User talk:Ewulp

Previous discussions are at Archive 1 (April 2006–May 2007) and Archive 2 (June 2007–Sept 2015).

Please start new discussions below.

Goodmorning, Why did you remove the complete paragrapf on 'The Bombardment of Almeria', the recently discovered counterpiece to Guernica? The paintings are 100% connected, historical, political. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CdGr (talk • contribs) 10:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ewulp. I'm wondering why you so quickly changed my corrections back to your original versions. Let's look at them one by one.

• The standard nomenclature for surnames in French which include de as a separate word is with a small first letter, as shown. Further, the French version of Wikipedia confirms that his family name was indeed de Gas ([[1]]).

• Since the standard nomenclature is de Gas, I removed the word "even" from your statement about de Gas being more aristocratic than De Gas.

• I confess my attempt to correct your hyphen to a dash was also incorrect in terms of Wikipedia's standard. But you should change your incorrect hyphens to the correct form of dash. But I accept that Wikipedia's dash symbol "—" is very (too) similar to the hyphen "–", and perhaps it was I who could not see the difference.

• English grammar requires that the word "either" be used only when two alternatives are being compared, the logic being that "either" is grammatically congruent with "both": you would not write "both from memory, photographs, and live models"; similarly you should not use "either" if there are more than two alternatives. So I removed the word "either" from "either from memory, photographs, or live models". (Incidentally, if there were only two alternatives, the word "either" should be in a different position anyway: "from either memory or photographs", or rephrased as "either from memory or from photographs".)

I thoroughly enjoyed your article ― thank you. I hope you accept that my corrections are not in any way meant as criticisms, but made in the interests of presenting good, consistent French and English usage to Wikipedia's readers. With this in mind, please reconsider accepting them. Cheers. (Harry Audus (talk) 08:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your note. You are correct about "either" (also about a comma you removed); I shouldn't have reverted those changes, which will be reinstated. Elsewhere, you changed an unspaced emdash "—" to a spaced emdash, which as you note is deprecated by our MOS. A hyphen "-" is much smaller and is not used where a dash is needed.

On the subject of Degas's family name, we can't use the French version of Wikipedia as a source; Wikipedia is never considered a valid source for Wikipedia (see

WP:USERG). The source cited in our article is Jean Sutherland Boggs, who writes: "[Degas] is the form of the name of the family of bankers from which the artist sprung (see Sigwalt 1988, pp 1181-1191). His Neapolitan grandfather and the grandfather's children normally used this form", which Boggs says is incised on the family tomb in Naples (Baumann et al., p. 98). She specifies "Auguste De Gas" as the spelling affected by the artist's father, while the artist's brother René preferred "de Gas". Gordon and Forge (Degas 1988, p. 15) tell the same story: Grandfather René-Hilaire Degas settled in Naples after the Revolution and prospered. "It was not unusual for the new rich to want to give the impression of a landed background. This was the case with members of Degas's family, who began to spell their name 'De Gas' or 'de Gas' only in his father's lifetime". Henri Loyrette (Degas 1991, pp. 10–11) confirms this and gives additional details concerning the construction by Degas's brother Achille of a doubtful noble ancestry using the split name. We need to report accurately what our sources say, hence my revert. Ewulp (talk) 10:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I had started to c/e this article yesterday but note that you have been working on it so will leave it be. I'm curious why you felt it necessary to delete the info box I'd added. These are standard in any biographical and many other articles in different subject areas. They are certainly not "unnecessary".Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:26, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes are often problematical in biographical articles, particularly in articles about people in the arts, because they tend to oversimplify the complex and to mislead by undue emphasis. When I said the infobox was unnecessary I was paraphrasing what it says at

WP:ENGVAR and date format which would have needed fixing; as I considered making the fixes I decided it was just as well to remove it entirely. Ewulp (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Thanks for all the watching! Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Poussin) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Johnbod! Happy Holidays to you as well, and best wishes for 2016. Ewulp (talk) 01:43, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2016 will be successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 23:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good wishes, Modernist, and all the best to you and yours in this holiday season and the year ahead! Ewulp (talk) 01:55, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ewulp,

Please see my comments at Talk on Alfred Hitchcock. I'd appreciate discussing them with you there. Thanks. X4n6 (talk) 10:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit at Bosch and the issue if it is "around 25 paintings" or if it should say "20 or 21 paintings". The first one sounds like a guess, while the second one sounds like the editor has given this more precise thought. Changing to this wording may be better than either your or my previous edit. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:56, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, I took a closer look at the sibling page for Bosch on his paintings and a separate gallery for his drawings. The current articles containing the galleries of Bosch painting appears to be missing all of the dates for the various painting at List of paintings by Hieronymus Bosch and I was wondering if you might have the interest to possibly fill any of them in as a start to organizing things there. Is this something which might be possible for you when time allows? Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly; would need to research. Ewulp (talk) 01:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I could not tell if its time for a Wikibreak for you. If you return soon to Bosch possibly you might be able to look at Hieronymus Bosch drawings which does not have the benefit of the dating of drawings which were usefully added to his page for his paintings. It is the five hundred year commemoration for Bosch now and perhaps you could add the dates at some time in the future for his drawings page, if time allows, which looks quite random at this time. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit war. Instead, go to article's talk page and make your case, per

]

Precious anniversary

Three years ago ...

visual arts
... you were recipient no. 504 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I sing in the Reger-Chor, did you know? Requiem (Reger) was first. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:55, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're fortunate I think! Reger is one of my favorite composers. Ewulp (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see the other compositions on my talk? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:03, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016

peace bell

The peace bell by Yunshui: let's make 2016 the year of the reader and of peace! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Four years now! Going to sing Der 100. Psalm in November, in Ghent --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:59, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:17, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another year gone by too fast ... Thanks Gerda! Ewulp (talk) 06:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... and six! Going to sing Nystedt, Brahms and Monteverdi! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:37, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

... and seven --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Guernica (Picasso), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Juan Larrea. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:00, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it is a statue by Gerome, then please fix the caption accordingly. Don't leave it unsaid. Do you know this statue? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 01:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the Musée d'Orsay as seen here. Ewulp (talk) 03:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Augusto Stoppoloni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crystal Palace. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up on the style manual for this absolutely trivial issue (one that, nonetheless, I thought I was fixing). My mistake. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 00:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I may have a language difficulty. Max Reger was the composer, pianist etc, - he performed, composed, published as Max Reger, not as the load of birthnames. - He was a bit unconventional, so the conventional order may be not the right thing to do for him ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see

Kiki of Montparnasse, other similar cases. There's no reason to make an exception here. Ewulp (talk) 02:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Best wishes for the holidays...

