User talk:Osoraku

This is Osoraku's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Walls of Lisbon has been accepted[edit]

Walls of Lisbon, 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 20% 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!

Hoary (talk) 23:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The comment above is machine-generated. But this is a human writing. (Though of course this is just what a machine might say.) Thank you again for a fascinating article. But two points. First, although Portuguese is just one among thousands of languages that I don't know, its apparent resemblance to languages in which I have some competence suggests that a number of the names (often in boldface) are actually just the Portuguese words for such words as "citadel". If they're not names, then either they can be translated into English or left in Portuguese but italicized. If OTOH they are names, they shouldn't be italicized (and my italicizing in the opening paragraph was a mistake, which you are free to revert) and they probably shouldn't be translated. Unfortunately the common noun versus name distinction isn't so simple: as an example, "tower" is of course a common noun in English, yet anyone with any knowledge of London knows that the Tower of London is a particular place (and not a tower; whereas The Monument is at least a monument). I don't have a quick recommendation -- but in the meantime, I would point out that use of boldface is generally deprecated: it's used for first occurrences of particularly important terms, but for not much else. Secondly, the article cites a masters thesis. For all I know, this may be of outstandingly high quality, its author already an associate professor somewhere; however, WP:SCHOLARSHIP says that "Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence." If the author subsequently derived a relevant article from it, cite the article; if not, find some published source to cite. -- Hoary (talk) 00:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked editing[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Osoraku (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 89.114.75.27. I suspect that my ISP assigns IP numbers dynamically, and I was given one that (used to be) an open proxy. I have a long history of being a logged-in Wikipedia contributor and can't otherwise reckon why I've just now been blocked. Thanks for any help you can give. Osoraku (talk) 17:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

What you say is probably true, please see Template:Blocked p2p proxy for more information. If this is a continual problem for you, you may request an IP block exemption as WP:IPECPROXY explains. 331dot (talk) 20:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.