lead of the article regarding terminology related to slavery in the American South while a discussion was already going on about this wording change at the Talk page. This started when another editor boldly inserted new wording in the lead and was reverted; this prompted creation of this discussion at the Talk page. It's contrary to WP:BRD to reinstate such a reverted change while the discussion is ongoing; please undo your change and join the discussion at the Talk page. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 20:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Sorry, this is an issue where I can't do that, per my reasoning given on the article's talk page. WP:BRD is not a WP policy, or even a guideline. As the page says, it's "an optional method of seeking consensus". Carlstak ( talk) 21:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

...and this edit summary made me snort. Generalrelative ( talk)

Thanks, Generalrelative. Your work is appreciated as well. Best, Carlstak ( talk) 19:26, 6 March 2022 (UTC) reply

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Every one of your edits to Francisco Franco has been solid gold. And they just keep coming. By all means, don’t stop till you get enough. But at this point some kind of special recognition is warranted. You’ve already radically improved an article that has been a real embarrassment to the project. Generalrelative ( talk) 17:00, 12 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much, Generalrelative. There's definitely more work to do.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 17:06, 12 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Gerda, you are amazing.:-) Carlstak ( talk) 11:26, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply

The Labour government did send him to the funeral, there was a vote of censure by the Parliamentary Labour Party. See, eg, The Times Friday, Dec. 5, 1975, page 8, "MPs censure 'courtesy' to Franco". DuncanHill ( talk) 02:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, DuncanHill, very kind of you to send this notice. Fortunately I have access to The Times Digital Archive, so I could quote the article. I have amended my edit, per your correction. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 03:32, 15 April 2022 (UTC) reply

No problem, I also found this in Documents on British Policy Overseas which says Britain was represented at the funeral by Shepherd and Eldon Griffiths, with Charles Wiggin (the ambassador) representing the Queen. Prince Phillip didn't go to the funeral, but did go to the coronation of Juan Carlos II. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC) reply

I'm writing about Franco, so the Google Books link will be useful—now I can cite a source that more readers will have access to, although mentioning Griffiths and Wiggin I think is too much detail for the context. I knew that Prince Philip attended the coronation but not the funeral, as so many sources mentioned, but I couldn't find any source that said Shepherd attended the funeral. Now you've provided it; thanks again. Carlstak ( talk) 14:39, 15 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Please do not revert the enlargement to the Puebla Cathedral article. on Friday I will continue translating it and then I will put the references that I can.-- BrugesFR ( talk) 04:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Don't worry, BrugesFR, I have no such intention. I'm glad you're adding all this information to the article, and if I have enough time, I'll help add some refs. I also intend to do some copyediting when you're done. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 12:00, 11 May 2022 (UTC) reply

thank you, all of us working, thats why wikipedia is among the 5 most popular websites, and today quite reliable, thanks Carlstak, I also ask if you can help me by fixing the few disambiguation links that I left. And I invite you to help me with some other articles that I enlarge when you can or want.-- BrugesFR ( talk) 12:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC) reply

I'm finishing up a work project in real life today, so I'll have time to help with the Puebla Cathedral article soon. Carlstak ( talk) 12:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC) reply

You neglected to mention that you copied the material from a raw machine translation of the Spanish text about the cathedral on the Cuban website EcuRed at https://www.ecured.cu/Catedral_de_Puebla. I thought it was suspicious that you added this copyrighted material with no sources, so I checked and found where you copied it from. Straight translations of copyrighted material are copyrighted too, so I've removed it. Carlstak ( talk) 19:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC) reply

No, All was copied from Spanish wikipedia, I dont know if they ecured again copied from the wikipedia-- BrugesFR ( talk) 21:47, 14 May 2022 (UTC) reply

the ecured page was created in 2017 while the same edition put in the Spanish wikipedia was already in 2016 or even in 2015. So I reversed your edition and put the translation again-- BrugesFR ( talk) 21:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC) reply

It appears that you are correct; sorry for the confusion, BrugesFR. In future, please add a translation template on the article talk page like I did to alert other editors that text was copied from a sister Wikipedia. It's ok to copy from WP, but editors are still required to indicate they are doing so. Please mention in edit summaries that content was copied from Wikipedia, so other editors are aware, in case they don't know to check talk page. I'm glad that the content has been restored, and your work is appreciated. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 22:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks I will do-- BrugesFR ( talk) 08:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC) reply

	The Original Barnstar
	Your work on Norse colonization of North America deserves more than a simple thanks notification, thank you for the work on the article correcting it and adding more sources. TylerBurden ( talk) 00:37, 21 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, TylerBurden, much appreciated. I don't think I'm done yet. I've also noticed that you've been doing some good work around WP yourself.;-) Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 00:45, 21 May 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Carlstak,

Thank you for all of your recent reverts of a very active sockpuppet. You were really on top of this one. It's much appreciated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you too, Liz. I would say "It's my pleasure", but it's really not. This one started off on the wrong foot with crazy fringe stuff and tried to keep it up by edit-warring. I'm pretty obsessive/compulsive, but I'd rather be creating content and finding needed citations.;-) I have great respect for you administrators and all the work you do; I don't think I could deal with it psychologically. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 02:37, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

He used to use [15] but now [16]. He wrote a bio of himself in his userspace, now deleted. Doug Weller talk 08:01, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Ugh, that guy again? Trying to manipulate WP articles for self-promotion with fringe nonsense? Who would have thought? Thanks for the heads up; I've added Kenimer Site to my watchlist. He's even worse with pretend law than he is with pretend archaeology. Carlstak ( talk) 15:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Yeah, he made legal threats with both accounts. Pretty sure he edits logged out also. Doug Weller talk 16:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Ha, he won't be pleased to see that I've just removed his made-up translation for "Lakamhaʼ " at Palenque, along with his given reference that didn't remotely support his "translation". You're a braver man than I am using your real name on WP. I'm fairly well-known in my area, and having had a couple of death threats already on WP, I don't doubt that some crank might hunt me down if I used my actual name. I mean that literally, all the right-wing zealots around here have weapons stockpiles. Carlstak ( talk) 17:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hope he notices. Death threats seem to go with the territory. I had one last week plus someone hoping I’ll be murdered. But I think I’m safe where I am. But I would not want to be still living in the US. My brother lives in a small community in the mountains of Western North Carolina, mainly people from Florida, and he’s lost a lot of friends there. Doug Weller talk 18:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Yes, these are scary times in the US; our democracy, such as it is, may not survive. I'm afraid to talk to old friends I haven't seen in a while—so many of them have gone off the deep end. I never would have thought they could be so gullible. If Trump gets re-elected or De Santis becomes president, I'll be an expatriate, too. Carlstak ( talk) 19:10, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I don’t blame you. Doug Weller talk 19:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I didn't self-censor enough on FB a couple weeks ago and pissed off a bunch of relatives (and a couple of HS classmates). I generally keep a low profile in WP, so it has been a few years since my last death threat. - Donald Albury 01:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I'm glad I don't have a Facebook account—I've heard quite a few similar stories. It's a shame that so many fond memories of old friends have been spoiled by political developments, and even more of a shame to see what they really think now. Carlstak ( talk) 01:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Just wanted to say I agree with your reasoning. It could have been worse: Talk:List_of_Shakespeare_authorship_candidates#Recent_WP:SPS_additions.