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Kings (Gerard David, London) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 10:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply ]

Thanks Johnbod, and all the best to you and yours for the holiday season and the year ahead! Ewulp (talk) 06:12, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2017 will be successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Modernist! Here's to a holiday season filled with cheer, and my best wishes to you for 2017. Ewulp (talk) 00:12, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

Excellent resolution, you hit the nail on the head. Ceoil (talk) 21:37, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ceoil! Ewulp (talk) 02:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why you changed my edits to Picasso's Demoiselles. Not all scholars maintain anymore that it "Is" a brothel. Picasso never said this. Barr never said this, and Blier has overturned this idea entirely. In French "le bordel" does NOT mean brothel (that word is un maison clos). When something is a "bordel" it is a mess (like a messy room) or a complex situation (like the colonial war in Algeria was a bordel). Whitemill33Whitemill33 (talk) 22:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The full explanation is posted at Talk:Les Demoiselles d'Avignon. Ewulp (talk) 03:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why you removed my edits? zingvin. Brueghel's style, more close to Northern Netherlands (including Hieronymus Bosch's and 17th-century Dutch Golden Age art) than Catholic-dominated Southern Netherlands. He was more Netherlandish (northern) than Flemish (southern) in his style (talk) 22:22, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Netherlandish Renaissance painter and printmaker from Brabant" seems a better description of him than "Dutch/Flemish/Netherlandish painter and printmaker from Brabant"; please see the discussions at

MOS:SLASH discourages use of slashes, which are especially awkward in a lead sentence. Ewulp (talk) 01:06, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry for the question because I'm an amateur in arts! But I know that the literature on Rembrandt's life and artistic output is huge and could fill a small library. So why this 'good' bio article lacks extensive sections about Rembrandt’s extraordinary achievement as a draftsman (see notes by David Hockney in his interviews about Rembrandt's draughtsmanship) and as a printmaker (historically, he was the greatest etcher of all time, and one of the greatest and most original printmakers until now).

This good article also lacks an important section about Rembrandt's legacy and influence (both contemporary and posthumous) on art and intellectual world in general, especially in France, Germany, and USA (19th century-20th century). Please read quotes of Francisco Goya (I have had three masters, Nature, Velázquez, and Rembrandt), Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (Rembrandt the Thinker), Eugène Delacroix (Perhaps we shall one day find that Rembrandt is a greater painter than Raphael), Auguste Rodin (Compare me with Rembrandt! What sacrilege! With Rembrandt, the colossus of Art! What are you thinking of, my friend! We should prostrate ourselves before Rembrandt and never compare anyone with him!), Kenneth Clark, and even highly controversial Damien Hirst who thought Rembrandt was not a genius? (I gave up painting by 16. I secretly thought I would have been Rembrandt by then... Anyone can be like Rembrandt... Picasso, Michelangelo, possibly, might be verging on genius, but I don't think a painter like Rembrandt is a genius). And where section about cultural depictions of Rembrandt‎, in novels and films ? Also, there are so few (compare with numerous wiki articles about his paintings) wiki articles about his drawings and prints/etchings!?

zingvin (talk) 22:22, 25 Jan 2017 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator. When something that should be there is missing it's because nobody has written it yet. Wikipedia is the work of volunteers. Ewulp (talk) 00:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The prints have a section which is more or less proportionate with the scale of the article. Johnbod (talk) 11:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you wouldn't do this. I like to work on articles over a period, adding multiple sources & fine tuning. Unscrambling these refs is a pain, & the gain to readers is minuscule. Johnbod (talk) 04:16, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did not notice an expansion was in progress; will suspend action. Ewulp (talk) 05:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Louis-Maurice Boutet de Monvel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carnegie Institute. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:53, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gabriel Talphir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Modigliani. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[2]...Modernist (talk) 12:51, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ewulp I would greatly appreciate your input here:[3], thanks...Modernist (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ewulp, could you keep an eye on this article Salvator Mundi (Leonardo), and it's Talk page. There seems to be much contentious editing going on, especially with regard to authenticity (See latest in Talk). Thanks.Coldcreation (talk) 07:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't on my watch list but it is now—Thanks, Coldcreation. Ewulp (talk) 21:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You seem to have made poor judgement in reverting my edits over at

Hello, Ewulp. 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 Ewulp,

I saw that you added a detail about Norman Raeben in the page of his art teacher. May I ask you from where you drew this information and if know something about Raeben? I am carrying out a research about him and I am looking for any bits of information.

Thank you

Fabio Fantuzzi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabio Fantuzzi (talk • contribs) 23:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The name of Norman Raeben is not familiar to me, so I checked the edit history of

John French Sloan and found that his name was added in this edit LINK by Arno Matthias on January 6, 2007. My edit only moved it to a different position, and I'm afraid I don't have any knowledge of this artist. Ewulp (talk) 03:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2018 will be safe, successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 12:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas Ewulp!!


Hi Ewulp, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
   –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 01:19, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Happy Holiday Season Ewulp and best wishes for the New Year! Coldcreation (talk) 08:36, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing you and yours Ceoil (talk) 20:44, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Ewulp,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 00:35, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello Ewulp, you may be interested in this conversation about the gallery section of Art Gallery of Ontario. Coldcreation (talk) 17:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it looks like it's settled since you posted but I'll add the article to my watch list. Ewulp (talk) 04:03, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. He managed to get an edit into the Britannica article, see Wt:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Editing Britannica.com. Doug Weller talk 18:57, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Related, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Possible IP socks of globally locked and blocked User:Relpmek, Heiro 22:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for edits. Its such a tragic canvas, both her story and his. Ceoil (talk) 08:48, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen the drawing of Fleetwood Pellew before, and am equally delirious and horrified. It must have been really early in Ingres' career that he got away with it. Did Pellew not have a close enough friend to tell him that it made him look like a jumped up little; well you know. Ceoil (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop to revert my Edits in Irish Americans — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:431:D729:B15F:2D65:82FA:2F5E:4E1C (talk) 02:52, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the reason for the revert: You list a mix of regions (the South; New England), states (Montana; New York; North Carolina; Pennsylvania}, and cities (Boston; Chicago) under the heading "Regions with significant populations", and you cite a source that mentions none of the place names you've listed with the exception of Boston. Your selection is arbitrary—for example, why include Montana? According to our article, the percentage of Montana's population that is Irish-American is 14.8. That is less than New Jersey's 15.9%, and barely higher than Iowa's 13.6%, Ohio's 13.5%, or Missouri's 13.2%, and all of those states have much larger total populations than Montana's 1 million (New Jersey = about 9 million, Iowa = about 3 million, Ohio = about 11 million), which means they have larger numbers of Irish Americans. And since all of these other states are geographically much smaller than Montana, they have much greater concentrations of Irish Americans per square mile. This kind of detail is not well conveyed using the infobox format. Ewulp (talk) 05:52, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unaware of any "blanking" that I did, but the power did go out while I was typing. I didn't delete entire sections, which is what the word "blanking" suggests. I can paste back my changes, which are all in the early years section, if you refrain from reverting. Thanks.
Vmavanti (talk) 01:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining that. I reverted because the article was in very bad state. All sections except "Early Life" were missing, which meets the definition of Wikipedia:Blanking, hence my use of the term. I presumed that you were either the victim of a good-faith mishap or your account was hacked. Ewulp (talk) 04:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've noticed you have undone a lot of edits I've made recently with the tag "rv spamming." I'm unsure why the edits have been considered spamming, could you explain so I can fix them? Thank you 128.239.106.66 (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the reverts is that the inclusion of a single work (or a few works) by artist N in a group exhibition does not in most cases merit inclusion in artist N's article. Unless a group exhibition is of singular importance in the artist's career (or, like the Armory Show, a milestone in the history of art) it is probably too trivial to include. In Wikipedia articles about artists you'll notice that if any exhibitions are listed they usually are major solo exhibitions – see here for good examples to follow when editing artist bios.

