User talk:Ipigott/Archive 9

Archive 9: November 2013 - August 2014

Copenhagen again

I have introduced some subsections in the Geography section similarly to what is seen in the London articvle. Feel free to revert if you think it is a bad idea, I am still not quite sure what changes can just be made made and what ought to be discussed fist when so many editors are active at the same time. However, "Cityscape" and "Geography" seems to overlap quite a bit. I think "Architecture" and "Parks" should be subsections in the Geography section too (similarly to the London article) while the current separate section on "Cityscape" (with subsectionsd on architecture, parks and beaches). Alternatively, I think t6hat "Cityscape" should be kept as a separate section (with the current subsections) but that the current subsection in the Geography section should then be moved. What do you tink, has this discussion already been had and/or where should it be taken?Ramblersen (talk) 17:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't think there's any hard and fast rule about all this. Personally I think Architecture falls more naturally in the Cityscape section (as in the Paris article) but others may think differently. I don't like the term "cityscape" in this context anyway. I the heading were to be Landmarks then it would perhaps be easier to see what should be included. Maybe your "Cityscape" heading under Geography could be replaced by Districts or Neighbourhoods?--Ipigott (talk) 18:04, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay I have changed it to "Districts". Is "Topography" okay – I suppose it covers both topography and geology? Do remove the subsections altogether if you think they are a bad idea. I have left a few more links about the economy and a comment to Administration in the sandbox.Ramblersen (talk) 01:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for these figures. I've also included some of the official statistics. Have a look at the Economy section and let me know whether you think it's OK now. In regard to the various areas related to Copenhagen, I see this is discussed under Demographics. I am not sure though whether the somewhat confusing level of detail is really needed in the main article on Copenhagen. The box contains population figures for various areas. Maybe that is sufficient?--Ipigott (talk) 10:24, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Not sure what district Radisson Blu Royal Hotel is in but can you mention it? Added it to Vesterbro but can you find a decent source for it, it's supposed to be the tallest building in Copenhagen?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you also check my additions to the admin and health sections translated from Danish. I've made a start on a law and order section. Can you find more on the courts/law and also mention the Danish parliament function and source the supreme court part? Probably once done it'll be too long and we can split into its own article and condense, the police and fire info is probably little too detailed otherwise. Also have you used this as a source? If so can you let me know what citation it is so I can source the Nordsk Film thing.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:12, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

The reference is used in the section on Nightlife, para. beginning "Copenhagen has several recurring community festivals". It's not one of mine. I'll now have a look at your additions.--Ipigott (talk) 07:41, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I've tidied up the part on the law courts but I really think the pieces on the police and fire departments are far too detailed for the Copenhagen article. There is, for example, already considerable background at Police of Denmark.--Ipigott (talk) 11:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I said. I've trimmed it. Would be good if we could have a literature section on notable writers based in the city or notable books with Copenhagen as a backdrop and libraries/literary organizations based in the city. Also I think the economy needs to mention something about exports, what are the main products etc and also mention banking and investment in the city. Also I think the use of solar panels in buildings etc like the recent projects of Bjarke Ingels should have a good summary in thr article, perhaps a section on Technology and innovation? I think we also need a section on International politics and organizations which meet in Copenhagen or its role in international politics/business/law/energy. Sourcing in the sports and eduction section needs improving and some of the 2009 sources don't look the best and should probably be replaced.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I've begun a makeshift Literature section above education. It's not great but it's a start. I got the society info from the PD 1911 Britannica I'll ask Charles for the citation shortly but I have a feeling some of names may be deprecated or have changed. I might also be wrong about the authors living in Copenhagen. Can you look into this and try to find what notable literary organizations and publishing houses are based in Copenhagen. You would also be likely to known more about notable works and authors based in Copenhagen and libraries. I mentioned all of the novels I could find but you might not think they're all notable. I'd imagine that some of the Danish classics were set in Copenhagen and are more worthy of mentioning but they weren't placed in Category:Novels set in Copenhagen! Feel free to add and revise as you wish!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

You're becoming more and more ambitious - but that's good. I think you'll find many of your answers on authors and other cultural figures in the section on Notable People and also in Culture of Denmark & Danish literature. In addition to the most influential Copenhagen-born poets and philosophers (unknown outside Scandinavia), there's Kaj Munk (who lived in CPH), Martin Andersen Nexø, Tove Ditlevsen (some of whose novels have been used for films), Klaus Rifbjerg, Dan Turèll, Bjarne Reuter, Jens Christian Grøndahl and Jens Christian Grøndahl. In any case, you've made a pretty good start, especially on mentioning some of the novels. It would be interesting to see if today's (or a more recent) Britannica still mentions the red-linked literary societies. It's the first time I have come across them but I can look into them. I can easily expand on the Libraries. All the main Danish publishers are based in CPH: Gyldendal, Politiken, Akademisk, Libris, etc. Maybe we should also include painters, composers and musicians? Reams and reams could be written on the environment. I'm not sure how far Copenhagen stands out in relation to the rest of Denmark but most of its planning priorities are mentioned here. Maybe the new municipal authorities have priorities of their own? I'm not sure whether the Bjarke Ingels innovations should come under Environment or Architecture. I'll look at all this later (perhaps tomorrow) when I've seen what I can do on Rosiestep's monasteries.--Ipigott (talk) 14:57, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The article is starting to look amazing now! What a turn around in just over 2 weeks! Your work on it has been invaluable!! Ambitious maybe, but I just feel like that sort of thing is relevant for such a city even if brief. We don't need to go into detail of course, but Copenhagen as the backdrop to notable Danish novels and notable institutions/groups/publishing houses might be worth mentioning. Yes we could elaborate a bit on the others, Copenhagen in art especially. I think I'd rather the performing arts split into different sections like Theatre, Music, Art. If the article starts to get too long we can always condense later, I just think it's important to make it comprehensive from an early stage and then cut down if necessary. I think we could get away with 160kb range but I think over that would be too long. I've mentioned the solar panelled buildings in the Enviro planning section, maybe you could elaborate on some notable recent "green building" projects? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:41, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your encouraging comments. I'll try to compromise on this, adding just the most important items. We're already at over 140 kB without any expansion to the lead, although I must say a substantial proportion of the expansion is in the form of references. Maybe we should also concentrate on items of interest to non-Danish speakers.--Ipigott (talk) 11:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Santa Maria de Serrateix

If you want a break from Copenhagen can you find more for this? It also needs checking for accuracy.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:51, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I've checked this through and added a few more details. If you want to go further, there's more detail in the EL site. Don't know how important it is.--Ipigott (talk) 16:11, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm still working on the Benedictine monasteries in Catalonia, but started these 2 structures nonetheless, and thought they might interest you: Ciutadella de Roses and Castell de la Trinitat. No worries if you're busy with other things. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Mañana.--Ipigott (talk) 22:15, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Good job on a nice article. I added photos but don't feel a need to add more prose for the moment. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:20, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you translate Sant Serni de Tavèrnoles or/and add to any of the others I've created on Lleida Province, particularly Santa Maria de Cóll and Sant Pere del Burgal? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Are we working against a DYK schedule on these or can I deal with them over the next few days? I really would like to finish additions to some of the Copenhagen sections.--Ipigott (talk) 10:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

No, not DYK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

A church now, yes, es wiki says "Perteneció a un antiguo monasterio benedictino. "♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:38, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Fine.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Scharinska villan

Hi Ipigott!

Something happened here. A copy-paste error, perhaps? In any case, Scharinska villan has nothing to do with Stockholm and I have tried to make that more clear now. Kind regards, Jopparn (talk) 19:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Glad to see it's been corrected.--Ipigott (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ipigott. You have new messages at Heb's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Randlett

Photographer Mary Randlett may interest you. No 5 day rush. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:48, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Can you proof Aldo Garzanti from Italian wiki, text is hidden?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Turned into a nice article. Thanks for that. I've actually been working on the Northwest School (art) members since 2007, so no worries about your timing on Mary Randlett. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

My translations for the English Wikipedia

Hello Ipigott, I understand that you are curious why my translations are fed into the English Wikipedia by Benutzer:Godewind. The reason is quite simple: While I am happy to translate, I am not so happy to look after all the formalities that are necessary to put the article into proper shape for Wikipedia. I furthermore understand that you are offering your help and assistance. Thank you! Since Godewind is the leader of our working partnership, I leave it to him to send you a reply. But you may, certainly, address me directly if you so desire. Greetings --Johann31 (talk) 12:09, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Johann31 for your rapid response. Given your proficiency in English and your track record with seven detailed biographies created and maintained on the DE Wiki (not to mention all your other DE contributions), I find your explanations a little surprising and disappointing. Indeed, unless Godewind is using a new user name, it appears you have far more experience of Wikipedia than he has. As you must know, Wikipedia is all about collaboration. If you want to work on the "translation" of an article from the German Wiki, it is extremely useful not only to paste in a one-off translation but to work with others on enhancing the article from other sources, often up to a standard which goes far beyond the original article. Furthermore, like all of us working in these areas of interest, you will certainly be able to learn a great deal from the edits made to the articles you create. Likewise, you will be able to contribute to articles in connection with the QR Bremen project which others create from scratch. It will not be easy to liaise with you via your talk page on the DE Wiki and it will be even more difficult to explain things to Godewind who does not appear to have a very extensive knowledge of English. Finally, if you really are hesitant about formalities for putting articles into shape for the EN Wikipedia, you could simply develop them as sandbox pages until they are ready to be moved into the main space. I hope you can give this some consideration. In any case, it is good to have an English speaker from the German Wikipedia contributing to articles in English. Keep in touch.--Ipigott (talk) 14:13, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Ipigott, I really do not want to disappoint you. I agree with you in many respects:

1. a "Wikipedia-translation" should really be more than a pure "translation". Many details which are of interest to individuals speaking German might not really be of interest for persons speaking other languages. Therefore, the "translator" should change and modify, adding and omitting things.
2. cross-references to existing articles in the German Wikipedia cannot automatically be converted to cross-references in the English Wikipedia. I may some day be ready to shoulder this work, but at the time when Godewind acquired my assistance it was my intention to supply translations in quick succession without bothering too much about formatting and having to read all the long-winding explanations provided by EN-Wiki.
3. it is extremely useful to cooperate with others (for many reasons).
4. I realise that it will not be easy for you to liaise with me via my talk page on the DE Wiki. For this reason, I today created a talk-page in the EN:Wikipedia which you will find unter User:Johann31(discussion).

I admit that this is only a small quantity of progress, but there will be more progressive steps in time to come. And since Luxembourg is not too far away from Bremen, it might be possible for you to meet Godewind and myself - we have a standing meeting time for all active Bremen-Wikipedians at 7 pm each last Thursday of each month. --Johann31 (talk) 14:43, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Johann31 is my address for messages and discussions which I erroneously named User:Johann31(discussion)--Johann31 (talk) 15:25, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

I do indeed frequently pass Bremen on the autobahn when driving up and down to Denmark but it would be difficult for me to attend a meeting in the city. I think it would be more productive to liaise in writing, either on our talk pages or even better in a WikiProject environment along the lines of Wikipedia:GLAM/GibraltarpediA. I would suggest a strong priority should be to bring in additional contributors who are able to work in German and/or English for a start. In Gibraltar, they managed to attract lots of young people by arranging competitions and awarding prizes. Maybe other languages such as French and Polish could also be covered later. I think it would also be useful to draw up a much more detailed list of landmarks and attractions in the city which are candidates for coverage with QR plaques and Wikipedia articles. These could for example also include many of the sites and institutions in DE:Kategorie:Kultur (Bremen). Then there would be a need to enlarge on the article(s) on the city of Bremen itself. I realize the German article has received GA status (despite its lack of comprehensive referencing) but it would require a lot more work to bring it up to GA in English. Just take a look at the article on Copenhagen which we have been developing over the past month or so. But now I would like to return to your translations, at least for a bit more copy editing for a start.--Ipigott (talk) 15:31, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Johann31/translation is the address of my latest translation. Your cooperation in checking and improving it is welcomed by Godewind and myself! --Johann31 (talk) 07:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I've just been looking at it. I think the Balge is generally referred to as a tributary of the Weser. Apart from copy editing, it looks as if quite a bit of work will be needed to tidy up the literature and the references, not to mention adding wiki links and so on. I would have hoped these could have been handled through your partnership. In particular, if the same book is referenced for different page numbers, it is not necessary to repeat the whole thing each time. See for example the references in the Paris article where the books are listed in the bibliography with the name of the author and the relevant page numbers for the actual inline references. See if you can sort some of this out then move the article into the main space. I am not too happy working in Godewind's user box. I have, by the way, done quite a bit of work on your Schütting (Bremen) and Stadtwaage (Bremen) articles. I think the latter is a weigh house is English. I would like to complete work on the other articles you have created too.

