This is an archive of past discussions about User:Theleekycauldron. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I just wanted to thank you for your work on this. It really is a very good article, and really is a great NPOV piece on something that could not be neutral. Well done! CAVincent (talk) 09:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Ditto, kiddo. Nicely crafted. Your West Wing episode work has given you a nice voice and solid vocabulary for this sort of material. BusterD (talk) 14:55, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Apologies as I didn’t see your explanation until after I redid the edit. I’ve read that article three times now and no where does it state or even imply that “critics” elevated Stewart over Carlson. Even if that were the case, it’s an opinion piece. I feel like it’s important to be neutral when posting about politics and that gives the article a biased left slant. Johnnytucf (talk) 01:43, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
@Johnnytucf: Might've been a stretch to take it from High-minded critics nodded in approval, contrasting Crossfire’s 21st-century lousiness with the erudite debates that had taken place on older shows like Firing Line or The Dick Cavett Show., but I more meant that they elevated Stewart's arguments over Carlson's. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that line, again with it being an opinion-piece, there was no citation of the “high-minded critics” (who they were or how many of them). And even with that, I would read “nodding in approval” as you stated just now (as opposed to the original claim), that it was more so they approved of Stewart’s points- not that they elevated him over Carlson. Johnnytucf (talk) 02:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
An opinion piece is still just one person’s opinion, regardless of who they are, and if being cited, it’s important to be clear the the information is a single person’s opinion. The statement is the wiki article was worded as a verifiable factual statement, “critics elevated Stewart above Carlson,” (paraphrasing). That was not supported by any verifiable evidence. It was a Wikipedia editor’s opinion of an unsourced Politico writer’s opinion, then started in the Wikipedia article as a fact.
I feel the inclusion of the Politico opinion article at all biases the wiki entry, however it would not be incorrect to make a more accurate statement based on the source such as “many critics applauded Stewart’s grievances” or such. Johnnytucf (talk) 13:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
That was actually intentional, the comment was unrelated to the one it was replying to, presumably because it was made with the reply.tool. — Qwerfjkltalk06:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Leeky, I did a qpq review of this article yesterday, but may have made a mistake: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Maggie_Tokuda-Hall
I gave it a tick for approval, but I see the DYK checklist has inserted a red X for sources. The problem is that there are four key paragraphs that are summaries of four books, but don't have a cite. Probably easily fixed, by citing to the four books themselves. I put that suggestion in the "Comments" section, along with some other relatively minor matters. But now there's a review with an X and and checkmark. I don't want to touch it any further, in case I make it worse. Could you or someone else on the DYK project take a look? Sorry about that. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Cites needed for the initial summary paragraphs for the four books, and then I think it’s good. The hook is properly cited. My other comments are things that need a look by the editor, but don’t relate directly to the hook. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 20:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
The article Dear White Staffers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dear White Staffers for comments about the article, and Talk:Dear White Staffers/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammielh -- Sammielh (talk) 10:42, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I don't have any questions about PSHAW, I downloaded it a while ago using it to promote hooks is fairly straightforward. However I think it would help new promoters to mention it at WP:DYKNA. Obviously it is not urgent as it has been around a while. Otherwise they will probably find the link via edit summaries. WP:PSHAW has most of the information needed, except possibly a reminder that DYK processes should be followed before clicking on the tool. TSventon (talk) 17:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
theleekycauldron, it is good to see that the rework will deal with this, I have not been following it in detail. TSventon (talk) 19:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
I also heard there's some good T-Shirts that protect you from the stupidity, like the 'I'm not an admin but I still get a crappy t-shirt t-shirt, and the 'I'm waiting for my RFA to finish and all I get is this crappy t-shirt from Tamzin with a khamsa on it'. But in all seriousness, when you get the t-shirt, make sure to send us a photo of it, I've never seen a leek wearing a t-shirt before, and this year is the year for it. In actual seriousness though, good work :) - Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 06:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Heh, I think you're misunderstanding what the khamsa represents, @Zippybonzo. It relates to a Jewish superstition about premature celebration. :P I'm not worried about whatever opposes leek may or may not get; I'm worried about the supports! -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 16:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
I spent more time than I care to admit staring at this thing, hoping it protects me from the meteor that hits every RfA... hey, maybe it did :) so difficult to not be superstitious these days... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:08, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Appreciation from Ixtal
Cute lil' corgi!