The fact that every edit you have made adds information about the

WP:COI

for more about this if it applies to you.

In cases such as Henry Ossawa Tanner I didn't revert, because the content you added is not out of proportion or out of context. Ewulp (talk) 01:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that makes sense. Thanks! 128.239.106.66 (talk) 14:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On May 23, 2017 you added new material to the Hans Bohrdt article. In the World War I section you started a sentence as follows, but it is incomplete. I was hoping that you would go back and add the missing material. The sentence below was added during your last edit that day.

"Bohrdt must have felt that fate had indeed been most unkind, for d"

I was adding a photograph to the article today when I noticed the unfinished sentence. Zcarstvnz (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't anything I added; it was part of a sentence in the existing article that got separated from the rest in the copyediting. It's a bit of subjective writing I intended to delete (and have now done so). Ewulp (talk) 00:47, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2019 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 12:48, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 10:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
	Hi Ewulp, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia,    –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 01:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Ewulp, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, talk) 06:31, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply ] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Hi, I want to thank you for pointing out that it is a poem. I somehow didn't see that and just blindly went and capitalized song.

Happy editing, --It's Boothsift 00:52, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ewulp

maybe if you have time you can give again your contribution to the thread that you opened on the Giorgio de Chirico discussion page. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 08:07, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why Leonardo Da Vinci is called Italian when Italy did not exist and instead other historical figures such as Bismark is not called German? What is the convention or criteria? Jacob34T (talk) 23:24, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the conventional description, as seen for instance in the Getty Union List of Artist Names, which is considered authoritative. In Wikipedia, Renaissance artists from Venice (e.g., Giorgione, Titian, Tintoretto), Siena (Stefano di Giovanni), Parma (Parmigianino), Florence (Michelangelo), and elsewhere are called Italian according to art-historical custom. Ewulp (talk) 23:58, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok,thanks. But, why in the article of Christopher Columbus he is called Italian if he was Genoese? Jacob34T (talk) 02:16, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The editors are following reliable sources. The matter has been discussed many times over the years on the article's talk page (see here and here for example); please search the archive on the talk page for more. Ewulp (talk) 03:56, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a problem with a particular edit, please don't revert a long list of edits, because that suggests you object to every edit. Discuss that particular edit that you have a problem with rather than reverting everything. That's how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Now, I have a book by Scott Yanow called Jazz Singers: The Ultimate Guide that lists Virginia Liston's birth as 1890, not circa 1890. Do you have a problem with that?
–Vmavanti (talk) 13:41, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was the opposite of "reverting everything". Here is a diff showing your changes; here is a diff showing that my edit preserved all your changes except that I restored "circa" or "about" in front of the YOB and restored "it is thought that" in front of "she was born in Louisiana". You introduced an error by changing "single" into "song"; I edited that for clarity and added details and a source. By rough count, that leaves at least 20 other changes you made that I thought were fine and did not revert. You, on the other hand, reverted everything, including improvements entirely unrelated to your edits: a new reference, two grammar fixes, movement of some song titles from the lead to a paragraph where some context is provided, and correction of longstanding punctuation anomalies to bring the article into compliance with

MOS:LQUOTE

.

Blues Who's Who by Sheldon Harris gives Liston's YOB as "c1890 (unconfirmed)". Here is what some books published more recently than Yanow's say: Eagle & LeBlanc (2013), Blues: A Regional Experience has "Virginia Liston (v) (Louisiana, about 1890—St. Louis, Missouri, reportedly June 1932)" (p. 513); Jasen & Jones (2013), Spreadin' Rhythm Around: Black Popular Songwriters, 1880-1930 says "c.1890–1932" (here); and Taft (2013), Talkin' to Myself: Blues Lyrics, 1921-1942 says "born around 1890" (p.378). Finally, the source I cited, Abbott & Seroff (2017), The Original Blues: The Emergence of the Blues in African American Vaudeville, is a scholarly book that evidences considerable serious research and provides more detail about Liston's life than any other source I've seen—and concludes that her birth year and birthplace are uncertain (p. 178).

Reliable sources emphasize that many details about Liston's early life are unknown. I don't think we do our readers a service by pretending the questions don't exist. Ewulp (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not life or death to me, but I do know what I'm doing. It's wrong to fall into the neoteric trap of assuming recent sources are correct while older sources are wrong simply because they occur later in time. It's like saying progress is built into time, i.e. what I think today, wrote today, did today, is automatically better than what I thought, wrote, did yesterday. Tuesday is better than Monday? Don't link big cities or states, so unlink New Orleans and Louisiana. That goes for infoboxes, too. What's the advantage in using a limp-wristed construction like "It is thought"? Why is "Virginia Crawford" in bold type"? Why is there a comma after "born in 1890"? The comma after "in local theaters in 1900" is a comma splice. Why remove the periods from U.S.? US is "us" capitalized. Why use "apparently"? You seem to like ambiguity. It either happened or it didn't. Don't speculate. This isn't the place for speculation. If something is known, source it; if not, don't say it. Encyclopedias are about facts. You tend to use journalistic construction and diction and National Enquirer insinuation. Most people do. See Quack this Way by David Foster Wallace. "Subsequently". There's another bugaboo. If you deleted that, would you lose anything? No. It's a word people use because other people use it. See Wallace again. Why remove the periods from Washington, D.C.? There's another comma splice after "Harlem theaters". Why fear the Oxford comma? If you hate Oxford, call it the serial comma. No reason to fear it. Ambiguity is always removed when you use it. So use it. Should be "Gray, Liston, and Williams". I don't understand the timidity regarding that usage. You used apposition incorrectly. When you wrote, "Several of her songs contained sexual innuendo, such as "Rolls Royce Papa", Rolls Royce is modifying innuendo. It should modify "songs". So: "Several of her songs, such as Rolls Royce". By the way, many or most blues songs contain sexual innuendo. I don't see the point in mentioning it here other than titillation. I worked for a radio station that had a blues program. Check your use of "remarried". See the ambiguity in the word? Click on my name for usage tips.
–Vmavanti (talk) 12:40, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many newer and older sources (e.g., Harris) say that Liston's birth year is not known. "It is thought" means "this is what reliable sources say is likely, or widely believed, but they have reservations". Wikipedia reports what sources say. "Virginia Crawford" is correctly bolded per

