User talk:Buidhe

I take requests for image and source reviews on historical topics at A-Class and Featured level. Please post all requests on this page.

Books & Bytes – Issue 69

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 69, May–June 2025

In this issue we highlight a new partnership, Citation Watchlist and, as always, a roundup of news and community items related to libraries and digital knowledge.

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team – 13:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Snowpack types

On 2 July 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Snowpack types, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that continental snowpacks are associated with more avalanche fatalities than other types? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Snowpack types. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Snowpack types), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Second Saudi–Yemeni War" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Second Saudi–Yemeni War has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 8 § Second Saudi–Yemeni War until a consensus is reached. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 08:08, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hello Buidhe,

I know this might sound a bit emotional… but I just want to say — sometimes I feel invisible here.

I see people being awarded Barnstars left and right, and I’m happy for them — really. But at the same time, I keep asking myself: “Why not me?” I’ve been trying so hard to contribute, to support others, to improve things where I can.

It honestly feels unfair — like everyone’s being noticed but me. And I’ll admit it: it makes me feel a bit bitter and sad, like a dog left out in the rain.

I don’t want pity. I just want to be seen. Maybe appreciated. Maybe even awarded — just once.

If you ever felt that my work deserves a Barnstar, it would truly mean the world to me.

Thank you for reading this far. With respect, — User:Spectra321578 Spectra321578 (talk) 09:07, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Genocides

Hey, thanks for your edits to the list of genocides. More eyes on it is always good given the toll reviewing sourcing takes on mental health and it's easy to see the burnout happening to long term editors of that page. It's good to have you helping out!—blindlynx 15:30, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Serbo-Croatian books has been nominated for renaming

Category:Serbo-Croatian books has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Aca (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

mustafa kemal

Hiya. i looked through the page for mustafa kemal and i noticed some edits by a user named Arsabent, and I have some concerns. While someone heavily editing a page in a short period of time isnt suspicous by itself, im concerned about some of their edits, especially in the section titled "Ottoman Genocides (1913-1922) and Mustafa Kemal", as well as got into a brief edit war with another user. I have not approached Arsabent about this.

they also left a note on one of their edits stating: Unreliable sources and text written by pro-Armenian and biased editors have been removed.

im concerned this person may have, possibly edited the page to whitewash him. they made some edits after you edited the page. ive looked through some fo their edits but Im unsure which parts are possible whitewashing. since you specialise on the subject of genocide, do you think you could double check this persons edits?

sorry this posts rather long and formal. i dont want to start a situation where it turns out i was wrong and ended up making false accusations. Bird244 (talk) 02:55, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"People who died of coronavirus" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect People who died of coronavirus has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 22 § People who died of coronavirus until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Deaths from coronavirus" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Deaths from coronavirus has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 23 § Deaths from coronavirus until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Coronavirus deaths" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Coronavirus deaths has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 23 § Coronavirus deaths until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Torture

I'm sorry if I'm being mean, I just want the history section to be as good as the rest of the article. It's one of the first things that people see, and it's an FA. Suvaborg (talk) 15:53, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beaune-la-Rolande internment camp

Hi @Buidhe, I’m working on improving the Beaune-la-Rolande internment camp article, currently awaiting GA review. I’ve tried to be especially careful with deportation data but I’ve encountered a minor discrepancy between two core sources: Rutkowski (1982), pp. 65–66 states 1,014 deportees: 589 women and 425 men. Klarsfeld (1983), p. 125 gives 1,013 deportees: 588 women and 425 men. I currently phrase it as: "Convoy 15 departed on 5 August 1942, carrying 1,014 deportees: 589 women and 425 men.{{sfn|Rutkowski|1982|pp=65–66}}{{efn|Serge Klarsfeld gives the number of deportees as 1,013, 588 women and 425 men.{{sfn|Klarsfeld|1983|p=125}}}}" Do you think this is an acceptable approach for a GA or future FA, or is there a better way to reconcile this kind of small difference? Thanks very much in advance. -Aeengath (talk) 09:34, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aeengath no worries this kind of discrepancy, probably based on primary sources /lists that differ slightly from each other, is pretty common. What I would do is write "about a thousand", and make a footnote where the exact numbers are attributed to each source. (t · c) buidhe 13:01, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe Thanks so much that’s really helpful. I’ll revise it and add the specific breakdown in a footnote as suggested. Best, -Aeengath (talk) 13:43, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]