Contents

User talk:OyMosby

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

If you leave a message for me: I will respond here. Please ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page. If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I will add it to my watchlist, so you don't need to notify me, unless I don't respond when a response is expected. This helps keep discussion easily readable and in one place.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of genocides, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romani.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You made a revert on the Dalmatia article, but you have not provided any reason why the content should stay. Since you are supposed to have a arguments-based reason for readding content, you need to explain that. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I reverted a user who removed a swath of information under the claim that the onus was on the user adding the content. But given it was long standing content that was removed, I would have thought the onus would be on them. After looking now that you made edits there previously outlining issues you had with potential weak sourcing, perhaps make the edits you seem fit or make mentions on the talk page expanding on what sources you have concern with? I see another user after me removed some stuff so not sure if that includes content you removed earlier? I see there was a back and forth of reverts. Is the consensus that Dalmatia is thought to solely come from an old Albanian word as to their being doubt? I’m not fully well read on the matter. I assumed there would be a discussion on the talk page about it. But neither sides of the discussion initiated one. Perhaps again just make the edit and on the talk page explain your reasoning. If no one challenges with their own explanation, then I don’t see any further reason for undoing your edit. Cheers. OyMosby (talk) 19:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since the most problematic stuff, the part sourced to a decades-old sources not supported by any other source, has been removed, I might leave the rest on the article and just modify the wording a bit so it makes more sense. I will give it some more thought. The etymology of ancient names usually is a matter of guessing for scholars, more rumour than fact-based research. Noone can tell if "Delmatae" meant this or that; at least we try to provide readers with scholarship-backed opinions that have some recent supporters. Cheers :) Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:28, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at the Tokyo war crimes trials

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]