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So are you saying that Category:Otto Dix shouldn't exist? Editor2020 (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OCEPON says "Eponymous categories named after people should not be created unless enough directly related articles or subcategories exist ... Practically, even most notable people lack enough directly related articles or subcategories to populate eponymous categories effectively but Category:Barack Obama, Category:John Maynard Keynes and Category:Albert Einstein are some exceptions." Category:Otto Dix contains three articles; numbers don't get much smaller than three. Ewulp (talk) 00:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

OK. So should we delete the Category:Otto Dix? Editor2020 (talk) 04:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It should be deleted. Ewulp (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind revisiting when you have time; think all of your suggestions and advice have been (finally) implemented, but I dragged in responding, the nom may be on the verge of overstaying its welcome with the co-ords :) Ceoil (talk) 20:12, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing you a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Mystical Nativity (Filippo Lippi) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 16:39, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas Ewulp
	Hi Ewulp, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia this past year,    –Davey2010talk 00:45, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2020 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 02:13, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...are always worth their weight in gold. And when it comes to gold, Santa lugs his around molded into the shape of a sleigh. Only the elves, working like dogs on the toys, have it better! May Christmas and this holiday week find you and your loved ones be as happy as Santa's elves who are given a few days off before starting again on next years crop. Enjoy! Randy Kryn (talk) 04:28, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Happy Holidays Ewulp and the best ever New Year! Coldcreation (talk) 10:04, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Ewulp,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010^Talk 00:14, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Edward Hopper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nyack (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:39, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]

Dear Ewulp,

We represent Harold Lloyd Entertainment, Inc. (“HLE”). Among other things, HLE is the owner of the copyrights and all rights, title and interest in and to the movies of Harold Lloyd (including but not limited to The Freshman) and the publicity rights of Mr. Lloyd, one of the most famous and popular actors and comedians of the silent era. We apologize for contacting you out the blue, but we are reaching out to you at the recommendation of legal counsel at the Wikipedia Foundation, who has suggested that we inform relevant editors of the official Wikipedia entry for Harold Lloyd, found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Lloyd, about the serious concerns that have arisen regarding the unfounded allegations of racism and support for racially restrictive covenants that have been leveled against Mr. Lloyd therein.

Specifically, we are deeply troubled by the last paragraph in the Harold Lloyd biography section entitled “Personal Life” and its assertion that “[I]n the early 1940s, Lloyd supported a neighborhood improvement association in Beverly Hills that attempted to enforce the all-white covenant [in place in Beverly Hills] in court after a number of black actors and business had begun buying properties in the area,” (the “Allegation”).^[1] As detailed below, this Allegation is wholly without any factual basis. In the process, it not only unfairly besmirches the good name and reputation of an iconic Hollywood legend, but it is also has caused and continues to cause significant injury to HLE’s existing and prospective business relationships because of the very serious charges of racism that it raises—charges that are (rightfully) toxic in the public arena.

We understand, based on the Talk file for the portions of the Lloyd biography pertaining to racially restrictive covenants, that you have raised similar concerns about the references to racially restrictive covenants and Mr. Lloyd’s alleged support therefor. As you wrote in the Talk Notes: “The article shouldn't exaggerate Lloyd's role here; these covenants were unfortunately common throughout the US at the time, and Lloyd (as far as we can tell) was not one of the eight white Sugar Hill plaintiffs who sued to have their black neighbors evicted in the 1944 [sic] case that Judge Thurmond Clarke decided.” ^[2] Indeed, there are no facts whatsoever establishing any link between Harold Lloyd and the Sugar Hills litigation or any of the plaintiffs therein and, as detailed below, any allegation of racism against Mr. Lloyd is wholly at odds with any facts we know about his life and how he lived it. As such, we are writing to kindly request that you might consider, in the interest of accuracy and fairness, to correct the problematic portion regarding said Allegation and the surrounding discussion regarding racially restrictive covenants. Your consideration of this request is deeply appreciated.

Allow us first to begin by thanking you for the unparalleled public service that you, through Wikipedia, provide to the world. Wikipedia is an invaluable public resource that has democratized knowledge and leavened disparities in access to social, political, cultural and scientific information and its many volunteers, such as yourself, play a vital role in that. As such, Wikipedia has represented a transformative tool for education, transparency, and, above all, the truth in a time when so-called ‘Fake News’ dominates the Internet.

With Wikipedia’s dedication to accuracy, proper sourcing and careful research in mind, the detailed analysis below plainly demonstrates that the Allegation against Mr. Lloyd Harold is without substance or reliable support. And, unfortunately, the Allegation tarnishes the legacy of an American legend and causes direct economic harm to HLE and its intellectual property and contractual interests. As you know, charges of racism and bigotry can impact the way in which a public figure is viewed and it can shatter careers and legacies (see, e.g., Paula Deen, PewDiePie, Kate Smith, John Wayne and Morrissey). When these allegations are without basis, lives are fundamentally altered both unjustly and unfairly. In this particular case, the Allegations have already threatened HLE and, among other things, interfered with its existing and prospective business relationships. Specifically, HLE is under contract with certain companies for a forthcoming original, feature-length animated motion picture based on Harold Lloyd and his films. This project is now in jeopardy as a direct result of the unfounded Allegations. These companies have put HLE on direct notice that investor concerns regarding the Allegations are significantly curtailing the ability of the movie’s producers to raise the necessary funding for continuing support of the project.

In the Wikipedia entry for Harold Lloyd, the Allegation is footnoted with a single citation to a single source—a book by Stephen Grant Meyer. The Talk File for the “Restrictive Covenant” section of Harold Lloyd’s entry on Wikipedia,^[3] further expands on the purported support for the Allegation by referencing “at least three reliable sources for Lloyd’s involvement in presenting the restrictions.” Yet these sources—books by Stephen Grant Meyer, Anima Hassan and Nancie Clare—do not provide any credible support for the proposition that Mr. Lloyd supported racially restrictive covenants and efforts to keep blacks and Jews out of Beverly Hills or his neighborhood. Thus, the Allegations violate Wikipedia’s commitment to accuracy and verifiability. Given the particularly incendiary nature of the claims—claims that easily fall under Wikipedia’s policy for “exceptional claims”—Wikipedia’s own burden of requiring multiple high-quality sources supporting the proposition is simply not met.

First of all, Nancie Clare’s book THE BATTLE FOR BEVERLY HILLS (St. Martin’s Press, 2018)^[4] states only that Lloyd “joined a neighborhood association whose goal was to enforce the city’s restrictive covenants that prohibited nonwhites, including Jews, from buying or renting property in the city,” id. at 195—an aspersion that could be cast upon millions of Americans at a time when both political major political parties—both Democrats and Republicans—supported such measures. More importantly, the book does not remotely suggest that Mr. Lloyd actually supported any efforts to enforce restrictive covenants (the proposition for which it is relied upon); rather, it simply claims that Mr. Lloyd was a mere member of a group that supported restrictive covenants. Above all, it does not provide any citation to substantiate its accusations and it does not provide any details regarding the neighborhood association in question or its identity.

Meanwhile, both the Meyer and Hassan books only restate claims from a single, 70-word article that appeared in the Chicago (Daily) Defender on July 28, 1945 (the “Article”). Specifically, Stephen Grant Meyer’s book, AS LONG AS THEY DON’T MOVE NEXT DOOR (Rowman & Littlefield, 2001),^[5] alleges that “one of the white home owners who led the challenge to black occupancy in Beverly Hills was also an actor: the silent-screen comedian, Harold Lloyd.” Id. at 76. Yet the only citation it makes that might support any such speculation is to the Chicago Defender Article.

Amina Hassan’s book, LOREN MILLER: CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY AND JOURNALIST (University of Oklahoma Press, 2015),^[6] fares no better. It claims that “In 1941, . . . Harold Lloyd, famous for hanging from the hands of a skyscraper clock tower in Safety Last! (1923), led the drive to keep blacks and Jews from moving into nearby Beverly Hills. Id. at 132. To support this proposition, Hassan’s book also cites only to the Chicago Defender Article. And, to make matters worse and to cast the rigor of Hassan’s research into further doubt, she erroneously cites the Article to date the relevant events as taking place in 1941 when, in fact, the Chicago Defender has them taking place in 1945.

In effect, therefore, the Allegations against Mr. Lloyd solely emanate from the Article. All of the remaining sources that state the Allegation are simply mimicking the claim by citing back to the Article. Thus, to assess the reliability and accuracy of the Allegation, it is necessary to examine the Article. As even the most cursory review of the Article demonstrates, the Chicago Defender piece neither credibly asserts the Allegations against Mr. Lloyd nor does it have any support from other sources.

The Article, entitled “Harold Lloyd Heads Anti-Negro Drive,” appeared on the front page of the Chicago (Daily) Defender on July 28, 1945 and its total content of 70 words reads as follows: "The famous film comedian of the silver screen was reported as the prime instigator of the new Beverly Hills restrictive covenant drive. A recent letter, sent out over the name of the famous actor, called for a meeting of residents here to sign restrictive covenants. The letter, sent out through offices of the Chamber of Commerce, was disclaimed by company officials who admitted that Lloyd had been elected president recently."

While it is true that Mr. Lloyd, at one time, served as the head of Beverly Hill’s Chamber of Commerce, the remainder of the Article is filled with ambiguities, inaccuracies, unsupported speculation and sophistry:

1. The Article engages in pure conjecture and succumbs to salacious innuendo in remarking, vaguely and in the passive voice, that Mr. Lloyd “was reported as the prime instigator of the new Beverly Hills restrictive covenant drive.” Notably, therefore, the Article fails to name any sources for its idle and unsupported tabloid gossip. For example:
2. The Article refers to a purported letter that was sent out by the Chamber of Commerce which the Article ties to Harold Lloyd. But, notably, it does not say the letter was written or drafted by Harold Lloyd, or even approved by Harold Lloyd (it merely alleges that it was “sent out over the name” of Harold Lloyd).
3. The Article fails to quote any actual contents of the purported letter. As such, its characterization of the letter and its contents are rightfully suspect and unsupported.
4. The Article only states the letter “called for a meeting of residents . . . to sign restrictive covenants.” As such, the Article does not state, outright, that an actual position was taken in the letter (i.e., that restrictive covenants are good or bad) and, quite possibly, the letter, if it existed, may have only provided information that such a meeting was taking place.
5. The Article is unclear as to when the letter was sent out (referring only to the vague characterization of “recently”), a particularly odd omission since official letter are always dated. As such, the Article’s leap in logic—that Harold Lloyd was recently made president of the Chamber of Commerce and that, therefore, the letter must be reflective of his point of view, is pure speculation. Indeed, the Article does not expressly spell out that the letter was written or sent out while Mr. Lloyd was, in fact, President.
6. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the Article itself acknowledges that the purported letter’s authenticity and accuracy in reflecting the viewpoint of the Chamber of Commerce (and, by extension, Harold Lloyd, who is being tied to the views of the Chamber of Commerce by virtue of his presidency thereof for a period of time) was contemporaneously and directly disputed and called into question. As the Article admits, “The letter, sent out through offices of the Chamber of Commerce, was disclaimed by company officials.” This sentence—the concluding one in the Article—renders the salacious, unsupported and speculative headline “Harold Lloyd Heads Anti-Negro Drive” wholly bunk and makes any misrepresentation of this Article as historical truth wholly inappropriate.

It's also worth noting that the statements surrounding the sentence containing the Allegation in Mr. Lloyd’s Wikipedia page are also demonstrably false or inaccurate. Specifically, Lloyd’s Wikipedia page states that “Greenacres [Mr. Lloyd’s home] was built in the 1920s in Beverly Hills, one of Los Angeles’ all-white planned communities. The area had restrictive covenants prohibiting non-whites and Jews from living there unless they were in the employment of a white resident (typically a domestic servant). In the early 1940s, Lloyd supported a neighborhood improvement association in Beverly Hills that attempted to enforce the all-white covenant in court after a number of black actors and business had begun buying properties in the area. The association lost its suit in a 1944 decision by Federal Judge Thurmond Clarke, and in 1948 the United States Supreme Court declared in Shelley v. Kraemer that all racially restrictive covenants in the United States were unenforceable.”^[7] Yet these sentences, and their citing sources in the Wikipedia page, are riddled with errors.

Among other things, this section contains the following inaccuracies:

1. The lawsuit to which the sentences refer challenged racially restrictive covenants in Sugar Hills, which is not in Beverly Hills, but in the West Adams area of Los Angeles. See Victory on Sugar Hill, TIME MAGAZINE (Dec. 17, 1945) (referring to Sugar Hills as being in the West Adams area of Los Angeles).^[8] As such, there was no direct link between the lawsuit and Greenacres (which was in Beverly Hills), Harold Lloyd, or any neighborhood improvement association in Beverly Hills;
2. The “federal judge” handling the case was, at the time, only a state Superior Court judge for Los Angeles County (Judge Thurmond Clarke did not receive his commission as a federal judge until his appointment to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California in the 1950’s). See Victory on Sugar Hill, TIME MAGAZINE (Dec. 17, 1945) (noting that Thurmond Clarke was a Superior Court judge, not federal judge);^[9]
3. There was no West Adams Improvement Association or any other kind of homeowners association in the lawsuit;
4. The eight plaintiffs in the lawsuit were merely local citizens not officially representing any community; and
5. The decision was issued in 1945, not 1944). See Victory on Sugar Hill, TIME MAGAZINE (Dec. 17, 1945) (reporting that the decision occurred in late 1945, not 1944).^[10]

This lack of rigor and precision in the page authors’ investigations and research highlights the unreliable nature of the claims contained therein.

While both Los Angeles and the United States have provided unparalleled opportunities to individuals of all races, there is no doubt that the city and our country, as a whole, share a tragic history of bigotry and racism as well. The legacy of racially restrictive covenants continues to haunt us to this very day, as, among other things, it has directly contributed to the vast disparities of wealth that still exist between white and African-American families. But there is no evidence that Harold Lloyd led efforts to prop up the use of racially restrictive covenants or even supported them at any time.

Indeed, everything the historical record contains about Harold Lloyd’s life otherwise suggests that such covenants would be contradictory to his personal values and the way he chose to live. For example, as Wikipedia’s Harold Lloyd page acknowledges, Harold Lloyd was an active and honored Freemason and Shriner.^[11] As a Freemason, he earned the Rank and Decoration of Knight Commander Court of Honor in 1955 and was coroneted an Inspector General Honorary, 33°. As a Shriner, he was selected as the Imperial Potentate of the Shriner’s of North America in 1949-50. Non-discrimination and color blindness are core, essential values of both the Freemason and Shriner organizations, and have been so, long before such causes were popular or even widely accepted. As Harold Lloyd himself said in a 1949 radio interview regarding his involvement with the Shriner’s:

The Shriners have these marvelous hospitals, all over North America, that do nothing but cure little crippled children, and that's without regard to race, creed, or color. You can go into one of their hospital wards and see little colored children, little white children, all there just the same, there's no discriminating at all, and it's 100% charitable, and the Shrine does not seek aid outside. It's all done by the Shrine and of course that's one of the things they look with great pride upon. It's marvelous work.^[12].

Not only would support for racially restrictive covenants be inconsistent with Mr. Lloyd’s lifelong values, but it is also critical to note that there are no other sources that independently verify these incendiary Allegations against Mr. Lloyd. And, in fact, the individuals who know the most about Harold Lloyd’s personal history, life, values and belief strongly deny the Allegations’ veracity. Specifically, declarations sworn under penalty of perjury from Suzanne Lloyd, Annette Lloyd (unrelated to Mr. Lloyd), and Richard Simonton explain their relationship with and to Mr. Lloyd, the basis of their expertise and personal knowledge about Mr. Lloyd and their unequivocal certainty that Mr. Lloyd was never supportive of restrictive covenants and, in fact, found them morally repugnant and inconsistent with his values. Among other things:

2. Suzanne Lloyd, Mr. Lloyd’s granddaughter, was actually raised by Mr. Lloyd and his wife and, as a result, lived with him for over twenty years and she notes that “she never once heard Harold make a single derogatory remark about anyone based on their race, creed, or religion and I never witnessed him, or had knowledge of him, ever exhibiting any prejudice on the basis of race, color, creed or religion,”^[13] and states that the allegations of racism are “utterly inconsistent everything I know about the man that raised me,”^[14];
3. Annette Lloyd, a noted historian and expert on the silent-era and the life and work of Harold Lloyd,^[15] declares that, “In the 40-plus year that I have studied, the allegation of racism published in the Chicago Defender in July of 1945 is the only instance I have ever encountered in which HL was mentioned in this light or accused of any sort of intolerance or prejudice,”^[16] and that, in light of what she knows about him and his life, the allegations of racism in the Article “are wildly implausible and, also, wholly unsupported by, and inconsistent with, the historical record, Lloyd’s personal values, and the manner in which he conducted his life,”^[17] as evidenced by, among other things, his political and charitable affiliations,^[18] and his work, where he regularly hired African-Americans during an era otherwise characterized by segregation and bigotry^[19];
4. Richard Simonton, one of the Mr. Lloyd’s last surviving friends, swears, under penalty of perjury, that through his many decades spent with Mr. Lloyd,^[20] he “can say with confidence and certainty that I never witnessed him indicate or express any kind of prejudice--never an unkind word about anyone,”^[21] and that, among other things, Mr. Lloyd’s extensive involvement with, and commitment to, the Shiners (and their core beliefs kindness, tolerance, and colorblindness) would make any support of racially restrictive covenants utterly inconsistent with his charitable work and the values he embraced through his life.^[22]

Finally, the Beverly Hills Historical Society recently unearthed archival video of Harold Lloyd joyously visiting a sick African-American child and embracing him and putting his iconic spectacles on him. The child’s face lights up and the warmth in this interaction is clear to any observer. The video is utterly inconsistent with any view that Mr. Lloyd harbored any prejudice, let alone any virulent racist sentiments. We encourage you to watch the video, which you can download.^[23]

All told, therefore, the allegations that tie Mr. Lloyd to support for restrictive covenants, which are published as fact on Wikipedia’s Harold Lloyd page, ultimately all derive from a single 70-word Article that repeated unsourced tabloid gossip without verification or quotation. The same Article acknowledged that the very position supposedly attributed to Mr. Lloyd through the Chamber of Commerce had been disputed contemporaneously by the Chamber of Commerce itself.

