User talk:Doremo/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

HMS Gloucester (62)

Hi. I noticed that you have claimed that my edit was not in the source material.[1] That is incorrect. Otter states clearly that:

1. 85 Men were taken into captivity
2. Royal Marine Noel T J Haines died in captivity on 16 October 1941
3. AB W Salter died in 1945, reportedly being hit by a bullet from a Russian fighter plane outside of the prisoner of war camp after the German guards abandoned their posts

The problem we have here is that some of the sources are imprecise in their descriptions. I believe that the BBC article where the 84 survivors claim is made was based on Otter's work (Otter's book titled "HMS Glouester; The Untold Story" 1999, and the BBC documentary "HMS Gloucester: The Untold Story" 1999). Whether this was a typographical error by the BBC or if there is an underlying dispute to the numbers is unclear. Separately, The Indepedent's claim that both the subsequent deaths occurred in the prisoner of war camps is disputed by Otter. I'd suggest the following text to resolve the dispute, but would be happy to consider alternatives.

"Of the 807 men aboard at the time of her sinking, only 85 survived to reach shore; two more subsequently died after being taken into captivity, one in 1941 and another in 1945."

This text does not consider the 84 survivors figure stated by the BBC, so a further clarification could be included in a footnote:

"Otter and The Independent both agree that 85 men survived to be taken into captivity in 1941 but only 83 survived to return home in 1945. The BBC states that 84 survived to be taken into captivity in 1941 but does not comment on numbers that returned home after the war."

Would you be happy with this revised sentence and footnote to clarify the dispute between sources? From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

There is currently only one source cited for the death of the two men (Boggan in the Independent), which states "After 10 days, the men were moved to prisoner of war camps where two more of them died." The cited source therefore does not verify the statement ("of whom one died shortly thereafter and another died as a prisoner of war in 1945"). It's simply an objective tag. You're very welcome to cite additional source(s) (e.g., Otter, which I do not have access to) that do support that statement and to modify the text accordingly. Doremo (talk) 16:54, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd moved the Otter source to cover both points,[2] but I accept that wasn't particularly clear. I'll insert the revised text and footnote per my suggestion above. Thanks. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:33, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I agree with that. Doremo (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The WikiProject Wisconsin Barnstar
		Thank you for all of your additions to Wisconsin articles! Dolotta (talk) 15:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. It has been fun working on them. Doremo (talk) 15:36, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

St. Stanislav's Institution

Hi, St. Stanislav's Institution's governing body has been using the name St. Stanislav's Institution (and not the once that's being used in its Wikipedia article) since its reestablishment in 1993. I reckon it should be corrected, I just cannot change the title myself, probably because I haven't edited any English articles yet. Could you do it? I can fix other mentions of the name myself. Kcitam (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Briefly, "St. Stanislav's" is a double mistake. First, Stanislav is the Slovenian name for Stanislaus, and the institution is named after Saint Stanislaus Kostka. There's nothing wrong with the Slovenian name (Zavod svetega Stanislava), but the English name should use the English name of the saint. (Otherwise, it would be like having a "Saint Janez" institution named after Saint John, or a "Saint Jožef" institution named after Saint Joseph). Second, the possessive form -'s is incorrect (cf. Francis Crick Institute, Linus Pauling Institute, Pasteur Institute, etc.). The institution's English website contains many other language errors, and this is only one of them. Doremo (talk) 03:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Miklosich Street?

Hi, Doremo. Regarding Miklosich Street, what was the rationale for the change and why not also Chop Street? [3] --TadejM ^{my talk} 14:50, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Franz Miklosich is generally known as Miklosich in English, as well as by his own spelling of his name. I don't believe Matija Čop is known as Chop (nor Tschop or Zhop) in English. Doremo (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Noted, thank you. --TadejM ^{my talk} 19:42, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Municipality of Kanal

Thanks for creating a separate article for the Municipality of Izola. Can you please do the same for the Municipality of Kanal? -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome, I've done so. I'd like to get all of the remaining ones (37) tidied up with their own separate articles soon. Doremo (talk) 03:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Great. Thanks again. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 03:32, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

University of Novo Mesto

University_of_Novo_Mesto: University of Novo Mesto ali University of Novo mesto? Sama univerza ima na svoji spletni strani obe različici ... AndrejJ (talk)

