User talk:UndercoverClassicist

The World Destubathon

You are invited to participate in The World Destubathon. It's currently planned for June 16-July 13, partly due to me having hayfever during that period and not wanting to run it throughout July or August in the hotter summer and will be run then unless multiple editors object. There is currently $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize. As 250 countries and entities is too much to patrol, entries will be by user, but there is $500 going into prizes for editors covering the most countries. Sign up if interested! ♦ Dr. Blofeld

Your GA nomination of Euthymides

The article Euthymides you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Euthymides for comments about the article, and Talk:Euthymides/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AmazingAce123 -- AmazingAce123 (talk) 09:57, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

story · music · places

Congratulations! - Check out my talk, - if you have little time, listen to Gilda Cruz-Romo in the final scene of Aida, if you have more read her article, and if you have still more check out my music, some sung with me in choir, some played by friends, all heard with friends. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations to the election! - Jahrhundertring remembered today, with the picture of a woman who can't believe what she has to see. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Mayerberg continued

As I stated on the Commons discussion, I received this response to an Email I sent to the Truman Library asking about the copyright status of the photo:

Your inquiry to the Truman Library was forwarded to my attention. The copyright/public domain status of the photos in our collection differs and largely depends upon who took the photograph.

I believe the photo you are referring to is here: https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/photograph-records/60-313-09. It was taken by a Truman Library employee. The work of federal employees is in the public domain, therefore this photograph is in the public domain.

Truman Library states its public domain for the federal employee reason. Roast (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

That looks good to me. I think there's a way of uploading those emails (perhaps via certain volunteers -- my knowledge/memory of the process is hazy) and attaching them to the image's entry: that could then be used to substantiate a licence tag that states it's PD as the work of a federal employee. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:01, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm a dumbass and deleted the Email already. I'll get a second response now. Roast (talk) 18:07, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

So I received the response but don't know how to attach them either. Roast (talk) 18:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Call for Candidates

Administrator Elections | Call for Candidates

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Candidates.

Here is the schedule:

• July 9–15 - Call for candidates
• July 18–22 - Discussion phase
• July 23–29 - SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

• The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
• Prospective candidates are advised to become familiar with the community's expectations of administrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful and unsuccessful RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing.
• The process will have a seven day call for candidates phase, a two day pause, a five day discussion phase, and a seven day private vote using SecurePoll. Discussion and questions are only allowed on the candidate pages during the discussion phase.
• The outcome of this process is identical to making a request for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA versus administrator elections.
• Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. A separate user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Linearity-Curve (18:12, 9 July 2025)

Hello,

I came here to create my company page. There was one page before, but I need to create a new one.

I created the first draft and sent it to review. But what is your suggestion about company pages? --Linearity-Curve (talk) 18:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

TFA

story · music · places

Thank you today for Spyridon Marinatos, "about yet another Greek archaeologist, I'm afraid. Marinatos, for better or worse, dominated Greek archaeology for much of his life: he is best remembered for his excavation of the "prehistoric Pompeii" site of Akrotiri, and his associated theories about the Minoan eruption, but had several other high-profile turns, particularly the discovery of the battlefield of Thermopylae. He was in charge of the Greek Archaeological Service during two periods of dictatorship -- that of Ioannis Metaxas and the Regime of the Colonels -- and used his influence to shape the institutions of Greek archaeology in his own image, which included taking aggressive steps to push out leftists, women, and people who disagreed with him. Marinatos was a fascinating if not particularly pleasant character, and not always an easy one to write about -- he inspired huge loyalty in many of those who knew him, and some of his students remain prominent in Greek archaeology today, but has also attracted huge criticism for his enthusiastic support of Metaxas and the nastiest parts of the Regime of the Colonels, and for undoing decades of institutional progress in Greek archaeology to serve his own ego and political ends."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Three Ukrainian topics were on the main page today, at least at the beginning, RD and DYK, - see my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

On Bach's day of death, I decorated my user pages in memory, with his music, and my story ends on "peace". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from MassSpecEdits (14:23, 13 July 2025)

