User talk:Editør

nominate

) 03:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Bas Jan Ader

Editør: Are you familiar with the work of Bas Jan Ader? I’m working on an article for “I’m too sad to tell you”. If you can suggest some sources or content, that would be great. I’m particularly interested in the influence this work has had on other artists.--Nowa (talk) 12:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can help you with sources or content for his work. – Editør (talk) 12:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Thanks anyway.--Nowa (talk) 13:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Goldfinch (painting)

On 8 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Goldfinch (painting), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1654 trompe-l'œil painting The Goldfinch (pictured) by Carel Fabritius has been in the collection of the Mauritshuis in The Hague since 1896? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Goldfinch (painting). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rechthuis

Rechthuis in the Dutch village of Bellingwolde was used as a courthouse from 1643 to 1811? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rechthuis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, roadfan!

Hello, Editør, and

welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions

. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please

sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions

, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

If you are interested, there is already a community of users who are

WP:USRD (United States)—and contribute. If your interest is in roads in the United States, there is an excellent new user's guide. There is a wealth of information and resources for creating a great article. If you have questions about any of these WikiProjects, you can ask on each project's talk page

, or you can ask me!

If you like communicating through

WP:HWY/IRC

.

Again, welcome! Imzadi 1979 → 10:40, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Station ownership

Railway stations in The Netherlands that are owned and maintained by NS Stations (which you recently created), should say that under the parameter {{{owned}}} and have {{{style}}} set as {{NS style}}. I think you are confusing train operations with stations and have created a false {{Arriva style}}. It appears to me that all of those stations have white on blue signage on the platforms rather than the train colors you have used. Am I correct in thinking that Arriva does not actually own the stations? Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:00, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right, the railway stations owned by NS Stations should use the colors of NS in their infobox. However, I was reluctant to change the colors back as boldly as I changed them the first time, before figuring out who owns what exactly at the railway stations. – Editør (talk) 18:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If Arriva does not own any stations, then {{Arriva style}} could be redirected to {{NS style}}. That would instantly change the display. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At the Winschoten railway station for instance, the station building is owned by NS Stations, the tracks by ProRail, and the roofed bus station by Arriva, but I'm not sure those are all related owners. In any case, I think your suggestion of the redirect is a good idea and make the edits right away. – Editør (talk) 18:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Threatened Swan

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:De bedreigde zwaan Rijksmuseum SK-A-4.jpeg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:47, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BTW could you indicate at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William III of the Netherlands, whether you support the alternative or not? Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done! – Editør (talk) 23:01, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William III of the Netherlands

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Willem III (1817-90), koning der Nederlanden, Nicolaas Pieneman, 1856 - Rijksmuseum.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:40, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Juliëtte Wytsman

If this is the first article that you have 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.

A tag has been placed on

Juliëtte Wytsman requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does 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. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable

.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

here. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 22:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Please don't alter the format of the entries on the date pages as you have done here. The explicit – is intentional and is part of the article template specified at

I did use the "proper dashes", but changing the code from – to – is fine by me. – Editør (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your exchange of images appeared to me editorially insensitive and so I have reversed it. The pearl-studded portrait needs to be closer to the mention of it in the text. Other images in the article are also placed near discussion of them or of the events they commemorate. It would have been better if you had read the article first.

I don't really see a problem, the portrait is not mentioned in the section it accompanied (and now again accompanies). If there is a good reason for using it there, maybe a brief explanation can be added to the image's caption? I think there should be a portrait in the infobox instead of the coat of arms. Are there any alternative portraits that could be used here? – Editør (talk) 17:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@

Mzilikazi1939: – Editør (talk) 14:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