Perhaps put a Help:Archiving (plain and simple) on this page? Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 13:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. The walls of text put up by people like those show how unself-aware they are, and not so clever. I don't want to archive this page because here people can see who I am, better than on a user page full of me telling them who I am. I think few people are going to want to go digging through its archives—I sure don't. Carlstak ( talk) 14:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi there. I had some fun last month putting infoboxes on the early administrators of New Spain and ran into a lot of basic questions about the proper terminology and conceptualization of the era, as would be appropriate for infoboxes and list articles. My full plea for help was posted in Wikiproject Military history and got no replies, so if you didn't see it before I wanted to ask directly if you could lend any insight? To me, the officeholder infobox conveys a sense of important authority, and in my opinion it should only definitively state what the official documented positions of the Cortés crew were. Otherwise, if they really were just a bunch of idiots who unofficially took the reins whenever someone went on campaign or on trial, a different kind of presentation might be necessary. I'd appreciate any thoughts and recommendations you have. Thanks! SamuelRiv ( talk) 18:35, 6 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi SamuelRiv, you've caught me just as I've restarted an intermittent offline project, so I don't have much time at the moment. I agree that the officeholder infobox should only definitively state what the official documented positions of the Cortés crew were. I'm sure you know that our own English WP article Hernán Cortés, for example, says, 'King Charles appointed Cortés as governor, captain general and chief justice of the newly conquered territory, dubbed "New Spain of the Ocean Sea".' That is gobernador, capitán general, y justicia mayor. King Charles V issued a royal cédula proclaiming such, so these would be official titles, as you can see in Hernán Cortés by José Luis Martínez. I believe all such appointments to higher offices were made in, and directions given in, real cédulas. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 03:25, 7 July 2022 (UTC) reply

I've started a discussion about our dispute at Talk:James Caan#"Known for his film and television performances" :) Stephanie921 ( talk) 16:49, 17 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Hey, thanks for your contributions to Recession; the actual article is indeed what needs the most attention. Regarding your recent comments on the talk page, I would suggest that if you don't read someone's thoughtful reply to your comment, it would be less demoralizing for the other editor, and honestly a bit less rude to not say anything at all than to say you didn't read it because it was too long, even if that's the honest truth. And it's certainly more civil to be silent than to call a comment that you didn't read "boring". Thanks, Beland ( talk) 17:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, but I disagree. The comments I did read were boring, and so long that they make the talk page harder to read and to comprehend. In my opinion, Jp×g has gone way overboard in his domination of the talk page, to the point that it makes participation in the discussion more difficult, rather than facilitating it. I thought I was being polite, considering how I feel about what he's doing there.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 17:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Was there something you wished to discuss that you felt was hindered by Jp×g? -- Beland ( talk) 22:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Nothing in particular, Beland, thanks for asking. Carlstak ( talk) 03:48, 6 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Well, then I fail to see what the problem is, when you could simply ignore conversations you are uninterested in. -- Beland ( talk) 22:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Your more recent comments railing against "Brandonites" and saying "who of course will ignore it and say it's fake" goes very much against the Wikipedia guidelines that require us to assume good faith, and not to make Wikipedia an ideological battleground. This sort of rhetoric does nothing to make a better article, helps create an impression that Wikipedia is politically biased, are a turn off to editors who both agree and disagree with you, and reduce the changes that other editors will be willing to cooperate with you in the future. -- Beland ( talk) 22:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your input, Beland. I think you are right and will strike my comments. Carlstak ( talk) 23:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://ifs.org.uk/fs/articles/FSCrawfordJinSimpson.pdf, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa ( talk) 15:28, 7 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Diannaa, I thought I did a better job of paraphrasing. I'll see if I can rewrite it. Carlstak ( talk) 15:49, 7 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for fixing something I haven't noticed, thank you. GoodPhone2020 ( talk • contribs • guestbook) 22:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC) reply

I appreciate the acknowledgement, GoodPhone2020. Regards, Carlstak ( talk) 22:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Come on, @Carlstak, we are editors here and we should be trying to to be collaborative. Look, I empathize and relate with you, truly, not only as a fellow editor that shares some of the same viewpoints but also because I am a Cherokee descendent. Many years ago I actually walked much of the route that my direct ancestors walked as part of the last group to leave Cherokee territory in 1836. It's hard to separate our emotions from how we edit, especially when its about polarizing issues like this which directly impacted our lives but we have to. @Sandy is right and I think it's very fair that they are trying to communicate with you here and not taking this further which they could do. It's best to take a step back and listen to them. This is not the hill you are going to die on. Please. The article will be reviewed once all disputes are settled. If a solution can not be found then it may get delisted but that's a call the community will make at that time. So please stop editing for now and instead engage in discussion. -- ARose Wolf 16:10, 25 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your considered remarks, ARoseWolf. They are appreciated. I had to work today and spent time on the road, so I wasn't able to get to this until now. Please see my comments at the article talk page. Nvwadohiyada, Carlstak ( talk) 03:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC) reply

I am very understanding of your thoughts because they are very much like my own. My personal position is one that thinks very poorly of, not only Andrew Jackson, but most if not all of the governments and a lot of the citizens from that time and place. It spills over into the 20th century with attempts to eradicate the culture and language while assimilating the individual. Then it became about eradicating the bloodlines altogether with the eugenics programs of the early, mid and late 1900's. Now there is this strong push, especially among religious institutions to inculturate depicting Jesus as a Native American and taking our languages, cultures and songs and weaving it into their own as if they had always been the same. To me this is no better than any previous attempt to destroy Native cultures. So those are my personal positions. I can't necessarily let that dictate how I edit though. Trust me, it's difficult. I just wanted you to know I get it. Tohidu diganeli -- ARose Wolf 15:22, 7 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, ARoseWolf. I share your feelings, too. My father told me about his great grandfather who was driven from his home and forced to march on the Trail of Tears. He said his grandmother lived on his family's farm in her own cabin and practiced the old ways, treating the family's sicknesses with medicinal herbs. When I read my first biography of Jackson at age nine or ten, I thought, "this isn't like what my Dad said". Maybe now the WP article will be improved, hopefully without so much reliance on a Jackson fan like Remini.