Certainly "University of Novo Mesto" in English. The university's website has quite a few serious problems with its English. Doremo (talk) 03:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Tnx. Any online reference for a things like this!? AndrejJ (talk)

It's just basic English orthography. If you're looking for a rule, in English proper names are written in title case, and in title case the last word of any name is capitalized;[4][5] (e.g., Kansas City, New Town, Greenwich Village).[6] A Slovenian text follows different rules, of course. Doremo (talk) 18:23, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I know for proper names (place names), is it the same rule for the institution names as well? AndrejJ (talk)

Proper names include names of institutions[7][8] (as well as people, places, companies, holidays, etc.); like any other proper name, these are written in title case in English texts. Doremo (talk) 20:10, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

J. B. C. Drew Article

This is a personal thanks from me for your help on the article on J. B. C. Drew, the 10th Florida Attorney General. As the Father of the Page, I know that it is next to impossible to find much valuable sources of information on these local politicians who didn't really accomplish much during their tenure. Also bravo on finding out his middle name and city of birth! Curbon7 (talk) 07:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. In this case it was possible to connect the dots through articles at newspapers.com and documents on familysearch.org, but it takes some sleuthing to put the pieces together and ensure it's the right person. Historical bios like this make interesting puzzles. Doremo (talk) 07:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Editing Maribor

Hello. So as you may have seen, I will try to fix the reference in question with a more legitimate one. I will also add references between sentences. The thing with the Maribor Wikipedia page is that it has been practically dead since 2013, and needs and update. Also the entire history section only had one reference, the others were missing. After I fix the references would it be possible for you to find someone (or maybe youself?) who is a native English speaker, to fix the grammatical errors? There are not that many and it shouldn't take more than 10 minutes. A lot of hours went into upgrading the Maribor page, because the current one is too short and missing references. All the best.--Mariborcan1164 ^talk —Preceding undated comment added 19:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Improvements to the Maribor article are welcome. However, it is unrealistic to expect another editor to tidy up extensive low-quality changes. The recent changes had assigned references to the wrong material, used an unreliable blog by a schoolchild as a source, and contained many punctuation and syntax errors. If you would like to contribute to the article, I recommend small, gradual changes so that editors have time to consider them individually. Doremo (talk) 02:53, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

dab Selle

Regarding this revert [9], you seem to be demanding that the changes need to be done in one bold step, and may not be proposed first. I can't always follow the logic of such dab page habits, and this appears to be such a case. Obviously my edit was intended to show what work is needed, and also that this involves work on other articles first. But I was not intending to do it myself, mainly because I guess I might follow the wrong procedure in splitting the Selle article - but that certainly needs to be done. I have no problem quickly writing up two new stubs, if the correct titles etc can be determined.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Please create the stubs that you suggest, or offer suggestions on the article's talk page. The page itself is not the right place to insert comments about what should be done with the article. Doremo (talk) 09:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Proposals are made on the Selle article. If they are acceptable, please note it there? (Or feel free to go ahead.) OTOH, the material you removed was not just "comments" but a correct description of the _target article. It is not currently about one river, so the text you have reverted to is now wrong again. More importantly looking for a way forward, did you intend to delete the merge from template?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the topic. If there are errors on the page, they should be corrected or the incorrect material should be deleted. However, the article should not describe what it is not about, and the header should not contain a comment saying that it is wrong. Doremo (talk) 14:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The header just said that the _target was an article about several rivers, which it currently is. The case is pretty simple to understand. I am only worried that if I act boldly I will break some further dab rules.

But why did we remove the merge proposal template? That would seem to be part of the process for moving forward because the most obvious solution involves the creation of two new articles, and a merge of the existing article with its dab. Doesn't the revert make that difficult to do in a methodical way?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 23:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The undo was based on the inappropriate additions "THREE DIFFERENT" and "two of them are mixed-up in one Wikipedia article" in the article text. I have no objection to the merge proposal template. Doremo (talk) 02:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

OK, as a first step I will make a tweaked version. It sounds like no one is going to advise about best practice in river name articles, so I'll probably push ahead with it to get past this phase.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:02, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Mohamed Al Arayedh

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

The page Mohamed Al Arayedh has been deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. As the page met any of these strictly-defined criteria, it was deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been deleted are:

• It seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appeared to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. creffett (talk) 13:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. Doremo (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Waltz's Slovenian ethnicity

Hello, I was thinking maybe you could give me your opinion on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Christoph_Waltz#Slovenian_heritage I've proven that Christoph Waltz has Slovenian roots (through his mother, née Urbancic) and is related to Josipina Turnograjska, but some editors are trying to deny this and I do not understand why. I'm trying to assume good faith, but the this whole thing really puzzles me. Anyway, I hope that by reading the talk through you will be able to put things in order. Thanks. Max9844419087 (talk) 22:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the question; I've made a suggestion at the talk page. Doremo (talk) 03:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Please, can you correct my grammatical mistakes instead of reverting the whole attempt at making the text more succint

Thank you in advance for your good will, willingness (is this correct?), and effort spent on Ljubljana article. DancingPhilosopher (talk) 09:05, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I can try to patch things up if you do a little bit at a time, but making many changes all at once makes it a lot harder. Almost every segment change contained language problems. Just to explain the ones in the edit summary: "has been rebuild" → "was rebuilt" (both the spelling and verbal aspect are wrong), "20th Century architects" → "20th-century architects" (complex premodifiers need to be hyphenated, and the capitalization of the common noun was wrong), "on historical center" → "at the historical center" (wrong preposition with the verb, improper articulation), "the Castle Hill" → "Castle Hill" (improper articulation for this proper noun phrase type), "a Castle Museum" → "a castle museum" (improper capitalization of an indefinite noun phrase), "in 1933, February 2nd" → "on 2 February 1933" (the date format used was both invalid and did not conform to the article's existing date format). I don't have any opinion about the content of any of the changes, but the basic language quality requires a lot of cleanup, so if you can just make one small edit at a time it will give other editors a chance to fix things. Thanks. Doremo (talk) 09:32, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for (patiently) explaining the errors to me. I appreciate it. Will try to do next time the way you suggested. DancingPhilosopher (talk) 10:06, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

No problem; I hope the explanations are useful. I'm grateful that you're contributing to improving Wikipedia. Doremo (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Another Norwegian actress

Emmy Worm-Müller - I wrote up the husband :) Geschichte (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. Doremo (talk) 15:56, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Doremo

Can you fix same in [[10]] what is exactly written in the source ,like you did here[[11]], instead of what it says "His alphabet mapped completely on Serbian Cyrillic which had been standardized by Vuk Karadžić a few years before". I not have acc for change , this article requires login. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.124.26 (talk) 10:55, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

I've taken care of it. Doremo (talk) 11:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Goodbye!93.138.124.26 (talk) 11:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Doremo

You just removed my edit in the Victor Friedman page labelling it as "yellow press". The articles is written by docent doctor Ana Kocheva who is a deputy chairman of the Bulgarian Academy of Science. Please re-consider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AcerStan (talk • contribs) 11:04, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

The article that was cited is simultaneously insulting (простосърдечно си въобразяват, че се занимават с наука 'simply imagine they are doing science'; шизофренно да се е раздвоил 'schizophrenically split'; Т.нар. „научен“ 'so-called "scientific"'; 'Деменцията ... идеално пасва на ... Фридман 'Dementia ... fits perfectly with ... Friedman'), vulgar (извира от дълбоките недра на т.нар. клоз… 'it springs from the deep bowels of the so-called toilet'), and chauvinstic (Факт е, че един чужденец трудно може да разбере българската народностна ситуация на Балканите 'The fact is that a foreigner can hardly understand the Bulgarian national situation in the Balkans'). Doremo (talk) 11:19, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

What you are citing is a direct repose to a article recently published by Friedman himself, directed at the Bulgarian Academy of Science. "Вai Ganyo in the Academy: Bulgarian ideological dementia". Not letting a mention of his controversial views shows you are biased and protectionist of an agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AcerStan (talk • contribs) 12:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