A portrait in the infobox serves the purpose of visual identification of the person. A coat of arms doesn't serve this purpose as well (if it does at all), even though it can an informative illustration for the article on different places. – Editør (talk) 10:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No infobox wars please. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like there isn't any. – Editør (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I take some issue with your rather curt removal of an otherwise pretty useless infobox. Drmies (talk) 15:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the infobox for Lulu Wang, not removed it. If you see a problem with it, please discuss this further at the article's talk page. – Editør (talk) 16:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you have that backwards: after your change was reverted, it was for you to obtain consensus for the addition. Now that I see the article creator, Drmies, also sees it as unhelpful on this particular article, it's plain that there is no consensus to add it, so I have removed it again. I saw you making other changes to the article that were helpful, but please do not impose infoboxes just because you like them and then demand others discuss before reverting that particular change. ArbCom has ruled them strictly optional. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user talk page is not the place to find consensus on this issue. Please move this discussion to Talk:Lulu Wang#Infobox. – Editør (talk) 16:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May I offer a small piece of advice, please? In my experience your case will always be damaged if you re-revert when your edit has been reverted. It's far better at that point to open the talk page discussion and lay out your reasons. You may also wish to alert any Wikiprojects that are interested in the subject, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes in these sort of disputes. If others agree with you, they'll restore your edit: there's never any advantage in doing so yourself. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to be butting in again, but if you want to bring more eyes to bear on a discussion, you have to alert others in a way that will not give the appearance of distorting the consensus on the discussion page. I mean you mustn't only notify editors whom you expect to be sympathetic to your view; that's why I suggested alerting multiple Wikiprojects above, as that will usually attract an representative range of editors to lend weight to the discussion without unduly favouring one side. I hope that helps in future. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 23:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, so I found this EU survey but I don't think it is the one Ethnologue is referring to, but I do think it is useful. This study cites the number of native speakers of Dutch at 96% which imho seems more correct. But judge for yourself: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_243_en.pdf Gati123 (talk) 09:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I removed your "citation needed" templates from The Holland Times, as all you want citation for can simply be read in the paper, and there's already a link to a page that lets you read old editions online. Also, could you further describe the notability issue? It is the only English-language, national newspaper in the Netherlands, that makes it pretty notable to me. PPP (talk) 15:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my comments on the article's talk page and comment there if you have any questions. – Editør (talk) 16:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You've been around long enough to know that cutting-and-pasting material robs contributors of the credit they're due for their work. Please sort it out.

Please explain what you want me to sort out. – Editør (talk) 07:44, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added two split templates, guessing that is what you meant, which you could have just said in the first place. – Editør (talk) 08:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if following the link I left to the section "Repairing insufficient attribution" and reading 1 short paragraph of text was so difficult for you.

talk) 10:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi Editor,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Vincent van Gogh - Head of a skeleton with a burning cigarette - Google Art Project.jpg is schedule to be Picture of the Day on October 31, 2015. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2015-10-31. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I explained, each one, at the article's talk page.

Before you posted to my user talk page, could you please check, and discuss, at the article's talk page, about the article ?

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for the pleasant manner in which you comported yourself during discussion on the talk page of The Truth According to Wikipedia !! Your polite and professional interactions are most appreciated. Thank you ! — Cirt (talk) 19:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! – Editør (talk)

You're most welcome, — Cirt (talk) 19:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd very much rather avoid violations of

Your own personal POV at The Truth According to Wikipedia is interesting, but irrelevant.

I'd very much like to keep reliance on secondary sources for this article, okay?

Thank you, for taking the time to think about this, and your understanding in this matter to not violate

— Cirt (talk) 18:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What are you referring to? – Editør (talk) 20:46, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let's both avoid "presume" things, on article talk pages, as you put it, in your words. Instead, let's suggest things backed up to sources, or not at all. Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 02:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your vague accusations don't make any sense. – Editør (talk) 11:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you use the word "presume", without backing up your complaints to any sources and fail to present any sources to back up your complaints -- that is what is vague. You later did back up your claims with cited sources, and that is most appreciated, so that particular complaint is now done and  Done and done. Hopefully we can successfully address all of your repeated complaints and move on forwards from here and continue to the future. — Cirt (talk) 22:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, you are twisting things, because you claimed a violation of NOR before that edit. Secondly, I did link the

Nederlandse Publieke Omroep article as a reference. In the artice you can read that the NPO uses the three channels NPO 1, NPO 2, and NPO 3 (which were called Nederland 1, Nederland 2, and Nederland 3 in 2008). Your accusations are unfounded. – Editør (talk) 23:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

In the future, please, I ask of you, to avoid "presume" things, before you back them up with sources. Backing them up with sources is the way to go here, on the talk page and in the article space. Thank you for taking some time to think this over and modify your behavior accordingly. — Cirt (talk) 00:04, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've been feeling a bit under the weather the past 24-hours with a bit of a stomach bug . I'm sorry if my tone recently came off as weird, was suffering from 10/10 pain all day and finally feeling a bit better. Thanks for your helpful participation, it would be appreciated certainly if we could both focus the future discussion on sources and what sources say, rather than our personal opinions, hopefully that's agreeable to you. :) — Cirt (talk) 03:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop revisiting past issues that we had already resolved.