I lived in the woods for years in a cabin I framed with cypress poles we cut in a slough nearby. A friend thatched the roof beautifully with palmetto fronds. Had running water from a tank filled by water pumped from the ground by a windmill, but no electricity. Fished with a cast net and hunted game, and smoked the meat. Made a study of the wild medicinal herbs that grew in the area. Gathered wild persimmons, wild grapes, and hickory nuts, even making an excellent cooking oil from them. I ate swamp cabbage from palmettos and all parts of the cattail, including flour made from the pollen. I made wine from wild grapes. We had a vegetable garden as well that we fertilized with chicken shit. I miss those days—mind, body and spirit. Saw and experienced things I don't talk about to just anybody, because I might get sent back to the "bin".;-) Still in touch with the natural world, but the one I work in now is very different. I keep my peace. Someday, a change is gonna come. Best, Carlstak ( talk) 01:28, 8 September 2022 (UTC) reply

You sound so much like myself. We lived in heavily rural areas all my life but we still had electricity. When we moved above the arctic circle we had no electricity. We had to do major upgrades to this homestead to be able to get power, which we did. But it is minimally invasive. We opened the land back up, removing much of any fencing that dotted the land. I reorganized our logging contracts to benefit the area (more trees planted) and the local Native corporations and villages. We reinstated the freight trails to get winter supplies from villages south of the National Park to those people living in the Park and areas just north of it. We expanded the float plane service to get even more supplies in and out. We opened up this land to subsistence hunting for local Natives who, in my view, still own this land. We are just stewards over it, keeping it wild. I prefer my wild flower salads, my medicinal herb gardens, my "old ways" which is a mix of many different cultures. I am slightly envious of you because you were taught so much about how to live as our ancestors did while I have limited sources to rely on but I make my way. I am someone that loves adventure. I mostly walked the northern route of the Trail of Tears because my family was in the last group to 1838. I have a grandfather who died on the Trail somewhere along the Ohio River in Kentucky or Illinois, we don't know exactly where. I walked much of it to honor my ancestors. I wasn't alone. There were others but we all walked in silence, except for the occasional sob and flowing tears. I can't explain what I felt. I was born with what some would call gifts and others would call curses. It's just life and I barely mention it but anyone around me long enough realizes my entire life is surrounded by it. I was given a clean bill of mental health so at least there is that acknowledgement that I've not lost my sanity which I am sure brings comfort to many. We are all connected and we affect others through our actions. I am not bitter about the past. I have no reason to be bitter about a past I didn't live. I do want my ancestors legacy honored and the atrocities they faced in the name of expansion and conquest to be represented factually. I believe the reliable sources back up that desire. -- ARose Wolf 15:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Those are impressive accomplishments, ARoseWolf—I should envy you. Didn't mean to give you the impression that I learned old lifeways at my great-grandmother's or my father's knee. My dad couldn't wait to get off the farm—he hated plowing behind a mule.;-) I knew him as a businessman and grew up in suburbia. I ran away from home when I was sixteen and joined a hippie commune in the woods at the height of the back-to-the-land movement; learned about medicinal plants from old botanical books at the library and in Dover reprints. An old Frenchman taught me how to hunt. My friends thought what I was doing was cool, but a little off (how could I live without tv?). The adults in my family all thought I was insane, but I chose that life and know I was communicating with something real and pure.

You have a strong connection with the ancestors, and I admire what you're doing. I think there are many reliable sources to back up a more inclusive understanding of how Jackson's actions affected people, with a better representation of Native perspectives. Carlstak ( talk) 12:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Woodstock and Coachella. I'm definitely a hippie of sorts. I wouldn't call my accomplishments impressive, more just being myself, but thank you. I'm not sure there is much to be envious over either. I may have just perceived the wrong impression based on what you wrote. Of course you were communicating with something real and pure. Our Songs are constantly communicating. The stars above our heads, the rocks beneath our feet, all have a Song and all are part of a bigger Symphony of sound energy. If you listen, what we write here, the articles we edit, are Song's and when something looks or sounds off you can hear a skip in the Song or a color change. Something just seems off. If it is something minor like copy editing then it's simple to fix but for more major things that require inline citations I have learned to ignore those sounds and colors until a source can be found to support any changes. Sometimes I can find them and sometimes not, it's still there I just have to learn to ignore. Policy and consensus matter and I am in big support of this community and the Libra mission of Wikipedia.-- ARose Wolf 15:02, 9 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Agreed. Finding quality sources is one of my specialties.;-) I've always had visions, like my Cherokee great-grandmother, and I had one of sounds that permeate the universe, coalescing into a grand symphony of vibrations. I heard it, and heard my own song, and sang it. I used to sing backup and beat the tambourine in the doo-wop songs we sang in our group gatherings, but I've discovered a new voice as I've gotten older. I can't believe it's me making those sounds; I think they've always been there, and I am just an instrument. I intend to produce a recording, attempting to render an impression of its grandeur, someday. I think animals can hear it. Carlstak ( talk) 17:05, 9 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Not sure why you would remove my edits because the people I mentioned were still living. Of the five that I mentioned (other than Jan's first wife whose family name I corrected) I know definitely that one is deceased (Bonnie Whaley). I have no idea about the three males although during the past few years I have tried to find them using various identity search tools and it's likely that at least one of them is still living. Kathi Weller (now Kathryn Weller-Renfrow) is still living in Northern California. As far as being a 'reliable' source my contributions aren't any less reliable than other unattributed information about Jan's forbears which I assume may've have come from his daughter. The reason I know these things is that Jan and I roomed together while both attending Ventura J.C. The last time I saw him was in the spring of 1965 and he was with Bonnie and I was visiting a girlfriend in Ventura. Jan also had a cousin from Bakersfield, Greg Pace, who I knew from high school and had relocated to Ventura with his folks. Pretty sure that Jan was living with the Paces when I first met him. My former girlfriend knew Bonnie Poorman from Camarillo HS and kept up with her for a while but after Jan's acting career began to take off they lost contact generally. I met Jan's mom once when she and a friend of hers came down to Ventura and they took us out to eat a local Mexican restaurant. It's possible I met his dad but not sure but I have an image of him so I may've seen a picture. Horace Jacoby ( talk) 18:50, 17 September 2022 (UTC) reply

It's not just my personal preference, it's Wikipedia policy. See WP:WHYCITE, which says: "Citations are especially desirable for statements about living persons, particularly when the statements are contentious or potentially defamatory. In accordance with the biography of living persons policy, unsourced information of this type is likely to be removed on sight." This applies to all living persons mentioned in an article. I don't doubt what you say, but please understand that we can't take a person's say-so in such matters. Per RELIABLE, we have to provide reliable sources for the sake of verifiability of information added to this encyclopedia. Carlstak ( talk) 19:04, 17 September 2022 (UTC) reply

I'm sure you're just abiding by the policy and I've been thinking about this; first of all I read a lot of Wikipedia articles and there are a very large number of mentions of people without attribution, especially in articles about technology. Second of all, there is or was nothing contentious or defamatory in what I wrote about the people associated with myself or Vincent. Again, and in the spirit of congeniality, I see people's names cited constantly without so-called reliability checks or some sort of fool proof verification. Additionally, you could've just struck the names and left other content in. I started to read the privacy policy and while, in general, I support policy objectives regarding privacy this series of documents is ludicrously convoluted. There is other content in the article which really can't be verified. Finally, when Wikipedia actually has a first-person contributor the contribution is rejected, at least in this case. It seems to me that fans or other parties interested in Vincent's life would be thrilled to have my contribution. Horace Jacoby ( talk) 20:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC) reply

