User talk:Krakkos

Welcome!

Hello, Krakkos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Go Phightins! (talk) 19:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Vangio and Sido, Krakkos!

Wikipedia editor Falkirks just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I have reviewed and passed your new article. Great Work!

To reply, leave a comment on Falkirks's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ancient Iranian religion, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Arta and Magic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Germanic peoples edits

After reviewing your recent edits to the Germanic peoples page, I noticed that you failed to cite your sources in a manner consistent with the extant page's citations. Please follow the same formatting convention therein and make the corresponding corrections—particularly since you added so much content. It also is not appropriate to use sources like "Factmonster" which secondarily cite the Columbia University Encyclopedia. Find other more appropriate academic sources that are directly attributable. --Obenritter (talk) 22:35, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Obenritter. When noticing that i've "failed to cite your sources in a manner consistent with the extant page's citations" i'm assuming you're referring to the fact that i used Template:Cite book for certain sources rather than WP:SFN. This is because, as far as i know, SFN doesn't allow adding quotations in the source. When editing Germanic peoples earlier today i noticed that a large number of the sources used in were misrepresented. By having quotations in the source this is easier to avoid. It is worse to have sources misrepresented than having them digress from the manual of style. That "Factmonster" is quoting the Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia can easily be verified by a Google search, but if using that website is so problematic it can of course be substituted with TheFreeDictionary.com, Orbis Latinus etc. Krakkos (talk) 23:05, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

What do mean by " a large number of the sources used in were misrepresented". You'll need to provide substantiated evidence to that end, using very specific instances in the text that can be accordingly verified as false or not in keeping with the source. BTW -- I have provided an example with the first reference you used in citing the Online version of Britannica. Perhaps you can refer to that as your template if it helps. You might even find it easier. On another note, "The FreeDictionary.com" or "Orbis Latinus" are not good substitutes for academic journals or scholarly books.--Obenritter (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Also, if you want to cite something verbatim you just place it "in quotation marks" and cite the sfn reference right behind it. Look at the last paragraph of Role in the Fall of Rome on the Germanic peoples page. You can also use the model as well for pages that have a Notes / notelist section like this page does. Look at the Pytheas section of this page for an example thereto. (Look at it in Edit mode) as well as how it appears in the text and how you can click on the reference. --Obenritter (talk) 23:34, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for helpful advice, Obenritter. Having looked through the edit history i noticed the major contribution you have made to this article, and it is very understandable that you want the citations to be in the same manner of style. By misrepresentation of sources one can for example refer to Encyclopedia of European Peoples, Page 296. That ref was originally introduced by me[1] to to show that scholars not only consider Germanic peoples as an historical, but also as a contemporary ethnolinguistic group. In the version before my edits yesterday this source was used for information about the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest,[2] but the source is not related to that battle. Similarly, the article Germanic peoples at Encyclopedia Britannica is used for information about how Proto-Germanic diversified during the Pre-Roman Iron Age,[3] but the Britannica article neither mentiones Proto-Germanic nor the Pre-Roman Iron Age. These are but a few of many examples of misrepresentation of sources at Wikipedia's Germanic peoples article. Krakkos (talk) 10:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Great to see you take some of those tips and put them to good use. Whenever and wherever you see wrongly sourced or misrepresented material, you should correct it accordingly—especially where it concerns Wikipedia citing an encyclopedia. Surely there are a few here and there as this is an enormous article with tons of drive-by editors over the years. When I first started editing it several years ago, a large percentage of it was verbatim extractions from a webpage—not exactly what I'd term a pinnacle of academic scholarship. It is vastly improved and gets better with time, but since so many trolls like to destroy pages, it is one that demands frequent vigilance. Sadly, I don't have much time for it anymore; hence my "Semi-retired" status. Good stewards and people interested in scholarship (as you seem to be) can help improve the page and keep it free from erroneous juvenile nonsense or copy-and-paste Pferdscheisse. Happy editing. --Obenritter (talk) 23:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Alexios Axouch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Latin Europe

Languages of Europe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Latin Europe

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Frankish warriors has been nominated for discussion

Category:Frankish warriors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your quality improvements. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Krakkos has recently returned to active duty on the article pages of Wikipedia. Mostly all of nearly 6000 edits were to mainspace back then, adding to categories and articles and providing images. The history of the article Wusun shows the type and variety of quality improvements that Krakkos makes. Validating sourcing and protecting that article from vandals is also worthy of note. Other articles like Iranian peoples, Vandals, Goths and Gauls have all prospered due to Editor Krassos's attention. A fine candidate for Editor of the week.

nominationtext}}} You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 12:15, 5 August 2018 (UTC)