Finally, if the object of the exercise is to make information available to visitors using smart phones, I would strongly suggest expanding the leads of all the articles, ensuring they present the most pertinent information. As you probably know, when accessing Wikipedia from mobiles, the only text to be immediately displayed is that of the lead. You have to specifically go into the other sections of the article to see the remaining text.--Ipigott (talk) 10:05, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

since your last message was received by me on my talk page, that is the place where you will find my last reply!--Johann31 (talk) 11:16, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

In the meantime, I went through your modifications of "Stadtwaage" and found it really most convincing how your tiny alterations changed the quality of the page! Please carry on like that! --Johann31 (talk) 16:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

They might look "tiny" but they do take quite a lot of time and trouble. I think I've just about finished work on the New Town Hall.--Ipigott (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Moin Ipigott. Frohe Festtage und ein gutes Jahr 2014 in Gesundheit und mit Lebensfreude wünscht Dir --Godewind (talk) P.S. danke für Deine Mitarbeit

Merry Christmas, Ian, and Happy 2014! --Rosiestep (talk) 00:34, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Mughal-e-Azam

Thank you for your copyedits here. I made a couple minor adjustments where I thought that the meaning had been lost. I am hoping that you are not yet finished, because the most complaints were on the sections that you did not yet get to. BollyJeff | talk 13:48, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

That source is already used (#127). Thanks again. BollyJeff | talk 15:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays! Thanks for all the excellent copyediting work you did on Mughal-e-Azam which has now made it to FA. I think you've done enough editing of it to claim it as your first FA?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations! Glad to hear it finally made it to FA. Just as well it made it now while we're still in 2013. Perhaps you can still get it on the main page before the end of the year. My contribution was minimal but if it helped, all the better. I'll try to get to the Dorchester later.--Ipigott (talk) 12:10, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I think there's already articles lined up for the rest of the year! Yes you might find more on the Dorchester worth adding from HighBeam if you're interested. I added some things I found last night. I will try to get to Copenhagen over the next few days.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Can you find anything on Amagerbro? That stub is appalling!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:50, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do as time permits over the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 07:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Added a few lines but could not find much of substance.--Ipigott (talk) 15:35, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Iconostasis of the Cathedral of Hajdúdorog

Hi Ian!
Thanks a lot for rating my article. That's I think pretty much a starter version, and I just wanted to ask for more feedback how I can improve the article. If you have time and any thoughts, I would really appreciate your opinion, advise and help.

Thanks again, and have a really happy holidays!

Jojojoe (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Typical wikipedia, the article is that detailed compared to the town Hajdúdorog...♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ian & Ernst!
First of all thanks a lot for your edits on the iconostasis page. My mother tongue is Hungarian, so checking my wording through a native's eyes can be quite helpful. Yesterday I added some references and a couple of sentences to the lead - as you suggested. It was pretty late, so I decided to let you know about that today - but you were quicker :)

Hajdúdorog: Actually I pretty much agree with Dr. Blofeld. A relatively less important article is a lot more detailed than the main one related to the topic. This was among the first articles I finished here on the English wiki; and I definitely want to carry on. The Hajdúdorog article seems to be a good one for that :)

Thanks again for your comments and help; and happy holidays for both of you!

Jojojoe (talk) 08:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Great job on the article! Not a criticism of your work of course, but the town should probably at least be brought up to start class status. I can try to help expand it but not speaking Hungarian it's an obstacle!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas Ian, Have a good one!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:06, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

thanks!

...for your kind comment and season's greetings to you. --Soman (talk) 13:36, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Church frescos

Hello Ian, I just wanted to drop by to tell you I've finally found some time to sit down and start an article on Church frescos in Sweden. And to say that I'm very impressed and thankful for everything you've done during the year. Happy New Year! Best, Yakikaki (talk) 14:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Yakikaki. I'm glad you've made a start on the article. I must say with all your efforts on the individual churches, the fresco scene in Sweden is now very well covered. I've also been looking at all your other articles describing Swedish churches, including all those without surviving frescos. I was particularly impressed by your recent Gothic secular and domestic architecture article. Excellent work! My very best wishes to you for the New Year. I hope we can work together on interesting topics in 2014 too.--Ipigott (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Historic centre of Córdoba

Historic centre of Córdoba, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, might interest you. I'm sure a bit can be carved away from the Córdoba article. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

It is turning out great! --Rosiestep (talk) 17:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I've tried to draw on better sources. I'll try to cover some of the red links in the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 17:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm off work till Thu, so I can assist with that. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

That would be great. The article can also be expanded to cover all the other historical sites in the old town. See this and similar Spanish cats.--Ipigott (talk) 17:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I created Category:Historic centre of Córdoba, Andalusia and inter-wikilinked it with the es counterpart. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:35, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, Cordoba is one of the spiritual homes of flamenco. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Can you proof the translation of Fabio Rugge and improve it. I've also created Template:Córdoba, Andalusia. Will have Copenhagen nommed by the end of the week!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Ipigott. Thanks for your work in the Bremen QR project an happy new year. --Godewind (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

A Happy New Year to you too, Godewind (or should I say Jürgen?). I think it would be useful for Furius and me to have some indication of which articles you would like to have translated next.--Ipigott (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

de:Domsheide is interesting for the project, because there are three buildings around in the list and also de:Schlachte (Bremen). --Godewind (talk) 15:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy new year .... I can be "officially involved"?? .... tell me more? :-) Actually we could help you with a Bremenpedia page and explain more about getting other languages. (I read you discussing it above) I'd like to find out more about the project and I havent "tripped over" a page that explains where you (etc) are going to use QR, NFC and/or Google Glass and how many plaques are in place so far.Victuallers (talk) 15:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

@ User:Godewind and Ipigott, started Domsheide.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

GA review of Copenhagen has begun.. You might be interested in helping get Lagskar and lighthouse up to GA too, both need little work on such small topics. Started Eduard Ichon, can you translate? It also red links [1] ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Votive ship

Hi Ian, just wanted to tell you I've begun an article on Votive ships, you know those charming models of ships found in so many Scandinavian churches. With your great contributions about and knowledge of Danish churches, I thought you might be interested. Best regards, Yakikaki (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that certainly sounds very interesting.--Ipigott (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Bremen

So, I have knocked up a DYK article about the main post office. It could do with a copy edit and some polish from a polyglot. Fancy co-authoring it for DYK? Anyway - best wishes Victuallers (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Just as well you let me know - short and sweet. I was about to do the post office myself. I'll try to contribute today, if not tomorrow. Have you seen Bremen are considering a GLAM QR project? That would seem to be right up your street. I've volunteered to assist.Ipigott (talk) 08:53, 16 January 2014 (UTC)--

I'd be very interested in their project. Seems to me they have a QR project! I'm interested in seeing if we could do more. Victuallers (talk) 12:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Their current project is based on the sightseeing tour of the old town. I think the GLAM project would centre on museums, like the Hamburg project. Godewind is ready to start the project now (see here. You should let him know you are interested. Thanks for nomming these for DYK!. --Ipigott (talk) 13:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC) Added 1 more for DYK and offered my help Victuallers (talk) 13:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Essighaus

Hello! Your submission of Essighaus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Essighaus

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh and another (No. 5 I reckon)

Do you mind if I add some iboxes if I get bored? Victuallers (talk) 17:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I think it would be useful to have iboxes for the "precincts" and for geographical features but less so for buildings. But I leave it to you. Thanks for processing the DYKs. I think they are helpful to the project but I find the procedure rather complicated. Good to have someone like you around who can handle it all.--Ipigott (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Landgericht Bremen

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the Bremen buildings, featured on Portal:Germany. Different topic: can you imagine a stub for Move Like This in Danish? We did German, and there's one in Swedish. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

There'll soon be more DYKs about Bremen. They are developing a QR approach to sightseeing and soon to the museums. As for Move Like This, I think it would be better if you found a Dane to help you. I see my role as presenting and improving articles about Denmark on the English wiki. And I'm not really into pop and rock anyway.--Ipigott (talk) 20:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Congratulations on promoting Copenhagen to GA! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Another core article and capital city passes. You put a great deal of outstanding work into it!! What next, Esjberg?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, let's develop Esbjerg together. I'm also going to do some more work on the Skagen Painters. I now have a copy of Lise Svanhom's excellent book which will help me to improve coverage of the article itself and some of the related biographies. I'll also have a look at Enid Blyton.--Ipigott (talk) 14:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Blyton's is a Vital Article. Amazing how many books of hers are missing. I started the Famous Five books a while back which all need work. Must try to do something about this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

You might be interested in adding to Achvarasdal [2]. Mogadishu for GA soon enough. Can you help add sources to the landmarks and sort out the poorer/unformatted sources? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm not too keen on spending time on Achvarasdal -- there must be hundreds of monolingual English-speakers able to help you with it. I've had a quick look at Mogadishu and was surprised to see so little about recent developments in the civil war. See, for example, 2014 timeline of the War in Somalia and previous timelines. I'll look through the article for the prose, etc., but then I would prefer to work on Esbjerg. I see by the way that our friend Folklore1 went to quite some trouble sorting out problems with the Copenhagen citations. Overall I think he did a good job with the review. You may also like to look at the Copenhagen template discussion at User talk:Ramblersen.--Ipigott (talk) 10:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Folkkore is GA reviewer's perfection personified Ian. I wasn't aware that you were only for translation articles Ian, I didn't ask you to edit Enid Blyton and you did. I thought a Scottish village in the Highlands would interest you like a little village in Denmark... With Mogadishu I was actually thinking that the lead and the lower history already focuses a lot on civil war and I know the article writer has said he's been trying to cut down on how much is said about war in African settlements as possible as most English sources tend to go on about recent conflicts. I agree though that it's worth mentioning more recent events briefly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:55, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm certainly not just for "translation articles" but I can't take on everything you suggest all the time and Achvarasdal didn't seem particularly important. I'm actually still working on the Bremen articles (still in the middle of one at the moment) and have quite a number of things on the stack: Skagen Painters, artists' biographies, Esbjerg (I hope) as well as assisting with your GA's, etc. As for Enid Blyton, I would have done more but my inputs were not appreciated. It's the second time Eric has reverted my prose edits -- so in future I'll see if he's done any editing on an article before I touch it. He obviously doesn't like my "interfering" and I don't like conflicts. Anyway, I thought the article was coming along very well. I've also been through Mogadishu but there was not much that needed attention there.--Ipigott (talk) 12:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Can you find a source to support the left the island in 1961 after lighthouse automated in Lågskär per the GAR?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Copenhagen template

I left you a question/proposal(reply regarding the Copenhagen template on my talk page. Sorry for not putting it on yours where it would be easier to spot or at least tipping you sooner. Congratulations with – and thank you for – the GA for Copenhagen!Ramblersen (talk) 07:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Spitzen Gebel

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

+1 Victuallers (talk) 17:43, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Teerhof

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Esbjerg1

Good start already! What's the situation with monument copyright in Denmark, would it be OK to upload [3]? I think we really need a more inspiring image with clear blue sky, although it does cover both the town and port in distance. I'm thinking maybe a good one of the port would be more ideal, given that it is essentially a port anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I've been dividing my time between Esbjerg and the Bremen articles. Esbjerg was in a pretty sorry state when I started and overall coverage of Esbjerg was extremely poor. So I've started to write articles on the landmarks (monuments, museums, churches, etc.) and will be including quite a few more. Hardly any of them are written up in the Danish Wikipedia so it's all original stuff and goes quite slowly but I think it needs to be done. Thanks for your own work on the article. I've found quite a bit more I can add to the geography but I would appreciate your help with a section on demography. The stats are included in the Danish version. As for copyright, the Danes are still very strict about monuments. I was surprised we had no trouble with CPH but personally I would not risk including photos of the Man Meets the Sea Monument (although it's in the German article). I agree with you, though, that the images are pretty dull at the moment. Your large picture of the market square livens it up a bit but maybe File:Esbjerg square.JPG would be good in the box (after I've rotated it a bit)? Your harbour dock could then be included next to the Economy section. I don't much like the aerial view or the view from the water tower. In any case, I think it's going to take a few weeks to bring the article up to GA standard.--Ipigott (talk) 10:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, will do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:55, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