So happy to see you run again, it seems you'll pass without problem and will be able to use the tools soon. Your presence on the wiki the past year has made it a much better experience for tons of us and you really do represent the type of community member I hope we can continue attracting. As you can see I'm not great at compliments but yeah! Good luck during the rest of the process. — Ixtal( T / C ) ⁂ Non nobis solum. 16:36, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Ixtal! In the end, I think you were right – it was worth it for me to try again later, even though most RfAers these days never come back after a first fail. selling yourself short, you're great at compliments :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:06, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Early Congratulations
Some scales used for weighing the !vote at TLC's RfA
Well it's the same in Jewish culture. The relevance here is that the ayin hora notices people talking about good things and then ruins them. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:23, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
I'm so glad to have been a part of this, even though you clearly would've passed without my co-nom. It's this close to 300! Beeblebrox (talk) 04:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
A remarkably celebratory process to date. Nothing even remotely negative. Unusual in the general good humor being expressed by supporters and even in the oppose section. Says something about the quality of the candidate, IMHO. It occurred to me if tlc has promoted 2600 DYKs in the last few years, thousands of positive interactions with many hundreds of other wikipedians. Promotion was not a favor, but a test of trust between those nominators and this DYK volunteer. Lots of good will expressed. I have abundant confidence she will demonstrate quickly her potency as an admin (if over 100 !voters don't oppose in the next 24). BusterD (talk) 16:04, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
@BusterD: re Nothing even remotely negative: the khamsa was there for a reason.
Thanks, Paine Ellsworth! Between you and me, I thought your support at my first RfA was super heartwarming, and I never got a chance to tell you that :) no records to speak of, couldn't be happier nonetheless. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:05, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations on your successful RFA! Carrying on a tradition, allow me to impart the words of wisdom I received from KrakatoaKatie after my RFA passed almost eight long, exhausting, and questionable years ago:
Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable.)
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.)
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for?
Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway.
Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. All rights released under GFDL.
Hello theleekycauldron! I am pleased to report that I have closed your RfA as successful. Very successful, in fact, at 100%! (Rounded, anyway.) Good luck with your new tools, and let me know if I can assist with anything. 28bytes (talk) 17:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Féleekitations, Claudia! Quite the showing with that 100%--if the community's confidence is any accurate barometer, you shall be a very useful addition to the corps indeed. I don't think we ever crossed paths prior to your RfA (at least that I recall), but after observing your conduct there, I hope we do so in the future. Happy editing (and mopping)! SnowRise let's rap19:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, I think you should know that Valereee was saying something along the lines of "leeky is all around difficult, but come on, we all want a taste of that", or something to that effect. I personally thought it was deeply inappropriate, but I didn't want to disrupt the discussion. Still, just very over the line, Val--so disappointed! SnowRise let's rap21:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Hey there, Snow Rise, thanks for the well wishes! I saw what was goin' on down there, it all looked kosher to me :) or maybe that's just navel-gazing... I trust Val implicitly, so I'm sure there's no harm to be read into it.
Well, I've always subscribed to the philosophy that life has a lot to offer, if you treat it like a pot luck! ;) See you around, Claudia! SnowRise let's rap21:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations, Leeky! Brilliant to see your hard work recognized at RFA. Thank you for volunteering, for all your ongoing creativity and entrepreneurship and problem-solving, and for putting so much care into DYK. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:25, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations leeky!! I've been away for a few days so I wasn't around when the RfA closed but I'm proud to have been one of the first supports :3 ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 14:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Would you please fully protect my userpage?