Your disapproval that a "documentary" is a form of "film" is just mind-boggling.

Despite this, I went through and replaced instances of the word "film" with the word "documentary".

This issue was then resolved.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 00:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you have added "done" to a discussion doesn't mean an issue was resolved. You are removing discussions from Talk:The Truth According to Wikipedia and User talk:Cirt which makes discussion and communication hard if not impossible. I would like to suggest that you take some distance and revisit the issues at a later time. – Editør (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are repeatedly revisiting past issues that were resolved to a compromise between both parties. Can you agree that it is factually accurate that I went and removed all instances of the word "Film" and replaced them with the word "Documentary" ??? I would like to suggest that you take some distance and revisit the issues at a later time. — Cirt (talk) 01:42, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And it appears you are ignoring my question, above. — Cirt (talk) 12:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. Please stop your continued postings reversing your prior positions at Talk:The Truth According to Wikipedia - it is confusing and stagnates progress.
2. I have now shown in several DIFFs where you previously agreed to compromises and my good-faith edits -- only to later go back and reverse yourself and say you are now not fine with them.
3. I removed all instances of word "film", and replaced them all with word "documentary". You previously said you were fine with this and agreed this was an effective compromise, at DIFF. Now, you appear to be reversing yourself, yet again, at DIFF.
4. You previously agreed that non-notable people should not be listed, per DIFF. Now, you appear to be reversing yourself, yet again, at DIFF.
5. It now is clear to me that your participation on the talk page appears to have an added motivation of getting me to make good-faith compromises, only to then go back on your word and make new claims that violate your own prior established agreement with these compromises.
6. Therefore, I respectfully ask you to disengage, back away, and stop participation in this discussion about this article, as you clearly have a lack of ability to engage in good-faith compromises when outreaches are made, as I have done, repeatedly, and you then agreed to, repeatedly, only to reverse yourself and go back on your word.

Thank you for agreeing to step away from your repeated reversals and going back on your word in this matter, it's most appreciated,

— Cirt (talk) 12:45, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do no appreciate your continuous accusations, reversions, mentions, pings, premature archiving of talk pages, and complete removals of user talk page discussions. I recommend you to stop taking discussions about facts in articles personal. And I urge you to stop contacting me or posting again on my user talk page. – Editør (talk) 13:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Don't post to my user talk page either. And STOP going back on your word from prior agreements. Thanks !!! — Cirt (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to the matters of fact on the Escher talk page, but I wanted to mention to you here that the tone of your message seems to me needlessly aggressive and uncollegiate. I have worked hard to bring the article up to a good standard, and it is simply unhelpful to a discussion, and in breach of the Wikipedia policy on

Instead of changing anything in the article, I merely asked questions. You may not like the questions or the issues addressed by them, but I don't see how they are in any way "aggressive and uncollegiate". – Editør (talk) 14:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just say, then, as gently as possible, that if a statement is made that tends to upset other people, it is the other people, not the person who made the statement, who can best judge whether they found its tone appropriate or not. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

]

DYK for Astrid Roemer

On 15 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Astrid Roemer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Surinam-born Dutch author Astrid Roemer is the first Caribbean writer selected to receive the highest Dutch literary prize, the P. C. Hooft Award? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Astrid Roemer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Goliath Poldermolen.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on February 6, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-02-06. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. – Editør (talk) 11:30, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Johannes Vermeer - Het melkmeisje - Google Art Project.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on March 1, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-03-01. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove voicing assimilations from the Dutch IPA transcriptions. The transcription was correct, the pronunciation [ˈmɑks vɑn] is impossible in connected speech if you're saying these words as if they were one word (unless you're extremely overpronouncing it). I suggest that you read this excellent free ebook on Dutch phonetics. Martin sv 85 (talk) 03:52, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't forget that [ɣ] can't appear in the word-final position (see [1]) unless a voiced plosive starts the next word (the next word that is pronounced without a pause between it and the word ending in [ɣ]). Martin sv 85 (talk) 03:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your transcription on Blauwestad was incorrect; no Dutch word can end in [d] in isolation - see Final-obstruent devoicing. Mr KEBAB (talk) 13:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The same applies to your transcription on Douwe Bob. Mr KEBAB (talk) 13:19, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't forget to include the stress mark in each transcription of words that contain more than one syllable. Mr KEBAB (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to send me a message each time you make a correction. – Editør (talk) 15:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, just trying to help. Mr KEBAB (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Rembrandt van Rijn - A Polish nobleman.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on April 26, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-04-26. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:09, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your information, per