St.-Katharinen-Kloster Bremen

Hallo Ipigott, Godewind give me a mail. You want information for the german-articel St.-Katharinen-Kloster (Bremen): The books Wilhelm Tacke: Klöster in Bremen, Edition Temmen, Bremen 2005, ISBN 3-86108-545-3 and Herbert Schwarzwälder: Das Große Bremen-Lexikon. Edition Temmen, Bremen 2003, ISBN 3-86108-693-X. Internetsites: I don't know a special site, may be [4]. Greeting --Roland Kutzki (talk) 18:31, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Roland. In the end, I managed to find a few online sources and have written up a short article on St Catherine's Monastery, Bremen. Pity Das Große Bremen-Lexikon is not available online. When I am writing articles about Denmark, the online Den Store Danske Encyklopædi is usually very useful. Generally I find it quite difficult to find good sources for articles about Bremen. Most of those quoted on the Landesamt für Denkmalpflege site are offline. Indeed, for background on St-Katharinen-Kloster, the Denkmalplege site here provides little detail (apart from what can be seen in the photographs). I see there are a fair number of members of the Wikipedia Projekt Bremen who say they have a high level of English. Perhaps you could encourage some of them to participate in the improvement of the English articles about Bremen and its landmarks. The English wiki is much stricter about the need for inline sources on every important fact in the article (unlike the German wiki where even GA articles frequently seem to rely mainly on literature quoted at the end of the article).--Ipigott (talk) 09:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bremen Main Post Office Building

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Started Hotel zur Post, you may wish to proof with German and add to it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:15, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

After The Tower House... --Ipigott (talk) 10:27, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:37, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Suding & Soeken building, Bremen

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Catherine's Monastery, Bremen

Materialscientist (talk) 01:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Deutsche Bank building, Bremen

Allen3 ^talk 18:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Robinson Crusoe House

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ludwig Roselius Museum

Orlady (talk) 04:31, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Langenstraße (Bremen)

The DYK project (nominate) 21:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for House of the Seven Lazy Brothers

Orlady (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Gosh, anybody would think Nvvchar was back in force :-] Some excellent new articles from you for Bremen and Esbjerg of late, keep up the good work!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Now concentrating more on Esbjerg but will try to catch up on Bremen's architects, etc.--Ipigott (talk) 13:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm brainstorming some possible ideas of books to get through the grant. If you can think of some great topics and books which you think might interest me feel free to list any in the other section! Try though to use the amazon.co.uk site if you can though! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:49, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Your provisional list seems to be mainly concerned with the U.K. I'm afraid I'm not really familiar with recent publications. There are quite a few on castles listed here. Or maybe this one about pubs. Maybe you should take a look a bookshops and libraries too?--Ipigott (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Glockenspiel House

Hello! Your submission of Glockenspiel House at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:13, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Glockenspiel House

Orlady (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Atlantis House

Orlady (talk) 06:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Ein fantastisches Ergebnis :-)) --Godewind (talk) 09:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Esbjerg Printing Museum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Category, Smithy and Linotype

Christian IX statue, Esbjerg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Altona

Esbjerg Station (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Struer

Hjerting (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sealand

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Women in dance

Saw your note on Sarah's page. I like the idea and I'll work on this with you. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Great! I thought a word on Sarah's page would be effective. Over 300 people watch her talk page. I was going to drop you a line after putting up the first draft of the list later today. Given the number of American female dancers, I think we'll need a separate list for them, split into different categories of dancer, maybe even different time periods. But for many of the other countries, there's a lot of creative work to be done.--Ipigott (talk) 15:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that list would be a great start. I'm going to tackle some translation work as there are lots of dancer bios in other languages which need a presence on the en lang wikipedia. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Exactly. That's one of the main objectives of the exercise. Some countries have very little in the English wiki. There are even a few important historical ones in English. See Wikipedia:WikiWomen's_History_Month/To-do_list#Dance.--Ipigott (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ha, List of Slovenian dancers just showed up on my watchlist. I created that in about 2008! Still plenty of red links.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

You DO keep your eyes open! Just added a cat. Let's have some more female Slovenians on the EN wiki too then!--Ipigott (talk) 08:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I added a few names to Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month/To-do list#Dance. Is this the list we're working off of or is you're first draft elsewhere? Sorry if you notified me, but I just didn't see it. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that is certainly the list I recommended and I see you have added several names from Argentina and Spain. I'll try to make a start on these today or tomorrow but I've been a bit bogged down with the red links on German dancers Gerda added to the list itself. I actually wanted to avoid red links on the list but of course I have to take other peoples preferences into account. As far as I can see, I have been the only one actually writing biographies up to now. I was hoping others would be tempted to contribute too. But there's no rush.--Ipigott (talk) 06:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I created Carmen Tórtola Valencia on Feb 1st. I'll add her to the Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month/To-do list#Dance list and I'll start working on the redlinks. I don't know where Gerda's redlinks are; I don't see them on "the list". --Rosiestep (talk) 02:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I started to work on the Spanish section of the list yesterday. I included Carmen. There's quite a bit more in the Spanish article. Gerda's red links are under Germany. Only four left at the moment -- I'm slowly getting through them. I'm now doing your Italian Carlotta Brianza.--Ipigott (talk) 06:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Figured out that this is the 'other' list: List of female dancers. I created on a lot of women's biographies in January-February. Some were vedettes, cabaret performers who sang and danced. Do we want to add them to the List of female dancers? I'm on the fence with them. On the one hand, they weren't known primarily for their dancing. On the other --if they weren't dancers-- they wouldn't have been vedettes; they would have been singers. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Until now, I've been listing those who were primarily dancers or who gained special distinction in dance. I think many of the "vedettes" list dance along with everything else as one of their assets but most of them are show girls, models or actresses. I think there are more than enough real dancers to be included as a priority.--Ipigott (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Eduard Scotland

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Petrus House

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that one, I overlooked it because St Petrus looks not German at all. Who calls it that way? - To the female dancers: what do you think of making the table sortable by nationality, dates, style etc? (Compare List of 20-century classical composers.) If not, were to place Gsovsky who was born in Russia, but worked in Germany? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

It's named after the Petrus statue on the building. As for the list of female dancers, once I have compiled the full list on the basis of articles from each of the countries, I will of course cross reference as in List of female architects. (You'll see that such names appear in black with a "see" pointing to the other country.) I'll get back to this once the list is more or less complete on the basis of existing articles but in the meantime I've handled Gsovsky in this way. Maybe we could make the list sortable later but as long as it needs to be expanded so much, I think it's much easier for all concerned (including me) to keep it the way it is. It's not too easy to put new names and comments into an existing tabular format and in any case I think the country-by-country approach has its avantages. I've been trying to cover all your German red links but I also have a number of Spanish-language additions to cover from Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month/To-do list#Dance -- so I'm trying to keep everyone happy. You may like to check out the German bios I've already done, perhaps making interesting additions (all the better if you can work along the same lines as Victualers and find some pretty pictures).--Ipigott (talk) 14:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

German would be "St. Petrus" (with the dot), English St Peter, perhaps. - Cross-reference is one thing, sortable another, but you are right, perhaps later. I nominated two ballerinas and will get Gsovsky there, - if some red links remain we can delete them or place them on hold on the talk. Thanks for what you did, I will look at your bios, - no extra efforts needed to make me happy ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bremen tourist authorities have called it "House St. Petrus" in English. I just thought St Petrus House looked better. They understandably want to keep the "Petrus". Most English speakers will have no difficulty in recognizing Petrus as St Peter. (Not too long ago, Roman Catholics always used Latin in church and even Anglicans have a Latin background.) As for the long list, I think as time goes by it will expand sufficiently to enable separate lists to be made for several countries. We could certainly develop some of them along the lines you suggest, perhaps with pictures, etc., too. But for now, I'm still adding lots of new names every day as I go through the various countries. In past years, there have been a considerable number of new names to add as people write new biographies. Glad to see you are starting to write dancer bios too. Not being an expert on dance, I'm finding it all quite an education. Birgit Keil and Konstanze Vernon are coming along very well with Tatjana Gsovsky to follow. I've been trying to cover some of the historic Italians today but will probably get back to the Germans tomorrow. Thanks for all your support, including the DYKs. Let me know if I can be of any assistance.--Ipigott (talk) 21:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

On Tatjana Gsovsky, you might find it easier to draw on the Oxford bio than to translate the German.--Ipigott (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the bio hint, that helps. I searched for "St Petrus", found a few, - what do you think of adding a dot? (There was an editor on classical music, horrified when we "invented" names, - but I know that many "translations" on German websites are awful, "Evangelical Church" for Evangelische Kirche, "St. Thomas's Choir" for Thomanerchor (why translate that at all?) etc. I try to stick to the official German name if possible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, as something of a professional linguist, I should perhaps point out that a stop after the St would require the article to be written in American English. In British English, it is no longer usual to use a stop for abbreviations if the final letter of the abbreviation is the same as the last letter of the full word. That's why we write Mr and Dr and not Mr. and Dr. So while the Americans prefer St., we simply have St George, St Luke and so on (as you will see from English church names in lists such as List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the English Midlands and in the hundreds of wonderful articles written by User:Peter_I._Vardy). You will see that St Petrus is also used in the UK as in St Petrus stout. The British do, by the way, use the point in abbreviations where the last letter is not the same as the one in the full word. For example it is correct to write "etc." rather than "etc" (for et cetera). As for using German titles for articles about Germany, I often use them in cases where there has been no English equivalent but if I do use a title in English, in virtually all cases I also include the German as a redirect. You will therefore no doubt have noticed that there is a redirect from Haus St. Petrus and that Haus St. Petrus is also included in the introduction to the article lead. But of course, as a fair Wikipedian, I would certainly not like to be possessive about the article or indeed about naming conventions in general. If you really feel as strongly about it as you appear, by all means move it to "Haus St. Petrus" if you think that would be preferable. Such a move would probably also require similar treatment to all the other articles about Bremen including St Catherine's Monastery, Bremen, Robinson Crusoe House, House of the Seven Lazy Brothers, Glockenspiel House, Atlantis House and many of the others on the list at de:Wikipedia:WikiProjekt Bremen/QR-Code. But remember, many of the English-language travel guides such as Lonely Planet frequently use the English equivalents rather than the German names. Maybe we open it all up for a wider discussion?--Ipigott (talk) 07:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, taken, - I don't feel strongly about it, just wanted to know why I almost missed a hook for Portal, because it didn't look like anything German. Gsovsky for DYK, not quite ready, but the date, - I don't want to argue with a reviewer if an expansion was enough ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Gsovsky is coming along very well but I think you will find Berlin State Opera is the same as Deutsche Oper Berlin. I've been working on another interesting German star, Anna Heinel.--Ipigott (talk) 06:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the new dancer! - Staatsoper is Berlin State Opera, "Unter den Linden", was in East Germany for a while, Deutsche Oper Berlin was in West Berlin at that time, - Gsovsky worked at both, I learned to look WHEN someone studied with her. One of the cases where it really helps to stick to the original names, - Berlin Ballet could mean about anything. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for enlightening me. I must have been confusing it with Berlin State Ballet. The German wiki (de:Staatsballett Berlin) is much more explicit on this. We really need a much better article in English on Berlin State Ballet, otherwise the confusion will persist. Do you feel like sorting it out? A detailed history would be very useful.--Ipigott (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Will think about it, - not now. The things named "Staat" or "State" get so confusing, because the Bundesländer translate to "states", and the German State was in tricky state for quite a while. Someone insisted that an artist was born in "West Germany" ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Expanding biographical coverage of dancers during Women's History Month

	Coordinator Award
	Thank you for once again taking a lead in coordinating women's biographies during Women's History Month, this time emphasizing women of dance. Rosiestep (talk) 23:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much. It's always rewarding and far more interesting when others collaborate in areas like this. We all seem to be getting on pretty well together. Once some of the articles are posted on DYK, we might even attract a few dance specialists, or even female dancers.--Ipigott (talk) 07:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, a very nice start you and Gerda have made. I'll help you out with the list in due course.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Looking at links for Gsovsky, I found this image that possibly shows her, see Rudolf Koppitz. Would be interesting if it could get sourced. I will look at Berlin next, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't look too much like Gsovsky to me. It seems to be one of a series of erotic photographs by Koppitz.--Ipigott (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

It also doesn't match the "head back" description, agree. Please check the Berlin State Ballet and the Deutsche Staatsoper, I tried, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's an improvement. --Ipigott (talk) 16:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

All Germans are blue now. Can you reword the rather promotional Stuttgart Ballet? - Is there a project Ballet to go on alk pages? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

That's great -- although there are certainly more to be added. There is WikiProject Dance which is not too active but I've been trying to liven it up. I've almost completed a first draft of Patricia Neary who has been extremely active across Europe but is nowhere on Wikipedia!--Ipigott (talk) 18:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

More: Belly dance#Notable practitioners --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I know about this. There are many, many, more starting points here. Enjoy Women's History Month!--Ipigott (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Hertha Feist