Thanks! I am trying to help update information regarding the subject "mass spectrometry" as I have noticed most information on wiki is not up to date. I would appreciate if you can guide me as to what would be the best approach. I am trying to add new pages, update existing pages, and add as much accurate and new information as possible to make the relevant wiki pages serve as strong source of information. --MassSpecEdits (talk) 14:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello -- in general, it's easiest to start by improving existing articles rather than creating new ones. The overarching piece of advice is be bold, and discuss things with other editors if they revert your changes or disagree with them. Make sure that material you add or changed is cited to reliable sources. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:09, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from JeremyJe29 (00:46, 15 July 2025)

Hello! I want to add citations to my drafts, but what if my draft is about something that doesn't have many, or no sources? Can I use Wikipedia as a source? --JeremyJe29 (talk) 00:46, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello -- the first test for whether an article about a topic can be on Wikipedia is whether it has reliable sources written about it. The usual litmus test is that there should be at least three sources that everyone agrees are published, detailed, reliable and have no conflict of interest (for example, they're not written by someone connected to the subject of the article). Additionally, it should be possible to verify everything in the article by referring to such a source. Wikipedia can't be used as a reliable source, because anyone can edit it, so we have no way of verifying that the information in it is notable or correct. If there simply aren't enough sources to write a thoroughly sourced article on something, Wikipedia probably isn't the place for it, though it might be possible to add information about it to an existing article, or there might be another site better suited for it. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Choni Sangay dema on Talk:Hybe Corporation (15:41, 16 July 2025)

How can I participate --Choni Sangay dema (talk) 15:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Choni Sangay dema on Talk:Hybe Corporation (15:43, 16 July 2025)

My name is Choni Sangay Dema, I’m 14 years old, and I come from the beautiful country of Bhutan. Ever since I was young, I’ve loved dancing and performing. I used to dance at home and participate in school events whenever I could being on stage made me feel alive.

Becoming a K-pop idol is not just a dream for me, it’s my passion and goal. I want to inspire people with my performance, make my parents proud, and represent my country on the global stage. I believe in working hard, staying humble, and never giving up. I’m confident, adaptable, and always ready to learn and improve.

I speak English and I’m open to learning Korean and other languages to connect with fans around the world. I can sing, dance, and I’m willing to do anything it takes to grow into a talented and respectful artist.

Thank you.. --Choni Sangay dema (talk) 15:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Instructions for candidates

Administrator Elections | Instructions for candidates

Thank you for choosing to run in the July 2025 administrator elections. This bulletin contains some important information about the next stages of the election process.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 16–17: Housekeeping phase (we are here)
• July 18–22: Discussion phase
• July 23–29: SecurePoll voting phase
• July 30–c. August 3: Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the Housekeeping phase. Your candidate subpage will remain closed to questions and discussion. However, this is an excellent opportunity for you to recruit nominators (if you want them) and have them place their nomination statements, and a good time for you to answer the standard three questions, if you have not done so already. We recommend you spend this phase getting your candidate page polished and ready for the next phase.

The discussion phase will take place from July 18–22. Your candidate subpage will open to the public and they will be permitted to discuss you and ask you formal questions, in the same style as a request for adminship (RfA). You are strongly encouraged to be around on those dates to answer the formal questions in a timely manner.

On July 23, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. Anyone can see who has voted, but not who they voted for. You are permitted and encouraged to vote in the election, including voting for yourself. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see your vote total during the election.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time. This phase took approximately four days during the October 2024 election, but could take up to a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (you may want to watchlist this page) and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, you must have received at least 70% support, calculated as support ÷ (support + oppose). Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("'crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation as a candidate, and best of luck.

You're receiving this message because you are a candidate in the July 2025 administrator elections.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the July 2025 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 18–22 - Discussion phase (we are here)
• July 23–29 - SecurePoll voting phase
• July 30–c. Aug 3 - Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages are open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Discussion phase.

On July 23, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's totals during the election. You must be extended confirmed to vote.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last approximately four days, or perhaps a little longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (you may want to watchlist this page) and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and must also have received a minimum of 20 support votes. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2025

• News and notes: Is no WikiNews good WikiNews? — Election season returns!
  Endowment tax form, Wikimania, elections, U4C, fundraising and a duck!

• In the media: How bad (or good) is Wikipedia?
  And how do we know?

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Medicine reaches milestone of zero unreferenced articles
  Five-year journey comes to healthy fruition.

• In focus: Wikimania 2025: Connecting Wikimedians across the world for 20 years
  Wikimedians from around the world will gather in person and online at the twentieth annual meeting of Wikimania.

• Recent research: Knowledge manipulation on Russia's Wikipedia fork; Marxist critique of Wikidata license; call to analyze power relations of Wikipedia
  As well as "hermeneutic excursions" and other scientific research findings.

• News from the WMF: Form 990 released for the Wikimedia Foundation’s fiscal year 2023-2024
  The report covers the Foundation's operations from July 2023 - June 2024

• Discussion report: Six thousand noticeboard discussions in 2025 electrically winnowed down to a hundred
  A step towards objective and comprehensive coverage of a project nearly too big to follow.

• Comix: Divorce
  Drawn this century!

• Opinion: Women are somewhat under-represented on the English-language Wikipedia, and other observations from analysis
  How data from the Wikipedia "necessary articles" lists can shed new light on the gender gap

• Community view: A Deep Dive Into Wikimedia (part 4): The Future Of Wikimedia and Conclusion
  Annual plans, external trends, infrastructure, equity, safety, and effectiveness. What does it all mean?

• Obituary: Pvmoutside, Atomicjohn, Rdmoore6, Jaknouse, Morven, Martin of Sheffield, MarnetteD, Herewhy, BabelStone
  Rest in peace.

• Traffic report: God only knows
  Wouldn't it be nice without billionaires, scandals, deaths, and wars?

• Humour: New forum created for people who don't care about Wikipedia
  If you are too blasé for Mr. Blasé and don't give a FAC.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Quick note re: Erlitou

I noticed the GA review of Erlitou is still open — just thought I’d ask if you’re planning to close it soon. No rush at all; just checking in as it's been a little while. Cheers! MSincccc (talk) 08:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm not, particularly -- the article isn't on hold; it has things still to do to meet the criteria, but they're well within Generalissima's capacities and I'm sure she will get to them. It's normal enough for a GA review to stay open for a long time (and indeed there are still unreviewed GAs that were nominated in 2024) -- I can't see that closing it as unsuccessful for the benefit of making the backlog look better would be a good idea. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 08:09, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh gosh! I completely forgot that one was still open. I'll get back to it today, my apologies. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 22:00, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

And now passed -- nice work! UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:30, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Dale Whitehurst (miracle man) (22:26, 20 July 2025)

Dale Whitehurst (miracle man)'s mentor Ultraodan is away.

all fact checked --Dale Whitehurst (miracle man) (talk) 22:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello -- is this about your user page? As QwertyForest said to you a week ago, I'm afraid Wikipedia probably isn't the place for the content you're trying to write: user pages are not supposed to be detailed autobiographies, even if what's written in them is fact-checked, and user pages of that form are likely to be deleted. Perhaps a blog or a something similar would be a better place for your story? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:33, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Commendation

I read your article on Arne Furumark — really well put together, and I enjoyed it. Congratulations as well on your RfA nomination. I look forward to any future collaboration, and hope you’ll continue with your excellent contributions. MSincccc (talk) 10:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

That's very kind of you to say -- thank you. I'm glad you enjoyed the article. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:30, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts in the question & discussion phase of AELECT2025

I'm certain many others feel the same way. I appreciate your putting yourself forward, answering questions (including mine) with candor, and demonstrating BOLD while still maintaining AGF. Thank you, and good luck to you in the next phase. We've certainly learned more about all the candidates during the last few days. BusterD (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Funeral Oration (Lysias)

On 23 July 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Funeral Oration (Lysias), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the ancient Greek orator Lysias wrote a "Funeral Oration", but may have been forbidden from delivering it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Funeral Oration (Lysias). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Funeral Oration (Lysias)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for this interesting DYK and new Good Article! Tenpop421 (talk) 20:39, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the July 2025 administrator elections has started and continues until July 29 at 23:59 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• July 23–29 – Voting phase
• July 30–c. Aug 3 – Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies to vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote totals cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's vote total during the election. The suffrage requirements are similar to those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for approximately four days, perhaps longer. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the results page (this is a good page to watchlist), and transcluded to the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose), and a minimum of 20 support votes. Because this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Peanut gallery note on GAN review

