User talk:Sator

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I would like to thank you for considerably expanding and improving the articles on frock coats, morning coats, and other such items, a subject which is unfortunately of little concern to many. If you are, as I hope, planning on making further improvements, you should take a few points into consideration. In particular, the purpose of Wikipedia is to describe the subjects in consideration, so "should", "must", and other such statements are generally not used. Instead, one should describe current and historical practices. For example, "Bow ties are not usually worn with frock coats or morning coats." follows this guideline, whereas "Like morning coats, frock coats must only be worn for day time formal events." doesn't.

I'm also uncertain about the sentence "Long ties and bow ties also lack authenticity as a cravat was usual with a frock coat...". While the cravat was usual in the circumstances described, I do seem to recall a considerable number of examples of frock coats being worn with bow ties and long ties. Would it be more accurate to say that they "were unusual" or "uncommon", rather than "lack authenticity"? It would be nice as well to have images of earlier frock coats (perhaps circa 1840) to show the evolution of the coat, but I'm not sure of any accurate representations of coats from that period that are out of copyright (Waugh has new drawings, if I recall correctly, and Cunnington, the only other source I have seen, mainly has rather unrealistic period trade drawings).

Finally, you might want to consider revising some of the articles which you are using as links. Oxford shoe is very short, and is lacking in the description of the style (it also has no image). Cravat redirects to necktie, which is a decent article, but it does not note differences in terminology between British and American English, and Ascot tie is in need of considerable improvement.

Again, thank you for your improvements, and I hope you will continue to improve the coverage of the subject in Wikipedia, since there are very few editors who have sufficient knowledge of the subject, especially in regard to historical issues and developments. --Constantine Evans 07:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work

Lovely work on Frock coat. We could use someone with expertise on men's wear in the various articles on the 19th century in the History of Western fashion series, if you are so inclined (and we really need to start 1900-1915 in fashion...). - PKM 17:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Versailles 1919.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Versailles 1919.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn 15:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Versailles big four.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Versailles big four.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn 15:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Oscar Wilde frock coat.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Oscar Wilde frock coat.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 15:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner controversies

Hi, I reverted your changes to Wagner controversies en masse mainly because (some of) the quotes you added seemed excessively long and detailed and the interpretations you suggested were rather WP:OR. Because this topic seems very sensitive editors should perhaps be ultra-cautious in offering interpretations of what Wagner wrote - (especially as W.himself was rarely consistent). Best , --Smerus (talk) 18:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Sator. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Sator~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

02:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]