As such, we are kindly requesting your action to correct and remove the Allegations from Mr. Lloyd’s page once and for all in order to serve the interests of accuracy and reliability that Wikipedia has always sought to uphold and to mitigate the tremendous damages that are being done to Mr. Lloyd’s legacy.

We appreciate your consideration of our request, which we do not make lightly, and we look forward to hearing back from you shortly. We’re also happy to provide additional details and documents if that might be helpful.

HLE1893 (talk) 01:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the author of the paragraph in question, which was added by an IP January 3, 2016, although I have reverted attempts to remove it several times. As explained on the article's talk page, this is "largely on procedural grounds: edit warring isn't the way to edit, and repeated invitations to discuss the matter on the talk page have been ignored". As you will see by these diffs [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], this matter is of interest to the Wikipedia community. I encourage you to post this request at Talk:Harold Lloyd. Ewulp (talk) 03:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• HLE1893 has been indef blocked for making legal threats. — Maile (talk) 02:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ewulp

Sorry to bother you again with this but I have found that the Salvador Dali article had Feature Article status on 5 Sep 2006 and was almost exclusively in U.S. English at that time. I therefore propose to progressively revise the article into U.S. English in the absence of any consensus to the contrary. My apologies for the confusion.

here... At the time I removed it the gallery had 17 images in it. Seemed like a lot of images for such a short article. The iteration that you restored - the 6 images - looks much better. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 01:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that ... no worries! Ewulp (talk) 04:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Magi (Jan Mostaert) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 12:11, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply ]

	Merry Christmas Ewulp
	Hi Ewulp, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,    –Davey2010Talk 19:51, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Ewulp! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a

Spread the

WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings

}}

Happy Holidays

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2021 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 12:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes

	To Ewulp!
	Wishing you, your family and friends the best holiday season filled with health, wealth and wisdom for 2021. Coldcreation (talk) 10:00, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes for the holidays

		Season's Greetings
		Seasons greetings. Hope you and yours are safe and well during this rather bleak period, though I think we will get through it. Best Ceoil (talk) 02:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Ewulp!

Happy New Year!

Ewulp,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010^Talk 00:28, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello Ewulp. Your name was mentioned in a dispute about the

]

WP 20

Thank you for good wishes! - Happy Wikipedia 20, - proud of a little bit on the Main page today, and 5 years ago, and 10 years ago, look: create a new style - revive - complete! I sang in the revival mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

... and today Jerome Kohl, remembered in friendship --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible for you to check this problem out [9]?...Modernist (talk) 20:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just so wanted that photo to be of Esther Bigeou and some evidence on the web, Syncopated Times in particular, backed it up. But of course as the file states, no documentation. I overstepped. Sorry and thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. It's a shame the few verifiable images of her seem to be from old newspapers & are generally grainy. Ewulp (talk) 00:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ewulp!

I grant you may be right that an infobox may not be worth the trouble on the "Degenerate Art" page, though I was editing it down to focus more on the art than the exhibition. But given that it is about the art, and not about the exhibition, I think you are in error to lead with an image of the exhibition.

Possibly, although I think a good case against leading with an image of a particular work of art is that "degenerate art" is not an artistic style but rather a pejorative term used by the Nazis to describe whatever Hitler didn't like. As such, the term is more about Nazi art policy than about the art itself. The current lead image, which shows a few works of art and a few Nazis, ties this together. Ewulp (talk) 04:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for your corrections in the edits I made in

Can I ask why you rewrote what I posted on the Baby Esther discussion page? [10]. Inserting the bit about liParamount's gigantic ke? What was the point of that?

No idea how that happened. Ewulp (talk) 08:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there I notice that Wilafa has recently added images of some of Dalí's more famous works. I understood from previous discussions that these were under copyright and wikipedia does not have permission to use them. Do you know whether this is still the case? It would be great if we could use more images of selected works. Thanks Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:22, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a safe guess that they are under copyright. The Wikipedia copyright enforcers usually take a dim view of using such images of an artist's work in a biography. In the case of (for example) Soft Construction with Boiled Beans (Premonition of Civil War), the jpg is allowed in the article Soft Construction with Boiled Beans (Premonition of Civil War) because the painting is the subject and is discussed in some detail; its use in the Dali article might be allowed if the fair use rationale for that article is deemed acceptable. Ewulp (talk) 02:27, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carl von Marr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Bend.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, [email protected] Apolo1991 (talk) 17:04, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Kings (Bramantino) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 14:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas Ewulp
	Hi Ewulp, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,    –Davey2010Talk 17:44, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply] Share similar holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Davey2010/MerryChristmas}} to your friends' talk pages.

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is safe, festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2022 will be safe, healthy, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 17:57, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	Nollaig shona duit
	To Ewulp, wising you and yours the very best for the holiday season and new year. Ceoil (talk) 20:38, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!
Весела Коледа!

Hello, Ewulp! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a

Happy Holidays

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing all you creative Wikipedians the best Holiday Season, and may all your wishes for the New Year come true! Gino Severini's 1911 Souvenirs de Voyage is my Wiki-Christmas card for you this year. Coldcreation (talk) 15:32, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Ewulp: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

Happy New Year!

Ewulp,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010^Talk 00:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

January songs

in friendship

Thank you for being around, and your good wishes! - Happy new year, in friendship! - One of my pics was on the Main page (DYK) and even made the stats. - In this young year, I enjoyed meetings with friends in real life, and wish you many of those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022 began happily with vacation. I uploaded images but stopped at 22 January - click on songs. 30 January means 10 years of Precious. It's also the birthday of a friend, - I'm so happy I mentioned his DYK on his 90th birthday when he was still alive. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This was probably not your intent, but by taking a citation out of the {{cite book}} format, you broke the link from the {{sfn |Hewitt |2018 |p=388}} to the full citation, {{{cite book |last=Hewitt |first=Catherine |title=Renoir's dancer : the secret life of Suzanne Valadon |publisher=St. Martin's Press |publication-place=New York |year=2018 |id={{ISBN|9781250157645|9781785782749}} {{OCLC|1006391440|1026408741}}}}.

You were probably trying to correct the {{cite book}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |lay-date= (help) message that was produced by these deprecated parameters/values:

|lay-url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/books/review/renoirs-dancer-suzanne-valadon-catherine-hewitt.html |lay-source=She Was a Model for Impressionist Masters. Then She Became One Herself. — NY Times |lay-date=2018-05-29

Please look at

As you are an editor with a lot of edits (about 35,000 at this time & currently about 2850 at this time on the

BTW, the deprecation of the lay parameters are not exactly a done deal, as you can see at the discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 82#Lay-url Peaceray (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've made occasional edits to

WP:CITEVAR. It is not a style I am familiar with; I was tempted at the time to revert the whole mess. Yesterday while editing Valadon I noticed an unsightly error message in the References; after 3/4 hour wasted in studying Help:Citation_Style_1#Anchors

in search of a fix for the template, I made a repair that I knew would work.