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for best wishes Ian. I have got distracted by Kate Marsden who may be the most interesting person I have found who has not got an article. I have started it but she is like a cross between Florence Nightingale and Oscar Wilde with a bit of Roald Amundsen thrown in - lots of dyk type stuff. Help obviously welcome. Victuallers (talk) 15:39, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, she certainly looks interesting. Strange she's been on the German wiki since 2009.--Ipigott (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Susana Agüero

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Clotilde von Derp

The DYK project (nominate) 08:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Paula Hinton

Ian, Thank you for your hard work on Paula Hinton. Having already started Walter Gore, Andrée Howard and Sally Gilmour (DYKs on the last two), this was on my notional radar. I also have Gerd Larsen and Harold Turner in sandboxes, ready for when I find the time to finish them up to DYK standard. Anyway, I've added a few bits to Hinton, and was wondering if you were planning to do a DYK, or whether I should? Edwardx (talk) 11:03, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Copenhagen

I see Dianaa is saying there is a copyright problem which is most surprising given that I don't even have access to that book, do you? It's possible the text already existed in the article. Can you look into the problem and restore/reword?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back. Did you spot this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I've looked at it but I can't do anything about it as I do not have access to the page in question.--Ipigott (talk) 21:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Capellen station.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Capellen centre.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:07, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Clemency gare.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:58, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Jarmila Jeřábková

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Penelope Spencer

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Paula Hinton

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Olga Smirnova (ballet)

Best wishes Victuallers (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Dore Hoyer

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Kate Marsden

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Sofia

Sofia Golovkina might interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:21, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for María Nieves

The DYK project (nominate) 16:42, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Kim Joo-won

Thank you Victuallers (talk) 00:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK pending

Template:Did you know nominations/Kirsty Martin is under review, but I have some minor concerns. Montanabw^(talk) 19:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Lucia Lacarra

Materialscientist (talk) 07:03, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Sofia Golovkina

Thanks for this article Victuallers (talk) 19:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Dominique Khalfouni

Thanks for this contribution from me and the DYK projectVictuallers (talk) 07:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Hélène Bouchet

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 19:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Kirsty Martin

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 19:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Veloz and Yolanda

I don't know if they would interest you but it badly needs cleanup and rewriting. There might be enough for an article on Yolanda.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:45, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks as if it needs quite a lot of work. At the moment, I'm still trying to help Rosie with bios on Paris Opera stars but I'll try to get back to it later. I see your Lithuanian additions are still red links. I had a look at the Google translations of the Lithuanian articles but they were not good enough to work on. Maybe you have some contacts who could help?--Ipigott (talk) 10:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll find somebody to start them :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bremen Cotton Exchange

The DYK project (nominate) 08:01, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I went to |Bremen last weekend and met Godewind and others. It was a GLAMwiki meeting but Bremenpedi|A and your contributions featured. The delegates wandered around the city and they were able to dowload your information. Thanks. The project is short of funding. I'm intending to help. I hope to tell you more when we understand what is required. All the delegates wre impressed to see your article on the main page. cheers Victuallers (talk) 12:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I had been told about the funding issue. Apparently they can't do much about it until next year. As far as I can see, though, if the museum people were willing to cooperate as they have elsewhere, much could be done without incurring additional costs. All they need to do is to print out QRpedia codes for the relevant items. Were you also on Fehmarn or was the church simply mentioned at the meeting?--Ipigott (talk) 14:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ludmila Pagliero

Hello! Your submission of Ludmila Pagliero at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Ludmila

Can you sort out the issue at Template:Did you know nominations/Ludmila Pagliero? Note, ALT1 was added by another user. Thx. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Flor de María Rodríguez

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Alice Renavand

Hello! Your submission of Alice Renavand at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mindmatrix 00:19, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Isabelle Guérin

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ludmila Pagliero

Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Alice Renavand

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Yulia Makhalina

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 16:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• You're just racking these up like there's no tomorrow, aren't you. Well done! Let's see you catch up with Rosiestep. Drmies (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. They were nearly all in connection with Women's History Month which is now over. There are still a couple in the queue but then that will be that until next year. I now intend to move back to longer articles and will also be trying to work more of Denmark's cities up to GA. As you mention Rosiestep, credit should also go to her as she has been doing the DYK nominations, usually adding interesting material to the articles. Unfortunately I did not have time to cover the principals from the Dutch_National_Ballet. If you're interested, we could work on them together sometime. Coverage of female dancers from the Netherlands is very poor.--Ipigott (talk) 20:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

And I'd be glad to work on these, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps we could embark on them later this month. It would be good if @Drmies: could join us too in the interests of collaboration -- if he can move away from Öland for a while. --Ipigott (talk) 08:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

It was a sad day when I left Oland for the last time. I'll be glad to help out. I am, in fact, quite an experienced dancer--we like to dance to Kate Bush, after breakfast, in the kitchen. Drmies (talk) 14:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

No kidding, about racking them up. not sure how you stay so motivated on women dancers. I'd have a job spending more than two or three days on a given topic without moving onto something else! Keep up the great work!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:03, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: Thanks for following our progress. Rosiestep's been contributing too. It just seemed unfair to me that the leading ladies from several of the world's best companies had not been covered. I'm still wondering what we should do about the four red-linked ballerinas from Lithuania. I could have a go at translating the Lithuanian articles myself and ask one of my Lithuanian friends to look at the results -- unless you have contacts who could help? And one of these days I'll get back to Esbjerg.--Ipigott (talk) 19:04, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Isabelle Ciaravola

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Myriam Ould-Braham

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Monique Loudières

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bernice Coppieters

Thanks from the wiki Victuallers (talk) 08:02, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Astrid Stampe Feddersen

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Sonia Destri Lie

Thanks to you and Sven Manguard (who prepared these hooks) Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Re:Maria Tallchief

Hello, Ipigott. You have new messages at Dkreisst's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Church of St. Margaret of Antioch, Kopčany

Hello! Thank you for your revision of Church of St. Margaret of Antioch, Kopčany. I would like to ask you why did you remove superscript from the ordinal suffixes "th". Is there any regulation for that? Thanks! Illioplius (talk) 23:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

@Illioplius: In the English Wikipedia, normal practice for referring to centuries is either to use figures with -th without superscript or to spell out the ordinal in full. For example, the year 1350 is therefore in the "14th century" or "fourteenth century". See also the explanations at WP:ORDINAL and WP:CENTURY. I enjoyed reading this article and also your well-presented pieces on Encyclopaedia Beliana and Slovenský náučný slovník. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 06:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ida Brun

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:29, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Igone de Jongh

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:08, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Iain Webb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Swan Lake (ballet) and Adam Cooper

Amy Watson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Fredericksburg

Maia Makhateli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ketchum

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Maia Makhateli

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:23, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Randlev and Hesselbjerg

I saw your comment to another editor. While you are right, and, as you know, I accepted it, please double check that none of the material is copied from any of the sources, or closely paraphrased. If there are similarities in organization of the sections on each site, you may need to rewrite. DGG ( talk ) 16:44, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

@DGG: Thanks for getting back to me on this one, DGG. I see that like me you take a serious interest in the library community. Good to be in touch with you. My comment on this article was to do with notability, not with plagiarism. Unfortunately, as the original editor's sources are all Danish books, it would be difficult to check for close similarity without obtaining copies. As all but one of the sources are in Danish, I expect the author has taken the opportunity to adapt the text in connection with his English translation. (In any case, I would be surprised if the article violates your own ideas on "copyvio".) By coincidence, I happen to be in Denmark at the moment but ILL usually takes a couple of weeks here and I will be leaving in a few days. If you are really worried about plagiarism, why not try to get hold of a copy of "Aros and the world of the Vikings" yourself? I see it is available from the LOC here. I would be interested to hear whether you find any passages that have simply been copied over verbatim. In any case, I appreciate your moving the article into the main space after it had been hanging around for so long and had encountered so much resistance. --Ipigott (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

the problem is that the article draws conclusions which need to be specifically cited, and that essentially all the sources are brief reports. Almost none of them are in the US, which does not surprise me--it is apparently impossible to do any sort of work on Scandinavian archeology in this country. In practice, there are so many AfCs to work with that I (and everyone else I know) tends to spot check only the most suspicious. I may try to get Aros, but mainly because I'm interested in early medieval commerce. DGG ( talk ) 01:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Then you might also be interested in this and some of the other articles listed in the margin.--Ipigott (talk) 05:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Port of Skagen

How much more can be found on this? I think we can get it up to GA. "The harbour consists of the following basins: Ydre Forhavnsbassin, Vesthavn og Østhavn. The Vesthavn consists of Indre Forhavnsbassin, Bundgarnsbassin, Auktionsbassin, Mellembassin and Vestre Bassin, while the Østhavn consists of Østbassin I and Østbassin II" needs clarifying though as I'm not sure what you mean by "basin" and what those sub basins are. Is og intentional too? Seems odd to have a colon and comma if there's only two mentioned. Also what do you mean by "call for tenders"? I've made it collaboration of the month anyway now that Althorp has been nommed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:21, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

With all due respect to your judgment, I think that we have done enough on Skagen as a place for now, especially as we achieved a GA. If we do more, I would like to return to the Skagen Painters which could still be considerably expanded and improved. And we should not forget Esbjerg (also a port). I've been a bit short of time for Wikipedia recently but can still afford an hour or two per day.--Ipigott (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

It needs very little to get it to GA Ian, otherwise I wouldn't have picked it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I certainly don't want to do anything to stop you bringing the article up to GA but for me it was very much a secondary addition to the work we were doing on Skagen. If I am not mistaken, @Rosiestep: created the article and I just added a few details.--Ipigott (talk) 20:53, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I've checked out "basin": definitions include "a dock built in a tidal river or harbor" (Webster), and "a dock constucted in a tidal river or harbour, in which by means of flood gates the water is kept at a constant level" (OED). (There is a similar item in Wikipedia titled "canal basin". So in this context the term (bassin in Danish) appears to be correct. I have now added a word of explanation in the article. However, if you think "enclosed docks" or "enclosed dock systems" (as used in e.g. Port of London) would be more appropriate, please feel free to make the change. I think nevertheless we should keep the Danish names of the individual docks as they are. A "call for tenders" is a procedure widely used in connection with construction projects whereby either pre-specified companies (limited call for tenders) or any interested company (open call for tenders) are invited to submit bids for completing prescribed work. I've also tried to improve the prose a bit. I should perhaps also explain that when writing the article, I attempted to summarize a much more complete history of the development of the port given in the referenced sources. It seems to me the article now clearly reflects the main developments but more could be added if you really think it necessary. There may of course also be other sources I have not yet identified.--Ipigott (talk) 09:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I honestly don't think it'll need much more to promote it. I've found a history of it in English on the website which could improve it a little further. I'll try to work on it over the next few days. Obviously the painters article would be more desirable to work on but I thought it needed more work than the port.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:26, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

I've just discovered some more recent stuff here. I'll go through it more carefully when I have time and add any important info.--Ipigott (talk) 09:36, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Excellent, I don't think it needs that much more, but I think it's worth doing. BTW there's some red links in Jazztage Dresden which I really think should be started. I don't know if your interest extends to other German cities than the project one, but they're pretty notable buildings with decent articles on German wiki. No worries though if you're busy. I'll work on the port article shortly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:31, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Wasaplatz might interest you.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:55, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll try to find time to expand this a bit over the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

You may be interested in adding to Vilhelm Tvede.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:35, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: Maybe later. I've just noticed we now have Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Historic houses task force. Maybe I'll add some suggestions to the todo section. I was wondering whether there are any tools for picking out articles about listed castles and manor houses in other wikis (e.g. Danish, Swedish, Norwegian) which have already at least one other language version. This might be a sensible way of seeing which deserve coverage in English. I've recently added Blågård, Selsø and Rønninge Søgård which you might like to look at, perhaps adding boxes?--Ipigott (talk) 08:21, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, browsing categories on other wikis I think would be the best way to do it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:08, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi! Thanks a lot for your edits in Church of La Milagrosa. There's only one thing I wanna fix and I have no idea how to state that in English in an accurate way. In the first draft I wrote: "The facade has two towers, one in each side, square plant and octogonal ending." I meant (or I tried to) "each tower has square plant and octogonal ending" (in Spanish ambas torres tienen planta cuadrada y remate octogonal), not the building itself, as we can see in the photograph (and written in the cited source, in Spanish, of course). After that you changed that for "The facade has two towers, one on each side, a square plan and an octagonal east end."

I'm not a specialist in architecture (neither in English, by any means) but I think... "east end"... could be a concept that is related to the building and not to the towers? Thanks again and sorry for my poor English. Cheers!Karkossa (talk) 21:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Karkoosa: Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I think everything's OK now. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 07:41, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Dance

Hello, I’m contacting you because you are a participant in WikiProject Dance. Myself and another editor, User:Mwacha are interested in developing some notability guidelines on WikiProject Dance for dancers, dance critics, performers, and other genre articles as there is no such thing at the moment comparable to what I have heard other editors use for Visual Arts, IE “if they are collected in a major museum, then they are considered notable.” There are of course exceptions to this standard but it is nice to have a rule of thumb to help with AfD, and other moderated discussions. We hope to start this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dance under Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dance#Notability Guidelines.OR drohowa (talk) 18:52, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

A question about words

Hi Ian, I was wondering if you could help me with a language-related question? I've been making articles for a few historic houses on Gotland these past days, but I'm a bit unsure of whether I've got the terms right - is a mansion like a manor but without land holdings, or what is the difference between the terms? I've used mansion for Stora Hästnäs and Katthamra and manor for the crown estate (Swedish: kungsgård) at Roma Abbey, but I'm not sure I got it right. If you know or if you could point me in the right direction I'd be very grateful. Thanks in advance! Yakikaki (talk) 11:10, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

@Yakikaki: I must first say how impressed I am by your excellent command of English. I have been reading your many recent additions and find there is very little requiring improvement. On the subject of manors, manor houses and mansions: today it is often a matter of personal preference although historically speaking a manor was the main residence of a landed estate or farming community while a mansion was simply a large, often grandiose house which could be either in a town or out in the country. In the U.K., we often use the terms "country house" or even "stately home" for such buildings. In translation, it is sometimes difficult to choose the correct one. If you run into problems, you can always use "(main) building" or "(main) residence" or if you are dealing with Swedish "slotter", perhaps even "palace" or "castle" depending on the status and the ranking of the residents. I also tend to take usage in guidebooks into account, whether or not they are strictly correct. Thanks for your suggestions on the Historic houses task force.--Ipigott (talk) 13:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind words and taking the time to respond! It will be of much help, now and in the future, not least for participating in the Historic houses task force, which I think will be a lot of fun. Let me know if you need any help from me at any time. Yakikaki (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Stevns Klint and the lists

Any chance that you would be interested in creating an article on Stevns Klint which weems to become a UNESCO World Heritage Sit (source?

Slow progress on the lists of historic houses. Suggestions for changes (what info to include, order of columns etx) will be very welcome. I would in particular like to know what types of buildings you think should be included. Should præstegårde, kapellanboliger, rektorboliger etc be included? I tend to think that they should but am a bit skeptical when a residence is built in association with for instance a watermill, windmill, lighthouse or the likes. These would probably be better off on specific lists. What do you think? Other comments about what to include or not to include will be welcomed.Ramblersen (talk) 20:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

@Ramblersen: Stevns Klint certainly deserves an article in English, whether or not it is included on the UNESCO list. I'll see what I can do. Thanks for all the effort you have put into List of historic houses on Funen, List of historic houses on Zealand, List of historic houses in metropolitan Copenhagen, List of historic houses in Jutland, List of historic houses on Lolland and List of historic houses on Falster. The lists themselves are already an important contribution to work on historic houses in Denmark. As for rectories and the like, I would only include them if they are notable for their architecture or history. In any case, with your lists we now have an excellent basis for more articles on houses of interest in Denmark.--Ipigott (talk) 05:17, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

@Ramblersen: Glad to see Stevns Klint has been included on the UNESCO listings. I hope that will encourage people interested in geology to contribute to the article. If not, I'll see what I can do myself in a day or two. Thanks to your alert, we managed to put a skeleton together just in time.--Ipigott (talk) 17:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for starting the article! I knew the formal decision was up this weekend so I figured now would be a good time to start an article before someone stubbed it. A shame that the selection of imiges is not that good but hopefully it will change with the new status. There are also some quite nice images of Højerup Old Church and of the beautiful Gjorslev manor house. Søren abildgaard may interest you and can at least provide some historic depictions.

There are some good pictures here on Flickr but they have changed the format and I don't know how to save them. Maybe user:Elekhh can help?--Ipigott (talk) 10:09, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Yep, quite annoying these format changes that make websites slower and confusing for established users without any meaningful benefits. The trick on the new flickr interface is to click on the three dots "..." on the right hand side of the screen which stands for "more actions" and than on "Download/All sizes". This is nice, but I also found more images on Commons, now in their own category at Commons:Category:Stevns Klint. --ELEKHH^T 12:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

@Elekhh: Thanks very much for the tip. I managed to download the one we both selected.--Ipigott (talk) 15:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Esbjerg

Three citations needed. I've merged some paragraphs and expanded the lede. All that's really needed now if you're sure there's not much else available is to copyedit and restructure the history and economy section a bit.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure there's a great deal more available but I think we have now covered the essentials for an encyclopaedic article. I've tried to deal with the points your raised. I note you did not think it necessary to cover demographics in a separate section as I suggested although the increase in the city's population over a relatively short period is impressive. Anyway, let's see if we can get some constructive feedback from the reviewer. And btw, Ramblersen's historic houses lists have made it much easier for me to progress on the coverage of Lolland and Falster, both in articles and by expanding on notes, etc., in the tables themselves.--Ipigott (talk) 16:29, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I've just noticed the image you substituted in the box. I far prefer the one of the town square. It includes the iconic buildings everyone associates with the city. On my screen, at the standard resolution, I can't make out much in the new image, I'm afraid, and I can't find anything better on Flickr.--Ipigott (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, I associate the port with the city!! I've changed it to a better image which is nearer the buildings. That the sky isn't bright blue isn't really ideal though. I could barely make them out in the distance before! Let's try to decide on a nice image. How about either of the top two at [5]? I'll nom for GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Can you add two more citations to sport section? I'll nom tomorrow. Also, can you find anything to start Nordic Ferry Service or the missing uni?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The second photo, Esbjerg Harbour, is pretty good. Despite advice from Elekhh on the three dots, I can't get back to the old format and therefore cannot upload it into Commons.--Ipigott (talk) 05:30, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Can you find anything on what ships come to Esbjerg from Harwich? I think we should probably mention a few of them. I came on one of them myself!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

It's now Sirena Seaways. In your day, it was probably the MS Winston Churchill.--Ipigott (talk) 06:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Certainly looks familiar. I think it's worth mentioning them. Can you also add a bit more detail on the courthouse and statue seems as the churches have more detail about them? Should be ready then! You say you want to work on Kolding next?♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. There's certainly lots more I could copy across from the articles on the individual churches and sooner or later I would like to start articles on Esbjerg's remaining churches too. Thanks for substituting "town" for "city". I think it is the correct term. Unfortunately there is an American tendency in Wikipedia to call any fairly large settlement a "city".

I don't think I've ever mentioned Kolding (although it could certainly do with a bit of work). I was more interested in improving coverage of Odense (interesting to many for its associations with H.C. Andersen). However, Aarhus would be easier to bring up to GA and is also Denmark's second city. But maybe I'll take a short break from the major cities as I would like to spend more of my available time on the historic houses, especially those on Lolland and Falster. I have also found it rather frustrating that no one else has shown much interest in improving the article on Esbjerg. I would be happier to work on articles which attract wider collaboration. It's all becoming a bit of a one-man show.

The beautifully presented new charts show that I added 18.8% of the text on Copenhagen, 32.2% on Aalborg and 48.9% on Esbjerg. If I don't watch out, I'll be over 50% on Odense. Even if you post the articles on your project page, they don't seem to attract much interest. Maybe I should put something up on WikiProject Denmark.--Ipigott (talk) 09:52, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make. That's rather disrespectful don't you think to call the achievements to date a "one man show". They've been a collaborative effort regardless of who did the bulk of the work. On the four Danish city articles I've worked on I've made a whopping 780 odd edits in total. That's a major contribution, and I've also made 107 edits to Esbjerg the exact number of edits as you. What more do you expect?? Neither Rosie nor myself speak Danish and most of the info on these places is in Danish so we entrust you to do the bulk of the writing work. If you really have a problem with it and our lack of work then I suggest we no longer continue working together. Gobsmacked at what you've said in all honesty and I'm sure Rosie would think the same thing. Have some respect. On some GA collaborations I've done 90% of the work. Do I care? No. It's not the point, and as an experienced and mature encyclopedia editor interested in Danish articles it shouldn't matter a bit to you either.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I'm sorry you think I was being disrespectful. It was certainly not my intention. In future, I'll try to be more careful about the terms I use but I was indeed trying to make a point. I certainly very much appreciate the tremendous work you have done to help so many Danish articles along to GA: Ved Vejen, Bjarke Ingels (really your article anyway), Aalborg, Copenhagen, Skagen and Port of Skagen, as well as Uppsala Cathedral in Sweden. It is also thanks to you that I ever embarked on trying to improve existing articles rather than writing new ones to fill the gaps. But particularly with Esbjerg, I was disappointed to see that I was unable to count on the same level of responsive collaboration as I had enjoyed on our earlier ventures together, especially on aspects where I do not have much experience. As I tried to point out, I would really appreciate wider collaboration and interest not just from you but from others who have a closer connection with or interest in the places in question. (I'll try to attract interest through WikiProject Denmark.) To be quite honest, I am not always happy with the additions I make on my own. On Esbjerg, I more or less finished my additions in mid-February and was hoping you would help out with some of the sections requiring attention, or at least perhaps let me know how I could improve them myself. I know you have been busy with lots of other important work but I had to wait until just a couple of days ago for you to take a renewed interest in the article. In just two or three hours, you were able to provide many of the inputs and suggestions which I had been waiting for over the months. In the meantime, I had tried to put together sections on the demographics, administration, etc., which you had handled so competently in our earlier articles. But maybe I am simply expecting too much. Perhaps I should just try a bit harder to cover all the sections required on city articles myself. Anyway, please don't be upset by my comments. I just thought it was important to let you know how much I appreciate timely collaboration as a basis on which to ensure real improvement. And while we're discussing collaboration, I would also like to emphasize how much I welcome you involvement on the historic houses scene, not just your own work on articles like Althorpe (where you indeed did almost 90% of the work) and the historic hotels, but especially on suggesting a historic houses task force which has already led to substantial and more focused improvements. Anyway, I'll push forward with Odense and Aarhus in the hope that I can count on further assistance. (As both have an extensive history, there should be lots of sources in English too.) You should also let me know if I can help you with any of your own new enterprises (especially those not related to the cinema).--Ipigott (talk) 06:30, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

The reason is because Esbjerg seems to have comparatively little information about it. I did ask you if there was anything else which could be added and some decent sources but you said you already thought it decent enough for a small town so I took your word for it and began copyediting it rather than a big new expansion. And you've been very busy for months on end with ballet dancers, I've been waiting months actually for you to renew your interest in it and getting it to GA. I did add material on the hotels and that earlier and it seemed at the times pretty much all I could find on the town in google books. If you could point out some sources which could be used to further improve it I'll see what I can do. But you do have the tendency to voice a negative comment every now and then, whether its photos or whatever. With what you had said thanking Rosie and myself and my nomming it I was only just thinking that it had been a good collaboration. Also part of the reason is that when before I began adding content at an early stage you said something about it interfering with your work on it or something and that you'd rather do what you can on it first and hand it over to me which I thought was a good idea to save edit conflicts. As for Althorp I thought Rosie did a great deal more than 10%, not just content but the way she edited it and did a lot with broadening the sources. I think you're unfairly comparing actual content added with all the other work Rosie and myself do to these articles and ignoring that here are several aspects to editing and producing good work which all have their part to play. Ultimately it doesn't matter, we produced a great article together and that's really what matters. With the RBN project though, you mention it attracts little interest but it's not supposed to. It's not really a project it's a loose collaborative effort which has largely diminished now Nvv and our DYK system no longer exists and I had though about deleting it but given what you had said about it being useful I thought it worth keeping the page up and at least having something we could loosely work on in a month, If everything was set in stone, you'd have been expected to contribute exactly a third of the content to Althorp or whatever. You pick and choose what you want to edit and vice versa. But even if at times my actual content input into articles radically differs I still believe I do a good job in wrapping them up and getting them to GA which is the most important thing. I don't mind you being honest and you saying that I could add material from xx, but please don't imply it's a "one man show" again. I really don't think it's a good idea looking at charts and detailed analysis of who edits what. It's not what wikipedia is about..♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I hate becoming involved in any kind of disagreement but the more I try to sort things out on all this, the worse it seems to get. I'm sorry you find my reactions so negative. I was really trying to emphasize the positive impact of your work in general and on our collaboration in particular. Apparently I was not sufficiently clear. You are quite right though about the time I spent on the female ballet dancers. Every year I try to focus on coverage of an important sector of female enterprise but I only did so after completing my first set of major contributions on Esbjerg, not just on the main article but on a range of smaller articles about the buildings and surroundings. I was also trying to fit Esbjerg in together with my work on Bremen at the time. And rather than return to Esbjerg a while ago, you asked me to help out with Port of Skagen - which I did without hesitation (and to good effect). On the photos, I am really confused. If you look at the first Esbjerg section on this page, you will see that you were the one who told me "we really need a more inspiring image with clear blue sky". Now you are saying the opposite! But I suppose we're all entitled to change our minds. In any case, you are quite right to say that the most important thing is to improve the quality of the articles, whoever does the editing. And I have never denied that you "do a good job in wrapping them up and getting them to GA". I thought I had made that abundantly clear too. Let's just try to appreciate each other's views, even if there can be slight difference of opinion at time. I'll now try to return to Odense and use my keyboard for something a little more constructive.--Ipigott (talk) 10:06, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

An image with clear blue skies would of course be ideal, but the subject of the photo I think is more important. Ideally we'd find one with both. We could of course have a montage image.. I'm not looking for praise or asking you to keep praising my work and efforts on Danish articles, you've more than done that in our time together. I'm just asking you to avoid implying that we've done bugger all to the articles! If you'd like me to add certain content then as long as you suggest sources and indicate what you want I'm happy to do it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: (Continuing our game of ping-pong, my serve!) That may be your interpretation but it is certainly not what I said. Please reread my comments more carefully as well as my subsequent explanations. All I was saying was that with each new article I was covering an increasing proportion of the workload, especially on content. (I used the charts as they appeared to illustrate this.) I was therefore hoping to restore more active interest and collaboration on the articles as they develop, particularly if I am specifically invited to work on them. I find collaboration one of the most positive aspects of work on Wikipedia. In the past, you and others have been quick to identify useful English-language content and sourcing as a means of improving coverage, even on the most obtuse Danish topics. Recently this level of interest and involvement seems to have diminished. I was simply trying to let you know that I would not like to reach the stage where nearly all the work on content (rather than the equally important aspects of presentation, photos, boxes, templates, nominations...) would be left to me. Collaboration on Odense along these lines would certainly contribute to improving the quality. After I've spend a few days going through the existing sections, I'll let you know where I think you can help.--Ipigott (talk) 10:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

You said "It's all becoming a bit of a one-man show". That very strongly implied to me that you think Rosie and myself and other Danish wikipedians don't put in enough effort and work into Danish city articles and that we ought to be putting in the same amount of content work as you even though we don't speak Danish. And in what else you said, reiterated again here, you seem to indicate that you resent doing much of the hard work on them. I don't know how you could mean anything else from what you have said. If you do then you worded it very poorly. Remember that Denmark isn't a primary interest like it is with yourself and while it is nice to edit the occasional Denmark article I have many other interests which take up my time. I was obviously mistaken in thinking that you enjoyed researching and writing these articles and was largely why I put the time into them to get them to GA with you in light of your vision for getting core Denmark articles up to good quality. As you speak Danish and we don't though I thought it inherently obvious that you'd be doing most of the content work and thought you were fine with that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I am not in the habit of making the kind of accusations you ascribe to me. And I certainly don't see why you think "It's all becoming a bit of a one-man show" is such an offensive statement. Let's not waste any more time on semantics. If you cannot appreciate my detailed explanations, then there's no more to be said. Sorry if my words have caused you such offense. As you say, Denmark is not one of your core interests and I understand you have other areas which you find more important. I have found in the past though that you have been able to make excellent contributions to articles about Denmark and the Danes and I hope you will continue to take a real interest in the future. Keep up the good work on all fronts! For anyone who should doubt my appreciation of your work, you have earned the title of Wikipedian No. 1 (I'll have to invent a barnstar).--Ipigott (talk) 11:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Ian, you should know me better by now than to know that flattering me doesn't in the least bit change or make me forget about something that bothers me, in fact it comes across as patronising that you'd think that would make it OK. The fact that you can't see that "It's all becoming a one-man show" is offensive to myself and Rosie as co contributors, that's concerning to me, and then you make out as if I've wrongly interpreted what you've said and that I'm making all sorts of accusations against you when it's clear as daylight what you are implying. I know you mean well and do genuinely appreciate my interest in Danish articles but unless you're willing to do the bulk of the work on our Danish collaborations together then I can't see it working as it would be counterproductive for me to try to decipher Danish language sources through google translate and you having to check it all. It's far easier for you to do most of the Danish language source work and then Rosie and myself try to fill in gaps and add English book sources etc. With Esbjerg, unless I'm mistaken, there wasn't much about it in google books in English. So how can I and Rosie possibly do an equal amount of content on it as you? Odense I'd imagine might have more material available in English. Anyway, no further apology necessary, let's move on... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I wasn't trying to flatter you. I just wanted to make sure that those following our discussion do not draw the wrong conclusions. I do appreciate your inputs. The whole thrust of my comments was to try to encourage more involvement by others. I now accept all your explanations, understand (from your comments) why you found my remarks offensive and realize that in future I should expect to have to cover more of the work on Denmark myself. I think I should make it clear that I have no issues with Rosiestep on these articles, although you have mentioned her name on several occasions in this discussion. I have always enjoyed an excellent level of collaboration with her and hope it will continue. On that basis, Avanti! Supper in Odense.--Ipigott (talk) 12:23, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Collaborations were always uneven in the Nvvchar days. Nvv did most of the work and Rosie and myself were usually left to copyedit and find scraps. I'm not sure how we can make collaborations on these Danish cities even given the Danish language barrier. We can try to work on an article like Odense section by section gradually together or you can do all you can from Danish sources and then Rosie and I try to pad it out. If you want proper collaboration the best way would be to do it strictly one section at a time. I know what you really mean, but the obstacle is the Danish language sources and that you prefer to work adding what you can first which oftne means there's not much left for me or Rosie to add, and that was also an issue during the DYK days when after your excellent work on some of the Danish entries we struggled to find anything! Wider collaboration would be nice, but I'm not sure who is going to show an interest aside from Ramblersen.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: If we go back to our work together on Copenhagen and Aarhus, you were a great help in handling the demographics and the administration sections and you also added quite a bit on geography and education. In addition to Ramblersen, who is always ready to help on specific issues, we might also be able to encourage the involvement of Hoary (if he is not too busy with his courses), Yakikaki (talk · contribs) (who has been doing great work on Sweden and Estonia and might like to cross the sound to Denmark for a change), and perhaps some of the Danes such as Danmuz and Favonian who are members of WP Denmark. And of course Rosie often has a lot of useful content to add too. Let's just see how it evolves. For the time being, I'll try to improve the section on the history of Odense. It'll probably be a while before I can get to the other sections. So there are great opportunities.--Ipigott (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Aalborg yep, Aarhus is still a mess! Yes OK, history of Odense for starters. You might post on the RBN talk page of what is being edited and what section to focus on.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Off out to enjoy the sunshine now... Over to you! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Enjoy the sun. It's raining here. Thanks for the last big batch of improvements.--Ipigott (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Thunderstorm coming over now! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:02, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll take a look at Odense and other big projects this week as I'm on vacation in Nevada City, Calif all week where it's warm and sunny. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

@Rosiestep: Thanks for your interest. We already seem to be making good progress with Odense. Much more quickly than I expected. Any assistance you can give would be greatly appreciated. But there's really no rush. Enjoy your holiday. Looks like a nice area.--Ipigott (talk) 14:10, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I did answer on my talk page but I moved up the post to the appropriate section! One thing though with this "gradual" collaboration which is problematic for me though is I'm really not the sort of editor who likes ploughing away at one article for a prolonged period. I prefer to get most of the work done on one day or two and then wait a few weeks and then repeat it etc. I don't want myself or Rosie to feel under pressure to keep contributing to it. That was part of the reason why we dialled down on the RBN collaboration to free ourselves up. It should be done in a relaxed fashion when any of us feel like adding to it. I really must be getting on with the books I have through the grant but it's difficult to get motivated on big topics like Kubrick.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I'm afraid I'm completely confused by the above message. If you are referring to Denmark Street (sorry if my message was misplaced on your talk page), I simply wanted to say that I thought the article was so good (even before it appeared in DYK) that it might be worth nominating it for GA. I certainly did not want you or anyone else to spend days and days on its further improvement. It was just a very mild suggestion and certainly not a call for renewed action! If you are referring to Odense, you have already contributed a great deal to the article and I don't expect you to do anything more until I have researched all the other items as far as I can. Unlike you, I am an extremely slow worker. It usually takes me several weeks to improve an article on a historic city and this is no exception. Some of the basic information is fairly easy to find but it is much more difficult to cover all the detail and write up/edit the supporting articles. Please don't feel under any obligation or pressure to contribute further if you have other priorities. I tried to point our to Rosie that there was no rush either. Kubrick does indeed look like a challenging assignment, especially if you want to cover all his films too. Please accept my apologies if I have been responsible for diminishing your motivation. I'll try to avoid bothering you with other misplaced comments on your talk page in future. Now I'll get back to Odense.--Ipigott (talk) 13:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, the Denmark Street discussion, scroll up my talk page... I think Denmark Street could get there will a little bit more. I was referring to Odense of course..With our collaborations yeah I tend to work in bursts. I just don't want really to strictly work on one section over the space of a week and so on. If I make additions when I can I hope this is OK for you. It's coming on very nicely! Now with a bit of effort I'll resume going through one Kubrick book!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Why are you so fussy with images? The previously image was beautiful, much higher quality, and with azure blue sky.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

I've started Template:Odense, you and Rosie might add further missing landmarks to it. Do you know what the neighbourhoods within the city are? I think I've seen something like Odense V. I've also added a media section which mainly needs sourcing. There looks an inaccuracy with the TV2 article and that claiming 6 stations, the TV2 Fyn article indicates 8.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Nordic Ferry Services

Nordic Ferry Services changed their name to Danske Færger in October 2010.Ramblersen (talk) 06:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I've made the necessary changes.--Ipigott (talk) 14:11, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

And another thing: Your article on Danish Maritime Museum has mot been updated since the new museum opened last authumn. Here are a couple of references in case you are interested in updatingthe article: Politiken review, Berlingske review, Dezeen, Wallpaper.Ramblersen (talk) 07:29, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

@Ramblersen: Thanks for the update on the maritime museum. I knew at the time it was "work in progress". But when you find relevant information on such articles, please do not hesitate to make any necessary changes yourself. The more collaborative work the better!--Ipigott (talk) 14:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Woll do. Being part of your Bjarke Ingel campaign, I just thoug you might prefer to adapt it yourself, rather than seeing me mess up the prose.Ramblersen (talk) 07:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia motto is "Be bold!" The excellence of all your contributions greatly outweighs any minor problems with the prose.-- Ipigott (talk) 08:30, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Tornø

Hi, can you add more to this from the Fyen source, it mentions a hotel/restaurant on it I believe. The translation is saying dam, Danish wiki says 300m dam but I had originally thought it was more a causeway seeing it on google maps, not too dissimilar to the one leading to the church on Whalsay, Shetland we did a while back, rather than a proper dam. Can you investigate? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Dæmning means both dam and causeway and is commonly used in Danish for road embankments connecting islands.--Ipigott (talk) 06:11, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I think causeway is more likely to be accurate.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, of course. I changed it in the Tornø article. I just meant the word could mean two things.--Ipigott (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Esbjerg GAR has begun BTW.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Funen really needs a massive amount of work. I created Category:Populated places in Funen anyway. When you return can you expand Helnæs from here? I think Funen should get the Bornholm treatment and try to at least get the main towns and villages looking half decent and start-C class. And of course the church treatment as you're the expert on those!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

The only islands covered properly up to now have been Borhholm and Falster. I've also made a start on Lolland and was hoping to get back to it on the basis of Ramblersen's historic houses list. Funen is quite a different proposition, much bigger and with several medium-sized historic towns: Bogense, Middelfart, Assens, Fåborg, Svendborg, Nyborg, Kerteminde and Ringe, Denmark. Of these, only Sevendborg and Nyborg have reasonable articles, both of which could be significantly explanded . In addition, there are a number of sizable communities and lots of historic sites, landmarks, churches, museums and beauty spots. So compared with little Bornholm, we are talking about at least ten times as much work. I'm not sure I'm ready for it yet! Let's stick to completing work on Denamrk's ten main towns first. As for my "return", I will be in Denmark until early September -- so can make use of library resources here if necessary.--Ipigott (talk) 11:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hehe, you're very predictable.. I knew it wasn't worth mentioning...♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I really like the island of Funen and will certainly try to cover it properly sooner or later. Maybe I could do a bit more with the towns I mentioned above in the meantime. You have to remember I am very slow.--Ipigott (talk) 16:34, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