About titles, honorifics and appeal to popularity

Hello and greetings,

This is just for your kind info. Since previously you have participated in an inconclusive RfC discussion at this RfC in year going by, and since some related aspects are under discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Titles, honorifics and appeal to popularity may be you want to join in to share your inputs or opinions.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 05:52, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your edits on John McCarthy (Nebraska politician). The Nebraska WikiProject is defunct, so I feel a bit alone in fixing many of the fairly run-down Nebraska politician and history articles -- but seeing your edits makes me happy, and feeling like somebody else is reading and caring about these articles. Thank you again. Urve (talk) 23:22, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I'm also happy when I'm able to find and add some material to a short biography like this. Doremo (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Trengereid School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trengereid School, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trengereid School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

unwanted or intentionally vandalism @ Novo Mesto -- last warning

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Novo Mesto. You are constantly revert my Grammar and spelling corrections. I have suggested to resign to en.wiki content a few months ago because of extremly poor English lang. knowledge. Stop it, it's not funny anymore. You are disturbing a quality content. No greetings, --Mateus2019 (talk) 17:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

If you have a legitimate concern, please discuss it at the relevant article's talk page. Doremo (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Please retain former villages

Okay. Just looked like someone did a shotgun list of everything humanly possible to think of near the end of the first decade of this century, then added more early in the second decade – then walked away. As we enter the third decade, it is good to hear that the list is helping in other ways. I have been doing some work on updating or filling in some of the Slovenia articles, but will probably be moving along soon. Hope you get others stepping up as dedicated members of the Project, or at least have a few more travelers, like me, help out with spot updates on some of these articles. Thanks for your ongoing efforts on this. Good luck, and have fun. Jmg38 (talk) 09:07, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I added most of the names and have slowly been creating the corresponding articles; it takes a while to create the corresponding articles, and I've mostly focused on the Ljubljana former settlements, which are much more complete. I've only been able to sporadically work on articles for other municipalities. Doremo (talk) 09:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I have put back the names of former settlements, and included an html note (I think that's what they are called) for editors to know how they can easily use existing templates to find which municipality the settlements are now likely grouped with, after some past re-alignment of municipalities. Jmg38 (talk) 10:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll try to step up the pace of working on these articles. Doremo (talk) 10:27, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Copyright attribution required for all future translations – you need to repair all past instances

Hi Doremo. I just saw your creation of Paolo Sperati, and from your edit summary, understood you had translated it (or parts of it) from existing content from the Norwegian Wikipedia article. I then noticed that you have done this many times before. Sorry to tell you this, but each and every one of these is a copyright violation. In short, we (us Wikipedia writers) own the copyright to our contributions (well those that pass the threshold of originality), but we automatically release our content under a free copyright license when we edit, that requires (among other things) credit to us as authors when the content is re-used. So when material is copied from one Wikipedia or Wikimedia project to another, or from a page here to another, the free copyright license requires that suitable credit be given to its authors.

Wait, don't worry, fixing the issue is easy (but must be done; I'll get to that below). All that the giving of that credit requires is that you state what you are doing and provide a working link in the edit summary to the source of the content you are copying or translating from when you save. Doing so gives suitable credit because the page history is available from the linked source's article, where the list of authors may be accessed, and every revision showing who added what, when, is accessible.

Please review Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, and especially the part of that page headed "Translating from other language Wikimedia projects", which is at the shortcut WP:TFOLWP. See also Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. At both pages you will find detailed instructions, with suggested edit summaries, for how to provide proper copyright attribution.

The above though is for your future, similar translations. The issue now is fixing all past translations where you didn't provide proper attribution. For this, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Repairing insufficient attribution, also known by the shortcut WP:RIA. See also Help:Dummy edit, where I list similar material about use of dummy edits to repair past instances of not providing attribution in a variety of contexts. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 07:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know; I'll start working through the articles and adding dummy edits to repair past instances. Doremo (talk) 07:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for jumping on this, and taking care of it! Sorry for how spoonfed the above is; I grow unused to meeting competent people like you in the Wikipedia wilds.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the clear instructions; it makes it easier to fix the issue. Doremo (talk) 14:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

KRŠKO

Considering that you are first mentioning PU (Policijska uprava) and then listing an official source, then you should acknowledge the fact that the official source in Slovenian mentioning PU clearly states that "presumably" or "supposedly" are there buried I don't how many Croats... it is not a fact. And further down that same source it also states that while location is determined, further research is needed. So the numbers of the dead or their nationality are inconclusive. Please correct this or I will add my own addition with the same correctly translated text and the same footnote as yours. Starangel19 (talk) 15:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

RfC notice

This is a neutral notice sent to all non-bot/non-blocked registered users who edited Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics in the past year that there is a new request for comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics § RfC: Where should so-called voiceless approximants be covered?. Nardog (talk) 10:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Emil Costello

Where did you get this date of death? --Orange Mike | Talk 00:20, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the message; I've added two sources. Doremo (talk) 03:55, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Johann_Weikhard_von_Valvasor

I tried too much in one sweep I assume. HOWEVER ... having the "map of croatia" instead of the Hertzogtum Crain map indicates a certain sloppiness - površnost -, ten plus years old and never corrected. etc. Vitosmo (talk) 09:05, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

It was difficult to see what the intent of some of the edits was (adding a blank section titled "Sklici", changing "prevajanja" to "prevajnja" in the url), and other edits contained grammatical errors. Of course, you're welcome to correct errors and make improvements. Doremo (talk) 09:13, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

It was sloppy work all over(red-ears alert). Hvala v vsakem primeru;) Vitosmo (talk) 10:21, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

John Calvin Fiser

I have a vetted book containing records of Fiser’s battles. On December 24, 1864 by special order of Major Gen. Mclaws, Fiser was promoted to the command of a brigade… He also later changed is name to Fizer after the war.

The book was given to me by one of his family relatives. 74.221.178.229 (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome to add the book as a source to the article. Doremo (talk) 03:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your many contributions.. Keep it up! Volten001 ☎ 06:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) Doremo (talk) 06:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Bleiburg repatriations

Hi.

REGARDING YOUR REVERT HERE, this is directly contradicted by the following text: “The repatriations were canceled by the British on 31 May, following reports of massacres in Yugoslavia.” This discrepancy should be reconciled one way or the other but I do not wish to revert without giving you a chance to consider the matter. Yours, 65.88.88.200 (talk) 19:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

There is no contradiction or discrepancy: foreknowledge would certainly precede reports after the fact. You're welcome to add sources and expand the text. Doremo (talk) 02:43, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kievan Rus'. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.--The Impartial Truth (talk) 03:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

You have been reverting edits made by multiple editors. You are clearly the one working against consensus, and your talk page shows that you have a history of engaging in edit warring. Please address your concerns at the article talk page. So far, you have failed to achieve consensus there for your opinion. Doremo (talk) 03:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, can you please explain

Hello, recently you have edited a page named Nicoladoni Branham sign, correcting some of my errors. But I need help with explanation of 2 of your edits 1. Why was "Dr." removed from Carl Nicoladoni's name? 2. Why were the "since"s swapped with "because"s? Is it grammatically incorrect? If so, how?

Sorry english is not 1st language, so a little explanation would help alot in the long run. Also I am editing on mobile so not able to link the page. Thanks! Comfortable East (talk) 20:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Asked and answered at WP:Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 22:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Doremo (talk) 03:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello Comfortable East; the style guidelines for not using Dr. are explained at MOS:CREDENTIAL. There's nothing grammatically wrong with "since", but it has more than one meaning, and so in some cases "because" is clearer. There's a useful discussion here, which concludes with the humorous advice "you can always default to because, since no one finds fault with it". Doremo (talk) 03:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for explanation! And apologies for not knowing the “policy” related to use of credentials. Still new to editing and learning a lot of things. But now that I think about it, the sheer numbers of such policies would be insane, how can one remember all of them? It's overwhelming!

Ah, maybe I'll keep committing mistakes and other editors will have to come and correct me, through that I can learn about the policies one at a time.

Anyway, thanks to you, I learned the nuances of using “because” and “since”!

Have a great day! Comfortable East (talk) 07:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Request for Slovenian IPA pronunciation

Hello. Could you add Slovenian IPA pronunciation to the articles Nuša Derenda, Aleksander Čeferin and Benjamin Šeško? Thank you. 49.228.64.4 (talk) 15:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the message. I'll get back to this in about two weeks. Doremo (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Dornberk

Hello. Why the italics here?[12] I am certain that toponyms never require italics anywhere on the site and I doubt there being any MOS requirement here. --Juicy Oranges (talk) 12:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Foreign toponyms, like Blejsko jezero or Jadransko morje, are conventionally italicized. Doremo (talk) 12:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

It's not a foreign toponym though. English cannot have an Anglicised name for Gorica/Gorizia as is does for Roma (Rome) - so they are both foreign for what it's worth. The only time I see regional names in Italics is when parenthesised and given as actual translations. Though if you look at the last paragraph of the short Movement for Justice and Development (Slovenia) article, Goriška is not in italics. Here's another example which incorporates everything we are discussing: if you look at the first line of Vukanović dynasty, you see there is no italics anywhere over Raška, but there is for the Latin translation. It is assumed that where there is no Anglicised standard, the local names even with diacritics are the accepted English form. Another example is Germany's Baden-Württemberg not in italics anywhere. --Juicy Oranges (talk) 12:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

There is no Anglicized name for Baden-Württemberg and so Baden-Württemberg is the English name in practice. In contrast, "the Gorizia area" (e.g., [13]) or "the Gorizia region" (e.g., [14]) is relatively common for the area that Slovenians call Goriška. Doremo (talk) 13:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

That's purely an alternative. Goriška is also used, and is why the article title is there. It doesn't become relegated to "foreign" because some happen to use the Italian form. --Juicy Oranges (talk) 14:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Some people choose to view Goriška as an English name in practice. Doremo (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I know. So what makes one foreign and the other not? --Juicy Oranges (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Foreignness is often subjective. It may be influenced by diacritics, morphology, government (i.e., -ška is feminine because of an elided Slovenian noun), capitalization issues, etc., as well as whether an English form is available. It's not a black-and-white issue, and it may also change over time. Doremo (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that. And for the record I originate from Mostar, and have lived in Montenegro, Croatia and Macedonia as well as the UK where I've been back and forth since 2000. In short, I have an 80% understanding of Slovene when spoken, and a near 100% comprehension of the written tongue but I'd be lying if I said I could speak it. They all know Serbian/Croatian there and that includes those born after 1991. What I am saying is, would you have any objection if I were to remove the diacritics given the article title, and references to the region elsewhere without italics? --Juicy Oranges (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't revert your change, although I wouldn't choose to do it myself. Doremo (talk) 03:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

That's very decent of you. Here's what we'll do then. As this is such a tame issue that hurts nobody either way, I'll leave it as it is. The reason I began the conversation was to see whether you were aware of some policy that I didn't know, though it seems that this one is open to however editors choose to present it. Kindest regards. Happy 2023. --Juicy Oranges (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you also for raising the issue (what constitutes foreignness). It gives me some ideas for some work outside of Wikipedia. All the best to you in the new year. Doremo (talk) 15:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Poglavja iz zgodovine prekmurskega knjižnega jezika

Prosim, da preberi to knjigo. Prekmurščina v tem obdobju je knjižni jezik, zaradi tega ne smemo pisati, da so knjige v 18. in 19. stoletju narečne knjige. V tem času je bila prekmurščina normirana in kodificirana. Doncsecz^talk 12:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The link goes to a page that says "Prekmurje Slovene ... is a Slovene dialect". Perhaps you intended to link to some other page, such as Standardized Prekmurje Slovene. In any case, there is no contradiction; British English is a standardized dialect of English, Croatian is a standardized dialect of Serbo-Croatian, Ndonga is a standardized dialect of Ovambo, etc. Standardization of a language dialect or variant does not make it not a dialect. Doremo (talk) 13:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Monografija pokriva najpomembnejša poglavja iz razvoja prekmurskega jezika od njegovega nastanka (Temlin, 1715) do prevoda svetega pisma (Š. Küzmič, 1771), katoliškega nadaljevanja (M. Küzmič) in razvoja v 19. stoletju. Pomembno spoznanje je, da se je prekmurski knjižni jezik sredi 19. stoletja poenotil z osrednjeslovenskim; v Prekmurju so tak naravni razvoj sprejeli katoliški pisci, medtem ko so protestanti vztrajali v pokrajinskosti vse do konca prve svetovne vojne. Jesenšek tako odpira aktualno in pomembno vprašanje za znanost, saj v tem prepoznava nastavke za neznanstveno vendsko teorijo, ki jo ovrže z analizo jezikovnih razmer v Prekmurju. Za nadaljnje jezikovne raziskave je pomembno, da Kardoševega vztrajanja pri prekmurskem jeziku v knjigi po poenotenju slovenske knjižne norme ne razlaga za jezikovno zablodo in odklon od pozitivne razvojne smeri slovenskega jezika, ampak njegovo držo sociolingvistično analizira in jo pokaže v luči takrat še prikritih madžarizacijskih pritiskov: ne kot odločitev za Madžarsko in proti Sloveniji, ampak kot odločitev za preživetje protestantizma v Prekmurju. - to je napisano na tej strani. Ne vidim omembe o narečju/dialektu, ampak o knjižnem jeziku. Drugače pa je treba še pregledati to, kar je napisano v monografiji. To je funkcionalna raznolikost prekmurščine kot knjižnega jezika, ki je cvetela v 18. in 19. stoletju. Doncsecz^talk 17:10, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry; this comment doesn't explain the objection to the link to the page on the Prekmurje dialect. Doremo (talk) 17:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Oprosti, ti ne razumeš: knjige, ki so nastale v 18. ali 19. stoletju, so napisane v prekmurskem knjižnem jeziku (literary language). Knjižni jezik je normiran in kodificiran (standard language), torej ni narečje. Narečje ni standardizirano. V tem obdobju so uporabili prekmurski avtorji kodificiran prekmurski knjižni jezik in ne pogovornega narečja. Knjižni jezik ima sprejeta jezikovna pravila. Doncsecz^talk 17:51, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

You seem to have ignored my comment above on standardized dialects. I've added the word standardized to the article on Miklós Luttár because you seem to be focusing on standardization. Doremo (talk) 17:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Doremo!

Happy New Year!

Doremo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 04:29, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 04:29, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Dornberk: meaning of 'Zali hrib'

Hello, Doremo. I hope you're doing well. Could you please confirm this edit? Thank you. --TadejM ^{my talk} 12:40, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

It is correct ("Vas se je do l. 1952 imenovala Záli Hríb iz záli < *zъlъjь 'slab' ..."). Among both laypersons and professionals, confusion between zèl zlà zlò 'bad' and zál -a -o 'fair, pretty' is frequent. The less common root-accented form zál- 'bad' is the result of strengthening of the jer (cf. pásji, bolán, črnomáljski, etc.). I have also seen this confusion with the names Zali Log and Zala (creek). In any case, a thorny hill (Dornberk) is a "bad hill," so to speak. Doremo (talk) 13:01, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I am Isidore Goldberg's great-granddaughter. How can I contact the editor? Thanks

Hello, I am Isidore Goldberg's great-granddaughter. How can I contact the editor? Thanks 2A00:A041:4FA0:600:154E:F911:2A9D:C21D (talk) 11:39, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. You should leave a message on the talk page of the particular article that you are interested in, and then anybody editing that page can respond there. Doremo (talk) 11:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Emona

Hi Doremo,

The Ljubljanica was obviously not called that during Roman times. The river was known as the Sava in the Middle Ages, and the Save during Roman Times (different from the Sava River, just a similar name. Knightoften (talk) 02:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Knightoften (talk) 02:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Please see various sources: "The Ljubljanica (Nauportus) is", "the navigable Ljubljanica River (the Nauportus)", "the rivers Nauportus/Emona (= Ljubljanica) and Savus (= Sava)", "über den Nauportus (Ljubljanica) und die Save zur Donau", "the Sava (Savus), and the Ljubljanica (Nauportus/Emona) Rivers", etc. Doremo (talk) 02:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Ah my mistake, so it was known as the Nauportus. I'll make the change now. Knightoften (talk) 20:12, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello Doremo!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 10:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Vršič Pass

Hello, Doremo. I hope you are doing well. I have been revising the content regarding the construction of the Vršič Road and have seen that you added some material sourced to Siol.net in 2016.[15] I have tried to verify the claim about the road construction in the early 19th century in another source but haven't able to do it. Would it be possible for you to provide another (scholarly) reference for this information to replace the Siol article? (The article contains a spurious claim regarding the number of victims who died in avalanches, so I would prefer to replace it with a better one.) --TadejM ^{my talk} 02:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the message; I've taken care of it. Best regards, Doremo (talk) 11:23, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, this is a good source. I have slightly rephrased the content and hope that you agree with the change. Please feel welcome to edit it further if you deem it necessary. --TadejM ^{my talk} 14:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome. I made a few minor changes. Doremo (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Preimenovana naselja v Sloveniji

Pozdravljen, že kar nekaj časa se ukvarjam z sl:Seznam preimenovanih naselij v Sloveniji, pri tem pa sem glede virov uporabljal (večinoma) tvoja urejanja iz člankov o slovenskih naselij. Zagonetko mi predstavlja Spremembe naselij 1948–95. 1996. Database. Ljubljana: Geografski inštitut ZRC SAZU, DZS, zato me zanima, če jo imaš morda pri roki oz. ali je dostopna na spletu. Hvala za odgovor in LP, A09 (talk) 09:49, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I've never found it online. The database was part of the ASP32 package from Amebis, which I no longer have. It was largely reliable, but some names were misspelled. Now I usually rely on Abecedni spisak naselja u SFRJ. Promene u sastavu i nazivima naselja za period 1948–1990. The pdf also contains some errors, but it is easily searchable and it also provides Uradni list sources that can usually be found on dLib. The SURS site (e.g., Sveti Jurij ob Ščavnici also includes notes on more recent name changes and mergers. Doremo (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your in-depth reply. Will go through each of them and see what can I pull out from them. So I assume that Spremembe naselij is a printed publication that's accessible to larger public? A09 (talk) 10:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't know if the database Spremembe naselij was ever printed, or if it only existed in electronic form, compiled especially for ASP32. Doremo (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

As above article is getting nice along the way, I'm asking you for any source that you maybe previously used or that I missed and it's important. Will still include Slovenian Statistical Office's reports and some local coverage. Many thanks! A09 (talk) 20:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Razširjeni seznam sprememb naselij: od 1948 do 1964: (poimenovanja, združevanja, odcepitve, pristavki, razglastive in ukinitve) (1965) is useful. Krajevni leksikon Slovenije (1968–1980) and (less often) Slovenska krajevna imena (1985) sporadically mention some name changes, but these are not systematic or comprehensive in any way. The article "Krajevna imena: poligon za dokazovanje moči in odraz lokalne identitete" (2005) focuses on renaming due to religious or German/Italian elements in names. Doremo (talk) 02:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Usage of digitalized sources in articles about Slovenian settlements

Hey there, I saw you're using many sources from Austria-Hungary or First Yugoslavia. Many of them were digitalized in Slovenia, either through dlib.si or sistory.si portals. As those sources are valuable to me and offer an insight to settlements' past to everyone. I think we could start linking those up. What are your thoughts? A09 (talk) 20:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, these are good sources that should be used. Doremo (talk) 01:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your input. I went through latest of your Slovenian articles and listed the currently available at User:A09/External links. If any other show, feel free to add them. Stay safe, A09 (talk) 20:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Doremo (talk) 02:08, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Deborah Shelton edit

I have reverted your addition of a date of birth to Deborah Shelton. IMDb is not a reliable source. Please see WP:IMDB for comments. You might also want to read WP:USERGENERATED to see other sources that are similarly unreliable. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Tanks vs. Tank

My mother went to high school at what you moved from Tanks Upper Secondary School to Tank Upper Secondary School. I assure you that everybody referred to the school as Tanks and not Tank...the articles on Paul Smith's College and Miss Porter's School respect the use of the possessive in the formal name so why are you not according that privilege to Tanks Skole?108.29.145.226 (talk) 09:26, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. In English, names of institutions are usually formed with bare modifiers; for example, Churchill College, named after Winston Churchill, or Jefferson High School, named after Thomas Jefferson. (There are some unusual exceptions, such as you mention.) Tank Upper Secondary School is named after Hans Tank, and so it follows the same pattern; the Norwegian name of the school also appears in the lede. Compare the Fridtjof Nansen Institute (Norw. Fridtjof Nansens Institutt) for another example of a well-formed English name. Otherwise, if the possessive were used in English, it would be Tank's rather than Tanks. Doremo (talk) 11:33, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Your deletion of the possessive makes the translation less accurate (just as would be the case if you wrote in another language and deleted the possessive from the names of Smith's or Miss Porter's).108.29.145.226 (talk) 09:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Your edit on Kasper Blond

Hey Doremo,

Thank you for your changes on Kasper Blond; you're perfectly correct about the DATEREF, but your revert of my entire edit due to a minor MOS deviation is unhelpful and an example of Wikipedia:FIXFIRST - deleting ~150 words of prose for using df instead of mf. I've changed the dates and added an in use tag, but please be more considerate.  Frzzl  talk; contribs  14:18, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the message; you're right. Doremo (talk) 14:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)