Hello, Constable31, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! HiLo48 (talk) 07:42, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Thank you ...
... for your comment on Verdi. I didn't know that list, and found it funny, surprised to find Charlie Chaplin on it and Death of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart😉 - I was similarly surprised that Verdi isn't among the top 200 (but Wagner is). Thank you for the fun. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
No problem. I think Verdi isn't on there because his talk page doesn't have the WikiProject Composers tag, his page views would put him around number 60 (alongside Erik Satie, who has an infobox). Shogeneral (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
Give him one? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:15, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, a majority of composers seem to have infoboxes now. It's only a matter of time until almost all composers have infoboxes, whether through revision of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Composers#Biographical_infoboxes or through RfCs Shogeneral (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
I think that RfCs are a waste of time. Did you read Mozart's? What would be different for Verdi? - It would be enough that four users would change their minds. Telling them that their view is silly is possibly not the most promising approach😉 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:13, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
I agree that they're a waste of time for most articles (e.g. a Verdi ib can be added without one), but I don't know if a consensus to add infoboxes on featured articles like Debussy can be established without one. I've read the previous Debussy and Rimsky-Korsakov RfCs Shogeneral (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
You will have seen that I didn't participate in those two, - I leave them to the preference of their writers (who don't like being called "owners"). Verdi, however, is written by a bunch of authors, and he was predominantly an opera composer. Project opera has removed the aversion against infoboxes (which goes against the MoS, regarding POB and POD) in 2019. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:53, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
Of the four topics I helped to bring to the main page, I'm most proud of a woman's work, so made it my story. As it happens, last year's story OTD was about the woman. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
From the Mozart discussion: a reply to Nikkimaria. (The "recently" mentioned there was 2024.) I mentioned you on S Marshall, in admiration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
I also mentioned my admiration to Barkeep49. - Today: Bach in story and music, imagine: four Easter cantatas in today's concert, pictured, - and more places in Cyprus. - Listening to the Verdi Requiem on radio, Libera me ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Today's FA is Bridge, - a broad topic by many. My father loved bridges, and I wrote a few articles with that in mind (Empress Elisabeth Bridge, adding to Chain bridge and Müngsten Bridge, the latter for childhood memory), and also thinking of bridges between people. - I brought two bios to the same page, Christian Schwarz-Schilling and Bill Ramsey whose regular Swingtime I used to hear in the car driving to choir rehearsals. - Thank you for having built a bridge! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
Nice to see a vital article recently promoted to FA status. By the way, I appreciate all the 'thanks' you sent me over the course of the Cosima Wagner discussion. Shogeneral (talk) 19:51, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
For a while, it was one per day😉 - I told one of the arbitrators to watch over it, and told him today he could stop watching. It was one of the articles with a story, DYK? - Listening to Le Sacre du printemps on radio, another one of those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:21, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
Today's story is about one of three bios I brought to today's main page: look and listen, an extraordinary woman in many respects. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
Precious
images to infoboxes
Thank you for quality work following "I especially like adding a good map to an election page and a good image to an infobox", performed for many elections and people such as Caspar David Friedrich with eloquence and patience, for project work in elections and opera, for high goals related to philosophers, - youare an awesome Wikipedian!
You are recipient no. 3029 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:34, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
Congratulations. Grimes2 15:38, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
Wow! Thank you so very much. Shogeneral (talk) 18:43, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
Post-noms
I suppose you think you are doing something useful in just removing artistic post-noms. I'm afraid you aren't. As I expect you know the policy only refers to the lead sentence, and if you remove eg "RA" there, you need to put it somewhere else in the lead, as it is virtually always lead-worthy, at least in the case of the major British societies. That it is mentioned waaay down in the text does not provide an excuse. The edits you are doing are damaging the articles. Johnbod (talk) 01:57, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
And edits like this one are ABSOLUTELY not required or condoned by the policy, which refers only to the first sentence of articles! Johnbod (talk) 02:05, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
The policy doesn't just refer to the first sentences of articles. It states that "post-nominals should only be mentioned at relevant places in a biography subject's own article (excepting the lead sentence), in an infobox parameter for post-nominals, when the post-nominals themselves are under discussion in the material, and in other special circumstances such as a list of recipients of an award or other honour. For example, "Brian Lara TC OCC AM" should not appear in an article like Warwickshire County Cricket Club."
That he's mentioned as the co-founder of the RA may justify the inclusion of post-nominals, but two points that go against it are 1) The article isn't about the RA or its members and 2) it's already clear to the reader that he was a member of the RA. Shogeneral (talk) 02:15, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
That most certainly doesn't mean they can't be mentioned anywhere else on Wikipedia! That is a forced and ridiculous interpretation. Johnbod (talk) 03:24, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
I see you are still just removing post-noms without putting them elsewhere in the leas as appropriate. I shall just rollback these lazy edits. Johnbod (talk) 03:24, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
If you have a problem with the policy, put it on the policy's talk page. Shogeneral (talk) 03:27, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
My problems is with your edits mis-applying it, though there perhaps should be adjustments to clarify that that is what your edits are doing. Johnbod (talk) 03:41, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
I'm not misapplying it, the policy says that "post-nominal letters may be included in any part of the article other than the lead sentence", and I'm removing postnominals from the lead sentence. Shogeneral (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
(watching:) I understand the guideline the following way: postnominal letters don't belong in the first sentence (the infobox being a better place), and they also should not be treated as part of the name when mentioning a person in prose, the same way as we don't say Professor preceeding the name. If that is so but not generally understood, perhaps the guideline needs clarification. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:59, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
Sorry, I was not clear: I meant that the post-nom that was in the first sentence of the lead before should go to the infobox, while the mentioning in the article below should remain as it is. I believe that it may vary from case to case if the post-nom is worthy to also appear further down in the lead. It's more prominent in the infobox, like the places of birth and death that are usually not needed in a lead. - I came from ANI as you may have seen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 12 May 2026 (UTC)