Since you have a new mop to swing... No reason anyone but me should edit or move. Thanks. I'll think of other demi-menial tasks for you to perform, now that you serve the entire community. So proud of you, kiddo. Blow us all away! BusterD (talk) 20:20, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Wait. You're an administrator now? I thought you just needed better tools to help with your wacky newfangled mainpage stuff. You could actually block me right now? I pledge to stay in my lane. I'll be on my best behavior. BusterD (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I have been taking a break from Wikipedia so I didn't notice your admin nomination. Congratulations on becoming an admin. SL93 (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Things are going good. I start four online college classes tomorrow for the semester. My lawyer finally received the settlement check from when I car hit me on December 1, 2022 at a crosswalk. I likely won't have access to that money until next month. SL93 (talk) 17:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Do remember to take this opportunity to bonk multiple vandals and poor DYK submitters with your two-weapon, I mean tool, set-up. Nosebagbear (talk) 18:29, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
I remember hearing about that months ago – I'm so glad it turned out okay :) I'm not starting school for a few weeks, the quarter system is fantastic. Any major in mind yet? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone who's left well wishes so far, and a preëmptive thanks to anyone who wanders here with positive thoughts to share! I'll be trying to respond to all of y'all, but I was on a strict no-silliness diet for seven days and there's a lot of junk food to catch up on :) cheers, all! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 17:44, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
I like the crappiness of it, it gives it charm. I like it so much that after my RfA I had a physical copy of that shirt made. - Aoidh (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Valereee, we can supply you with a women's cut variant of the admin T-shirt, but in the interests of honesty and transparency, the women's cuts were all printed to say "I'm an admin, and all I get is this crappy T-shirt! ...and a 20x increased likelihood of being called a 'meddlesome c***' by an LTA at some point." SnowRise let's rap04:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
I can't find a similar free-looking graphic online, but if you can please link it to me and I'll make it right away. Panini!•🥪18:56, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Lol, thanks, but I don't think I can take much credit for that save the initial nudge, and a few (hopefully) helpful comments - and besides, as any good chef will tell you, it helps when cooking with good ingredients : )
Thanks, Pamzeis! I got a cookbook from my school library, but in classic claudia fashion, I never actually made a recipe with it before having to return it... I took a picture of the one vegetarian thing! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 17:56, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
"classic claudia" is some really nice alliteration BTW. But your good humour really contributed to making your RfA such a fun place, instead of the daunting trial it usually feels like. 100% the funniest RfA I've ever seen! Pamzeis (talk) 10:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Congrats from me too. I don't know how to cook leeks in a cauldron, but if you cut the leek into inch thick chunks and drizzle some olive oil on them they roast just fine. Salt and pepper to taste. Back to the admin stuff, when you get bored of scrabbling down the back of the sofa to find the right block template, some kind techy person put a really nifty bit of code into my Monobook that you might want to borrow. ϢereSpielChequers21:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, and you can add about interestingness what you find for Berit Lindholm, a primadonna known from New York to Moscow (in 1971 Cold War days!), for whom was approved to say that her opera manager in her early days spoke of her as "that damn primary teacher". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Thanks for the note :) I'm monitoring the discussion closely – since it looks like the nominator, reviewer, and most outside parties are cooperating nicely and have reached a consensus, I'll come back to possibly close the nomination once the August 30 prep set opens up.
As a side note: in the future, please be mindful of WP:CAN, which prohibits soliciting the participation of editors in discussions using a non-neutral statement and/or on the basis of an opinion you believe they hold. Thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 17:51, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
@Storye book: I do see that you've had your fair share of disagreement in that thread! I do want to stress, however, that WP:CAN does say that invitations to participate should be "neutrally worded with a neutral title". So as far as Gerda's message to me, I thought this would be a helpful reminder, should this ever arise on someone else's talk page. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:23, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Shaking head. Claudia, did I request anything besides a reflection about interestingness in your essay? Some days I believe I can't express what I feel in English. I am sorry for that, but not for being determined to picture a woman active and not passive. I called this the year of resilience for a reason ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I understand that I suggested to reflect the case in your essay about interestingness, without any time frame, so could well be after the ongoing is over. I believe it's a general disagreemet not restricted to a specific case. I am also not aware that I painted the approved hook negatively (if that perception is wrong please educate) - it just is negative. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: well, it's certainly not restricted to a specific case. re painting the approved hook negatively: I take "for whom was approved to say" to mean that you're expressing incredulity that the hook was approved and you think the hook was bad. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
incredulity
I am a simple person, when I say "reflect in your essay" I don't mean "take part in the discussion", and when I express incredulity (thank you for a new word!) I don't mean the hook is bad. (I thought it was impossible. So did Floq.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
In prep, a woman looks at me, a bit mocking it seems. ... that opera singer Berit Lindholm (pictured) was said to have been called "that damn primary school teacher" and used it in the title of her memoir?
If we really have to have a joke as all we say about her (a man's description instead of her achievements, many words saying so little about her), can we at least have dramatic soprano instead of "opera singer" (she was one of the top three of the few at her time!), and a link to the Royal Swedish Opera for "her first director" (in whose article that house isn't even mentioned). Otherwise, this could be a small voice at a small house in some provinces at any time. - I am a news person, and like to give facts a time and place. In ALT0a, Stokovsky would have provided a time, in ALT2b Moscow and Vienna places and the "international" information. Have mercy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for understanding one bit. I was close to thinking it was hopeless. Then please link to the man, Göran Gentele, and by when it appears the house will be mentioned in the lead. Next question: "was said to have been called" - that sounds so clumsy to me that I - as a reader - would never get to the "damn", which - I know - gets the extra clicks, like "Nazi" does. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the pipe. Almost at the same time, I added the opera company to her lead. GA review has begun. - Storye book had suggested to work on the hook in the nom instead of prep, - too late. - The more I research, the sadder I get about rumour-based trivia for a hook, but who cares. - TSventon, can you please add opera company to the director's article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:30, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, I have added director of the Royal Swedish Opera from 1963 to 1972 to the lead of Göran Gentele, hopefully that is what you wanted. The source for "that damn primary school teacher" says "is said to have uttered the famous words" ("lär ha yttrat de berömda orden") so we are stuck with "is said to" or equivalent. TSventon (talk) 20:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
On a bike trip, I thought the following which I would like you to consider. Berit Lindholm is now in prep 6 with image and a longish quote hook. My estimate is that it's an interesting image, and 80% of clicks will come from the image regardless of what the hook says. Yes? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: That's on the right track; a probably better way to look at it is that the image will net the hook 3, 3.5 times what it would have done in a vacuum. So, yeah, the hook will be around 30% of the total, but the content of the hook does still matter. If the hook is half as hooky, the resulting viewcount decreases by 50%, not 15%. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:37, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
For me, viewcount is one thing, but what the relatives of a woman who just died may think on her funeral day, is another, - plus while the "hooky" hook is on for 12 hours, it will for as long as Wikipedia lives the one thing you meet first about her on her talk page, and in the archive. I know what I prefer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
I want it to be something to the core of the subject, not tangential, - better a key achievement than an anecdote.
I like some reference to where and when it plays, and prefer hints to naked years and places. In her case "live Broadcast" which didn't happen before 1971, and the Met for New York.
I like additional links for context, here Nilsson, at that time (and possibly even today) the best-known Wagnerian singer, which many will know, and others can find out.
What do you think? - Had I written the article later, I'd probably proposed (shorter): ... that she was filmed as Waltraute in Jahrhundertring? - but that wasn't yet written then (scene pictured above, and in it's DYK). - I'm rather proud that Lindholm is GA now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: So, a little bit of background about me that you may not have known: I happen to be a classically trained violinist (an amateur, of course). I've been playing violin since I was 6, and I've been teaching myself piano and guitar since the ages of 3 and 13, respectively. I've been singing for just about as long as I can remember, I've been classically trained in vocals, I've sung for theater, written waltzes, played violin at recitals, whole bit. On another note, I recently started watching a YouTube channel under the name of 12tone, which does fascinating musical analyses of recent and recent-ish music. Because of that, I can't stop listening to "Mr. Brightside" and "Under Pressure", and I gained new appreciation for principles of lyric writing and the intricacies of production. 12tone made that content engaging, and I never would've found those things out on my own. If it weren't for YouTube channels like 12tone, channels that made it fun and exciting to learn and think and make new things, I would never have found DYK.
So, really, I think I'm the exact kind of reader that you might want to write for. I love music and I'm intellectually curious, but no one ever gave me that spark for opera. You could be that teacher who sets the spark, that educator who lays out why this is interesting or beautiful or important. You could be that for thousands of people in your audience. You have so much power at your fingertips as someone with a giant megaphone and an unrivaled passion for something relatively unknown to big parts of our readership.
If you want my honest critique, Gerda: When I think about that, and I read your hooks, I always feel a little let down. If opera is just playbills from high society playhouses and lists of performances, I guess it's not really for me. At least, it's never made me feel engaged. Maybe some of that is down to your sourcing: I've always gotten the impression that you're smarter than your reading material, that you make the good connections your sources don't. Your sourcing, for instance, doesn't talk about the geopolitical significance of Berit Lindholm's Soviet Union performance during the Cold War. That was cited to a simple list of performances with dates. Maybe if you tackled bigger topics, you'd find sources that spell out the more engaging ideas we can't otherwise put on DYK (because it'd be OR).
And finally, to your question. I think your five points are good ideals, if you that's what you want. I also think they really don't matter that much, and they're not why your nominations seem to become quagmires so often these days. I think that happens because you make readers know, but you don't make them care. To misuse an old idiom, you lead the horse to water – and then shove it in. All the stuff about shortening the hook, leaving out details or including more links, whatever – that's window dressing. My real suggestion for improvement: think about whether you really want a captive audience for the work you produce, if you really want to make people understand why you love this so much. If you do, let's talk more. If you don't, maybe your energy is better spent writing more of the quality articles you have a knack for. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:23, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time, and I'll take it to heart, but not today, - it's Sunday, I want to go out, and there's a concert to which I look forward.
Template:Did you know nominations/Gwendolyn Killebrew is a review I liked. The phrase "spirit of DYK" is used from time to time, often telling me that I lack it, but I believe the spirit of DYK was Yoninah, and with her death, something went missing.
I leave for some other day that I believe that banning certain topics as not fit for the general public is a sort of discrimination. I don't think Yoninah cared about opera at all, but she approved verified hooks.
As you may recall, I went on strike for DYK when 2023 came because the arguing takes too much time away from article writing. I focus on Recent deaths, and I have my audience. Seeing that I improved Berit Lindholm's article enough to claim a 5* expansion, I hoped that we could - by saying a bit more - reach different readers. I asked Story book, who in the past successfully made hooks palatable for the broad readership. She made two suggestions, I said what I prefer, which looks amazingly similar to the Killebrew hook, and if Yoninah was still around, she might have simply approved that.
The hook now in the queue leaves me unhappy, because all it does is blaming two people, a director of not having recognized the potential of a singer, and her for not having forgiven that but made it the title. It fails my #1 already, and #3.
I'm not against quirky hooks per se for a person who recently died, see my very first one (the third, Berhard Blume, - the others were unrelated to a recent death).
I believe that the hook about a person who recently died - the one thing millions of readers will get about the subject, those who won't click - should not be negative, and if it stays, I will be unproud and ashamed and wish I had avoided DYK more consequently. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Talk-page sniping, I was here to leave some TLC and was hooked by a passing Gerda mention!, but I love how much you both care about this subject. Two comments: a) don't waste too much time belaboring things (in noms or in commentary ;) b) you might try "that soon after starting her 'operatic' career at the Met, Gwendolyn Killebrew appeared in Wagner's Die Walküre in a live broadcast (and here's what that meant for her career) - the specific role and the title role being less important to her bio than how that changed the course of her life (or the course of opera!). – SJ +20:45, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, but Killebrew appeared in 2014, and we better focus on improving what's to come. I am happy, though, to discuss what was good and bad in the hooks for people who recently died and I improved - my focus since 2019, so DYK really came to be only a by-product.
There were many more people from other different professions to whom I paid tribute. All hooks for which I stand had one thing in common: they show something the person achieved.
The present hook for Lindholm will not go to that archive. "is said to have been called" is not only passive but also clumsy, and most people will - like me - not being able to read the Swedish source. If we really find that "damn" so interesting, can we at least turn it around, not blaming the poor man, and letting people find out why that crazy title?
I wish we could say in it in a simple way that this is of course a translation, and may have lost in translation (so we can't really make it italic, as it was not the English title of a translated book, afaik). Or find a hook with not so many problems on different levels, decency on her funeral not the smallest of them? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Well, no, I'll have to move it to honor the duly approved request. I'm not the person you have to convince – go talk to the nominator. As a final note, yes, categorically banning things on the basis of topic area is a bad idea. Esoteric topic areas are opportunities (that we, admittedly, usually squander), not nightmares. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
I have talked to the nominator. You brought the version to prep, therefore I talked to you, and you (plural) DYK team have a record of changing hooks. My theme tomorrow will be a Beethoven cello sonata, related to the upcoming concert. I am fiercely determined not to appear at ERRORS although I learned that you should only speak good about the dead, and this hook doesn't, and I think that is an error. - In case I feel like coming to DYK again, I'll consult you for a hook. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Oh, I do also want to say that the current hook gives me a better impression of Lindholm than any of the others proposed in the nomination. A celebration of life and the good sense of humor that makes it bearable :) Thanks for stopping by as always, Gerda. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
I guess I have a language problem, again, - sorry for not seeing the celebration of life, and who can be sure it's even her sense of humor and not some editor's clever idea to sell the book better? - I see more of her in the answer to the question how she wished to be remembered. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
@Festucalex: I'd say no, per MOS:DEADNAME. Just because the sourcing exists doesn't mean she's notable under that name, and it seems like the overwhelming majority of sourcing ignores it.
I'm happy to working with you on this, by the way :) just so that we're on the same page: this is a BLP about a minor involved in contemporary politics. There's a huge amount of damage we can do if we get things wrong, so I plan on writing the article very close to the vest. Sound good to you, too? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
awesome :) going to sleep for now, will pick this up in the morning. there's no chance you're on the discord, is there? might make collaboration easier, but no pressure, we can talk at the talk page :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammielh -- Sammielh (talk) 17:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
; see Talk:Dear White Staffers for comments about the article, and Talk:Dear White Staffers/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammielh -- Sammielh (talk) 10:42, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
{{awe}}some display of community trust! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 15:58, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
bring it :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:44, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
SnowRise let's rap 21:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Well, I've always subscribed to the philosophy that life has a lot to offer, if you treat it like a pot luck! ;) See you around, Claudia! SnowRise let's rap 21:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Not done) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg)