User talk:Soidling

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scholarly Peer Reviewed articles

Hello, Thank you very much for highlighting the need to add peer reviewed scholarly publications to the articles, I have sent you public thanks for helping me know how to improve my sources on wikipedia :) Lubatchovsky (talk) 11:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I am also grateful for your contributions on this platform :) Soidling (talk) 18:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Theodora (wife of Justinian I), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sophia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Empire

I've witnessed similar issues at other articles involving the same editor; see the history at American Revolution for example. I've attempted to raise those concerns at his talk page, but I got no response either time. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent removal

Hello, I see you had reverted this users edit twice but they have again removed the inmate picture a third time sneakily in this edit. They also removed similar images in the Italian Fascism and racism artice. It seems they refuse to go to the talk page and just force their edits. OyMosby (talk) 22:38, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Late Antiquity

Your second-to-latest edit is listed as "-368" (or something like that) characters,¹ yet when one tries to "diff" w/ the prior version, it says: ..."No changes".

It's not important, heh—I'm just curious: any idea what the heck is going on with that? Bug in the software, maybe?

¹: (or is it bytes? well, whatever it is, surely it wasn't no changes at all, right...?!) Himaldrmann (talk) 15:30, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's strange, it shows up in my diff. What I did was replacing a duplicate ref with the one defined earlier. Soidling (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Darius the Great

You are correct that I had not used the Holland book yet in the article. I intended to put in a citation to it but got interrupted and had not gotten back to it yet. As I have time, I am working on trying to save the GA assessment for this article, which has been nominated for reassessment. If the citation needed tags are not eliminated, the nominator (who is an administrator and arbitration committee member) will downgrade the assessment. I was surprised, and pleased, to see someone else watching out for this article. If you can cover any of the citation needed tags, the GA assessment can be saved. I may, or may not, be able to eliminate all of them so it would be some help if you have any references that can be used. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 01:41, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Donner60, my apologies, I had misunderstood your intention and thought you were done with the article improvement three days ago. I will restore the Holland book and once I find the time (perhaps later today or tomorrow), I will try to fill in some of the citations. Many thanks. Soidling (talk) 11:50, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No apologies needed. I have been moving around among four GARs and have coordinator tasks most days. I needed to concentrate on one thing at a time. I forgot that I was part way on an edit and did not get back to it right away. It would be great if you have sources for any of the remaining tags. My books may not be able to help with very specific tagged sentences. JSTOR didn't provide me with anything usable, as I noted on the reassessment review page. Donner60 (talk) 04:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your hard work. After taking a look at the article, I have been able to fill in the Religion section. Please correct me as my knowledge here isn't great and I could be entirely wrong on this but it seems to me there are questionable assertions in the article, like the Royal Road's being based on Phoenician. A number of the Citation Needed phrases need to be corrected or reworked at least, and I will change where I can. I believe you have more expertise on Darius the Great but where you need some hand, I would be glad to help, if not this week, next. Soidling (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a citation to Will Durant's 1954 book, Our Oriental Heritage, for the Royal Road. That book doesn't have mention about the road being based on Phoenician construction. I think you should either substitute your source or add it, regardless of whether or not any reference to the Phoenicians is in it. We may need to delete the mention of the Phoenicians unless I overlooked it in one of the general sources. Other than that, I have cleared all the citation needed tags except the one pertaining to the conquest of the Indus Valley. Even with a Wikipedia article on that military action, I could not find a citation that would cover the detail in the last sentence of that short paragraph. In fact, most sources that I have seen even shed doubt on the exact dates and locations of the conquest. The voyage referred to in the paragraph is also mentioned in these sources. Since I thought I would find something better and neglected to keep the ones I saw, I will need to recover at least one so I will need to take a little extra time for that. At least one of the listed sources covers this. If you have a source that can cover it, that would complete the task. I hope to get to it within a few days. Since clearing the citation needed tags seems to have been the only objection to GA status, I hope this work will be enough to keep it and nothing else will be required. Donner60 (talk) 05:29, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flavian dynasty

This article is also up for GA reassessment. I have noted that I have some sources on this. Again, citation needed tags appear to be the big and maybe the only problem. If you have time, I thought you may wish to look at this as well since it is within your area of interest. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 05:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]