User talk:Borsoka#Block

{{ombox

| name = First Edit Day

| image = 50px

| imageright = 50px

| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(300deg, AliceBlue, LavenderBlush 30%, LavenderBlush 70%, AliceBlue);

| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;

| plainlinks = yes

| text = Happy First Edit Day!
Hi Borsoka! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Borsoka&dir=prev&limit=1 your first edit] and became a Wikipedian! 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 08:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

Hey, would you take a look at the High and Late Middle Ages sections and see what faults you can find? Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 07:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

: You have been so great on the FA review. But I really want to post this video on the Trinity that describes how I feel about writing on it... {{Smiley}}. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw]. I thought you would get a kick out of it - laughing helps. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

At the very moment I pressed the button to nominate Council of Tripoli for DYK I realized that you might have been saving the nomination for a future GA promotion. I hope I did not spoil any plans. Surtsicna (talk) 19:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

:I have no problem with the nomination, but years ago I decided I will never be involved in DYKs. Borsoka (talk) 01:49, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

::That is a shame, but you probably have your reasons. I might then go on to share your work when/if I notice it early enough. Surtsicna (talk) 10:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joscelin of Courtenay.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Gulf of Mexico on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

{{ivmbox

|image = Updated DYK query.svg

|imagesize=40px

|text = On 25 January 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bertrand of Toulouse (son of Alfonso Jordan), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the capture of the crusader Bertrand of Toulouse by Muslims was blamed by an anonymous monk on the "treachery" of Queen Melisende and Countess Hodierna? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bertrand of Toulouse (son of Alfonso Jordan). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, [https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?start=2025-01-15&end=2025-02-04&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Bertrand_of_Toulouse_(son_of_Alfonso_Jordan) Bertrand of Toulouse (son of Alfonso Jordan)]), 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.

}} 1=Launchballer 12:02, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montferrand.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

{{ivmbox

|image = Updated DYK query.svg

|imagesize=40px

|text = On 7 February 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Council of Tripoli, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that summons to the Council of Tripoli were issued in the name of the Church to bypass the issue of whether a king could summon a prince? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Council of Tripoli. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, [https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?start=2025-01-28&end=2025-02-17&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Council_of_Tripoli Council of Tripoli]), 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.

}}  — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Third Anglo-Afghan War on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Crusader states, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ecclesiastical state.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

It was great and enjoyable working with you on this GA, thank you so much for your collaborative efforts. In case you have fallen in love with the history of Edo people, I have two more GAN of subsequent Ogisos that you might be interested in reviewing too, Ehenneden and Ohuede, I also intent to take any of the subsequent one I create to the status, and that is only possible with the precious suggestions from editors like you. I hope you like it and would be interested :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

:Reviewing it was my pleasure. Yes, I am planning to review more articles from your "series". Borsoka (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::Hi Borsoka! I hope you're well in health and safe too, and I hope you will have the time to look at some of my other GANs in this series too. Happy editing :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:28, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello again! I was wondering if you could look at this article Ive been fixing up and I was wondering if I could get your opinion on it. Do you think this article is good enough so far to submit it for a good article nomination? Its for - Blasius Mataranga. Thank you again! Arberian2444 (talk) 06:23, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

:Glad to read it and highly appreciate your hard work. I think the article needs a thorough copyedit. You can request it at the Guild of Copyeditors project page. Before nominating an article, I always request a copyedit. I would also radically shorten the section titles. Borsoka (talk) 01:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you so much yet again!! Arberian2444 (talk) 01:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I apologize for making the edit without thoroughly researching the topic. After looking into it further with multiple sources, I now understand it was completely unnecessary ZZARZY223 (talk) 21:03, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

:No problem. Have a nice day. Borsoka (talk) 01:32, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Borsoka, I will take a look and see if I can add anything! Adam Bishop (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Borsoka, I just wanted to mention that I haven't forgotten about this. It's on my list! But it's a very big article and I haven't had a chance to go through it yet. So far, I've thought of a few things that I could add. I'll try to look at it soon. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you, but it failed a day ago due to inactivity. Borsoka (talk) 01:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, @Borsoka. As regards the reversion you have just made on Theodore I Laskaris, correcting a misspelling does not constitute original research on my part; I apologize for wording my edit summary in a manner that gave a wrong impression. How should we now proceed? "Prussa" is incorrect, but I do not wish to edit war over it. ManuelKomnenos (talk) 02:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• I think stating that "as far as I know" never verifies an edit. Borsoka (talk) 04:33, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
• :Indeed, it does not. I should not have used that phrase- it is the consequence of my reluctance to make decisive, potentially aggressive-sounding statements (here, you use “I think” in the same way). “Spelling correction” was the appropriate edit summary in this case.
• :A prior editor fixed the misspelling of the place’s name, as well as making changes contrary to MOS:'S. You reverted both the changes contrary to MOS:'S and the spelling correction with the edit summary “?”, which is not a helpful elucidation of your edit. I assumed that your putting back the spelling error was accidental. ManuelKomnenos (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
• ::Upon consultation, the source for that piece of information just calls the place Bursa; I have revised the article text accordingly. ManuelKomnenos (talk) 11:53, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've Talk:Bartolomea Acciaioli/GA1{{!}}begun reviewing the article Bartolomea Acciaioli you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. File:Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amir Ghandi -- Amir Ghandi (talk) 16:22, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

The article Bartolomea Acciaioli you nominated as a good article has passed File:Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Bartolomea Acciaioli for comments about the article, and Talk:Bartolomea Acciaioli/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 Amir Ghandi -- Amir Ghandi (talk) 09:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Borsoka

Are you interested in being a FA reviewer for the Byzantine Empire article? You already have a lot of knowledge on the topic and have an experience that I lack to save this article from the current FARC. I also greatly respect your work. A lot of work has occurred on this article already, but it needs someone else drive it to get it to the endpoint with me. Would you be willing to be a senior reviewer on this? Biz (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

• Thank you for your kind words. I have some knowledge on the topic but I am not sure what you are expecting me. A full review? Borsoka (talk) 02:12, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
• :Well, this is a choose-your-own-adventure. It is a monster of an article; it's a busy, critical Talk community. I need someone to respond and deal with the issues with me as it all a bit too much.
• :Priorities:
• :* Address the delist vote issues
• :* Address the tabulated issues that is growing
• :* Hold me accountable with my contributions that it is to the best standard. I take feedback well compared to most people, but I have room to improve to edit to an FA standard. I've been working with Airship for a year on this, and learned a lot. But we are both burnt out, so keeping it positive would help me.
• :* Identify and fix issues to make this a FA. This is where your experience will make a difference.
• :* A big one that I have started (in responses to Fut.Perf) but we could partner on, is text-source integrity and unbundling the sources into smaller more specific sentences. I've started History, but you could take that. Airship did that, and this works well with your previous WP work; the other sections I worked on are so I can move quicker, but fresh eyes on any of this is the value. At close to ~350 multiple-source-bundled citations, you can understand why I need help to just meet this important issue.
• :Let me know what interests you. I would, of course, have the pleasure to learn from you in any thing you work on. Biz (talk) 04:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

{{Ping|Biz}}, sorry for not answering your question. Sorry, but I think significant amount of edits are needed to improve the article, and I prefer to edit other articles for the time being. Borsoka (talk) 08:46, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:No problem. It has been delisted, which is a relief. Your feedback is still welcome, I'm trying to decide if I finish the work needed, and to get it submitted for grading in future. Biz (talk) 19:31, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've Talk:Council of Tripoli/GA1{{!}}begun reviewing the article Council of Tripoli you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. File:Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Borsoka,I apologize for my impatience that may have caused you discomfort, and I hope we can continue working together.To be honest, I am quite worried when you review my articles because your reviews are quite tough. However, I am also glad because it helps me improve my writing and the quality of my articles a lot. Min968 (talk) 19:31, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

• No problem. It did not cause me discomfort. I am tough. :) Borsoka (talk) 01:24, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
• Hear, hear (to both comments). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:31, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I see that you're a new editor here. Reverts like this, which reinstate incorrect publication years, are disruptive. Please be more wary about what you're reverting. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:27, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you for your message. I will fix the problem. Borsoka (talk) 08:38, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::If you want to contribute to the article, do so. Reverting extensive new WP:RS additions is pure disruption and is unacceptable. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:41, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::No. What is disruptive is the unilateral addition of texts to a FA. Borsoka (talk) 08:45, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::::FA articles get expanded, delisted, whatever all the time. Same with GA articles. Do you have anything to add to this article? :bloodofox: (talk) 08:50, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::You are right, but for the time being you are ignoring the views of other editors. Borsoka (talk) 08:52, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::How? I'm easily the most active individual on the talk page and as I review the article I am finding a plethora of issues, which I am remedying as time permits, as well as adding lots of new material that should have come up during the GA and FA reviews. I've been through GA reviews many times and the article needed more time in the oven. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:00, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::You are editing the FA without seeking other editors' opinion on the Talk page. Borsoka (talk) 09:08, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Nobody needs to ask anyone permission to add WP:RS and correct data on articles. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:10, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::You are right but nobody is entitled to force their own opinion across a FA. Borsoka (talk) 09:12, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::In short, the article has issues. I'm volunteering to take the time out to spot these issues. The article's review status is really irrelevant if it has issues and any new corrections should be commended. All I am adding are hardcore WP:RS and nothing remotely controversial. If corrections are not applauded, the system is broken: I think that is important to consider. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::Yes, I experenced that you think your edits cannot be challenged by any editors because you are obviously right. This is the problem. Borsoka (talk) 09:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::What are you referring to? See the talk page regarding lists as an example. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:27, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Why do you think other editors do not want to comment on the issues you are raising? You are writing messages and began to edit the article without waiting for some hours or ideally days. Borsoka (talk) 09:31, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::It's an obscure topic and many editors don't have a background in linguistics. Again, nobody needs to wait around or ask to edit an article. At this point, people should really just be happy that the article, an obscure topic, is getting attention and scrutiny from at least one specialist editor. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:39, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::I doubt that many people are happy. You know nobody enjoys when their mouth is filled with fruits and vegetables by force, even if they are healthy. Borsoka (talk) 09:45, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

The article Council of Tripoli you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold File:Symbol wait.svg. The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Council of Tripoli and Talk:Council of Tripoli/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:22, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Crusading movement, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aegean.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

The article St Scholastica Day riot's previous nomination was archived following concerns raised about its sourcing by Fowler&fowler. I noticed that you recently opposed its current nomination. Do you believe a single oppose carries weight given the multiple declarations of support for the nomination? I look forward to your thoughts. Best regards. MSincccc (talk) 13:19, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:I am not one of the FA coordinators, so I cannot answer your question. Borsoka (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

The article Council of Tripoli you nominated as a good article has passed File:Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Council of Tripoli for comments about the article, and Talk:Council of Tripoli/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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 00:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Borsoka!

I think it would be worth to check the strange edits of this user, some examples (I experienced also many weird edits in past):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religion_in_Hungary&diff=prev&oldid=1287217051

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Hungary&diff=prev&oldid=1286880108 OrionNimrod (talk) 19:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I have an article, Kitty Marion, listed for peer review, and I saw your similar listing for Archbishopric of Moravia. They are both historical articles, and both are GA class. Would you be interested in reviewing each other's articles? One reviewer already posted a few superficial comments at WP:Peer_review/Kitty_Marion/archive1, but I was hoping for a more thorough review. I could start on Archbishopric of Moravia today, if it sounds like a good plan. Noleander (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

{{-}}

{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Nine}}

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

You requested peer review for an article at: Wikipedia:Peer_review#Archbishopric_of_Moravia. If you are not going to participate in the process, you should remove the review so editors don't waste their time. Noleander (talk) 17:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)