I've changed two links, the others seem alright to me. – Editør (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They're fine, it's just unnecessary! (Personally, I have CSS styling that alerts me when I have links to redirects, so I always deal with any that matter.) Relentlessly (talk) 12:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added a "clarification needed" tag under the "Models" section today. I could not determine the missing noun in the phrase. I believe this to be the result of your edit. Hope you can help. --LilHelpa (talk) 16:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can, I believe this part was written by User:Quirienraat. – Editør (talk) 23:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:LilHelpa,User:Editør Dear all, Sorry for my late reply. I never saw the notification. The missing noun should be "Model" I assume. This comes from a dutch publication about the mode (https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/doc217.pdf) User:Quirienraat

On 23 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Winschoten railway station, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during World War II, approximately 500 Jews were transported from the Winschoten railway station via the Westerbork transit camp to Nazi concentration camps, where most of them were killed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Winschoten railway station. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Winschoten railway station), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Editør, on this edit: The text saying that her conversion to Catholicism was one of the causes of the constitutional crisis has since been removed from the article. Above I see that you also added one for the Winschoten railway station.... as it happens, I was there just one and a half hours ago! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 21:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have not added the dyktalk template, just ordered the banners per

WP:NL banner. – Editør (talk) 09:42, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør,

Just to let you know, the Featured Pictures File:De pruimenboomgaard te Kameido-Rijksmuseum RP-P-1956-743.jpeg and File:Vincent van Gogh - Bloeiende pruimenboomgaard- naar Hiroshige - Google Art Project.jpg are scheduled to be Picture of the Day on September 5, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the captions at Template:POTD/2016-09-05/1 and Template:POTD/2016-09-05/2. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:28, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanna edit or reverse my edit on the Party for Freedom article please use the talk page. It's well enough documented on the European Election resultS OF 2009 or the dutch wikipedia pages. I also added 5 references. I tried to accommodate your criticism of the edit, but editting my contribution without any discussion on the talk page i would consider hooliganism and report you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BasBr1 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had used the talk page, which you ignored, and I have used explicit edit summaries, which you haven't. If you disagree with the reversion of your edits you should start a discussion. Also see Wikipedia:Edit warring. – Editør (talk) 11:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:De bedreigde zwaan Rijksmuseum SK-A-4.jpeg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on April 29, 2017. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2017-04-29. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed you recently added these tags to the above article. They seem redundant to add to an article already nominated for AfD over notability and referencing concerns. I was just wondering why you added these tags instead of participating in the AfD discussion. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might have addressed these issues before nominating the article for deletion. – Editør (talk) 21:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As noted in the nomination, I attempted to find such sources and did not. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:53, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editør, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on

Thank you for the notification. — Editør (talk) 18:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, just letting you know that I believe I have adequately addressed your notability concerns regarding Sutton Hoo Helmet by Rick Kirby; I've responded on the talk page, and there is an attendant discussion on its DYK nomination page. Please weigh in in one or both of the discussions; if you still do not believe your concerns have been addressed, the probable next step is, as Narutolovehinata5 mentioned, to nominate the article for deletion in order to allow for a more robust discussion. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 04:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not reopening the merge discussion despite Prince of Thieves being banned as a sockpuppet, it puts a different slant on the discussion but there are more useful things for me to be doing. Regards Szzuk (talk) 11:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me about Prince of Thieves being a sockpuppet and being banned. — Editør (talk) 09:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. ...SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 21:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other users were not following guidelines by agressively removing a warning template and prematurely archiving the discussion about the issue. — Editør (talk) 18:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Others were repeatedly removing the notability template, but you were repeatedly adding it. That is correctly described as an edit war, and is subject to the

WP:DR are available if you think you aren't being heard. I agree with you that this archiving of a discussion on March 2 looks premature. EdJohnston (talk) 19:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I have checked the article history and I did actually not intend to do the third reversion (the one without an edit summary, which I would normally always add), but that doesn't matter now. It was very clear from