It doesn't matter what you've seen in other articles, or what you think about it, policy is policy and is enforceable. Your opinion on the matter doesn't supersede policy. It should be obvious that we can't just let people add unsubstantiated content that is unverifiable, especially about living people (or even if their names are removed) to an encyclopedia. Like I said, your say-so doesn't do the job, and the content will be removed if you add it again. Why don't you ask an admin, such as Drmies, and see what he says? Carlstak ( talk) 20:37, 17 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC) reply

You are in my thoughts. I didn't even know there was a hurricane down there. Please, please, please be safe and don't take any chances. -- ARose Wolf 13:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you so much, ARoseWolf. My bank is open today, and the auto repair shop at the beach is open, and although it's quite windy and raining as the bands pass over, birds are singing in the back yard right now. If things get worse, I will take action.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 13:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC) reply

I just glanced at the new on the web. It sounds like the worse has arrived. How are you doing? Wtfiv ( talk) 03:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for asking, Wtfiv. I'm at our house riding it out; the water from the Intracoastal had come up into our back yard earlier but has retreated some. It may very well come up to the house tomorrow though, which will be the worst for us, but we have sandbags around the lower part. Houses in our neighborhood have been flooded in previous hurricanes, but not the one we live in. The Grill & Bar at the Beach was packed around 9 pm. I was surprised when the staff at the island Publix said they would be open tomorrow. We'll see.

I moved my vehicle to some of the highest ground around, and I'm on our enclosed back porch right now with some of the all-surrounding windows open, having a glass of wine, and I just made a big pot of jambalaya. I'm provisioned and have 15 gallons of drinking water, kerosene lanterns, hand-crank radio, and other essentials. The wind is picking up, and I realize the situation can change quickly, but I'm not really worried. Funny, the feral cats have suddenly got more friendly. Best regards, Carlstak ( talk) 04:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Are you through the worse yet? Wtfiv ( talk) 23:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Yes, the storm surge flooded our back yard and the water rose as far as the bottom of the steps to our back porch, but the surge would have had to rise over four more feet to flood the house. Hurricane Michael's surge reached four feet higher than Ian's—fortunately our house is on the central ridge that runs north-south through the neighborhood—but we who live on the ridge were on our own island surrounded by water. The road to the east of us towards the ocean (which is only a couple hundred yards away) was a river, and the intracoastal waterway had flooded our street from the west.

The water has receded and the winds have calmed a lot; it appears the neighborhood had little damage. One reason I hung out on our porch is that we have large trees whose limbs extend over the house, and I was concerned that one might fall on the roof and crush it. Our yard is covered with a carpet of oak leaves and twigs, but otherwise everything looks good. We were lucky that we never lost power, other than the lights flickered a few times. I feel for the people of southwest Florida in the impact zone. Carlstak ( talk) 01:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC) reply

There's a huge mess and a need for disaster outreach, I bet; but I'm glad you've made it through this one. Wtfiv ( talk) 07:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Wtfiv. Carlstak ( talk) 14:13, 30 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Good to hear. Thanks to that shift southwards, we got little wind and only 1/2 inch of rain. Just tree limbs scattered around the yard. We do have family and friends in the Cape Coral to Naples area that we have not heard from yet. Donald Albury 14:22, 30 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Donald, glad you didn't get a big impact. I hope your family and friends are okay. Carlstak ( talk) 14:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Our friends in Naples are fine. I'm not surprised to not hear anything out of Cape Coral, yet. Take care. Donald Albury 17:32, 30 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak, thank you so much for getting into the nitty gritty of the Jackson article in the edits now. Except for just micro-changing, I'm done with the biography for now. I'm wrapping trying to draft the last two parts of legacy to meet the concerns of talk. But I know the article is still messy and needs cleaning. Please don't hesitate to make larger changes if you need to. (I don't think you need the encouragement- but given the issues with editing a while back, one never knows.) I've also asked another editor, John, to jump in too. He was a delight to work with when we were working on the Joan of Arc article and has a great eye for catching and cleaning poor writing, too.

Once I'm done with legacy, I think the lead needs to be tackled. Most of it seems okay as is, though it could use a bit of trimming. But that first paragraph is may require care. I think where will be interesting. Once its ready to be tackled, think all invested parties will have to pitch in on talk. I'm looking forward to seeing a compromise that most of us can agree to forged in five sentences or so.

Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate what you are doing, and am glad you hanging around and keeping your eye on my edits of this article. Wtfiv ( talk) 23:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Wtfiv, I really appreciate your reaching out. I commend you on your diligent work ethic and your dogged seeking out of sources. I think the article, although it may still need some editing, is vastly improved. It has been a pleasure collaborating with you—I thought it best to step back and let you do your thing without interference, and you've done a great job. I'm still working on my never-ending offline project, but will check in when I have time. I'm sure that any editor you have faith in will do good work as well, and I welcome John to the article. I've learned a lot from this experience, and I thank you once again for your dedication. All the best, Carlstak ( talk) 01:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC) reply

I have been away from the article about Elcano after the bitter discussion with a new user and the ANI, but I didn't want to pass by the great work you have been doing copy-editing it. I have seen some of the changes (I didn't want to be around, really) and they look great. Thanks again! Theklan ( talk) 21:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC) reply

I appreciate your feedback, Theklan. I have a special interest in Spanish, and Basque, history, so I enjoy working on the Elcano article. Since you wrote most of it, could you possibly help provide the numbers of cited pages of the refs in Euskara? I can navigate my way through sources in Spanish and Portuguese, but I don't know Euskara at all, so it's much more difficult for me to find the relevant texts in that language, even though I can use the DeepL translator to get a rough idea. Any assistance would be most helpful. Carlstak ( talk) 00:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your correction. I suggest you to correct the full article using your English references and tge same enthusiasm, because the lack of Historic accuracy in pro of nationalist and ethnocentrist perspectives are damaging the information of this population in the English version. And thankfully we have enough historical information avalaible from the century XV to contrast before editing articles and generate confusion among the innocent readers of this website. 92.190.167.12 ( talk) 01:43, 17 October 2022 (UTC) reply

King of the Hill is in the naturalistic style, meaning it's as realistic as possible. In early episode ' The son that got away' a cave system is described. In a late episode in the series (Harlottown) stone formations (the tea Kettler) are described. In BOTH cases the topography plays a central role in the episode. WHERE else in Texas but the HILL Country could the stone formations described in King of the HILL be found - reallistically? 186.12.22.94 ( talk) 22:15, 18 October 2022 (UTC) reply

See WP:Reliable: "This guideline discusses the reliability of various types of sources. The policy on sourcing is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged..." Carlstak ( talk) 22:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC) reply

