User talk:Storye book/Archive 31

Elena Manistina

January songs

happy new year

I began Elena Manistina on 29 Dec, so the last day for a DYK nom is tomorrow. I don't want to do it - on strike - but on the other hand, I feel a bit guilty for a living person to suffer from me not being up to DYK. If you could imagine to nominate her, I could add a bit (10 chars missing, but she's good for more), or even you could? Let me know. It's too early for IWD, but singing at the Bolshoi and the Met (and in Frankfurt) is quite international. I saw her in Frankfurt, and while in the premiere, she had stepped in for only singing from the side, she learned to act the part which includes yoga exercises on a pink mattress - too bad nobody wrote about that because it happened after the premiere. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, I'll have a look. Storye book (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Done. As you have said, you still need to extend the article to 1500+ characters. Happy new year! Storye book (talk) 19:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

No, you already expanded enough ;) - I added anyway. - Is that what DYK wants: hinting at Domingo who is best known for sexual harassment allegations? (while I remember him conducting La bohème at the Met.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, if our supposedly knowledge-free readership knows that scandal, then they have heard of him, LOL. You can always contribute another hook? Storye book (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

LOL, I have wasted enough time proposing hooks that I'm told nobody cares about. I'm trying to watch and learn. Seriously, I'm afraid a slight allusion to sexual harassment allegations is exactly what DYK wants now, and I'm not willing to deliver. Once upon a time (in 2010), DYK - to my amazement - swallowed a Bach cantata every week - the pace in which Bach composed beginning in 1723, always taken to prep by the same prep builder (who is blocked now). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

This is all so sad. I was not aware of those allegations, and have not looked it up. I only remember what a fine singer he was, and how I once heard him as Pinkerton in Butterfly, a performance to die for. But our problem now is that some reviewers have become way more bitterly aggressive than before. We're going to have to adapt, and give them something of what they want. If you don't want Domingo, then we must find something else for the Simple Wikipedia box. Storye book (talk) 08:01, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

This is all sad. Levine similarly, - remembering another Bohème, same place, when a fireman had to come on stage and extinguish Rudolfo's burning poems. As I just said on another WT:DYK thread too long for me to read: I pass the articles now to the DYK crew, and they can do with them what they want, ignore, nominate with whatever hooks, I don't care, - I care about RD, GA, FA, neglected for too long, and, yes, filling red links with stubs - what LouisAlain used to do until we banned him. - I have one of his (2021) creations in draft space, - want to review? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for asking me to review. I have not done that before, and I looked at the acceptance process for reviewers. It looks as if I could do it, but the process of familiarising myself with the obligations is time-consuming, and I can't do that right now, though at the moment I am happy to do quick tasks to help other editors.

As for the article for review, at a quick glance it looks fine to me. The important thing is that he has published, and that an important work of his has been translated. Also, he is doing a very important job, showing how the teaching of Latin can be kept alive, for the use of scholars of history. If you have citations stating those important things clearly, and if you can put them in the header as well as the body, that would make the article a lot stronger, I believe. I have not checked whether all the sources are as minimal as one of the reviewers has suggested, But if that is so, then if you could write his biography yourself, and put it on an authoritative website (a German website would be fine) then we will have the substantial source that those reviewers have been looking for. Sorry this is not an official review, but I hope it will help? Storye book (talk) 10:03, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, that's helpful. There are two sources about his academic career, and any other - if found - would mention exactly the same steps, - that's how they are built. They are no breaking news to be mentioned elsewhere. I am helpless about the notability question when one of our articles, Renaissance Latin, mentions his view as a quote in the prose. - Did you see how much weight of the Manistina ref from the Bolshoi rests on her roles? It's just what defines an opera singer. For Pisarenko: DYK could run a little text: present the 19 hooks (or at least some) in as many weeks on the same day. I fail to see how our broad audience would be more interested in learning that she studied Norwegian than that exported Tatyana to Tokyo, seriously. But I'll let it go without further comments. The waltz melody of Musetta is still with me ;) - Busy with a RD , - that's the problem with those: it happens and you better react quickly while curiosity last. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:15, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Update. I have now looked at the sources (sorry I didn't do that before) and the Grafton and Ruppeo sources are fine for length and depth, concerning the subject of the article. But I think that more from those sources could be included in the article, whether as quotations or rephrasing. I think the best bit is about how the subject has revealed the different qualities of Latin used in the past, and how the satirists made fun of the different types of Latin. I once had a brilliant boyfriend who was a fluent Latinist, and he used to laugh his socks off at the terrible dog Latin (which was like schoolboy Latin) on medieval gravestones and memorials in Canterbury (it was not meant to be funny, it was just awful). And at the other extreme, I remember from school how silver Latin poetry can be very beautiful, especially, as one of your sources says, when Latin can be so deliciously ambiguous. And yes, that means that some Latin poets can be rude, and get away with it.. There was a famous Latin primer for use in British schools, which was used until at least the 1950s, in which the writer had quietly included various double-entendres, to make the pupils giggle. It's all there, if it can be got into the article with citations..

