User talk:UndercoverClassicist

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arab–Khazar wars[edit]

Hi! I intend to bring the article on the Arab–Khazar wars back for a second run at FAC soon. Since you made a most comprehensive review in the first run, can you check whether your concerns, as stated there have been addressed? Regarding the Silk Road specifically, I admit I am baffled; as you say, not my field, but though there is much debate going on on when it started and what its exact nature was, I have not encountered skepticism of the Silk Road as such. Can you point me to some literature? Thanks! Constantine ✍ 12:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Constantine -- I'll try to give it a look when I can. Regarding the Silk Road, the issue is less whether silk and other goods were traded between Europe/Persia/China (they certainly where) and more whether a single, centrally-planned "Silk Road" is the best way to conceptualise this trade, as distinct from a series of smaller and more ad hoc connections between people(s), including connections by sea. This edited volume looks at the topic in detail; the British Museum opt for the plural here, as do UNESCO here. This JSTOR article goes into good detail as to why the plural is useful, and offers the routes across the steppe as a case study. UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the lead, I noticed that where the Khazars were already established since the late 6th century.: were ... since isn't quite grammatical in English: had been ... since is better. Otherwise, I'm sure I'll be able to find some nits to pick at FAC -- it is after all a huge article, and testament to your hard work and patience -- but it's clearly in good shape. UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger PR[edit]

I listed tiger for peer review. Would appreciate a through review to prepare it for FAC. LittleJerry (talk) 13:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are your plans? I feel like it would be better if you reviewed it at PR than FAC. LittleJerry (talk) 23:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello -- I'll try to give it a look. UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Just want clarification if you intend to "nitpick" at PR. I think it would be better served there as there isn't a timeline. Thank you. LittleJerry (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review comment query[edit]

Dear UndercoverClassicist, I happened to notice, while scrolling the "History" section of the list of Good Article nominations, that you have undertaken to review the article on King George II, for which "additional comments are welcome". I would like to offer such a comment, for what it's worth, but I am not sure where I should write it and I thought I should ask your help in this matter. Should I add my comment in the "Discussion" section or am I supposed to create a new section in the review page? Thanks in advance for your response, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 19:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -- up to you: if you only have one or two comments, or want to join in with a conversation that's already started, you might wish to just directly add what you have to say to what's already there. On the other hand, if you have a substantial amount to say, it would be best to start a new subsection, titled after your username, and to put them there. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Annika59 (19:40, 22 April 2024)[edit]

Hello, hope you are doing well. I have read all the initial Wikipedia policies. I have done some edits as well to practice and memorize the policies. The community has been very helpful as well. I want to learn to source editing. It seems to me some sort of a programing language, I don't know what it is called. If you can guide me regarding it, I will be very grateful. Thank you. --Annika59 (talk) 19:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -- honestly, I think the best way to learn how the markup works is to simply have a look at it when you're editing (most things, like text and links, are fairly self-explanatory if you look at the code and the finished article alongside each other). You might want to have a look at this help page, which has some of the basics on it.
You'll see a few templates (in pointy brackets, like this: {{sfn|Smith|1994|p=18}} -- those each have their own documentation, which you can find by searching for Template: and then whatever is after the bracket but before the first | (so "Template:sfn" in this case). Generally speaking, you don't have to do too much with those to be able to do most things. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Thank you so much. I would try to learn as much as I can, and ask you if anything henders. Thank you. Annika59 (talk) 01:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Anactoria[edit]

On 4 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anactoria, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that scholars debate whether Anactoria, mentioned in Sappho's poems, was a real person, a pseudonym, or an invention of Sappho? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anactoria. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Anactoria), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of Alan Wace[edit]

Congratulations, UndercoverClassicist! The article you nominated, Alan Wace, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, David Fuchs (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins[edit]

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Under the unacknowledged on Marriage law (18:12, 9 May 2024)[edit]

Hello. What must be updated about this page? --Under the unacknowledged (talk) 18:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the laws in some countries have changed -- particularly around same-sex marriage, for instance? You'd have to do a bit of research to find out, but looking out for statements referenced to older sources and checking if they're still valid would be a good start. You might also look around in the news for headlines like "X legalises same-sex marriage". UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Clive.tyesi on Calcium carbonate (06:29, 10 May 2024)[edit]

what is the aim of this investigation --Clive.tyesi (talk) 06:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Arthur Fulton (sport shooter)[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Arthur Fulton (sport shooter) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 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 Arconning -- Arconning (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of Christianity[edit]