The Mosquito Reservation article was created becasue it is was a political entity created under the Treaty of Managua. There are current discussions about the Mosquito Coast article, and what it should really mean. Becasue the term Mosquito Coast was more political than geographical. Whoforwho ( talk) 02:05, 22 October 2022 (UTC) reply

I would ask to please not merge the Mosquito Reservation article into that of the Mosquito Coast. There are also current discussions about the 'Mosquito Coast' article as to what it should really refers to. Becasue as I mentioned; the term Mosquito Coast was more political then geographical. Whoforwho ( talk) 02:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC) reply

You have no business editing Wikipedia and you know it. Your attempts to evade blocks are contrary to WP policy, which you know very well. You refuse to respect WP policy and follow the rules; you're not a legitimate editor.You need to stop these outlaw edits. Carlstak ( talk) 02:22, 22 October 2022 (UTC) reply

New page patroller here, been noticing the funny business at Mosquito Reservation entering and exiting the queue. I think WP:DENY is prudent here until you get a response from EdJohnston and/or Tamzin. Don't let 'em get you too riled up; just fuels 'em. Cheers! — Sirdog ( talk) 02:40, 22 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Duly noted. Thanks, Sirdog. Carlstak ( talk) 02:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC) reply

I just wanted to say I'm glad to see you're keeping an eye the Jefferson article. I thought it was interesting it popped up in FAR after mostly finishing with Jackson. It seems like a real challenge, particularly once it gets closer to the legacy section. I hope you are doing well, and all in Florida is renormalizing! Wtfiv ( talk) 23:07, 1 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Wtfiv, good to hear from you. I've had the Jefferson Davis article on my watchlist for a while, but hadn't previously edited it (there're so many that need attention;-). I appreciate your ambition to tackle these important articles, and your can-do attitude. I much respect the fact that you do your homework, and your collegial approach to collaborating with other editors; it really makes all the difference. I'm wrapping up a big (for me) IRL project and about to start another, but I'll make time to try to keep up with your and Hogfarm's work, probably mostly on weekends. All is well here in northeast Florida, but I know there are still many challenges for those in the Fort Myers area. Carlstak ( talk) 01:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

It's good to hear you are doing well! And I'm glad he's on your watchlist. It's good to have you around. Good luck with the IRL project! Wtfiv ( talk) 17:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC) reply

I saw this edit where you added a ping to a user, and just wanted to let you know that they likely will not get a ping for it. For whatever reason if you edit a comment after the fact and add a ping, it will not actually ping the editor; it must be a comment that has a signature added via four tildes (~~~~) in order for it to ping correctly (per WP:MENTION). It's weird and frankly unintuitive, but I just wanted to let you know that the ping won't work when added to an existing comment. - Aoidh ( talk) 02:22, 20 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Ah, thanks for the heads up, Aoidh. I was under the impression that if a comment containing a ping was edited after the fact the ping would no longer work, but didn't realize you can't ping merely by adding the markup later. Carlstak ( talk) 02:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello. At Punic people, you removed content containing five sources and left an edit summary instructing another editor to "provide a source". ??? Largoplazo ( talk) 13:52, 25 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Well, clearly I made a mistake. I misread the edit—why would that be such a mystery? Carlstak ( talk) 02:08, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

PS: Whenever I see a comment with multiple question marks I always think of the proto-punk band Question Mark and the Mysterians. Makes me smile every time. The Mysterians—now that's funny, almost as funny as Panic people.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 02:24, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

LOL, I noticed my heading as soon as I saw your replies in my watchlist. I'm afraid I don't know the band, I would have thought more of The Riddler from Batman. Anyway, I'm relieved it was just a mistake! 🙂 Largoplazo ( talk) 04:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Ah, I thought maybe it was your clever commentary.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 04:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Best known for " 96 Tears". Branded in my memory from a time I was driving at night and a song came on the radio where the music was very familiar but the lyrics were gibberish. I entertained the notion that I had had a stroke that affected my language ability, until the DJ came on and announced that it was ? and the Mysterians singing "96 Tears" in Japanese. Donald Albury 14:56, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Hahaha, that's hilarious. I loved that song when it came out on AM radio in 1966, and I still think it's a great song. I had to listen to it since you brought it up, and found this youtube video of the band; Question's (Rudy Martinez's) dancing bowls me over. He's definitely a better dancer than Mick Jagger. Must be that Mexican soul.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 16:11, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Worth seeing! Donald Albury 16:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Hey Carlstak, I was looking at the Long hot summer of 1967 page today and saw your edit summary stating that the table of riots was removed for coatrack that added material longer than the page before my edit. If it was for " Compilations of Something Very Bad", then I'll have to disagree with your statement because it had a reliable news source and included riots started by both whites and blacks, so I'd like to know exactly why you thought it was coatrack and how it could be fixed. TrueDarkDorito ( talk) 02:59, 26 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your inquiry, TrueDarkDorito. I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not your list is coatrack material. The list of riots you added to the article is sourced to one article from U.S. News and World Report, which consists mostly of a list of 109 "U.S. cities [that] were hit by race-related violence". Your list consists almost entirely of quoted material from that article, and you quoted most of the article, which makes your list a copyright violation. Carlstak ( talk) 03:31, 26 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, and thanks for the edits that you just made to the Francis Drake page—I had flagged it myself but you beat me to it. I laughed out loud at your comment, since it has been exhausting to just get the community of Drake editors to acknowledge that Drake's role in the slave trade is notable at all. That said, a new consensus does seem to be emerging, and hopefully the result of that long and frustrating discussion will be treatment of Drake's role in the early slave trade that is less susceptible to endless edit wars. Ynizcw ( talk) 01:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm not surprised that it's been contentious; I was alerted by the participation of an editor whose edits I would keep an eye on—they seem to have a way of stirring these things up.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 01:53, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I apparently incorrectly attributed the mess of dates in the slaving section of Francis Drake to you, and I wanted to apologize for my mistake. I'm sorry for that. In checking the history, I must have misread who did what. It's all gotten a bit hard to follow.

Ynizcw and I have been working hard to achieve a consensus/compromise that will not get reverted every other day. It has been exceedingly tedious, but is showing some progress. I am leaving it to him to act on our latest discussion.

