Archives

Archive 1/Archive 2/Archive 3/Archive 4/Archive 5/Archive 6

.

NOTE: Editor is a volunteer for the [[WP:Feedback Request Service]] which randomly selects volunteers to give feedback to [[WP:RfC]]

Hello, I see on your user page that you use JSTOR and I'd like to know more about your experience. By my calculations, a good 70 % of the main JSTOR content is now available for everyone at Internet Archive Scholar, with full text search provided e.g. at https://scholar.archive.org/ . The service is still in beta, but I've used it for some source-finding and it seems quite usable to me; I wonder whether that's just my experience. If you have a chance, the next time you'd be looking for a source on Google Scholar or JSTOR or similar, to perform the same search on IA scholar instead, I'd be curious to hear how it ends up. Thanks, Nemo 19:06, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nemo bis: main problem with Internet Archive Scholar for me is the citation templates for "web" or "news" (I think) offer archive fields, but not "journal". So I guessed for the names of the field, which pretty much worked

Example:

Galvão, Walnice Nogueira (2010). "Rebellion in the Backlands: Landscape with Figures". ABEI Journal. 12. doi:10.37389/abei.v12i0.3575. Archived from the original on 16 February 2020. Retrieved 11 April 2022.

... but would be better if the templates had this feature. ---Sincerely, Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Last Judgment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Isa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Syro-Malabar Church on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nezak Huns on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voted to keep article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nezak_Huns#Potential_Merge Louis P. Boog (talk) 14:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Muhammad ibn Falah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kaffir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ahmed ibn Abi Mahalli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fez.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hypothetical Axis victory in World War II on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Islamic republic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shirazi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I observed that many articles you edited have headers starting with a ';'. Because of this, the headers don't display properly in the table of concent. I would recommend to use '==' instead, for sub-headers '==='. This makes it easier to edit and to find the sub-sections. best regards VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@VenusFeuerFalle Sometimes I use ; headings as a temporary/provisional heading and sometimes as minor heading in long articles that already are larded with headings, so that if they don't display it's no great loss. Louis P. Boog (talk) 00:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few guidlines regarding headers [[MOS:SECTIONSTYLE], MOS:SECTIONSTYLE and MOS:LAYOUT. In case you prepare an article for yourself first, before formatting them correctly, there is a sandbox tool (WP:ABOUTSAND) next to your talkpage on the top-right corner. best regards VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 16:43, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying ; headings should never be used in an article? --Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Operation London Bridge on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Valiullah Faiz Mahdavi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No WP:SUSTAINED news media coverage. One of a great many victims of Iran's regime.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:59, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323 while opposed to deletionism in general, in this case I don't see much to object to. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did do a WP:BEFORE and the subject unfortunately does not appear to have ever entered the annals of history in the form of any news clipping or academic nods. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kryvyi Rih on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mary, mother of Jesus on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Campaign finance in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Duncan Hunter.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 25 November 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Louis P. Boog, you went ahead and reinserted content that I removed from the Mubarak Bala article, seemingly ignoring the fact that I've attempted to communicate with you about it on the talk page. Did you simply miss it, or are you uninterested in having a conversation? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:22, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku did not see your message until recently. will reply in talk page Louis P. Boog (talk) 02:25, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged you on the talk page. Please be sure not to reinsert content that I've removed before first discussing it. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:35, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Campaign finance in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Brother.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Islam and abortion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diya.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Louis P. Boog Requesting your inputs @ Talk:Islam in Pakistan#Citation seem to fail verification since you seem to have edited article topic areas previously.

I had tried to ping from article talk page itself but for some technical reason that did not seem to have worked hence leaving this message @ your talk page. Looking forward to your inputs. Bookku (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku hope it's been corrected to your satisfaction Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Season's greetings @Louis P. Boog

Yes I invited your contribution to help other users to avoid their confusion and give better inputs for future updates in the topic area and as noted @ t/p your contribution has been valuable. I am looking forward to some more improvement from other contributor @Owais Al Qarni in due course, so I conveyed them on their talk page.

Happy Wikipedia editing. Bookku (talk) 04:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wherever an articles is in need of in depth coverage I remember you since I have seen your contributions to multiple articles.

Two articles Islamic marriage contract and Islamic inheritance jurisprudence come to my mind since, IMO, these articles looking at their utility value deserve more in depth coverage. I do not have any hurry, just see if you can keep these articles at your back of mind and work on them in due course.

Thanks and regards Bookku (talk) 05:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku thanks for your kind words. my inbox is very full but I'll see what I can do. Louis P. Boog (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please, for the love of God, start using the correct headers. Not an offense, but everytime I see that sub-headers aren't shown properly in the template, it is because someone used ";" instead of "==". Literally, every time, your name pops up. I am tired of tidying up after you. I already pointed it out a while ago on your talkpage. Please inform yourself about editor guidlines if the case is not clear. This is getting frustrating. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@VenusFeuerFalle i was going to use ; as a way if getting around excessively long left page outlines in long articles, but now that you are haranguing me about it I have to admit that's unnecessary with the new left side outlines. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 22:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Louis, this is a quick reminder that copying within Wikipedia requires attribution in the edit summary for copyright reasons – see WP:CWW. I've added the necessary attribution for your edit to Twelver Shi'ism in this edit. May I also ask you to check the reference section after you copy any text from another article? Admittedly the references in Twelber Shi'ism are in rather a mess as it is, but your edit added a couple of undefined references – these sorts of things are much easier for the editor making the changes to fix at the time than for somebody else to clean up later. Thanks! Wham2001 (talk) 12:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wham2001 my excuse? thought Twelver Shi'ism article was in big need of a clergy section and didn't have time to check for sources with my slow connectivity. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 13:20, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Australia on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:First statute of the IMRO on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:West Germany on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shia–Sunni relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hazara.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

fixed -Louis P. Boog (talk) 00:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in your recent edits to Ideology of the Iranian Revolution you introduced {{sfn}} references to "Bohdan 2020" and "Rahnema 2000" but did not define them. This means that nobody can look the references up, and adds the article to Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. If you could fix this that would be great. DuncanHill (talk) 15:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DuncanHill Add references. the problem should be fixed now. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Shia–Sunni relations, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:14, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hossein Noori Hamedani, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 18:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sectarian violence in Pakistan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bengali.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DPL bot done Louis P. Boog (talk) 04:47, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bronze Age Pervert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ulysses.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DPL bot fixed Louis P. Boog (talk) 12:29, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am the author of the page on the Zikri sect and I’m very unhappy with the changes you made to it. You made huge changes to the article without consulting any other editors or me or even putting anything on the talk page. It reads like a personal essay now expressing an opinion on the true origins of the Zikri when we should defer to the most reliable sources and not less reliable ones like “adherents.com”. There are grammatical errors. There are sourcing issues and not nearly enough accurate and high-quality sources. It’s now very repetitive and not chronological. Zaynab1418 (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Franklin–Nashville campaign on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Ayatollah into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — SamX [talk · contribs] 03:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Reuss-Lobenstein on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Louis P. Boog. Thank you for your work on Eden Community. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:43, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn: thank you for your kind words, hope you and your family also have a great day. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 03:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:35, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Louis P. Boog. You added a lot of incomplete references to Islamic fundamentalism in Iran. {{sfn}} templates create hyperlinks to full cites elsewhere in an article, but are not valid references in their own.

All of the following are missing full cites which will need to be added to the article: Aziz 1993, Behdad 1997, Bohdan 2020, Calvert 2010, Farzaneh 2015, Fuchs 2021, Hermann 2013, Keddie 1966, Khalaji 2009, Mangol 1991, Martin 1986, Mashayekhi 2015, Nouraie 1975, Rahnema 2005, Wilford 2013.

Can I suggest you turn on the error messages for short form refs, you can find the details here Category:Harv and Sfn template errors. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 12:55, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hope that fixes it. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 20:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, nice work. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 20:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Al-Shifa ambulance airstrike on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 11 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

screenshot from unidentified page of In the Shadow of the Sword: The Birth of Islam and the Rise of the Global... by Tom Holland, taken from Google books.

Louis P. Boog (talk) 16:06, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In these edits of yours [1] [2] [3] on the talk page of Banu Qurayza article, you repeatedly inserted your replies into my comments. Please read WP:INTERPOLATE, which states that:

Generally, you should not break up another editor's text by interleaving or interpolating your own replies to individual points. This causes confusion with who said what and obscures the original editor's intent.

You have been a Wikipedia editor for almost 17 years and have made more than 42,000 edits; you should have been aware of this. — Kaalakaa ^(talk) 07:14, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Generally", but there was a natural break in the subject of your reply between your attack on Tom Holland and whether hadith are supposed to be passed down verbatim. I don't think anyone was confused over who said what and your original intent was not obscured. Have a nice day. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 20:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Natural break? What the...? There seems to be a serious problem with your understanding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, as you seem to have been banned in the past over this issue as well [4]. Do you want other editors or admins to explain this to you instead, or what? — Kaalakaa ^(talk) 01:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had several blocks thirteen years ago and around that time.

@Kaalakaa: The problem is I did not see your first delete of my edits here, and thought I had somehow forgotten to post my edits (it's highly unusual for someone to delete someone else's edits on a talk page so I didn't check) so I reposted them. After that I saw you had deleted them and saw your edit summary ("Like I said, don't you put your words within my comment!"). I thought you were right (to a point) and I should redo the reply, so I bunched together my replies on your attack on Tom Holland and put them after your attack on Tom Holland and before the comments on whether hadith are supposed to be passed down verbatim.

Yes, it's still WP:INTERPOLATE, but like I say, it's after a natural break in the comments.

I don't see why there would any confusion to a reader. The reply is indented, starts out {{reply|Kaalakaa}} and end with my signature ~~~~ --Louis P. Boog (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC) Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me with... have I violated WP:INTERPOLATE with this edit? (I ask because of the argument over the edit in the section above. the edit was a reply to this dispute). Louis P. Boog (talk) 18:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm honestly not sure what your question actually is, but it's generally a good idea to reply to an editor after their signature, and not in the middle of a reply. As a minor point, WP:INTERPOLATE is a guideline and not a policy. Primefac (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac I understand that it's generally a good idea to reply to an editor after their signature, and not in the middle of a reply, and that WP:INTERPOLATE is a guideline and not a policy.

Here is my question, the editor above says: There seems to be a serious problem with your understanding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, of which my WP:INTERPOLATEing in my reply to him (linked above) is a part. I thought he was overreacting.

Which of us do you think is right (or at least closer to the truth)? --Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:10, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If someone asks you not to reply halfway through their comment... maybe you should listen to them? Primefac (talk) 17:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well of course they're not just asking me, they're telling me there seems to be a serious problem with your understanding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, but thank you for your reply. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:17, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bangladesh genocide on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Louis P. Boog, At least some times I have felt good appreciation for your edits on Islam related articles. The article on Michael Muhammad Knight is on my watch list since the author focuses on importance to distinguish between textual religion and lived religion. Certainly I do not have any particular concern about your edit to that or other articles, just I wanted to let you know my general concerns I had noted @ Talk:Michael Muhammad Knight. Secondly my perception has been not only about Islam related but over all religion related WP articles have been more focusing on textual aspects and coverage of 'lived religion' remaining on lesser side.

Yes world religion and politics is polarized and that might have reflected in religion related articles on Wikipedia more; but, I suppose, there is some scope in improvement in the articles relating orthodox i.e traditional religions regarding aspects of lived religion and ethos of orthodox i.e traditional but non-political, commoners pious religious people who live their lives peacefully.

I wanted to seek your contribution help in expansion of some articles, but that I will post separately since my above monologue is already long enough.

Wish you happy editing as always Bookku (talk) 05:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku Agreed, lived religion, popular religion, not just religious text and scholarship, deserves attention and coverage in Wikipedia. Religious issues should not be over or under politicized. As for expanding WP articles, my MO has been to add to articles as I come across information that looks important and interesting in WP:RS, I might be of only limited use to you. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I watched a few of your recent edits and I want to let you know I appreciate efforts to improve the free encyclopedia. However, some recent changes on jinn and shaitan appeared to me to be a clear decrease in quality, sometimes mixed with some personal opinions, especially on matters of "demons" and, if I remember correctly, topics realed to the afterlife. According to my observations, this mostly comes from confusing how to write an encyclopedia with how you write an essay or a newspaper. Your recent edit on jinn, for example, included as proof for the importance of jinn-beliefs in Islam, what some dude went to exile for denying their existence. This is neither a valid conclusion for an encyclopedia entry nor even for an essay, since none of these claims logically follow from the other.

If you need help for the start, look at my personal page, there are some common advises to avoid common mistakes. Furthermore, do not bother to use the talkpage or write smaller articles. I remember you starting editing large portions of the Jahannam article but never finished it. Also, it helps to start with articles with low quality such as Islamic eschatology and bringing your first article to GA, since this will allow for a lot of feedback on what it takes for a good article to be considered "good".

I reach out to you, because I see as someone who edited for almost a decade by now, lot of potential in becoming a good writer. Anthropological, philosophical, and religious topics are often very challanging. Even professionals have a hard time to get them right. SO, please do not feel frustrated but take my advises to heart and look at some "finished" articles or GA articles such as Satan to compare.

with best regards VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 21:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously we disagree over what is suitable for an encyclopedia and what is not. A matter for Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 15:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to IslamQA.org. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JTtheOG (talk) 02:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree but thank you. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, regarding your edit here. Please take a look here. Thank you!--TheEagle107 (talk) 10:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. thank you for pointing that out. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 18:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is really nothing to apologize for. We are all do mistakes at times. Anyway, thanks for your civility and understanding.🙏 Best regards.💚--TheEagle107 (talk) 04:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's very kind of you! ... but if you or someone else hadn't been watching that page, my hairbrained edit would have remained there for who knows how long! --Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was not talking about edit warring. I think you know very well, what edits you made. For the memory, articles, such as Spirit possession and exorcism in Islam which is still using a lot of questionable sources and in need of improvement. Another article is Jahannam tagged with an original research template. There probably are a few more, but these stick with my mind as I remember trying to imorive them until they have at least a decent standard appropriate for an encyclopedia. You disagreed with me and I left the articles for you. However, after you edited the changes I made I decided to not work on the article anymore. In the end this is a group project. However, when you make edits and most articles end up in a state worse than before, we cannot let you make edits which downgrade the quality. One major issue is the use of unauthentic or questionable sources, such as IslamQA or YoutTube Videos.

Since you edit for almost two years now and disregard any advise for improvement, I doubt at this point that you have any intention to do so. It sems to me, that you are fine with your standards, standards in odds with the standards proposed by the Wikipedia guidlines. And whenever we have a discussion on the talkpage, you ignore the talking points. Do not see this as a discussion starting point, but as my last attempt to help you. I know that it is hard to get to udnerstand how to write a good article, but ignorance cannot be helped. I want to point out that my criticism is limited to the edits on the several Islam, religion, and philosophy articles. I do not know (and I am not interested to know) if your quality is better on other articles. However, the quality of edits is so bad, whenever I read your name on my watch list, I know that I have chores to do. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was not talking about edit warring

Well, you did specifically talk about "I left some articles completely to them after constant edit warring " here on on the Jinn Talkpage.

Since, I shouldn't ... see this as a discussion starting point, but as my last attempt to help you, it sounds like the best way to handle these disputes is case-by-case on something like WP:DRN --Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Louis P. Boog Hi once again. This time I came from Talk:Jinn and read about VFF concerns. Really speaking users like us who expand content are much less and we intend to invest our time and energy in improving Wikipedia. So personally I prefer to take personal suggestions in positive stride, rather than investing time and energy in countering them.