Hi UndercoverClassicist, just saw Talk:Laconian (dog)/GA1 and have a couple of concerns regarding the general comments. I hope this is not DNTTR. Regarding MOS:LEADCITE, there's nothing specifically against using citations in the lead even though it is uncommon, the actual issue is with information (and thus usually citations unless there are two different ones) being exclusively in the lead. I would focus on exclusivity rather than figuring out whether they should be in the lead at all at GAN. Secondly, regarding "All facts need to be cited no later than the end of the sentence", that is an oversimplification. What is important is WP:INTEGRITY, which usually but not always coincides with the end of the sentence. A common exception is where two consecutive sentences follow the same source. In discussions at WT:GAN we have converged towards advising that citations are used at least before the end of the paragraph, to accommodate different ways to meet INTEGRITY (exceptions for mathematical formulas where the source is otherwise obvious, quotes, other things which technically aren't paragraphs but might be considered as such, etc.). We also do not require ALTTEXT for images, although of course it is nice to have. I think this is the nominator's first GAN, so I appreciate you taking it on and the note about page numbers. Best, CMD (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Good comment -- the sentence/paragraph thing was a complete brainfart -- now fixed.

On the others -- you are right that LEADCITE doesn't forbid citations in the lead, but the bigger problem here was that information should be repeated in the body, and cited there. Perhaps it would have been clearer to lead with that. Slightly outside the GA criteria, the density of citations in the lead was affecting readability, which does start to come up against Because the lead usually repeats information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. If the nominator feels that having citations in the lead is important for some reason, we can work with that. As it is, their solution was to move the material into the body, which means that I need to give them a slightly different steer to hit MOS:LEAD (which is a requirement).

Similarly, while we don't require alt text, personally I think "should include" (as distinct from "must include") is reasonable -- perhaps could have phrased as "it would be good to..." or similar. Obviously, it wouldn't be a failing matter if the nominator desperately wanted to leave it out, but I think it's also useful to flag a straighforward opportunity to improve the article. In my initial comments, I usually point out things which can be improved fairly easily even when they're not strictly required to get the article to GA (and leave them as moot if the nominator decides not to act on them), though I understand that different people have different approaches.

Thanks for chipping in -- wise comments on all points. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

That all makes sense. I recently went through a GAN where the reviewer asked for alt text on some images where it was missing and some source formatting. I'm happy to do it myself, but was wary here as this was a new nominator. We've had a few issues with reviews being seen as too much work, and it has been theorised that reviews that go beyond the requirements create the impression that other reviews also need to do this. Obviously this is a system problem, not something that an individual GAN is going to make or break. General advice is to clearly phrase additional easy improvements as "slightly beyond GA criteria, but would be an improvement to the article" or similar. I generally agree on alt text, but that is specifically an issue where there has been discussion that did not reach consensus to make it a requirement. Maybe it will change one day, although making accessible language a more explicit part of FACR recently failed too. CMD (talk) 07:33, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

All very sensible. From the GA reviews I've been on the other side of, it's usual to suggest a few things which wouldn't necessarily be essential to promote the article, and personally I think that's to the good as long as it's in moderation and everyone involved is clear that these are just suggestions. Clear phrasing is definitely an advantage, though, and you're right to flag that mine might have been murky, particularly for a first-time nominator. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:39, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Alison Frantz

Just curious. Why is there nothing on her personal life such as husbands, partners, children, etc? MisawaSakura (talk) 16:39, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

There would be nothing to report -- she never married. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Interesting. She probably had some sort of personal life but was quiet about it. Thanks though. MisawaSakura (talk) 16:43, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

A psephos for you

I have cast my vote in support of your appointment as one of the new Galactic Overlords. Use your death rays wisely. Choliamb (talk) 18:34, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from PaulMcfarty1942 (08:16, 27 July 2025)

Hii I tried to add a date that a man was born he was a very famous wizard and it took it down. Why? --PaulMcfarty1942 (talk) 08:16, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from PaulMcfarty1942 (08:18, 27 July 2025)

Umm never mind it was kept😋 --PaulMcfarty1942 (talk) 08:18, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Pritam0612 on User:Pritam0612/sandbox (17:26, 27 July 2025)

My submission got rejected May I know the reason --Pritam0612 (talk) 17:26, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello -- it looks as though the "declined" box was added in this edit, which you made. Is this page a copy of a draft article made elsewhere?

If not (or if that question doesn't make any sense), the article hasn't been rejected, but also hasn't been submitted for consideration. To submit it, copy the code into the Article Wizard, once you've answered the preliminary questions. You will need to delete the bit at the top reading {{AFC submission|d|ts=20250728120000}}.

If it has been submitted through Articles for Creation, you can look at the page history of the draft page to tell you who declined the submission, and that will probably have some information as to why (but see below).

As a word of warning -- in its current state, the article will almost certainly be declined. This is because it doesn't yet have enough references to sources independent of the subject to demonstrate that this person meets the criteria for a Wikipedia article. Generally, this means a reasonable number of independent, quality publications, not written by the subject or anyone connected to them (e.g. an employer), which discuss the person and their importance. In theory, everything in the article should be cited to a source like that, so that we can establish that it is verifiable. This is particularly important given that the article is about a living person, so stricter standards apply. If you're closely connected to the subject, the further warning applies that writing about yourself or a friend is rarely a good idea, and often something that people come to regret, since the article leaves their control the moment it is published.

I hope this helps -- let me know if you need any help with any of that. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:51, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Karo

I bought my copy of Greek Personality in Archaic Sculpture for £4 at Heffer's in Cambridge in 1984, mostly because it was marked down from £18.95. I wish I could say that in the forty years since I have got my money's worth out of it, but I don't think I have. Choliamb (talk) 20:18, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Poor old Karo. I do wonder what he would have made of his own scholarly legacy -- I used Schachtgräber for part of my MPhil (and briefly got very good at very niche bits of German like Späthelladischer silbereingelegter Schwertklinge) and it's still the reference if you want to do any kind of detailed work on Schliemann's finds, but I doubt he would have expected or particularly wanted a catalogue of someone else's dig to be his defining contribution. As your fellow traveller Jack Davis pointed out, perhaps a bit unkindly, he came accompanied by great fanfare and expectation but never really seems to have lived up to it. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:43, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Furumark

Just out of curiousity, did you purchase/gain access to the books you have cited on Furumark's article or is it available for free? I would like to have a look. I look forward to your response. MSincccc (talk) 11:21, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

(Almost) everything cited here is available online, at least as far as I cited it -- usually via Internet Archive and/or TWL. Several sources (about four, from memory) were found for me by the kind folks at WP:RX. For the list of Furumark's own works, I used bibliographic references but didn't necessarily have access to the text. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 14:14, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Here's your free T-shirt!

Congratulations on the new mop Andre🚐 20:41, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Well done! If there's ever anything I can do to help, you know where to find me :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:43, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:05, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• Congratulations UndercoverClassicist! I am pretty sure that you'll become a great administrator. Cheers! Fade258 (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations, UC, on becoming an administrator. I’m sure you’ll keep contributing just as well with the badge on. Cheers! MSincccc (talk) 17:34, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations, UC! Hard to think of another editor I'd like to see more with mop in hand! ThaesOfereode (talk) 21:25, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

All your work at ERRORS is appreciated, and this is a real upgrade for all of us. Well done! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:23, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you all! I'll try not to knock the mop-bucket over. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:14, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Wendy645 on Help:Getting started (22:40, 31 July 2025)

Established --Wendy645 (talk) 22:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

A baton for you!

The admin baton

Per ancient tradition, it is my great pleasure to pass on this baton to you, as Jlwoodwa did to me. This baton is a reminder that somehow, amid edit wars, sockpuppets, and the occasional llama photo tiger stamp on Talk pages, we still build the internet's most ambitious group project. Wear it like a cape, or at least don't drop it. Enjoy it and then pass it on to the next AELECT admin as soon as you can! SMasonGarrison 04:17, 3 August 2025 (UTC)