I don't know whose edits you "watch" - which seems a bit like "hounding" [17] imo - but I do know that the section following slaving lacks sufficient sourcing. It would be great if you could help fix that. Thank you for your input to the article and again, sorry for the mistake. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I felt so bad that I went back and rechecked. Is this [18] not where you added that material? Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

No worries, Jenhawk777. That part of the section was a mess—I tried to fix it, knowing that it still wasn't quite right, but I got distracted by other issues and forgot about it. I'm sure I would have gone back and done it eventually, but you seem to have fixed it.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'I don't know whose edits you "watch" – which seems a bit like "hounding" '. You seem to be insinuating that I might be hounding someone, which I think is frankly rather far-fetched. I suppose you're referring to my comment above. I really don't see how keeping an eye on an editor's edits is "hounding" in any sense. If you think I was referring to you, I assure you I wasn't, but I don't think I should have to explain to you who I was talking about, as I wasn't speaking to you. Just to let you know, I have no appetite to get involved (yet) in the talk page discussion because it gives me a headache. I've already got one of those.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 20:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

PS: It was nice of you to apologize, but I must say, I'm rather put off by the mention of hounding and a link to the WP page on wikihounding under the heading "Types of harassment and disruption" (!). You've come to my talk page, so this seems rather aggressive. Carlstak ( talk) 20:39, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Please forgive me. I had a bad first year with someone who did hound and harass me, and I suppose it has made me oversensitive to any implication of it - like "keep an eye on" seemed like it could be - so I indirectly asked. I was reacting. I apologize again. Two apologies in a row! This does not bode well for a future friendship does it? (Sorry for your headache!) Jenhawk777 ( talk) 00:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

No worries at all, Jenhawk777. I know you do good work. I'm still apologizing for things I said thirty years ago.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 01:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Did you intend to leave part of Frank's edits in place? You reverted one of his two consecutive edits. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 06:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply

No, I did not. Looks like it's been taken care of. Thanks for the heads up, Firefangledfeathers. Carlstak ( talk) 12:25, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Greetings fellow editorial comrade. Listen, not sure what your schedule looks like, but I recently edited the page on Ricimer in its entirety and it could probably use your keen copy-editing editorial eye...should you be so inclined. Danke sehr und mach's gut. Obenritter ( talk) 19:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the kind words, Obenritter. I'll be pleased to take a look. Will read tonight after supper, if I don't fall asleep first,;-) or I may have a day off tomorrow, or maybe not. Es ist immer ein Vergnügen. Carlstak ( talk) 02:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Nice work you did on the article, my friend; I enjoyed editing it. Now I know a thing or two about Ricimer.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 13:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for cleaning up the article, your edits improved it even more. Yeah, Ricimer is a pretty important historical figure, so I was surprised how lacking it was when I encountered it. For a long time, it remained on my "to do" list. Now it's at least academically solid and thanks to you, reads without hitches. -- Obenritter ( talk) 13:55, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Glad I could help; it's a good informative read, thanks to all your work. Looking forward to the next one. Carlstak ( talk) 19:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Re: your edit summary, the date 1541 appears throughout Lady Eliott-Drake's book. I hope your other claims about sources are less inaccurate. DuncanHill ( talk) 20:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Oops, sorry for the mistake, don't know how that happened. I ran a search. Thanks for the correction. As for my other changes, surely you're checking them; the article has been in a sad state. I'm amazed that no one else is helping to clean up this important article and find more sources for it. Carlstak ( talk) 20:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Precious

Two years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Gerda. You are an inspiration to all of us. Carlstak ( talk) 11:49, 16 March 2023 (UTC) reply

hey carlstalk, abt the lee article i dont have the book on me at the moment, and noone online has it either!, idk what u mean abt "georgie was lying" but please leave personal opinion out of wikipedia!, thanks for the copy editing though! that was cool of u man Montbur ( talk) 21:25, 20 April 2023 (UTC)capstar reply

First, I've moved your comment to the bottom of the page; that's where it belongs. Second, I can add my personal opinion to an edit summary anytime, as long as I don't add it to the article. Your writing is sloppy; if you're going to be contributing to WP, you need to use proper punctuation and capitalization, or you'll find that most of your edits will be reverted. Surely you noticed that I added the page number to the citation; the info can be accessed on the book's Amazon page if one is signed into Amazon and uses the search function on the "Look inside" popup. Carlstak ( talk) 22:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak. You added a reference for "Weatherly 2014" to the Hank Williams artice, but no such work is defined there. You also added a cite for "Wilmeth 2014" did you mix the names up? If not could you add the required cite, or let me know what work this refers to? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆ transmissions∆ ° co-ords° 13:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Fixed. I was in a rush to finish editing last night, and missed that. I woke up this morning with a nagging feeling that something wasn't right, but forgot about it until you reminded me. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. ;-) Carlstak ( talk) 17:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi Carlstak. I did some good faith changes in the editing of these total speculative claims about Cabrilho being Jew. This has nothing to do with private research, but with basic common sense. If anyone who read both books can point me to a single document, single line of evidence, I will stop saying that is not History anymore. It seems though people do not read the books and just quote anything. I read both books and this Jewish claim is total bogus - thus not providing valuable information to Wikipedia. If anyone can just dump here any source, without a certain quality criteria...I can imagine, if being consistent, that Wikipedia page about Columbus must list all the putative nationalities too many speculators ascribe to him, from Polish, to Portuguese, to Hungarian, Catalan, etc, Columbus was Genoese as anyone who reads books and cares for solid evidence knows, despite a sea of rubbish and speculation out there. What worries me is to see how easy it is to have anyone just add some low quality sources into a Wikipedia article, when one of the principles is also that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and in this case there is none, zero evidence...thus surely not extraordinary...I am puzzled by this way of working but if that is how Wikipedia works...I drop the towel and let people add all kinds of junk. Peace 104.220.108.138 ( talk) 06:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your note. I have to go to work now, but I will respond this evening. Carlstak ( talk) 11:39, 18 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Well, I've had supper (I eat it later than most Americans) and all I want now is a couple glasses of wine and a bowl. I see that Glendoremus has addressed your changes. I know him to a be dedicated and trustworthy editor. When I have more energy I will look things over. I have no doubts of your sincerity, but you must understand that without policies and guidelines, WP would be total chaos. It's chaos now, but it's a sort of controlled chaos, if such a thing is possible.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 02:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC) reply

I have this article on my watchlist. I wanted to show a bit of appreciation for the improvements you have made. Knitsey ( talk) 14:02, 27 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you very much, Knitsey. It's a work in progress, as I'm sure you've noticed. I've bought copies of pertinent works that I couldn't access directly online, and as I read them I make changes, and remove or add content. I'm certainly not above making mistakes, and if you notice any errors, please don't hesitate to let me know here or on the article talk page. Carlstak ( talk) 14:23, 27 September 2023 (UTC) reply

You have way more experience than I have with substansive edits.

I'm just interested in the subject (Michelangelo sculpture in particular) having seen some up close, mainly in Florence. My goal is to visit Rome to see some of the sculptures.