As I said though there's a massive amount of work needed and we can't be expected to do it all! But it would be good to get those you mentioned at least with a source or two and start class minimum. It is surprising to still see decent sized towns which are still stubs! Priority though as you say is the main cities, so let's mainly stick with that for now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I realize your main interest is geography and you are of course quite right: these towns should be covered up to a reasonable level. But let's not forget culture. I really had intended to spend a little time on the final improvements to the Skagen Painters. So give me a few days for that, then we'll get back to geography. As you recently said, our work here should be enjoyable.--Ipigott (talk) 20:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm interested in both, but I do tend to think geographically and see things like major cities and towns on a map as important as within them they contain many notable article subjects. Looking on google maps Funen doesn't look that big at all to me, I mean when I look at Russia now... Let's focus on the main cities now anyway. Still waiting for a source which documents the historical population of Odense like Aalborg.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Møn (which I've also covered) is 218 km2, Bornholm 589 km2, Falster 514 km2 and Lolland 1,243 km2. Funen is bigger than all four together: 3,098 km2. Anyway, I've made a start on Bogense. I'll try to add something (but not too much) on the history and landmarks of the other main towns too. The source you want for the population stats is this. Unfortunately I do not have MS Excel on this machine and therefore cannot see the exact numbers. If you have it, you should be able to see everything, if not the tables give a pretty good idea of the evolution. Is there anything else we need for Odense?--Ipigott (talk) 14:43, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't think so. GA doesn't even have to be comprehensive anyway. Can you find anything more on the climate or expand it a bit based on table observation? I'll add to the demo section later. Funen is definitely a lot bigger than I thought then, but I think it would be good to get those you mentioned up to start class with an infobox/pin anyway. I copied over the Region of South Denmark map and added a window in it in the other day. Pity there's not a good one for Funen though. It can be done gradually anyway. if it becomes a "chore" then don't do it. We should probably press on with Aarhus once we nom Odense anyway. You've made a great start with sorting out Bogense and Middelfart thoug, kudos for that!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:46, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Downloaded to excel, when I hover over bars in graph it shows exact figures so I'm onto something! With a bit of luck we'll have Odense nommed tonight!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I've expanded the demo section. @Rosiestep: Can you source each notable person in the notable people section of Odense section and pad out climate using observation from table if you're in the mood? Sport could also use a little more detail. Doesn't need much, just a bit fleshier. Should be ready to post at GAR then. Either of you are also quite welcome to copyedit or expand Veloz and Yolanda which is GAN.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I've started c/e Veloz and Yolanda but I'm not done. I'll continue working on it, and Odense, tomorrow when I'm less tired. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I've added a bit to sport and climate and Ian has sourced the notables. Should be ready to post at GAN now.Still could blue some of the remaining red links though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:02, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Nommed and started cleaning up Aarhus sources..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Great! You are really helping to put Denmark on the Wikipedia World Map. I'll give you a day or two before I touch Aarhus. In the meantime, I'll try to improve coverage of Funen.--Ipigott (talk) 11:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! You too! Just spotted though that the Palaces and theatres section is underdeveloped and St Alban's Church could use some more info. I've added the text but there's still quite a few citations needed for it and throughout the article. Should be fine then after a final read and copyedit. St Alban's Church and Odense Palace could still use some more detail though. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:02, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

No rush to move on to Aarhus. I'll try to clean it up over the next day or two though. I think it would be worth doing a bit of work for the time being on Funen, basic stuff. I've stubbed quite a few of the suburbs/villages which could be fleshed out a bit too. I added infoboxes to the main towns you mentioned yesterday.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour and just check the translation for Léon Escudier from French, the Verdi part especially.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Done. You can flush it out from the sources I've included.--Ipigott (talk) 15:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I've added over half of the remaining citations needed for Odense. Can you take care of the remainder for Landmarks and Education, there's only about 3 left.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:06, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can see, all the ref problems have now been fixed.--Ipigott (talk) 13:11, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I created Template:Funen, Template:Landmarks of Funen and Gelsted...♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:03, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Together the templates create a challenging agenda for the next few months! And there are lots of historic houses to be added from Ramblersen's list too. I'll just keep to the main towns for the moment.--Ipigott (talk) 20:56, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Something to work on gradually anyway, the main cities are obviously priority. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:06, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Svendborg

You know, Svendborg is really 3/4 the way there to GA already I think. It's a smallish town and wouldn't be expected to have all of the ingredients of the main cities. How much more material do you think exists on it? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

After Odense, it's the biggest town on Funen. I know it quite well. I was thinking of adding a bit more on the churches and something on the museum. There are also a couple of theatres. Points of interest in the surroundings include Egeskov, Valdemars Slot on Tåsinge, and Hesselagergård. Notable people with close associations to Svendborg include A.P. Møller and Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller, Kai Nielsen (sculptor) and the author Johannes Jørgensen. It won't take me long to add these details. On Odense I see there is a problem with the date sequences for the mayors. Perhaps you could handle it.--Ipigott (talk) 12:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Well now we've completed work on Odense, the next main challenge will be Aarhus. I'll take a first look at it tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Already looking great. It's really hot here, peak summer heat, too hot to concentrate on writing an article I'm afraid. So I'm unlikely going to be adding much for Aarhus. Hopefully I can find something before you nom. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:28, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Hot here too but still adding bits and pieces. No rush.--Ipigott (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Financing

Hello. To ask straight away: Are you being paid for the improvement of the Aarhus page?

I wish :-)...♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I do not mean to offend you! But I wanted to ask, because I have read about some Wikipedia projects being financed to improve certain pages. These projects do not aim for commercialising the WP information, on the contrary they are by design put together in order to help commercial interests to be represented on WP, without the usual PR-bullsh*t. It is thus a sort of win-win situation. Maybe you know more about these projects? Maybe you were involved with them somehow? The reason I suspects it on the Aarhus page, is that the city has invested large sums of money to advertise the city for the coming 2017 culture event and in general as well. Whether you are involved or not, I think you would like to know more about this too? And I had to ask you somehow .... RhinoMind (talk) 20:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

@RhinoMind: I must say your question came as quite a surprise. I have never received any form of payment for my contributions to Wikipedia and have not been involved in any of the preparations for Aarhus 2017. Indeed, I only discovered that Aarhus had been selected as a European Cultural City after I started working on the Aarhus article earlier this month. I am nevertheless very interested in culture in general and believe the European City of Culture initiative has done much to improve awareness of the cultural assets of a wide range of European cities. As I think I mentioned to you earlier, my interest in Aarhus is simply that together with Dr. Blofeld I am trying to improve the quality of articles about Danish cities. We have been working on the top five: Copenhagen, Odense, Aalborg, Esbjerg and now Aarhus. The others have already reached GA and I hope Aarhus will make the grade soon. If you think the article is giving too much prominence to the Aarhus 2017 initiative, I suggest you raise the matter on the article's talk page where others can express their opinions. You are of course quite right to point out that some national and municipal authorities have been directly involved in improving coverage of their interests on Wikipedia and I have indeed had close contacts with some of them, especially through the national libraries, but this has been without any kind of financial arrangement.--Ipigott (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Yeah I know, but I had to ask anyway. I dont think the Aarhus 2017 initiative has been given too much prominence as of now, quite the opposite perhaps. I have mixed opinions about the commercial WP projects; they could be used to avoid the PR-bull that often seeps in, but I would also feel a bit strange, if everyone else than me was on a payroll :-) I think you understand? I needed to get things straight. RhinoMind (talk) 20:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps I should add, that it was not anything you did or wrote Ipi, that made me suspect you personally. Not at all. I was "inspired" to these lines of thought, by the large sums of money that has been directed to the PR-area within Aarhus. Projects like Business with Aarhus fx. ([6], [7]). At the same time, I am curious to learn more about WP commercial aspects, because I find it fundamentally interesting as a Wikipedian to know about. Btw, I am not affiliated either. RhinoMind (talk) 23:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Is Aarhus wiki a reliable source?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I have my doubts about Aarhus wiki too as it is now an openly editable facility like most other wikis. I was however able to find useful information there on a few geographical items which I failed to find elsewhere. Ideally, though, these sources should be replaced whenever possible by more reliable ones. Nevertheless, Aarhus wiki is based on the Aarhus Leksikon which was established by Aarhus libraries in 1997 in collaboration with the other cultural institutions in Aarhus, including historians. It became a wiki in 2012. It is now administered by the city archive.--Ipigott (talk) 12:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. The Aarhus Wiki is not 100 % reliable per se, but some of the pages there are sourced and as good as can be. Good information on the Aarhus wiki Ipigott (!), it shows that even though an article there is not sourced, it is not completely random bullocks, it gives ideas to follow up, but of course these unsourced pages can not be used as sources in themselves directly and should be replaced. As far as I know the AW is being replaced by a new wiki and the Aarhus Bymuseum is also planning to improve their web-presence, but this is fantasies right now. RhinoMind (talk) 20:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I think it's likely a user generated wiki so will need replacing.There's another editor been working hard on Aarhus I see. Unfortunately there's now quite a few references needing filling out or converting to citation templates. I'll add some things first anyway, just roughly expanding the lead.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I've replaced the Aarhus wiki links. Yes, it's good to have RhinoMind working on the article. He seems to have been responsible for much of the content before we started working on it. He's also made some suggestions on the talk page which I've tried to address. I think some of the references he has added probably also refer to details in his unreferenced paragraphs. Glad to hear you're working on the lead. I'm still trying to source/update the transport and sports sections. And then there's also the Health section you started.--Ipigott (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

On sources and especially in-line referencing

Yes as Ipigott says. The sources, links and refs are there but needs proper placement. It is a painstaking process and I have focussed on creating a solid framework first and foremost. Something that reflects the real world in an "un-biased way" (in relation to level of importance). More details can and will follow and the in-line refs as well. While we are so few working on this article atm and with the GA goal in mind, I dont think it is constructive right now, to instantly delete unreferenced information. Instead the recently added material should be trusted and if it misses in-line refs, then please provide these in-line refs. They are out there or perhaps already on the talk page. This will be a much more constructive attitude right now. If its too much work to add them, then insert "citation needed"-tags instead. Just please dont delete. Let me explain: I (and Ipigott as well I think) have focussed primarily on the framework in my additions, on extracting information that can sometimes be extremely hard to understand, if one does not live in and know the city well. Randomly picked refs and sources does not always give a clear cut picture of what is really important. Once a proper framework is in place, we (and others) can add missing information details later. It is very hard to work bottom-up and we risk flooding the article with non-sense details. Example: The section on hotels and restaurants need a complete overhaul as of now. The information is not wrong of course, but it does not give a picture of the city, that resonate with reality. I will try to give advice and ref'ed explanations later, I just mention this as an illustrative example of how reading random refs about a place can be misleading. RhinoMind (talk) 20:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

The article is much improved of course but still rather rough around the edges. A lot of the content you've added Rhino is unfortunately messy to read and poorly sourced and it's going to take quite some effort to sort out the sourcing and also to copyedit it and improve the flow. In fairness though you've done much to lay down a framework as you say and done a lot of important work for it and it can be improved gradually up to a decent standard. The history section needs expansion, the economy section needs writing about its main industries and exports (rather than just the port and research), the demo needs a historical progression account, the environment and parks etc need trimming, the education and culture sections improving and the healthcare section needing expanding of course. Also the notable people all need to be sourced. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the section I added needing a complete overhaul. And I didn't just pick some random refs, I picked my regular source for adding hotel and restaurant info which highlights the most notable hotels, restaurants and bars in the city. The article desperately needs book sources anyway..♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure. A good list of needed improvements there. I like lists like that. And of course I am totally supporting you guys in improving the wording of my gnarled English, that goes without saying. I will explain in more detail later on the "hotels, restaurants and bar" section, but can quickly reply that 1 It reads like something from Wiki Voyage. 2 It is too superficial, while at the same time giving some unnecessary details and is overall unfair to the three businesses. 3 Some recent (and important) buildings are not represented, like the Aarhus City Tower with the large Comwell Hotel for example.