I humbly ask (beg?) for any input you might be willing to give, especially on the high and late Middle Ages sections, after extensive rewriting of this page, that might help make it FA quality. Please. And thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Annika59 (00:48, 11 May 2024)[edit]

Hello, hope you are doing well. I wanted to know, how to do cleanup of page like Alise Willoughby? Such pages have a few references, and there structure doesn't follow the conventional formate of Wikipedia articles. Kindly, guide me in this regard. Thank you. --Annika59 (talk) 00:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -- there are a few things that I would be looking at if overhauling the article:
  • Format: we don't generally use bold text outside subheadings and the subject's name in the first sentence. The list with bold starters like "Started racing" should be rewritten as continuous prose, in paragraphs. Elsewhere, wikilinks should be removed from subheaders.
  • Grammar: there are a number of incomplete sentences: these should be reworked into full sentences.
  • The "Note" asides, if considered helpful, would be better as footnotes: we don't generally use "editorial" asides in the body text of an article.
  • The list of titles is quite oddly formatted, and seems very long: I would try to work out which of these were particularly important, and which could be summarised, joined together or left out (given that she was a world champion at the time, for example, is it particularly notable that she also won a district-level competition in Minnesota in 2004?).
  • Referencing: quite a lot of the statements in the article have no apparent source: the ideal is that everything in an article can be referred to a reliable, independent source.
I hope this is helpful. You might want to take the article to Peer Review to get some more input on it, perhaps once you've had a go at these things. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. Most appriciated. Annika59 (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Narwhal[edit]

Hi. You've reviewed both of my FACs, so I was hoping you'd take a look at the peer review before the FAC later this month. I'd appreciate a critique of the prose, as that was the main reason for my last FAC failing. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 10:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Arthur Fulton (sport shooter)[edit]

The article Arthur Fulton (sport shooter) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Arthur Fulton (sport shooter) for comments about the article, and Talk:Arthur Fulton (sport shooter)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Arconning -- Arconning (talk) 01:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Br42092 (05:03, 17 May 2024)[edit]

How do I create a page about a business --Br42092 (talk) 05:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Homeric Hymns[edit]

The article Homeric Hymns you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Homeric Hymns for comments about the article, and Talk:Homeric Hymns/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Morrison Man -- The Morrison Man (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wace in Rome[edit]

Hi there. I'm getting ready to upload some photos of sculpture in the Capitoline Museums, and in the course of preparing references and descriptions I've been looking at the old catalogue of the collection edited by Stuart Jones and published in 1912. The descriptions in that catalogue were written by various members of the British School, and although the entries are not individually credited, the Roman portraits were apparently the work of Wace (see the preface, p. iii). That was news to me, so I turned to your article, where I read this in the Early Academic Career section: "Wace worked briefly as a librarian at the BSR between 1905 and 1906, supported by a grant from the British government to allow the BSR to catalogue its sculpture collections." What is the intended antecedent of the possessive "its" in this sentence? The British School? The British government? Neither makes any sense: the BSR does not have an extensive sculpture collection, and obviously Wace did not catalogue the sculpture held by British government in the various museums in the UK. The principal source cited is the DNB article, and if you read the whole paragraph there carefully, I think you'll see that when Gill writes "to work on the catalogue of the [sic] sculpture collections", he is referring to Stuart Jones's project to catalogue the Roman municipal collections in the Capitoline Museum and Palazzo dei Conservatori. (See also Wallace-Hadrill, The British School at Rome: One Hundred Years (London 2001), pp. 27–28.) This could probably do with a little clarification. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 14:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- I hadn't twigged about AWH's BSR volume, but it does clear up what wasn't particularly clear to me from the other sources -- adjusted the article to better clarify Wace's work and the nitty-gritty of the timeline. UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, and at risk of being forward, I've got George E. Mylonas up at FAC -- if you get a moment, would appreciate your thoughts. UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UndercoverClassicist&oldid=1224850155"