From what I can see, your edits are an improvement and make for interesting reading. I wanted to show my appreciation for such diligence. Knitsey ( talk) 14:54, 27 September 2023 (UTC) reply

I spent a month in Italy and wasn't leaving till I saw the David in Florence and the antique Dying Gaul in Rome, having wanted to see them since I was very young. I spent so much time looking at them that I got odd looks from staff.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 15:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC) reply

I visited Florence in November one year, so it was much more quiet then in the high season. David wasn't my favourite though, Bacchus was beautiful to see in real life. What I missed was the de'Medici Tombs which I want to return to see. The 'Slaves' sculptures are on my list. I've never been to the Louvre. Knitsey ( talk) 15:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Yes, I was there in October, it was lovely. In Rome I practically had the Pantheon to myself. Thank you again for your kind words, Knitsey, it's always nice to get some positive feedback. I'm glad you dropped in. All the best, Carlstak ( talk) 06:25, 28 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi! I saw your comment here. I don't have access that article, and am not prepared to give my email address to academia in order to get it; I'm sort of assuming that you do? This search seems to show that the page includes the phrase "taken from Wikipedia"; if so, I don't think we need worry about the copyvio aspect. If not, would you kindly let me know – and tell me the date of publication of the paper so that I can try to look at the situation in greater depth? Many thanks, Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 09:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello Justlettersandnumbers, the only reference to Wikipedia I see in her paper is a cite of the WP article on ska. Why don't you create a single-purpose email account just for downloads such as this? Google, for example, lets users create multiple accounts. I have numerous email addresses for different purposes. Carlstak ( talk) 13:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Because I've no interest in inviting yet more spam from Google, Facebook, academia or indeed anyone else. If you have access to the article and would like to give me (here or via email) the publication date and an example of some content that seems to have been copied, I'll look at the page history to see who had that content first. That may be enough for me to decide if revision deletion is needed, or I may need to ask you for further help. Entirely your choice, of course. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 19:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC) reply

That's funny, I haven't even looked at some of those accounts in years—I don't care if they get gigs of spam, but last I checked, they had none. Rudder has a whole section she calls "Analysis of Reggae Music" that says "taken from Wikipedia", as you say, in parentheses; don't know how I missed that after the first check with ctrl+F. Maybe because it was late and after a spliff and the fourth glass of wine?

I compared various samples from the WP article with her text and there is a lot of correspondence, so it looks as if she plagiarized much of the article, which isn't surprising, given that her work isn't at all scholarly. Also, her paper isn't even dated. Our article is a mish-mash, naturally, of contributions by many editors since the early days of WP.

I don't know if you're familiar with the Who Wrote That? tool, but you can use it to see who wrote what in an article and the exact time they added it. You can activate it under the "gadgets" tab in your preferences. It would appear that the WP content is okay and not copyvio. I must say I find all this a bit strange.;-) Please feel free to ask me whatever you'd like to know about the pdf, though. I'm a little off-balance lately, but I'm sure I'll get over it.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 01:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC) reply

PS: I know it's not best form, but I made another null edit (I don't like the term "dummy edit";-) as a correction of my previous mistaken comment, noting that Rudder acknowledges she copied from WP. Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy. Carlstak ( talk) 13:37, 8 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Carlstak – all fine! I'd much rather we flagged a possible copyvio and then found it to be OK than let one go unchecked. Thanks both for noticing the possible problem and for taking the trouble to follow up on it, much appreciated. Yes, I do know that tool, but – mostly out of habit – usually use WikiBlame for copyvio hunting. Thanks, regards, Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 18:25, 8 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Hiya, I mean all that I am saying here in the nicest possible way, so if some of it sounds sarcastic, it's not meant to be. I live in England and am a native speaker of English, and have always called the city Alacant, even with my friends. Alicante is not an English name as opposed to the native language in the same way that Mexico City, Athens or Istanbul are. As someone with family from the region and also having had members of my family punished for speaking the Catalan Language, I find it quite hard to accept the normalisation of using the non native name. The name of the article is Alicante, and people will see it as the Spanish name, but will read "Alacant" the Valencian/Catalan name, which will teach them (the whole point of an encyclopedia); that the Valencian language is the native one, not the common misconception which is that it is Castillian Spanish. Regards Vitojest1 ( talk) 23:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I've reverted your edit. Please respect WP:BRD and take your concerns to the article talk page, the proper place to discuss this. Carlstak ( talk) 00:05, 12 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I don't know how to change the domain of the wrong url, but I thank you very much because You always fix what I add. :). -- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 16:27, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

You're doing good work, but using the Venezuelan domain makes it more difficult for editors who want to check your sources. Just use this markup: https://books.google.com/books?id=&pg=PA for the url and fill in the id and page parameters. This is the top level Google domain. Look at the parameters I've changed to see how to find the url id.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 16:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks friend, but due to the country where I live, many pages are blocked on my computer, one of the Few things I don't like about my country :), This appears when I click on the link you gave me,

'Google. 404. That’s an error.

The requested URL /books?id=&pg=PA&redir_esc=y was not found on this server. That’s all we know.' -- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 16:58, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I don't use VPNs because then it's worse, it blocks me for several days to edit in wikipedia, although that's actually a good thing, because I do other things better, in life, but sometimes I really like editing.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 17:01, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I can't open that page, sorry brother.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 17:07, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

That's just a sample of markup for you to use as a guide in composing a url for references, it's not intended to be an actual link. As I said, fill in the id and page parameters of the Google book page you want to cite, and it will become an actual link. By the way, are you the same person as the indefinitely blocked user Vvven, also known as Venerock and IloveCaracas? Carlstak ( talk) 17:11, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

No, I'm not, thanks for the link, I will do it that way.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 17:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

No, sorry friend I have nothing to do with that sock, I like the hispanic things, like so millions Latinos who feel identified, but I also contribute and want to contribute in cities and buildings in many countries that are unrelated around the world, have a nice day, and I will continue editing the Alcazar of Seville, I will spend Sunday editing, have a good time.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 14:40, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

And I am sorry friend, I have tried to put the link you gave me in every way and it does not access the book, I better hope that you or someone else fixes the links to be international, thanks.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 14:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

LaGuairabeach, you say you can't fix Google books links so that they link to the top-level Google domain in English, yet somehow you managed to do it in the markup " https://books.google.com/books?id=dRFtAAAAIAAJ&q=catedral+de+lima" you added to the "Renaissance architecture" article with this edit that I reverted because it was poorly written and you added some unsourced content.

Look, you're editing on an English language website, so you really should be able to figure this out. All you have to do is identify the id number of the Google Books url in the Venezuelan domain, and add it to the id parameter in the example I gave you above. Adding the page number to the page parameter is self-explanatory. This isn't difficult, and if you look at the edits I made where I fixed the url markup, you can see which part of the string is the id. Aside from this issue, you can't expect other editors to follow you around fixing your edits written in subpar English and in which you don't always add a reliable source to support the text you add, as you did with this edit. Frankly, I'm not thrilled that yet another Spanish-speaking editor with subpar English skills wants to contribute to English Wikipedia. I've spent countless hours fixing terribly written articles created by another such user who presented himself as having "advanced" skills in English, yet much of what he wrote was unintelligible, and he had a big problem identifying sources that are reliable.