Many travel guides (both online and in books) are extremely unbalanced, when dealing with Aarhus for some unknown reason, so I dont blame you or anyone writing from these refs alone. I am really schoked when I read most of them and feel sorry for both the tourists and the general reader. I can supply sources and we will debate later and ma~ke this article beat any (mainstream) travel guide by a million miles. I's not difficult, trust me. RhinoMind (talk) 22:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately Rhino, most editors on here tend to view any discussion of hotels and restaurants as unencyclopedic and accuse people of advertising or that it belongs in a travel guide. I'm not buying it, sorry. Similar content is in all of our other Danish city GAs and not one reviewer complained. There isn't a way really to discuss them without it seeming like a travel guide, but I think it is important to mention them and I have a hard job believing that what I've already written doesn't at least partly highlight some of the more notable establishments. By all means mention the others but I can't see why the section needs a complete overhaul at all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I fully agree we need to address hotels and restaurants. The current section provides a good basis for expansion. The establishments mentioned in the 2007 source still appear to be important although we certainly need to include more recent additions as RhinoMind suggests. There should be more on tourism (perhaps in the economy section too) and the city's attractiveness as a conference venue and as one of Scandinavia's top destinations for shopping. As for the other sections, I think the history section pretty well covers all the main events although it may indeed be good to identify more book sources. Unfortunately, as far as I can see, most of the English-language literature seems to deal with the history of Aarhus as part of Danish history in general. I still have quite a bit to add on the economy section: headquarters of both Dansk Supermarket and Jysk (a world-wide discount bedding company with interests in design) with other major companies such as Krifa (business services) and 5R Marketing (telemarketing). After I've finished tidying up the sourcing, I'll go through the whole article more carefully for c/e, presentation, duplication. Overall, I think it's coming along quite well.--Ipigott (talk) 08:27, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

You misunderstand. Probably because I haven't explained it very well, as I was saving this issue for later. I will try to be more clear though: 1 If we should mention restaurants, hotels and bars to the detail-level that is up now and at the same time be fair to the three businesses overall in the city of Aarhus, there is a lot to add (!) and I think it would lead to a section out of proportion. For a travel guide it might work ok to cherry pick a few places, but I dont think this approach will work for a GA level WP article. My suggestion will if we describe them generally as the three businesses they are and then we can perhaps give specific names and examples. 2 Some of the info is outdated (they dont exist no more) 3 Some important new sites are not mentioned.

I was not trying to be disrespectful of your engagement in the section, I just think an honest critique will lead to a better text overall. I have been engaged elsewhere, but will try to write up a draft later. A draft will illustrate what I am trying to get across much better. Cheers. RhinoMind (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Btw. Ipi´s ideas about conferences and shopping are good I think. The city often (but not always) sees itself in a Scandinavian context.RhinoMind (talk) 02:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Can you find a good source for healthcare? I visited the hospital site and all I found was a generic list of departments etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll try to get to it later.--Ipigott (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Excellent work on it today! Giving a read shortly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I have fixed the Aarhus University Hospital page yesterday. There is probably information there now that could be added to the Aarhus page. RhinoMind (talk) 02:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Additions to Aarhus

Can you or Rhino find any more recent tournaments the city hosted? It's just it currently seems like that was written in 2006 or something. It reads pretty well overall, doesn't need to have wonderful quality of prose for GA anyway. The education section and to some extent the transport is all that really needs work now I think seems as history can't be expanded. If you have a historical population progression like for the others though I'll add more to demo.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:45, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

You'll find the stats here. My source is this. If you really think the history needs expanding I can see what I can get hold of from the library. By tournaments, do you mean sports events? I have really looked properly at the sports section yet and I'm sure there's more to be added on education. There are also some red links to be dealt with, and of course a few more citations.--Ipigott (talk) 15:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Tournaments yeah, there's a lot given for 2002-2006 and seems odd to mention none since. I suspect that part was added in 2006 or something and it hasn't been updated.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:29, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Would be good if you could find more on history form the library but it's now adequate for GA IMO, although refs 141-156 ought to really be filled out, even if official websites. Shall I nom yet? Sorry I took a while to edit this much again but as I say I find it very difficult to edit in the warm weather and only got around to it today as it's raining and relatively cool, first time in about 6 weeks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I see you've had a really good go at it today. Sorry to hear it's raining in the south of Wales but as you say it's been good for the article. No hay mal que por bien no venga. Here in Denmark it's still hot and sunny. I certainly think you could go ahead an nom it now. It will take a while before it's reviewed which will allow us to polish it up a bit and handle the remaining red links and references. Thanks for all your help. I think we've managed to bring it up to standard pretty quickly.--Ipigott (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Can't find anything of relevance on the link you sent. Only blank pages.--Ipigott (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

The rain is most welcome! OK I'll nom, thanks again for your consistent hard work and diligence. Hopefully I'll be able to put more work into Randers earlier on.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Some info here if you can decipher it...♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Both Roskilde and Kolding look much more interesting but you are right in thinking Randers is the sixth-largest city. Roskilde, a former capital, has a rich history associated with the Vikings while Kolding is the site of the fine old Koldinghus castle. I'll leave it up to you which one we do next but I would first like to spend a week or two improving the Skagen Painters. I'm really glad you've been helping to improve the quality of Danish articles. At the moment, there are only 30 GAs (out of a total of 15,047) compared to 259 for Norway (total 37,400) and 54 for Sweden (total 35,933). So there's still quite a way to go!--Ipigott (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah that would be good to get the painters article up to GA. I'll probably make a start on Randers on the weekend. Still, I think it's a great achievement to get the five biggest cities up to GA, no other country has that to my knowledge! The Aarhus article could do with a climate section though, I did ask @Juliancolton: to add one but I guess he's been busy with the summer, and a list of mayors might be a good idea. We could get a major Danish castle or palace up to GA after Skagen painters though as a treat...♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:25, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see poor coverage of the inside of the Louvre. I was wondering if you'd be interested in a detailed coverage of it internally by department/room. I'd imagine enough info could be found to have an article on every room of it, covering it's displays. 380,000 objects though.. Still, something like Department of Egyptian Antiquities etc would be a good place to start... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:06, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld:You have not yet responded to the GA review. Rhino has made a number of changes, some of which will require attention. Will look at the Louvre later but it looks like an elephant task.--Ipigott (talk) 14:37, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Hadn't even noticed the review had begun Ian...♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:42, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

That's what I suspected. I thought you would pick up my mail. But now I'll leave it to you for a while and come back to it later.--Ipigott (talk) 14:45, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I shut off my email tab when I emailed Krimuk this morning as I needed tabs for websites etc for the work I've been doing today, plus I had a jazz album playing on youtube in the background!! I often have my email open in a tab though you're right about that, not today though! I'll examine Rhino's latest additions but I've trimmed the lede and given the culture a copyedit and it looks OK now. I think you've covered the rest now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Fine. I would still like to go through the whole thing for copy editing. I had not expected the assessment to come up so quickly.--Ipigott (talk) 15:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: On the Louvre, you could start here but I must say for the job to be done well, it looks as if it would take months. I could help you along from time to time but the Louvre has tremendous resources itself and I think my time would be better spent on providing more content on items that are not so well covered anywhere. Glad to hear you've taken up Spanish. We can work together on Iberia and Latin America.--Ipigott (talk) 16:06, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

True, but if not well covered was the pure motivation I'd only be working on African topics!! The problem is that there's a huge amount to cover for everywhere! I think it's important for an encyclopedia to consolidate information, and although we have a lot of info on the artifacts and museum, we don't have anything coherent summarizing the museum by section. I'll see how it goes anyway. For starters we should at least have an article on each of the major departments of the museum..♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

	Danish Barnstar of National Merit
	For your hard work in getting the top five Danish cities to GA status. Congratulations!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the recognition but the honour could and should of course be reciprocated. You've always been a great source of encouragement and expertise.--Ipigott (talk) 20:39, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you start Harald Sandbaek? Plenty of info about. I'll probably start the Aarhus Air Raid.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Odense

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:07, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:TWL/Journals

Can you think of any newspaper archives and resources or any others which you'd like free access to? If so please propose them here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I think I should leave these to those who really need them. Thanks anyway. Your own additions all seem very useful. --Ipigott (talk) 06:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you add a bit to Sondern (land division) from the source or German wiki?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:35, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Started Summer Evening at Skagen Beach – The Artist and his Wife. Not sure if the title is right. Would be good to have a few articles on the paintings. Can you expand? I should have the main article at GAN by the end of the day.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'll try to expand a bit on this one and perhaps add a few more. Thanks for all your contributions to the Skagen Painters.--Ipigott (talk) 13:50, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

As for the title, I think it's OK as it is. The original Danish is "Sommeraften ved Skagens strand. Kunstneren og hans hustru" (just as you have it).--Ipigott (talk) 14:06, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

It's developed into a lovely article, well done! It would be good to cover say the 10 most notable Skagen paintings individually. Or at least a number of those linked in the article to the image rather than articles. It can be quite enjoyable doing individual painting articles I think. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

You are of course absolutely right on this. Once we have brought the Skagen Painters article up to GA, I would be happy to write short articles on the most important paintings. Most of those I have linked are covered in the literature. I'll try to cover them fairly soon. Some of the individual biographies could also benefit from additional work.--Ipigott (talk) 15:01, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Started Will He Round the Point?..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Aarhus

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Getting one's retaliation in first

While I'm looking at Skagen Painters you may like to sit in judgment on two articles I have up for FAC as a co-nominator: John Gielgud and Jules Massenet. No hint of a quid pro quo, natch, and in any case after a first perusal I can predict that Skagen Painters will have no trouble at GAN. But look in chez Sir John and/or Jules if you have time and inclination and be as critical as you like, Tim riley talk 18:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Will take a careful look at Massenet tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 20:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Started Men of Skagen on a Summer Evening in Fair Weather♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Skagen Painters

My comments are now on the review page. Quite a few points, but only one is of any great consequence, and it can be easily attended to. The page is clearly GA-worthy, and once you've tidied up, I'll have much pleasure in cutting the ribbon. Tim riley talk 16:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

As you will see, the article is now promoted. Reviewing it was an enjoyable job, and in my inexpert opinion the page has the potential to be a Featured Article. Please ponder on that, and if you take it to FAC please don't forget to let me know. Tim riley talk 10:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Afterthought on spacing of people's initials: P. S. Krøyer or P.S. Krøyer – you have both at present. Tim riley talk 10:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

When Tim said he was busy I figured he'd do it next week so very pleased to see this swiftly reviewed! Thanks for also quickly addressing the excellent points! FA hadn't occurred to me, but I think given the work you've put into it Ian we could keep it in mind. I think the style section could still be strengthened, and we should also have a section summarizing some of the most notable paintings, but aside from that it's pretty solid. Up to you if you want to go for it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Tim for your encouragement. Maybe we could indeed take it to FA one of these days but I think it still requires more work, not just on the style section, as Dr. B suggests, but also on background (why it took the Scandinavian academies so long to appreciate the importance of modern trends), the emergence of other artists' colonies in Denmark and across Europe, and also on the influence the Skagen painters had on Danish art, etc. Nevertheless, we now have a reasonable article on the essentials.--Ipigott (talk) 10:24, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Check it out on here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Looks pretty good but I am surprised Locher's painting is included at the very top. Who put it there and why is there no caption? I would have still preferred to see Hip, Hip, Hurrah at the top but can't see how to edit it. I also think it is a pity all the image sizes are standardized. If I install the interface, will all the Wikipedia articles come out in the new format? Is there not an easy way to view any article with the new interface?--Ipigott (talk) 05:34, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I've just looked at Denmark on the interface and found the most inappropriate image on the top and as far as I can see, there is no means of changing it. Have decided not to install Wikiwand as default but have bookmarked it for future viewing.--Ipigott (talk) 06:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it selects images automatically I think according to shape and size I think so you get a lot of that. I like it, I'll use it for browsing wikipedia.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:19, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I like the overall approach but I think we should try to do something about selecting the top image. Maybe we could devise a way of indicating which images are most appropriate. I am very happy, for example, at the WikiWand pages on Luxembourg, Skagen, Stege and our own local resort Råbylillestrand on Møn but am amazed by France, Italy, Belgium, http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Poland and Canada, not to mention Aalborg on which we spent so much time and effort. Don't you think we should get a discussion going somewhere on all this? As the interface seems to be so popular, Wikipedia stands to suffer from this kind of random selection. Any contructive ideas?--Ipigott (talk) 15:10, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Skagen Painters♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Josefina de la Torre

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:56, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Björksund Castle

Morning, can you find some sources and content for this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:04, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I looked at this yesterday when I saw it threatened with deletion. Unfortunately I did not find much to support it except this which I have included as a reference together with a ref from Enjoy Sweden. I think the image you have included is a kind of logo or drawing specifically developed for the commune.--Ipigott (talk) 09:07, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you translate the French text I found in Bissikrima?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Very busy at the moment. I'll try to get back to it later today.--Ipigott (talk) 09:31, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Johannes Østrup

Hello! Your submission of Johannes Østrup at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Iselilja (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm putting this here even though you aren't the nominator; as the author you are probably the right person to address the issues. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)