User talk:GusGusBrus

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Grimstad Bay has been accepted

Battle of Grimstad Bay, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TheBritinator (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, GusGusBrus! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! > Tesseractic: talk? ✎ 22:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Follow the guidelines

Hello. I see that you have added information to articles, which have not been considered a consensus on our recent discussions. If you want anything changed on Wikipedia [that is disputed] then you should not change it until its agreed upon. At last in our recent discussion you said you were going to find a third-party to resolve the issue. This has yet to happen and therefore you **SHOULD NOT** change the article. If you want the articles to be changed, you should first resolve the issue, and since we cannot on our own resolve it, you should find a third-party who's willing to intervene. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 09:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The articles i changed isnt unsources and doesnt have anything to do with the other on-site discussion we had. Please don’t reverse my edits and call them unsourced but rather take it to my talk page. I’m gonna reverse your edits since you wrongly mix this up with the other discussion we had. Although feel free to find a third party.

Best of luck! GusGusBrus (talk) 10:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is all about the same thing; If a victory of Denmark-Norway can be called a Dano-Norwegian victory, without any mention of Norwegian participation.

Claiming any victory is Dano-Norwegian (which you have changed multiple articles to) without Norwegian/Dano-Norwegian is mentioned in the article and supporting sources, is what you have done, and also what we were discussing. To say this isn't the same issue if plainly wrong, and even if we consider it as such, then I would still fully disagree, and you would still need a third-party intervention to make such changes. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 11:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore it would also be a breech of the guidelines to reserve my edit, in that you have the burden of proof and you made the change. Thereby for Wikipedia rules your claim should not be added until we have come to a conclusion on the talk page. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 11:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for a quick answer.

Your claim that Norwegians need to be spesifically mentioned is not needed, as your sources on multiple of them such as https://danmarkshistorien.dk/vis/materiale/trankebar already mention the fleet consisting of both Danes and Norwegians along with Danish and Norwegian ships. It also describes the colony as "Dano-Norwegian" which would itself make it right to put the result as "Dano-Norwegian" since the result section in the infobox should show which combatant claimed victory, and possibly extra information if needed. Your claim that there wasnt any Norwegians involved is therefore a negative claim, since its different from the default that there would be both Danish and Norwegian intervention as they had a combined fleet. It is also a known fact that "Denmark" or "Danish" is often used to refer to both nations during this period as shown in https://web.archive.org/web/20060212020313/http://www.sa.dk/ra/brugearkivet/rasaml/foer1848/danskekanc/B0274.htm. Therefore you would need a source stating that for some reason the navy was split up and that there for some reason where only Danes (?) Which would differ from the default.

Hope to hear from you soon, GusGusBrus (talk) 12:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No of the sources describing the engagements you have changed says they were “dano-norwegian” yet rather as Danish. And just because the colony was owned by Denmark-Norway doesnt mean we now should Call everything it possesed and did “dano-Norwegian” should we now also Call the Danish East India Company for the “Dano-Norwegian East India Company”? By No means. Because that Company is described in sourced as danish, just like the engagements. Again for the 10th time, we have already gone over this, and if you want it changed contact a third party. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 12:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read what i just wrote? Denmark or "Danish" was often the way Denmark-Norway and its people was refered to as. Same way the wars against Sweden was mostly called "Dano-Swedish war". Either way the name of the trade company is irrelevant and i wont discuss that further. You have yet to really reply to what i sent in the message above your most recent message. GusGusBrus (talk) 12:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is My last reply to you without a third-party. Per Wikipedia articles you should write What your sources say, if the sources say Danish, even if they imply Norwegians, it should be described as Danish in the article and supporting infobox. That os how it is. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 13:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And sources say that they had a combined fleet? Either way this would be irrelevant as Denmark-Norway is the combatant either way. GusGusBrus (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Lisbon (1109) has been accepted

Siege of Lisbon (1109), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Toadspike [Talk] 22:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Formentera (1109) has been accepted

Battle of Formentera (1109), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TheBritinator (talk) 00:53, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Denmark under Norwegian rule

Hello, GusGusBrus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Denmark under Norwegian rule, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Norwegian expansion in Finnmark

Hello, GusGusBrus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Norwegian expansion in Finnmark, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mecklenburgian invasion of Sweden has been accepted

Mecklenburgian invasion of Sweden, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

OhHaiMark (talk) 20:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your Draft:Norwegian Empire

I see that in your Draft:Norwegian Empire, you added the norwegian antarctic territory as being part of a Norwegian empire. I have never seen the Queen Maud Land being described as part of a Norwegian empire. You should provide a source when adding controversial information. E4t5s.new (talk) 13:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is often described as a part of the "Modern Norwegian empire" (along with Svalbard, Jan Mayen and the Bouvet Island), the same way Denmark is with the Faroe Islands and Greenland for reference. The page is a Disambiguation page therefore does not use direct citing or a reference section.

Hope this helps! GusGusBrus (talk) 13:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

gusgus, when an editor has questioned the validity of a claim, it is up to the editor who contributed the claim, to prove it with a source, even in disambiguate pages, as per Wikipedia:BURDEN. Also, there is no actual “modern Norwegian empire”. It is also not in any way the same as the Danish Realm. The Danish realm is not even considered an empire. E4t5s.new (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This isnt about what its scholary recognized as, its a page for what it might refer to. I have seen multiple videos and articles online which have refered to it as such. The article even clearly states that the term might refer to, not that its neccesarily a scholary factual term to use for said.

Hope this helps! GusGusBrus (talk) 13:41, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Show a source. E4t5s.new (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read my last message. It clearly fits into a disambiguation article. GusGusBrus (talk) 13:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you not just send me the source claiming it to be an empire? E4t5s.new (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can give you examples of it being called such if thats what you are asking about when you say "source". If you are thinking about a scholary one i will say it again, it isnt required for such an article.

Hope this helps! GusGusBrus (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DAB pages are not excluded from WP:Verifiability, it's just that the references are not supposed to be added on those pages, but to the target articles or on the talk page. See WP:Burden. DAB pages are referred to in footnote [d]. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 16:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Denmark under Norwegian rule

Hello, GusGusBrus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Denmark under Norwegian rule".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Norwegian-Wendish War

Hello, GusGusBrus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Norwegian-Wendish War, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sweyn Estridssons Rebellion

Hello, GusGusBrus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sweyn Estridssons Rebellion, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Ibiza (1109) (September 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Johannes Maximilian was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please fix your footnotes; Kennedy (1996) is not listed in the bibliography section. --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 00:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Battle of Ibiza (1109) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 00:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I have resubmitted now, could sadly not find back to the source i used for the island to later on get under the Almoravid dynasty. I have removed it and resubmitted.

Thanks! GusGusBrus (talk) 15:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GusGusBrus! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 00:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only used reliable and scholarly sources? Which of them weren’t reliable? GusGusBrus (talk) 07:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]