User talk:Midnightblueowl

Archives
Archive 1 (2006-2011) Archive 2 (2012) Archive 3 (2013) Archive 4 (2014) Archive 5 (2015) Archive 6 (2016) Archive 7 (2017) Archive 8 (2018) Archive 9 (2019) Archive 10 (2020) Archive 11 (2021) Archive 12 (2022) Archive 13 (2023)

Hello and welcome to my talk page!

		Happy New Year!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you remember volunteering to help long - long - ago, but this page finally went GA and I have high hopes of taking it to FA status as well, but I am unsure how. I would very much appreciate your input and guidance on that. I made one attempt at FA years ago and did not succeed - I was completely unprepared - so now I want very much to be fully prepared, so I am asking for help. This is an important article and should be FA quality for all the right reasons. Do you have time to help a fellow editor? Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have now gone and made a formal request for a peer review aimed at taking it FA. I would be thrilled if you decided to do it. No hard feelings if you don't. Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you luck with this, Jenhawk777. I'll try and take a look if I get time, although I'm not very active on Wikipedia these days. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Anything you can do will be appreciated. Jenhawk777 (talk) 14:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Popped up on my watchlist and thought it may be of interest. Ignore if not! Josh Milburn (talk) 12:36, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Josh. Was literally about to log off, but will take a quick look. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Asterix on postage stamps is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asterix on postage stamps until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Fram (talk) 08:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Midnightblueowl!

• 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!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lakota religion 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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Umbanda 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 Sawyer-mcdonell -- Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Lakota religion you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Lakota religion and Talk:Lakota religion/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello could you add your input a possible decision on my GA nomination on Haile Selassie I page, it currently is being reviewed but adding a fellow experienced such as yourself with dozens of GA successful and even featured articles relating to Africa does help upbring this article. And since you are very active i would with my most humble honour ask for you to review the GA nomination, and give some improvements if you see such. CtasACT (talk) 00:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CtasACT: Thanks for bringing this to my attention. If I can find the time, I will. Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your kindness: please do make sure when you have time that if the article needs some fix's you notify me, since the review seems to be stuck with one new user reviewing it for over 20 days no, and the last reply over a week from now. CtasACT (talk) 00:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Lakota religion you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lakota religion for comments about the article, and Talk:Lakota religion/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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Umbanda you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Umbanda for comments about the article, and Talk:Umbanda/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 Sawyer-mcdonell -- Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 19:58, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. – Aza24 (talk) 02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

The article Haitian Vodou you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Haitian Vodou for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 11:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abakuá, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Epiphany and Cross River.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am here to request some of that "tender love and care" you mention as needed for taking an article FA. This is a flagship article and should be among WP's best. Any comment you can make will be appreciated. Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Early life of Mao Zedong is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Early life of Mao Zedong until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Coddlebean (talk) 09:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Haitian Vodou you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Haitian Vodou for comments about the article, and Talk:Haitian Vodou/GA2 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Midnight. I have a question. Sry to bother you in particular. But just because we care deeply about Angela Lansbury's gold star FA status, and her article has the "Dame" above her name (within the infobox). I'm not well-versed in the reasons why. I perused MOS:DAME, and felt that I had a good grasp on it. And it stipulated why, and reinforced it.

Now, on Alan Bates, a user has removed Sir from above his name, and placed it in front of Alan (within the infobox). I personally felt that he is not comprehending the Wikipedia rule. Maybe I am misunderstanding something, but I don't see any discrepancy in his knighthood as to why his shouldn't be above his name as per common Wiki practice, while other actors do. If you could help me articulate it properly, I'd appreciate it. My understanding was that the "in front of" rule meant in the first paragraph, but it still meant the "Sir" goes above within the infobox. --Cinemaniac86^Talk_Stalk 07:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cinemaniac86; I am afraid that I don't actually know what the rules are on these particular issues, but of course standardisation across different articles is ideal. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you're a member of WP:Folklore, would you be interested in joining a wikiproject on oral tradition (which folklore is a subset of)? Kowal2701 (talk) 18:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kowal2701 and thanks for your message. I'm afraid that I'm really just focusing on a few religion-focused articles at present and don't have the time to start working on other topics. Nevertheless I wish you well the project. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the spam Kowal2701 (talk) 06:46, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	You're absolutely crazy for taking on the quality improvements on Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, etc., but in the best way possible. I truly admire your work, and though it may be an understatement, I'd like to offer you this barnstar as a token of appreciation for your efforts. joeyquism (talk) 18:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, joeyquism. I'm afraid that I'm not as active on those political biography articles as I used to be, but it's nice to hear that people appreciate the work. I just hope it isn't all lost to gradual entropy. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Candomblé, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Lazarus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... for reminding me never to waste my time to contribute to Wikipedia. Good luck getting more people to contribute with that attitude. Manscher (talk) 18:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Friedrich Wilhelm Quintscher has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Skyerise (talk) 11:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited West African Vodún, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oyo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- I know you're the major contributor to Aleister Crowley so I thought I would drop you a note about George Raffalovich, one of his associates. A friend of mine is a relative of Raffalovich's, and has sent me some sources (that I've yet to review) about him. I am hoping to create an article about him. I don't think this is a conflict of interest but will mention it on the article talk page anyway in case anyone disagrees. Since you're interested in Crowley I thought you might also be interested in Raffalovich -- if so please drop by the article and help out to whatever extent you're interested. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Candomblé 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Rob Knox.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Candomblé you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Candomblé for comments about the article, and Talk:Candomblé/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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning,

I noticed you reverted all my recent edits to the Rastafari article without any explanation in the edit summaries. Can you explain why? If there are any specific objections, perhaps we can find consensus or I can take it to talk to see what others think. I'll explain my reasoning, too, in case that helps. Firstly, "Rastafarian" and "Rastafarianism" is largely an exonym of which Rastafari disapprove. They tend to reject the idea that it's an "-ism", and the article reflects that. Importantly, most articles highlight when something is an exonym and when the subjects at hand nay disagree with its usage, so this should too, without a strong policy-based reason to do otherwise.

The other edits were mainly for brevity and WP:NPOV. E.g., the following wording is both overly long and minimises the beliefs of the group:

"Central to the religion is a monotheistic belief in a single God, referred to as Jah, who is deemed to partially reside within each individual."

This is over-hedging, since we've already said these are their beliefs, so it's clear we aren't saying their beliefs are true in Wikivoice. We don't need to hold their views in metaphorical scare quotes, since it implies disdain.

Tweaking that to the following is more direct, and less likely to be read as pushing an antagonistic POV:

"Central to the religion is a monotheistic belief in a single God, referred to as Jah, who partially resides within each individual."

(Nor are we overly complicating the language to explain their beliefs here.)

Similarly "a specific interpretation of the Bible" is weak and vague. Specific how? I would argue it also appears to fail WP:NPOV, because it again minimises those views and holds them in an overly sceptical light. It's simply more accurate to move the text about Rastafari being Afrocentric up here to say "an Afrocentric interpretation of the Bible", not least because the interpretation they rely on descends from the Ethiopian movement in early Revivalist Black churches in the Americas. The context of this is well explained over at Black nationalism#Rastafari (and there's a section above it about Bedwardism, which led into Rastafari).

Finally, "Some practitioners extend these views into black supremacism" is WP:UNDUE in the lede because the term "black supremacy" appears only twice in the article—once in the title of an early 20th century book, and once in a section that says:

"There is no uniform Rasta view on race.[104] Black supremacy was a theme early in the movement, with the belief in the existence of a distinctly black African race that is superior to other racial groups. While some still hold this belief, non-black Rastas are now widely accepted in the movement.[108]"

"Widely accepted" versus "early in the movement"/"some still hold this belief" suggests "black supremacy" is the minority view (and an outdated one at that), and therefore this is likely undue given the prominence it has. At best, you could say "Early Rastafari was criticized as black supremacist, though practitioners of all races are accepted by most Mansions of Rastafari today."

I'll start a topic on the talk page with a version of this for others to chime in. That way, we can help get consensus if needed. Lewisguile (talk) 07:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Midnightblueowl! The article you nominated, Palo (religion), 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, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

As a fan of Tintin, I recently stumbled on your work on the various Tintin comics and I felt the need to give this to you. The articles are incredibly detailed and well-written, and to get them all to GA is a genuinely impressive feat. I know it was a long time ago, but I felt it would be remiss not to recognize the amount of effort you put into this subject. Bravo and happy editing! Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 27 December 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/December 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 13:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]