WP:MAINTENANCEDISAGREEMENT that I was generally not doing the wrong thing here. See also my comment below about the apparent reason why people were so keen on archiving the discussion and removing the template. – Editør (talk) 19:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:MAINTENANCEDISAGREEMENT is a section of a how-to guide, while WP:Edit warring is a Wikipedia policy. The latter takes precedence. EdJohnston (talk) 20:03, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I was not arguing against precedence or policy. — Editør (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Prince of Thieves (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The complaint has been closed per this result but you should be cautious about restoring the notability tag again. It seems consensus is against that. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Other users were ignoring guidelines and repeatedly removing templates during an ongoing discussion. — Editør (talk) 18:44, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Editør, nice to see you back. I think you should be aware that the article has been now accepted for DYK, I won't probably support a merge at this point should one be started for that reason. Prince of Thieves (talk) 18:59, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Very interesting, now I understand why people were so aggressively removing the warning template and inappropriately archiving an open discussion, it was to make it appear that the notability issue was resolved so the DYK nomination could be accepted. — Editør (talk) 19:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that is accurate, the AfD was put forward as a procedural requirement to clear the way for the DYK to be accepted, once complete it has gone ahead. Prince of Thieves (talk) 21:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was just informed above that Prince of Thieves is banned for being a sockpuppet. – Editør (talk) 09:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With this edit in April 2014 you removed the "Further reading" section of the Leeuwarden article, stating "remove Further reading with only Dutch publications". Unfortunately, that section should have been more appropriately entitled "Bibilography", as it contained the bibliographic data for several citations in the main body of text, namely to books by P. J. de Groot, et al., and K. Jansma. The citations were given in short form in the text, so when you deleted the "Further reading" section you removed essential information about sources. On a side note, you might want to think about whether an entry in a "Further reading" section is inapposite simply because it is in a non-English language, or published in a non-English speaking country. For a number of topics the in-depth works were not always published in the English language; Phenomenology (philosophy) comes to mind as an example. Also, not all readers are hindered by monolingualism. --Bejnar (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. You have new messages at Talk:Rick Kirby#Merger from Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Bejnar (talk) 16:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:56, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Overijssel Regions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Dutchy45 (talk) 18:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NL style has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Syntus Stoptrein color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 20:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Arriva Stoptrein stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 19:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've

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 The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 12:42, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply

Hi Editør, I've seen you have made a tremendous amount of edits on the article Femke Bol, I just wanted to know what your goal is and if you needed any help. Thanks. Alexysun (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking in. I've been trying to improve it to good article standard. Two weeks ago, I've nominated it for GA it and I am currently awaiting the (full) review that was started last week as you can see right above your post. I think I need to wait and see for now, but I will let you know if I need help in a later stage. I've just started working on the article Amsterdam Marathon, where there is still a lot to do if that would interest you. – Editør (talk) 22:39, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Femke Bol you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Femke Bol for comments about the article, and Talk:Femke Bol/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 11:42, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you are already considering doing it, but someone with such an impressive curriculum as Femke Bol would look great at a DYK. Do nominate it! The Blue Rider 23:32, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am considering nominating her indoor world record (Did you know that Femke Bol broke the 41-year-old world record of Jarmila Kratochvílová in the 400 metres indoor on 19 February 2023?), or do you have another suggestion? – Editør (talk) 23:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, that one looks great. The Blue Rider 00:59, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've just nominated it. – Editør (talk) 11:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Minor barnstar
	For cleaning up Talk:The TRACK at New Balance. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 02:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply ]

Thanks! – Editør (talk) 12:08, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

On 7 December 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Femke Bol, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Femke Bol broke the 41-year-old indoor world record for the 400 metres with a time of 49.26 seconds in 2023? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Femke Bol. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Femke Bol), 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.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've

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 The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 12:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

WiG Editathon Barnstar – October 2023

		Women in Green Editathon October '23
		At last – here is your barnstar! Thank you for your excellent contributions to GA nomination Femke Bol and GA review of Seraphina Sforza at the WiG "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article editathon. Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 02:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thank you for organizing! – Editør (talk) 10:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Editør! The list you nominated, Dutch Athlete of the Year, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists 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 list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Femke you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Femke for comments about the article, and Talk:Femke/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@The Blue Rider, thank you for your review! – Editør (talk) 18:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editør. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Geardona (talk to me?) 12:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Congratulations, Editør! The list you nominated, List of winners of the Amsterdam Marathon, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists 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 list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 January 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Femke, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Femke is the most common feminine given name of West Frisian origin in the Netherlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Femke. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Femke), 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.

Z1720 (talk) 12:02, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Felt like sending someone a kitten.

Coulomb1 (talk) 16:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) – Editør (talk) 16:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]