I do have following tips

RS side

• Whenever any one expresses personal concern, usually I go to history and click the thanks button.
• On WP:RS side use google scholar and google books more often. See author is an academic with some university and publication is reputed enough.
• Use WP:Wikipedia library resource exchange more frequently, to access academic literature otherwise not openly available.
• In ready citation formats in visual editor there is one "Quote" there one can fill original quote which you are referring from the book. In this polarized world Other user may wish to know what is written in academic literature as is and you are using it properly. So quoting original may help in avoiding misunderstanding in likely contentious areas.

Copy edit and MOS side.

• Read and watch list WP:MOS and Wikiproject Islam related MOS.
• I tag my own writings sections for copyedit support. I approach experienced and helpful copyeditors frequently enough to help out. If the article is long I list the article at copyeditors board.

The reason to share above tips is sincere, I hope you do not mind them. Wish you all the best and happy editing.

Bookku (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, and I will check out your tips. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 00:12, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

of course there's a limit to how much sending of thanks I can do when someone deletes my edits with a not much explanation and their personal concern is that I'm harming the quality of the article but they are so done with my edits they can't be bothered to give any explanation .... --Louis P. Boog (talk) 00:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See my view has been that shifting focus from content to personal concerns benefits the accuser to take content dispute off the track. Solution is from your side give primacy to content dispute and take the discussion back to the track again at earliest.

About personal side usually best solution meet impatience of accuser with patience. Address legitimate concerns so the other side would have less scope to continue off the track.

Refactoring requests

Where personal accusations are clearly factually wrong, arrogant or insulting Wikipedia has a discussion culture where in you reach out to such user at their talk page with section heading 'Refactoring requests'. Cite their specific objectionable difs, mention your concern and request them to correct their sentences. After coming such request a user is generally expected to do self introspection and drop their stick and correct their improper mentions and sentences.

If they don't do leave it their for future users who are similarly affected from similar behavior shall take them to the task at appropriate forum with list of improper behaviour and then community warns. In my point of view this is smarter to save our own time, stress and focus.

I hope you would find my suggestions helpful enough. Bookku (talk) 09:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fyi I had suggested VFF also to focus and engage in content side of the discussion. Anyways failure of other user to join WP:DRN seem to have helped you to score a point at least for while.

• 1) Your content dispute mentioned at WP:DRN about the article Jinn seems mainly concerning WP:DUE. So I suggest to spare some time to update or re-read policies WP:DUE, WP:BALANCE, WP:RNPOV, WP:PROPORTION. If any side feels WP:NPOV is a concern one can make input request at WP:NPOV/N. (Always remember, ideally previous discussion on the same topic on other notice and discussion boards ideally be closed, before you start a new discussion on any notice board or talk page).
  • If any one of you wish to start WP:RFC remember there is WP:RFCBEFORE, in present case an experienced WP:DRN moderator has offered to help articulate neutral questions for RFC as part of WP:RFCBEFORE.

• 2) I suggest to visit archive pages of Talk:Jinn to see if any previous discussion has taken place on the same or similar topic also Idk if you have visited and evaluated references and points in the recent note of the user:Eagle107.

• • I suggest to check already available refs in the articles Abul A'la Maududi and Nasr Abu Zayd for RS and also check if their importance has been cited in any reliable journals and academic books available at google scholar and google books. Take input help of WP:RSN forum to confirm if any source can be considered RS or not.

• • I suggest read the article body again and write down your own lead in your own sand box and then compare if you find the present lead has a proper weight from reliable contents made in the rest of the body. Such an exercise may help you in RFC discussion and during good article and feature article nomination reviews.

I hope above points shall help you in remaining focused on content during future discussions.

Wish you happy editing. Bookku (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku shouldn't this be on Talk:Jinn rather than my talk page? Louis P. Boog (talk) 16:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right. I shall give synopsis of this there. Thanks Bookku (talk) 16:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Francis Scott Key Bridge (Baltimore) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Estonia on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Louis P. Boog,

WP:FTN is on my watch list. There are two discussions are going on at WP:FTN

• 1) WP:FTN#Why are there so many religious topics here?

• 2) WP:FTN#Fringe: STEM Vs Humanities?

The second one is started by me. I read and participate in such discussions once in while to get pulse what Wikipedians think about. Just I wanted to share it just for your information. Bookku (talk) 12:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Louis P. Boog also @TheEagle107 as requested by you I have listed next RfC steps @ my talk page go through them. Besides I just started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#RfC etiquette these tips too may help you. Wish you happy editing Bookku (talk) 04:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Bookku, thank you --Louis P. Boog (talk) 18:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion WT:BRD .. and/Vs #Responding to RfC, this is just for your information since may be helpful in balancing two guidelines. Bookku (talk) 07:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see your comments ("Avoid making edits that others may view as unhelpful. ... Be patient ...") as relevant to my June 16 reply to you in Talk:Jinn#Pre-RfC? Namely: "I'll wait a few days for a reply and then add the sentence and citation." --Louis P. Boog (talk) 22:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Why I request admin review before directly going to ANI

I prefer focus on content and not personal altercations to save my own time and energy, It helps me avoiding escalation to ANI level if it gets sorted out at Admin level.

• Why do I prefer to contact last last active admins from WP:ANI?

First we know they are already active in resolving disputes, Second it remains easy for us to prove our neutrality, that we are just not going to admin of our own choice, but who so ever is available. If one is busy we can request next last one editing admin from ANI.

• How do I understand some one is admin or not?

WP:ANI is watch listed by me, though, usually, I do not indulge in personal altercations, once in a while browsing that notice board keeps me updated about various policies and also helps understand who is admin from their admin actions like blocking and all, But when we do not know if some is admin or not what is the solution. I go to WP:ANI history If I am not sure if last editing one is admin or not I check if their user page is categorized as admin or not? Second way is I open user contribution page reach the end, there I find 'User rights' link which mentions if some one is an admin for example this WP link informs whether User:Joe Roe is admin or not (Of course Joe Roe is an Admin).

I hope above Fyi would help in avoiding confusion. Bookku (talk) 09:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku I'll check this out and try again tomorrow Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not for raising a complaint immediately again but just for your information to avoid confusion next time. Bookku (talk) 02:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Louis P. Boog

Please confirm following

1) Have you taken note of replies of DRN moderator and admin User:Robert McClenon and User:WhatamIdoing @ Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Pl. suggest format for RfC discussion?

Got it. Sounds good. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2) @ your Jinn sandbox 4-20-2024 I used Template:Collapse multiple times. Are you able to read them? this is just to confirm you are not facing any technical difficulty in reading and using Template:Collapse?

Bookku (talk) 13:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per your request at my talk page, initiated Talk:Jinn#RfC: Proposed additions of text 1.

You are encouraged to follow:

• WP:RFC#Responding to an RfC
• RfC etiquette

Bookku (talk) 13:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to oral tradition, would you be interested in joining a wikiproject on the topic? Kowal2701 (talk) 15:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kowal2701 Thank you for asking but I'm quite busy currently. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:54, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Kowal2701 (talk) 21:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Save following links for easy accessibility

1) WP:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (WP:REREQ)

At google books, google scholar, Wikipedia library you know some info is in some chapter but some research paper / chapter / page number is not visible to you? Most helpful place is WP:REREQ

2) Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities (WP:RD/H)

When you need help in some information to be searched or confirmed for you. When I have too many things to google or confirm I reach out Humanities board

3) WT:REFCHECK (I have used this one less) but some help can be requested here to verify content from the sources.

Bookku (talk) 03:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting you take note of following

1) Important technical aspect: Unknowingly we tend to miss some very important technical aspects of RfC formatting which may break RfC listings on other related pages. Your 'this update (edit dif)' to RfC sentence inadvertently deleted "}}" after and the time stamp "13:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)". User:Redrose64 has restored it now. Please see those edit differences and (actually similar mistake had happened from me too while starting RfC), to avoid it happening again, pl. also read this answer by Redrose64 about technical importance of time stamp.

@ Bookku Totally missed that. Unaware of the finer points of RfC. --00:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2) Your technical difficulty about collapse template at sandbox talk. User:Maproom has responded to the help request at Wikipedia:Teahouse. Maproom's idea of creating and testing collapse template within collpse template with short text seems nice. You too can test in the similar way then communicate with User:Maproom there about remaining difficulty.

Problem solved without edit?? I swear it didn't open earlier. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3) CR: Edited volumes of academic books already use best of vocabulary, we face difficult choice of not having similar best words while paraphrasing in our own words. Still Earwig tool expects similarity in wording should not cross 40%.

Frankly I edit sentences off line attempt 80-90% change in the wording and also at least some change in grammar while paraphrasing in my own words, even at the cost of not being best in wording and grammar to avoid copyright concerns. Then again request some copy editor to help me improve.

Though in your RfC sentence you have changed sentence formation and juxtaposed with other authors and it's part of discussion as of now keeps on side of fair use, I think it would be better to paraphrase it once more by changing wording, to be safe on copyright side. Hence I have suggested alternate sentence you can further suggest alternate improvements.

@ Bookku which RfC sentence?

• There is one more RfC related discussion but I will update you once you read through above to avoid giving too many at one go and confuse.

Bookku (talk) 12:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) Technical note: {{collapse top|Reply with details 1}} and {{collapse bottom}} need to be totally left aligned without any space or : before {{. Space can come inadvertently or : can come when you click on "reply" on talk page and try to add these templates then all the text below the templates will become invisible.

So you add these templates always by clicking on [edit source], not by clicking on reply.

Best way to test this aspect is working properly is below {{collapse bottom}}

write some text.

and below written text should remain visible to you in preview and after saving the template.

If above is not your problem we will discuss further in next section. Bookku (talk) 05:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the problem faced by you is not the one discussed in above section then test following.:

Some text E

Now tell me which part you are not able to open?

1) Is [Edit source] opening?

2) Whether each '{{' opening template bracket is closed by '}}' closing bracket?

3) Whether every {{collapse top|header}} is being corresponded by one {{collapse bottom}}?

4) Are you able to save above templates with inside text ?

5) Whether show and hide working for 'outer header', 'inner header 1' and 'inner header 2'?

6) Whether you can see each of: 'Some text A', 'Some text B', 'Some text C', 'Some text D', 'Some text E', after saving the templates?

7) After Introducing references Whether references are visible properly?

• You can try above test on your this talk page it self by creating a new test section.

8) If something else is not opening, then what it is? in such case you may need to describe more to User:Maproom.

Bookku (talk) 05:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The collapsible boxes are all fine on the Jinn Talk Page and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Louis_P._Boog/sandbox/Jinn_sandbox_4-20-2024, so I'm not going to try this out right now, but thank you for working on this. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 01:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Louis P. Boog. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:IslamQA.org, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you added a Jinn subsection in the "Comparative Mythology" motif section. After reading it, perhaps it is much more suited somewhere in the "Comparative Religion" article (I know both topics can and do overlap, however the concept of Jinn began with Islam, an actual current religion)

I wanted your input before deleting it in its entirety. Thanks Gizziiusa (talk) 19:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gizziiusa link? Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparative_mythology&action=history

12 june 2024 Gizziiusa (talk) 07:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gizziiusa what exactly is your argument for deleting the section? there is more than a little evidence that jinn are a part of Arab folklore as well as part of Islam. Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Im under the impression that the article wants to emphsize comparisons that happen "happen stance" across differing parts of the world. The Jinn simply dont follow that path, but rather are limited to, as you say Arab folklore, and Islam (for the most part)

Granted, there are other mythological motifs that have a resemblance, like giants and, Dragons and Serpents (Ouroboros) for example, howevever these are covered across large expanse globally.

If Jinn is added, I think we will start down a slippery slope of ("ok if Jinn is going to added, then so must Angels, and demons, and perhaps even the phoenix" (if the phoenix would be applicable, that is)) Gizziiusa (talk) 14:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gizziiusa Thank you for notifying me of your deletion but I have to contest it. see: Talk:Comparative_mythology#Deletion_and_restoration_of_of_Jinn_section --Louis P. Boog (talk) 00:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Australia on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Storrs, Connecticut on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:United Kingdom Special Forces on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

done --Louis P. Boog (talk) 01:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]