Regarding your last comment, above: yes of course I totally agree with you about how hooks should be. They should appeal to our intelligent readers, who want the hook links to go to articles which actually reflect and expand upon the hook content. But what we have now, is what we have now, and we all have to adapt. The one thing that we should be most grateful for, though, is that our most aggressive reviewers have not attempted to edit the article and thereby damage it so that it no longer reflects the sources. I have had that experience during DYK noms, and it can be a big struggle to repair the damage. So at least, as far as I know, your articles have remained intact (at least the ones that I have seen). Storye book (talk) 10:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like you'd be perfect to expand the article about the Latinist! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

The writer of that Latin Primer was Benjamin Hall Kennedy, but I can't find a source for his little hidden ambiguities for the kids to giggle at. I'll come back to your article when I have time, if you like. Storye book (talk) 11:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Great. It's LouisAlain's article, and has waited from 2021, so no rush whatsoever. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:59, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

OK. Storye book (talk) 12:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

today, I point at two singers I whose performance I enjoyed - and you know why. Manistina: what I'd say is that she stepped in for The Enchantress. That's an opera with a good ambiguous name - the person is charming, but accused to be a witch - even our broad audience should be interested. This was Tchaikovsky's favourite opera and is hardly known! ... politics and church not painted on the bright side. That doesn't have to be mentioned in a hook, but perhaps that she came from Moscow to Germany (if we want to avoid mentioning Oper Frankfurt again, but that's always where the great things in opera happen, like Asmik Grigorian in the title role and her husband the stage director). The opera is so little known that you'd hardly find a singer qualified enough for the Oper Frankfurt to know the role anywhere else. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

today, less pointy: a composition from a remarkable 2022 concert, the sad record of four articles about people who recently died on the Main page at the same time, and singing for Epiphany --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:52, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I love the Graham Waterhouse link. A fine bass on that piano, and maybe good acoustics in that lovely building - though the stage mic is by the piano, so who knows. Lovely to listen to, anyway. Thank you again. Storye book (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! - Today's featured article is Osbert Parsley, not by me but Amitchell125 where I commented, including the beginning of my songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:06, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Lovely article, thank you! I really enjoyed reading that. Storye book (talk) 17:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Tell the author! - I'm on vacation, - click on songs! I tell my own stories now, instead of relying on DYK. That was a real hook in 2012. Today, I'd probably been forced to say that he learned Greek. Or (true) that he had to give up his sculpture collection when he married to make room for kids (4) and began to collect bozzetti. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Interesting. I'm not sure if I want do nominate my creations for DYK any more. I'm still making up my mind. I'm happy to review, though. Storye book (talk) 22:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Manistina is in prep now, thank you. - I may ask for help again for the latest world premiere at Oper Frankfurt. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, let me know if I can help with anything. Storye book (talk) 11:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

