User talk:Nederlandse Leeuw

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Hello, Nederlandse Leeuw, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 04:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Foundation for Medieval Genealogy

Please note that user:Dmitry Azikov has added references using FMG as a source. As seen here, it may be necessary to remove fmg from articles, again. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:44, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. NLeeuw (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is valuable

I really appreciate your input regarding the modern period discussions. It's been very helpful! I understand if you feel disheartened at having to defend the same point over and over again. I feel the situation with historical periodization is very much a matter of Randies from Boisie wanting to place themselves at the same level as academic historians. I doubt they would ever do with the natural sciences, that is "real" science.

I'm really going to do what I can to try to improve our historical coverage and periodization beyond the mere listing of historical events (as is the case at human history). What's sorely missing from Wikipedia is obviously input from professional historians or at least people with a grasp of historiography. And the attitude of way too many history-writing Wikipedians is most likely discouraging a lot of academics from commenting. A very good example of this is the reaction to this thread over at Viking Age.

If you want to get back in the discussion, I think your input would be very valuable. But if you want to just share suggestions or thoughts regarding this and similar issues, don't hesitate to contact me through the email form.

Take care! Peter ^Isotalo 09:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter Isotalo Thanks, I appreciate your message! You and I found a lot of agreement in our understanding of the topic and Wikipedia's coverage of it, and the RS as well as the policies and guidelines are on our side. But in order to enforce it, we would have to engage in conflict with the few non-expert Wikipedians who disagree, and at the moment I do not choose that battle. (It's quite frustrating that after conceding to move the discussion to another talk page, I still did not get any substantive response or concession from the other side). I'm sorry to abandon you, but at this point we have too few others who agree with us to easily settle the issue. I'm moving on for now, but perhaps I'll revisit the question in the future. Cheers, NLeeuw (talk) 09:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your helpful insights and input regarding Wikipedia's coverage of modern history. Peter ^Isotalo 09:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category inquiry

Hello there. I was just wondering, I noticed back in October 17 2016, you put Coralie Colmez in the category British Skeptics. I thought she was French? Jack Riding (talk) 08:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're right, she lives in the UK but holds French citizenship. NLeeuw (talk) 09:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She has lived in the UK and in America, but she’s back in France now. On her Wikipedia page, her nationality only says French. I’ve removed her from the category of British Skeptics, and put her into the French Skeptics category. Jack Riding (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of interest, did you put her in the category British Skeptics because she has lived in the United Kingdom? Jack Riding (talk) 11:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. NLeeuw (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In order for her to actually be British, she’d have to be naturalised. She’s French, through and through. Jack Riding (talk) 11:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever dude. Stop bothering me please. You only created an account 5 days ago and all you seem to care about is telling everyone she's French and not British. I got it. Have a nice day and enjoy your tea. NLeeuw (talk) 12:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn’t mean to bother you. It’s just important that the information on Wikipedia pages is accurate. All the best. Jack Riding (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I've been doing it for 15+ years, and you for 5 days. I already told you 3 hours ago you're probably right. Do you want a medal for correcting me, or will you see yourself out? I've got things to do. NLeeuw (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Nederlandse Leeuw. Thank you for your work on Siege of Vyshgorod. Another editor, Aszx5000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Lovely work, should definitely be autopatrolled? thanks.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Aszx5000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Aszx5000 (talk) 11:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to Kazakh literature, would you be interested in a taskforce on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rus' principalities has been nominated for merging

Category:Rus' principalities has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies 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) 10:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kievan rus

Hello, I saw you haven't answered me for a long time in discussion, so I want to directly discuss the changes in the article. I'm not antinormanist by the way, so no need to assault me, I have already provided reliable sources so it shouldn't take a long time. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should I maybe rephrase my statement, @Nederlandse Leeuw? 46.200.75.110 (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, I'm not interested. Have a nice day. NLeeuw (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]