User talk:Aristeus01

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Hi all! Found a bit of time to return to language studies, maybe even a bit of art studies as well. If there's anything you'd like to discuss please leave a message here and I'll reply asap.


Istro-Romanian language

[edit]

Hi, hope you're well. An editor added a tag to an unclear bit of info [1] and I saw it had been you who added it a year ago [2]. Do you think you could clarify that bit of the text? Regards, Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 18:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Super Dromaeosaurus! I've rephrased that part, hope it is clearer now. Aristeus01 (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Țara Chioarului moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Țara Chioarului. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 07:40, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Aristeus01 (talk) 12:14, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romanians, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Istro-Romanian, Aromanian and Megleno-Romanian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Romanian National Council

[edit]

Hello Aristeus01,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Romanian National Council for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want Romanian National Council to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

C F A 16:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second Vienna Award and Northern Transylvania pages

[edit]

Hello Aristeus01,

I remember you from the discussion on the page History of Transylvania regarding the maps. There is an issue on the Second Vienna Award and Northern Transylvania pages with the same user, OrionNimrod. He essentially wishes to remove content regarding atrocities commited in Northern Transylvania by Hungarians, calling it anti-Hungarian bias and that the data is not in the source, strange sources or no sources. Which I don't know what to say to this because the edits have sources. He doesn't speak about anything specific that he disagrees with or why, just that everything in the edit is bad overall.

As far as I know, as long as a content is sourced, you need an actual reason to object it.

He even added falsehoods himself such as in this edit where he replaced "measures of terror imposed by the new authorities" with "some cases" for some reason, and changed "Official data" with "Romanian statistics" despite the data provided by the source not being exclusively Romanian statistics but also from the Kingdom of Hungary.

He also added "however Romania was an allied country at that time" for the source [1]. Which (a) the source doesn't say that. (b) it's not even true, Romania was not an allied country at that time.

Or about the population, he is upset that I made a table where I also added Hungarian estimations about the population in 1940, saying that the source says no such thing, when the source does, and not only that, there is also a paragraph on the page using the same source saying the same thing: "Some 1,150,000 to 1,300,000 Romanians, or 48 percent to over 50 percent of the population of the ceded territory, depending upon whose statistics are used".

Given such events, I think he's upset that bad things are said about Hungary regardless of accuracy and don't think he can be reasoned with, but at the same time I remember from the History of Transylvania maps page that reverting one another is bad. So could you offer me an advice on how to go about this? TheThorLat (talk) 23:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheThorLat. You should probably disengage if you feel a discussion would be pointless at this moment. However, discussing content and changes is the only avenue to fix these sort of disagreements and either now or later when you think the discussion would be more cerebral, do open a talk page section for the topic. Keep in mind discussing on the talk page should be done with the aim of improving the article and one should assume good faith from the interlocutor. In other words, don't make it a battlefield.
There are quite a few ways to reach an agreement if the discussion on the talk page failed:
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution
Anyway, I see in the revision history already an uncivil remark. Don't chose the path of making this a personal dispute. Aristeus01 (talk) 07:24, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Super Dromaeosaurus: you were also part of that discussion, what is normally done in these cases? TheThorLat (talk) 23:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samuil Micu-Klein, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Enlightenment and Romanian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Hi Aristeus, hope you're good. Thank you for creating a page for Roja, I had been dragging making one since May 2022 (!), when I made pages for Mihail Boiagi and Constantin Ucuta. As a fun fact, you just gave an article to the final author of the first Aromanian generation of writers (composed by these three, Theodore Kavalliotis and Daniel Moscopolites) that was missing one, so congratulations on that achievement. It's always good to see work for this neglected topic area. Regards! Super Ψ Dro 22:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2025

[edit]
French Wikipedia defends a user against public threats, steward elections, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
"The only time I ever took photos in my entire life".
From patrolling new edits to uploading photos or joining a campaign, you can count on the Wikimedia platform to be up and running — in your language, anywhere in the world. That is, except for a couple of minutes during the equinoctes.
Or just the end of Wikipedia as we know it?
Of "hunters", "busybodies" and "dancers".
User Sennecaster shares her thoughts on her recent RfA and the aspects that might have played a role in making it successful.
What are they? Why are they important? How can we make them better? And what can you do to help?
Liberté, liberté chérie.
Grammys, politics and the Super Bowl.
Straight from the source's mouth. A source is a source, of course, of course!
Turkish linguist wrote about languages and plants; Brazilian informaticist studied Wikimedia projects and education.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 March 2025

[edit]
It's an ecstasy, my spring.
Let them know what you think!
Read this, then forget all about it.
Life on the Wiki as usual!
And WMF invites multi-year research fund proposals
The Oscars, politics, and death elbow for the most attention.
The photographers are the celebrities!
And very unusual biographical images.
Send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When can an RFC be considered done?

[edit]

Hello.

There is an ongoing RFC here regarding Second Vienna Award & Northern Transylvania pages: [3]. The last message was 10 days ago and there seems to be no sign of new messages. But there is already a 3rd opinion. When can the RFC be considered closed and how should the closing of the RFC be approached?

Thank you! TheThorLat (talk) 20:27, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheThorLat! It is unlikely that this the RfC will attract more interest. I'm not sure what the outcome is: did you reach a consensus? In any case, follow RfC recommendations and if you just want to close it then remove the RfC flag. Aristeus01 (talk) 20:58, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think a consensus is a realistic scenario as one of the people involved is OrionNimrod. But the other person agrees with me on 8/9 points. Could this be considered a consensus? for those 8 points while the other one can remain unchanged. Please take a look and tell me what you think. TheThorLat (talk) 21:10, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheThorLat The comment added by the uninvolved user is thorough and clear. I didn't see any strong protest, I guess that means you both are as close to a consensus as it can possibly get. I believe the issue subject to WP:SYNTH is better dropped, something I see you agree with now.
What I would do is close the RfC. If you want to make the recommended changes, go ahead. If there are further disagreements on the same issues, open the RfC again. Aristeus01 (talk) 21:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 April 2025

[edit]
Fellow doctor Osama Khalid remains behind bars for "violating public morals" by editing.
Major changes to core content policy, or still-developing plan for new initiative?
Defeat, or just a setback?
Plus: 30-year anniversary of wiki software commemorated.
Our content is free, our infrastructure is not!
What is to be done?
Advice to aspirants: "Read RfA debriefs", including this one.
Rest in peace.
Snow White sinking, Adolescence soaring, spacefarers stranded, this list has it all!
The Wikimedia Foundation's announcement from Diff.
Gadzooks!
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

[edit]
As always, Wikimedia community governance relies on user participation; plus, more updates from the Wikimedia world
Scrapers, an Indian lawsuit, and a crash-or-not-crash?
And other new research findings.
And don't bite those newbies!
And don't bite those newbies!
Television dramas, televised sports, film, the Pope, and ... bioengineering at the top of the list?
Community volunteers network among themselves and use technology to counter attacks on information sharing.
A look at some product and tech highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation's Annual Plan (July–December 2024).
Hey! At least it is something!
Zounds!
Would a billion articles be a good idea?
There's a lot more to this than you think.
I wonder about having crats, but decided to become one anyway.
Just beautiful photos!
Rest in Paradise.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2025

[edit]
And comment is requested on a privacy whitepaper.
And other courtroom drama.
And how he knows it: all about lawyer letters and editing logs.
Why the language barrier is not the only impediment to navigating sources from another culture.
And QR codes for every page!
When an editor is ready to become staff at a public library (not a brother in a fraternity).
Rest in peace.
The technology behind it, and the other stuff.
Gadzooks!
And more.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 June 2025

[edit]
Admins arrested in Belarus.
Pardon our alliteration!
A get-out-of-jail card!
And other new research publications.
Holy men and not-as-holy movies.
Get your self-nomination in by July 2nd!
After two years RuWiki fails to thrive.
With some sweet-and-sour sauce!
Every thing you need to know about the Wikimedia Foundation?
Egad!
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 July 2025

[edit]
Endowment tax form, Wikimania, elections, U4C, fundraising and a duck!
And how do we know?
Five-year journey comes to healthy fruition.
Wikimedians from around the world will gather in person and online at the twentieth annual meeting of Wikimania.
As well as "hermeneutic excursions" and other scientific research findings.
The report covers the Foundation's operations from July 2023 - June 2024
A step towards objective and comprehensive coverage of a project nearly too big to follow.
Drawn this century!
How data from the Wikipedia "necessary articles" lists can shed new light on the gender gap
Annual plans, external trends, infrastructure, equity, safety, and effectiveness. What does it all mean?
Rest in peace.
Wouldn't it be nice without billionaires, scandals, deaths, and wars?
If you are too blasé for Mr. Blasé and don't give a FAC.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 August 2025

[edit]
Plus a mysterious CheckUser incident, and the news with Wikinews.
A review of June, July and August.
Who is this guy?
Threads since June.
And slop.
It's not a conlang, it's a crossword puzzle.
gang aft agley, an' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, for promis'd joy!
Everybody's Somebody's Fool.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:21, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 September 2025

[edit]
UK Online Safety Act remains undefeated.
Plus Wiki rules, Wiki Spin, and physicists get street cred!
The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.
And other new research findings.
Tis true: there's magic in the web of it.
With the usual mix of war, death, super heroes, a belt, and Wednesday.
It's an easy one.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Nicholas M. Nagy-Talavera, Anatomy of a Massacre