You can keep an eye on Manistina (and her hook) while on the Main page because I will be out hiking. Eventually I want to fill the red links for the Enchantress - DYK or not (tenor and conductor). If you want more work while I'm out you could add the Frankfurt performance to the opera, and to Asmik Grigorian, her husband and the baritone, - key functions for all of them. The opera is Blühen (blossoming) of all titles, after a story by Thomas Mann, directed by Brigitte Fassbaender who did Britten Midsummer night and Strauss Capriccio - I first want to see it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Forget about all of that: they switched to one set per day, making her come tomorrow all day - which I even prefer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, I guess I'm free to do my own editing for today, then? At the moment I'm working on a big set of long-ish articles, to be published all on the same day, because they are all connected. That means a lot of work, but I'm happy to help people with DYK stuff or with minor edits if they ask me, but I don't think I could concentrate fully enough to add new content to articles, or to do extra research. I'm happy to check articles for Standard English, typos etc. Enjoy your hike! Storye book (talk) 14:29, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

The hike was great, just up the mountain behind the apartment, 550 m, so about a quarter of the top of the island. Ups and downs are enormous here. At times the road was so steep that I moved not straight, especially going down! - Ups ad downs: after the hook was changed back, and ill faith displayed on WT:DYK, I'm at a current low regarding that place, - can't imagine returning right now. I managed adding The Enchantress to Asmik Grigorian and Iain MacLean, found Grigorian a messy article which would at least deserve a better lead, and Oper Frankfurt not ready to mention special performances. I'll add the latest world premiere after the next hike, further south. All the best for your efforts, and thanks for the offer to help! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, one person there seems to think there is a vendetta, but they are in it on their own. This is not a place for hostility, or puerile letting-off-steam. I have great respect for your calmness in this matter. Meanwhile, that mountain sounds wonderful. I too go in zig zags down steep hills, digging in with the sides of my boots. In Yorkshire the hills are just hills. It is many years since I saw a mountain. Are you going to upload any photos? Storye book (talk) 12:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Today's hike was also great, much shorter because the main event was a six-course surprise menu with accompanying local wines, sitting outside next to the ocean, and the hike was down towards a lava beach, then up again. Click on songs for photos, last day was 24 Jan. I keep updating ;) - Showing such places is my version of DYK. The other is User:Gerda Arendt/Top which I show on top of my talk and my images (click on happy new year), and list here. I wonder if the Clytus Gottwald hook of 2012 would have passed today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Great pictures. Thank you for the links. I agree, that hook would not pass today. But until or unless the guidelines change, there will always be a full impasse in that discussion. In my opinion, on the one side, we have a particular set of reviewers who are not only bound by the broad-audience guidelines like all reviewers, but they agree with those guidelines. And those US-centric guidelines say that we must assume a poorly-educated, unsophisticated and parochial audience (albeit intelligent) because that's what they've got - or think they have got) in the US. They do not realise that in the Rest of the World, education, backed up by the Media, is better, more sophisticated, and more cosmopolitan, than in the US.

Of course I may be wrong about that, but that is the impression that we get here, from the way they talk to us about opera, and from their media, especially their films. That, I think, is what is behind the guidelines that we have, and the guidelines assume that our audience is poorly-educated. But even so, I think that most of WP's audience, including a small proportion from the US, belong to the more educated part of the world. So I think that those DYK reviewers, who don't want hooks aimed at a knowledgeable audience, are underestimating our audience by a long way. I don't believe that we are going to win this battle in our lifetimes. This is why I am doing my best to adapt to the situation that we have got.in DYK. Storye book (talk) 09:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I partly agree, but don't think we have to change the guidelines, just the interpretation of the guidelines. "intriguing" could be something that a reader never heard about. Tchaikowsky's work has an intriguing title, and his name should be familiar even to a less educated audience. The question if that opera was more intriguing than Oper Frankfurt should have been answered with a clear yes. Well, we know what happened instead. - Talking about stats, the only language the DYK team seems to understand: Oper Frankfurt received some 600 views, and I guess that the opera would have gotten 1000. I don't think the views for the singer - 2k+ - would have been different. Coming from project opera, I know what I'd have preferred. (Making the opera a FA would be a damned hard work, and GA, for that one line 12 hours, for 1.5k views - probably not worth the effort.) Clytus Gottwald had 8k+ views (and is still on the Main page), and a simple review, just one support was enough, - that's where I see my chances, even in page view terms. - A 10-year-old hook is pictured on the top of my talk ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree that "intriguing" could be interpreted in a better way, but at the moment our most vocal reviewers and promoters are not going to do that. A quick google for the definition of "intriguing" gives "arousing one's curiosity or interest; fascinating". They take that word, and that definition, as meaning clickbaitey, which in turn they understand to mean lots of clicks - as you have already said. We might take "intriguing" to mean offering the chance to learn about something new - but that's what they would object to, as I understand it, because their background culture tells them that something new might be opera, and they believe that their audience would be scared of, or hostile to, opera, So I don't believe that we will persuade that particular group of reviewers to interpret the word in a different way.