Your work isn't quite that bad, and I don't know what your process is for translating Spanish text into English, but if you're using Google Translate, you should use the DeepL translator instead because it yields much better results. Of course, any machine-translated text still has to be checked for mistakes and edited. If you create a free user account, you can translate up to 5000 words at a time. Carlstak ( talk) 14:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks, I just used the deep translator, that's the one I like, the only one that translates texts well. Everything you have seen has been a product of the deep translator, which I use for free for this.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 01:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Soon i will be translating the Cathedral of Buenos Aires, it seems to me that few people have put effort into the articles of Argentine constructions and history. Of Italy I also want to do. With the url's of the books, I tried, I will keep trying but I don't think it works, I have done what you tell me and I get an error as if the url's are misspelled or something is missing.-- LaGuairabeach ( talk) 01:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I don't know what your problem is with the top level Google domain urls. You do understand that you have to fill in the id= parameter with the Google id, right? I've already told you to look at the edit diffs of my edits in the revision history of the page to see where I fixed your strange Venezuelan Google Books urls so that you can identify which part is the id string. You have done that, haven't you? For the page number you fill in the &pg=PA parameter like this: &pg=PA17 (a random page number I'm using here for demonstration) or if it's an ebook without page numbers in the text then you fill in the page number with the one in the Google books url, like this: pg=PT17. This is all elementary stuff, and you should be able to figure it out.

If you start editing articles on Italian architecture and buildings I imagine you are going to get some pushback, meaning reverts, from other editors if you don't improve your work and always provide reliable sources. You should know that you're not supposed to verbatim copy machine translated text such as that generated by DeepL without checking it for proper syntax and grammar, duplications, and results that distort the meaning of the original text in Spanish. Your command of English seems to be somewhat lacking in that respect, but at least Spanish is your native tongue, so that should help you decide if the English translation is true to the meaning of the Spanish text, at least one hopes so. Carlstak ( talk) 01:50, 21 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your efforts to move Lost Cause forward with better sourcing. If Wikipedia is going to call bullshit on something, like pseudoscience or fringe beliefs, I believe it essential we do so with at least sufficient sourcing to properly rebut random drive-by complaints as they arrive. This field is difficult territory, because recently even great scholars have admitted their own societal bias and failure to combat it through scholarship. Stridency is reasonable but sourcing is better. I suspect we'll be rewriting a lot of this material eventually, but today I'm thankful for your collegial approach and willingness to add supporting sources. Thank you. BusterD ( talk) 23:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you, BusterD, much appreciated. I completely agree, and moral support helps me keep going with the work, which is mostly reading the sources, but sorting things out is laborious. I have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy, and was raised (brainwashed) with the Lost Cause as Gospel. On family vacations, we never passed a Civil War battlefield without stopping to pay respects—to the Rebels—not those "damn Yankees". My siblings and I weren't taught to be racists, though, and would have got a severe whippin' if we had ever uttered a racial slur, even though my father was quite racist himself. I was still amazed that my parents didn't protest when I had a black girlfriend in high school, and they welcomed her to our home.;-) Carlstak ( talk) 00:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I went to school in the south. My dad used to say he'd never heard the word "yankee" without it being preceded by the word "damned". Yet he volunteered in wartime for our country's first fully integrated service and dramatically corrected me the first time I used a racial slur. Many American scholars are trying to incorporate our past into our future. Not sure if you've ever read "Legacy of the Civil War" by Robert Penn Warren, but it's a work sixty years behind us by a legend. It's old but pithy and available at Internet Archive. BusterD ( talk) 00:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC) reply

I'm familiar with Robert Penn Warren and the Southern Agrarians of course, but haven't read much of them. I know Warren's views on racial segregation and integration evolved. I'll have to check out "Legacy of the Civil War", thanks for suggesting it. Carlstak ( talk) 00:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC) reply

It's a short read and by a Pulitzer-winner, so worth your time. His "Great Alibi" and his "Treasury of Virtue" concepts underlie a lot of rhetoric we still dispute. BusterD ( talk) 01:10, 29 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Sorry! I edit on mobile and it just stacks images on there and disregards the alignment tags so I often don't notice until I toggle to desktop and realize it's smooshing the text weirdly. I'll try to double check from now on! jengod ( talk) 01:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Haha, no problem, Jengod. You've been doing a lot of great work, and I've been meaning to tell you so. Thanks for dropping by.;) Carlstak ( talk) 01:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your proposal of a medal for me on ANI (while I slept)! - I got one and love it! - As you know, I have a DYK on the Main page, but my story would be different, about Figaro, - this Figaro. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Ah, I think I like your story better. The medal is lovely, and I'm so glad Girth Summit made it for you. So deserved. Thanks for the beautiful card, sentiments, and links. Best, Carlstak ( talk) 00:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC) reply

You know what I like to hear ;) - On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

And why not? Beautiful music, the viol makes me cry. Carlstak ( talk) 00:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

story · music · places

What a lovely response! - Yesterday was a friend's birthday, with related music. - I'm on vacation - see places. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply

A distinguished-looking gentleman, for sure. He looks familiar to me, somehow. The description of the last stanza of "Herr, unser Herr, wie bist du zugegen" in the associated WP article makes its spirit sound similar to some of the philosophical concepts expressed in the Vedas—very profound.

The Canary Islands are definitely on my list of places to go. That seafood platter is my kind of meal! Carlstak ( talk) 01:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Province of Carolina

I am so sorry for my poor edit of the Province of Carolina page and for the great mistake I made confusing Barbados and the Bahamas. Thank you for your edit and patience with my error. I hope to further cite portions of the page (I added a citation to content that was there prior to my edit attempt) and will be careful with content changes. User:January2009

Thanks for the notice, January2009. You've definitely made some improvements. To make a proper signature with a time stamp please sign your talk page posts with four tildes, like this ~~~~. The wiki software will do the rest. Carlstak ( talk) 03:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for adding the Google Books link; I don't know why I didn't see it. But why did you choose page 72? It doesn't mention Jessie Donaldson. I searched the book for her name and four pages came up, but Google Books doesn't allow us to read the full pages, so I could not tell which if any mentions her invitation to Douglass. Maurice Magnus ( talk) 11:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Ah, thanks for me letting know—must have been the zombie-like state I was in due to terrible insomnia;-). I've moved the cite to the text it actually supports and slightly amended the text to align with what Wilson says. Not sure why you can't read the full pages, I can, but I find no reference in the book to Jessie Donaldson, although other Donaldsons are mentioned. Carlstak ( talk) 12:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Precious

Three years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC) reply

How time flies! Thanks, Gerda, for all that you do. Carlstak ( talk) 01:19, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Whenever you have a chance and if you are interested, I recently rewrote the article on Walter Gross (politician) but it could use a second set of strong editorial eyes. Obenritter ( talk) 14:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

With pleasure. Glad to see you're active. Carlstak ( talk) 15:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Danke sehr, Sir. -- Obenritter ( talk) 16:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Djong (ship) has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.

Talk:Djong (ship) on a "History and geography" request for comment-- your comment would be greatly appreciated Merzostin ( talk) 14:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC) reply