User talk:Julia117

Welcome!

Hello Julia117, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- KHM03 18:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great job

...on creating all those articles! I've gone quickly through Aaron Katz and Boris Shimeliovich, mostly fixing format. Let's keep it consistent with other biographies in WP. Perhaps (my wild guess) you would be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism, Portal:Israel, Portal:Russia, Wikipedia:WikiProject Soviet Union and the corresponding message boards. Let me know if this is confusing. Welcome! ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 09:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Itzik Feffer

Hi Julia,

thanks for your comment on my talk page.

I don't myself know anything about Feffer, but I had two issues with the article. First of all, you need to give sources for the information you add. This can be done by adding appropriate internet links (use single square brackets around the web address to do this) or by using footnotes (see Wikipedia:Footnotes: far better in my opinion, but rather more of a nuisance). So saying things like that he was an informer for the NKVD without citing a reliable source for the information is a problem; once you give a reliable source, it is a valuable contribution to the article.

Secondly, language like "slavishly patriotic" or "baseless and outrageous" seems too emotive and not in line with the Wikipedia policy of always giving a neutral point of view. This isn't a question of accuracy, I know that the accusations in question were indeed baseless and outrageous, and it wouldn´t surprise me if an officially approved poet at that time was producing "slavishly patriotic" material. But we can´t use Wikipedia to give our personal opinions, we have to confine ourselves to objective statements of fact in neutral language.

On the other hand, if a prominent critic has described Feffer's work as "slavishly patriotic", then we can report that, citing a source and depending on circumstances it could be a useful addition to the article. Equally, if a prominent historian has said that the acccusations in the Doctors´Trial were "baseless and outrageous", again we can quote them citing a source.

I hope this answers any questions you may have had about my comments on Humus sapiens's talk page. Good luck, and enjoy Wikipedia! Palmiro | Talk 21:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I personally believe that remembering the victims of tyranny is of great importance, and I'm delighted to see the work you are doing on Wikipedia. One or two more points: published books, especially when written by historians or persons who can be assumed to be knowledgeable about something, are probably better sources than websites. I don't, after a very quick look, see any reason to be particularly concerned about the websites you've cited for the Feffer article but it's something to bear in mind. You might like to take a look at two relevant Wikipedia policies, if you haven't already; Cite sources and Verifiability - simply for future reference. Also, if you write some information - whatever you feel like, stuff about yourself and what your interests are, quotations from Yiddish poets, anything at all - on your user page, it will show up as a blue link and people looking at watchlists and page histories will be less inclined to be worried when they see it coming up. Besides, I'm curious to know more about someone with an interest in Yiddish poets! Palmiro | Talk 02:53, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Editing hint

Hello again Julia,

I see that on some of the pages you have edited, you have made a very large number of individual edits. This has the disadvantage, for other users, of making the page history a bit unwieldy. For that reason, it is much better if you get as near as you can to a final version on a word processor or whatever before saving the article. If you use a word processor you can also use a spelling and grammar check, which also saves you time checking for errors. Also, if you're not doing so already, using the "show preview" button to review your proposed edit before saving it saves you hassle, keeps the page history tidier and ensures that what appears on the website is in better shape right from the beginning. All the best, Palmiro | Talk 03:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedia

I think you can use some additional information from EJE. Успехов. --Shaul 11:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poetry and translations' samples

The best place for original texts and poetry translation is Wikisource! Wikipedia does not encourages such kind of publications like you did in Leib_Kvitko - Some of Kvitko's poems or The Ghetto Dancer in Peretz Markish, especially if it is in Russian.

Please see the example of Russian translation publication in Wikisource: Кольридж. Стихотворения.

-- Shaul 15:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]