I understand that those reviewers come from a world which is very different from ours, and they will probably never see and hear what we have heard or seen. I remember, during a rehearsal of Cavalli's La Calisto in the 70s, sqeezing into a small room with the rest of the cast to check out the tenor trio about Pan, which the three lads had been rehearsing on their own. Every woman who was there, agreed later that the room was electrified - you could just smell the testosterone from those guys. Interestingly, the men from the cast were all very moved by it too - it wasn't just about fancying singing stars. It was a revelation about what a male trio of Cavalli's era really is. They sang in a very controlled manner, correctly, as per Cavalli - but maybe that's what reveals the power of it. Our guys on DYK will never experience that, and that is their loss. Storye book (talk) 20:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, and thank you. I just read that Rosiestep found DYK "less enjoyable" years ago, and remember that SusunW used to be a frequent nominator and isn't any more. We could form a party of those disenchanted with DYK ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Haha, yes, that would be fun, though I don't believe we could achieve any change at the moment. I also think that we should value those reviewers that we have been complaining about, because they have one very important characteristic. None of them interferes negatively with our articles - they don't try to delete or diminish the content. And they all agree that our articles are more important than DYK. For that we can thank them. There are far worse editors out there. Storye book (talk) 21:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

To my memory, I have never complained, not individually, not as a whole. If not, please point it out, and I'll apologize or clarify. What I see is misunderstanding - both language and cultural. I don't even believe anyone wanted to drive me away. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Apologies. I had answered you, but I have just noticed that my phone must have binned my message. I had written that of course you had not complained, and that I was the one who had criticised them, and I wrote the above to balance that with a bit of fairness. Apologies for the misunderstanding. Storye book (talk) 10:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

It's fine. - Melitta Muszely died, RIP - the other story is 10 years old OTD ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Elena Manistina

On 27 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elena Manistina, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that as a last-minute substitute in a premiere performance at Oper Frankfurt, Elena Manistina sang from the side while the assistant director mimed onstage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elena Manistina. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Elena Manistina), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red in February 2023

Women in Red Feb 2023, Vol 9, Iss 2, Nos 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 259 Online events: New: Alphabet run O & P | Black women | Justice | Folklore Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: Explore Wikipedia for all variations of the woman's name (birth name, married name, re-married name, pen name, nickname) Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2023

Delivered February 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 202, February 2023

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on translation and Eisenhower's armies Review essay: Catlemur on military museums in Athens

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

February songs

February songs

my daily stories

yesterday's cantata, 300 years later --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:27, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Nice one. Thank you for the link. Storye book (talk) 16:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

One? It's sort of my story book ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant a nice (singular) update to your story book. But "nice one" in English is just a compliment with no specific context. It also fits the English tendency to understatement, so when a certain world leader gets the weapons he is asking for, and maybe wins his war, we'll say "nice one". I suppose it just really means, "I am pleased with that". Storye book (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

thank you for your patience with my lack of idioms - did I tell you that my brother, a double bassist, played today's piece? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