Since you're the one who knows how to do this, could you also fix "Further reading" (the John Storm book) before I commit another felony? Ewulp (talk) 02:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the hdl parameter for the Storm book.

I made the citation changes to the Valadon article. I actually believe the changes to be in concord with

WP:CITEVAR#Generally considered helpful

for the following reasons:

• imposing one style on an article with inconsistent citation styles; The article contained a mix of plain text & citation templates in the footnotes & the references section.
• improving existing citations by adding missing information; I added online links & author links, & ISBN, OCLC, & ISSN numbers.

Additionally, I moved items from the References section that was not used for inline citations AKA footnotes into the Further reading section, as suggested by

MOS:FURTHER

.

I also changed unlinked shortened footnotes to shortened footnote templates (e.g. <ref name="Marchesseau 92">Marchesseau 9</ref> & <ref name="Marchesseau 92"/> to {{sfn |Marchesseau |1996 |p=9}}) for a couple of reasons:

• They are more useful in that a click takes the reader to the full citation
• They provide a standardized display format.

Perhaps I should have noted my intentions on the talk page, but since there was a mix of citation styles, information to be added, & other optimization adjustments, I proceeded as per

WP:BOLD

.

I am admittedly a enthusiastic proponent of Wikipedia:Citation templates. If one uses Visual Editor, this is what it inserts into the wikitext.

Most experienced editors seem to have embraced them, & the template editors have spent a lot of time continuously improving & standardizing them. I think there is a host of benefits in using them that that make them superior to untemplated text. Peaceray (talk) 08:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Camille Cazedessus Jr., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pulp fiction.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. That illustration is signed by Gunn (and Gunn is credited for it where it appears on the Smart Set article, and on the file itself). Sorry to revert your reversion, but it seems warranted. Jcejhay (talk) 10:57, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're right. Evidently I'd clicked under the image instead of on it, and landed on the Gunn cover from the Smart Set article. I apologize. Jcejhay (talk)

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

During the last year, you have made suggestions to improve the Wikipedia entry on Thomas Nast. Accordingly, I want to call your attention to ThomasNast.com, a domain I have owned for 25 years and recently refreshed.

The site will give you a good overview of Nast in general and my biography in particular, America’s Most Influential Journalist: The Life, Times and Legacy of Thomas Nast. You can look at 160 Nast cartoons, each with its characters identified and its content and context explained. Categories include Christmas, Civil War, Lincoln, Tweed, Presidential Election Losers, Symbols, Shakespeare, and Inflation. The site’s purpose is to educate people about Nast and his work, as well as to preview my book.

The only previous substantive biography of Nast was published by Albert Bigelow Paine in 1902, and is frequently cited in Wikipedia. Although Paine was a good storyteller, his book has many significant errors and omissions because Nast misinformed him (eg., Nast never went to the front during the Civil War) or didn’t tell him about important events (Nast spent a year, beginning in May 1867, on his Grand Caricaturama (33 9 by 12 foot pictures in a traveling panorama which failed), Paine gave it two sentences).

There were also facts about his life that neither he nor Paine knew. Eg., Nast thought he was born on September 27, 1840, but his Landau birth certificate, issued under the auspices of the King of Bavaria, shows it was September 26. Understandable, every prior mention of his birth date is incorrect. I have made the correction to his Wikipedia entry along with a a copy of his birth certificate.

My 830-page biography contains 1,000 Nast cartoons, illustrations, sketches and paintings — 800 from Harper’s Weekly and 200 from other sources. The manually-created Index is predicated solely on Nast’s output. It includes Nast’s Life and Work; Topics/Issues and People/Characters. You can view the entire Index on ThomasNast.com. Harpweek (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I acknowledge my error, thanks for correcting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.199.229.83 (talk) 18:43, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ewulp: I notice that your editing history at BWJ goes back to 2013, so maybe you have some thoughts on the abuse of multiple accounts/sockpuppetry on the article. In 2016, Wotz5gaM received an indefinite block[11] for editing warring and began using Ciscokid997[12] who was also blocked. Then, it appears they continued as Demojury73,[13] but no action was taken. Now, DejaVudu19 is carrying on with the same type of editing (removal of material referenced to reliable sources that doesn't agree with their preferred source). Do you think that there is enough to report a block evasion? —Ojorojo (talk) 15:27, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There does seem to be a strong hint of

WP:DUCK: All accounts show exclusive attention to the same article, make similar arguments, and the latest two accounts have four-syllable, eight-letter names starting with De, followed by two digits that add up to ten. But it may be best to ask an admin if this evidence meets the test, as I'm not experienced in these matters; I think I've only twice involved myself in sockpuppet cases, and those ones were comically obvious. Ewulp (talk

)

Good points. I've put together a draft here and used some of your wording. Please feel free to add suggestions. I don't have any substantial experience with SPIs either, but know that things move along better when other editors also comment on the case page. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is safe, festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2023 will be safe, healthy, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 19:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I wanted to quickly say thank you for pointing out the Twinkle mistake I made on Hans Grundig. I quickly realized that I tagged articles incorrectly, so I'm going back and correcting the mistakes. My apologies if I messed things up. Losipov (talk) 01:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Losipov! Ewulp (talk) 01:52, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:43, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:05, 2 September 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) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The Nativity scene on the Pulpit in the Pisa Baptistery by Nicola Pisano is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 02:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Johnbod – Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year! Ewulp (talk) 06:51, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Barthel Bruyn the Younger Portrait of a Woman AIC.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, redundant to File:Bartholomaeus Bruyn, the younger - Portrait of a Woman with a Prayer Book - 1940.934 - Art Institute of Chicago.jpg

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote "See talk" while reverting all my edits. What talk am I looking at specifically? Do you not agree the article needs to be cleaned up? ParXivalRPT (talk) 01:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! My revert was a knee-jerk reaction to seeing, in the lead sentence, the same spurious date of death citing the same confused webpage that has been added again and again by a disruptive editor. Explanation is at Talk:Baby_Esther#Date_of_death_unknown: 1984 is the death date for a different "Little Esther", Esther Phillips. I've restored the rest of your edits which I overlooked before & which are welcome improvements. Ewulp (talk) 00:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful! I apologize for any unnecessary confusion, I will definitely make sure to look out for vandalism like that. Thank you. ParXivalRPT (talk) 01:55, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]