No worries. A lot of our idioms are sniffed at, and called slang by those who think they are better than the rest. So there is no need to worry about our idioms. In my view, all uses of English have creative value of some sort. It's eye-of-the-beholder, I suppose. And congratulations to your brother. You must be very proud of him. Storye book (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I am proud. Pictured in an external link ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean here? I could fancy the tenor ;), and the counter-tenor has some delicious blue notes, but I can't see a double bassist, just a cellist. Can you give me the right link? Storye book (talk) 15:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot that I have two pieces today, and I meant the top one - the other was more 2 days ago, but they keep the link for 3 more days. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Can you give me the external link here? Please nicely? Storye book (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Bass und Bier --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah, an actor too! Well done, your bro. Storye book (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

He often quoted lines from the piece in rehearsals, and colleagues said why don't you play it, and so he did, found that director, took voice lessons, and I saw the result twice. He toured with it to places, including Switzerland outdoors. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

What fun! I am glad it went well for him. Storye book (talk) 08:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

today a book, Alte Liebe, for Valentine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

That was a lovely idea! Storye book (talk) 15:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

thank you! - today the regional festival - DYK of 13 years ago ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

(Apologies for late reply) Wow, that's some fancy castle. Did you attend the festival? Storye book (talk) 11:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes. From the very first event, CPE Bach's Magnificat. Most of the images in the article were taken by me ;) - I remember that I was cross with DYK (in 2010!) because the pic of the palace (not a castle) wasn't taken but instead some grapes, - well that's their logo, but still. Then already I felt that DYK doesn't know to distinguish the extraordinary from the interesting ;) - I should update the concerts I booked for this season ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

... updated - My story on 24 February is about Artemy Vedel (TFA by Amitchell235), and I made a suggestion for more peace, - what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I have always been happy with infoboxes, and I have used them in most of the articles I've created. They are especially useful in reminding me to add information that I would otherwise have forgotten to include. I would not want to do without them. So I cannot understand the past controversy. For the sake of peace in that respect, I think that maybe we as editors should not try to force an infobox into (or out of) an article if the creator of that article objects strongly. That way, there should be peace. Storye book (talk) 16:20, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I normally do. I normally don't add an infobox to an article to which I didn't contribute (and I did contribute to this one, please check out edit history, - I was truly disappointed how many links were missing for theatres and singers). - I have a habit to check the Main page for topics I'm interested in, and there was this opera (with the image of the day). The last dispute about an opera was in 2016, an infobox is project standard for them, see the same composer's masterwork, or any opera you know. When I saw who created it I hesitated, yes, but then I wanted to know if a single editor's personal preference really trumps the project standard. Define "force". Every edit can be reverted, and yes, I carefully said "suggest" in the edit summary, and yes, I was curious in how many minutes that would be reverted. But nothing happened all day long, while 3k+ people saw the article. I don't really care how it looks now that we are back to a 2-digit number ;) - Smerus and I argued 10 years ago, on Siegfried (opera), and that was much more pleasant. we talked again here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I was aware that we already agreed on that topic. Peace is a good thing, especially right now. Meanwhile, please could you kindly help me regarding two articles I am working on, about two 19th-century itinerant band leaders from Hinzweiler (I may have got that link wrong but Hinzweiler is correct). One British source about the band leaders says that Hinzweiler is in an area called Phalz, and I would like to link it, but I cannot find that area mentioned on WP. Maybe it is spelled differently, or the name has changed - or the source is wrong? Or are there two places called Hinzweiler? I have also seen Hinzweiler described as being in the Upper Palatinate, but that is in Bavaria? Storye book (talk) 17:16, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Pfalz, Rhineland-Palatinate is my guess without looking. - I came to fix the stats: we had 2-digit counts, but are not yet back to them, possibly because the discussion added to interest in the article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

How is this de:Pfalz (Region) = Palatinate (region)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

There was a time when it was part of Bavaria, but not now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Now I understand - I think. The 19th century was a long time ago, and borders have moved. Hinzweiler has stayed in the same place, but Bavaria has moved. I wondered why the 19th-century British newspapers kept on saying that those two musicians were Bavarian. So the two musicians were Bavarian in the 19th century, but would not be, today? Could that be correct? Storye book (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Correct. As there was no Poland at times, and Ukraine. In Germany, it was especially tricky, because until 1871, there was no Germany, just people speaking German. "The only real nation is humanity." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps link directly to the section Bavarian rule, in the Pfalz article, and see on a map how strange it looked. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I have corrected my articles to say that they came from Hinzweiler, which was in Bavaria at the time, but is no longer. I guess that would cover it. They were apparently Wandermusikanten, and they had small farms in Germany, but travelled in summer around Europe to perform music. They had a very strong musical culture in Hinzweiler. I have one example of a performance by one of them, as a band leader. They were performing extracts from symphonies and operas, and were trained on orchestral instruments - so not a folk-music thing. Storye book (talk) 10:11, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

thank you - last of the month: two women whose birthday we celebrate today, 99 and 90! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Good for them! That is a good age. Storye book (talk) 16:24, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red March 2023

Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261 Online events: New: Geofocus Mediterranean | Art + Activism | Alphabet run Q & R Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | Folklore See also: #Visible Wiki Women Wikimedia challenge to add more images of women to Commons Tip of the month: Mobile phone readers may only see the article "lead" – take some time to make it shine! Include something to keep people reading. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - March 2023

Delivered March 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for copy editing Mohamed El-Amin Ahmed El-Tom. You did not have to do that and could have easily (and rightfully) pushed pack and rejected the nomination until the article is copyedited. Thanks for your kindness FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:23, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! That is very kind of you. To be honest, it is quicker and easier for me to correct minor errors than to try to explain them and then ask others to do it. Storye book (talk) 12:28, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 203, March 2023

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hog Farm on the Trans-Mississippi Theater of the American Civil War

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar! 🌟

		The Death Barnstar
		Hereby I award you this Death Barnstar for Grove Road Cemetery, Harrogate and the related articles in your recent DYK nomination. Nice work! BorgQueen (talk) 19:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Wow, thank you! And it's not even Halloween. I shall keep this with pride! Storye book (talk) 20:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Prior Pursglove and Stockton Sixth Form College.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Prior Pursglove and Stockton Sixth Form College.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).

This is a duplicate file, superfluous to requirement. Please delete. Storye book (talk) 10:41, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE

Storye book, congratulations first of all on creating the article on Margery Jackson. It's always good to see editors filling out WP's breadth of coverage. However, I'm reversing your edit to the Robert Anderson article as being poorly placed and disrupting the sense in the treatment of his dialect ballads in that paragraph. There is simply no reason (other than your wish to provide a link to the article you created) for special mention of the one particular item out of the several other characters and situations he writes about in his book. My appeal for responsible editing in this instance is in line with the WP:INDISCRIMINATE guideline. Your correct approach would be to create an article on the whole collection of Anderton's ballads and mention the Margery Jackson connection in its course. Sweetpool50 (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

That's interesting. Your original objection was that you thought that the information in my edit was wrong, and therefore OR. After I added a second authoritative citation, you have changed tack, and found a different reason for removing my edit - of disrupting the sense? There is nothing wrong with the Standard English in my edit. What is more, most of that article is not even sourced, so that it all needs to be re-written accordingly. "Your correct approach", therefore, would be to rewrite the article, with sourcing, and to remove those facts which are not sourced. And no, I want nothing more to do with your WP:OWN article. Storye book (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2023

Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266 Online events: New: Gender studies | Health | Dance | Alphabet run S & T | Books by women Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | See also: Women in Red is supporting Every Book Its Reader through our Books by women event. Tip of the month: When writing about a book, check WP:NBOOK for notability, then see MOS:NOVEL, WP:NONFICTION or WP:POETRYSTANDARDS for guidance. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging