In [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anne_of_Denmark&diff=prev&oldid=1285777332 this edit] you tried to replace refs with sfn or some such, and were missing a closing }}. Then in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anne_of_Denmark&diff=next&oldid=1285922961 this edit] you tried to close, but closed badly(?), dropping a whole segment of text at beginning of section [[Anne_of_Denmark#Relationship_with_James|Relationship with James]]. Could you fix that? Do finds on the word “pressure” to locate the problem area. [[User:Shenme|Shenme]] ([[User talk:Shenme|talk]]) 03:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
In [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anne_of_Denmark&diff=prev&oldid=1285777332 this edit] you tried to replace refs with sfn or some such, and were missing a closing }}. Then in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anne_of_Denmark&diff=next&oldid=1285922961 this edit] you tried to close, but closed badly(?), dropping a whole segment of text at beginning of section [[Anne_of_Denmark#Relationship_with_James|Relationship with James]]. Could you fix that? Do finds on the word “pressure” to locate the problem area. [[User:Shenme|Shenme]] ([[User talk:Shenme|talk]]) 03:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
* {{Reply to|Shenme}} Before my edits, much of the text was in <nowiki><ref></nowiki> markers. In my edits you note here, all I’ve attempted to do was to swap <nowiki><ref></nowiki> with <nowiki>{{Efn}}</nowiki>. Regardless, the whole segment of text remains in a note, just not a footnote. I’ve moved it all out of a note and into the main text, against the unknown intent of the previous editor who had put it in a note. How does it look? —[[User talk:GoldRingChip|GoldRingChip]] 12:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
* {{Reply to|Shenme}} Before my edits, much of the text was in <nowiki><ref></nowiki> markers. In my edits you note here, all I’ve attempted to do was to swap <nowiki><ref></nowiki> with <nowiki>{{Efn}}</nowiki>. Regardless, the whole segment of text remains in a note, just not a footnote. I’ve moved it all out of a note and into the main text, against the unknown intent of the previous editor who had put it in a note. How does it look? —[[User talk:GoldRingChip|GoldRingChip]] 12:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
== Nomination for deletion of [[:Template:Marquess of Donegall family tree]] ==
[[File:Ambox warning blue.svg|30px|link=]][[:Template:Marquess of Donegall family tree]] has been [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion|nominated for deletion]]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 June 1#Template:Marquess of Donegall family tree|”’the entry on the Templates for discussion page”’]].<!–Template:Tfdnotice–> – [[User:Jonesey95|Jonesey95]] ([[User talk:Jonesey95|talk]]) 17:56, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
== Galicia ==
== Galicia ==
In this edit you tried to replace refs with sfn or some such, and were missing a closing }}. Then in this edit you tried to close, but closed badly(?), dropping a whole segment of text at beginning of section Relationship with James. Could you fix that? Do finds on the word “pressure” to locate the problem area. Shenme (talk) 03:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Shenme: Before my edits, much of the text was in <ref> markers. In my edits you note here, all I’ve attempted to do was to swap <ref> with {{Efn}}. Regardless, the whole segment of text remains in a note, just not a footnote. I’ve moved it all out of a note and into the main text, against the unknown intent of the previous editor who had put it in a note. How does it look? —GoldRingChip 12:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Gooday GoldRingChip, I have come across with a balanced, informative, to the point summary on the complexity of Galicia’s situation based on several books (some of which I’ve read). So I decided to share with you.
The poverty of the Galicia as a region was both consistent and endemic throughout the nineteenth century. The minimum taxable yearly income was 1200 Crowns a year and only .78% of Galicians met this criteria in the 1890s. Per capita income for the region in the early twentieth century was between 310-16 Crowns. In contrast, 7.29% of Cisleithanian Austria met the minimum tax requirements and its per capita income level averaged around 700 Crowns. Famines in this region were quite common and the region was sometimes known as Golicja i Głodomeria (Galicia the Hungry/Naked Lands). Although Galicia had relatively abundant natural resources, the consistent levels of poverty puzzled contemporaries. There was no single cause for this level of poverty, but rather a unique constellation of factors that worked in conjunction with each other to turn Galicia into one of the underdeveloped regions of the Empire.
One of the most salient reasons for the underdevelopment and lack of economic integration of Galicia was geography. The Carpathian Mountains and Galicia’s waterways meant that the Galicia lacked easy trade connections with either Austria or Hungary. Galicia’s traditional trading partners were the Polish regions of Russia and protectionist trade policies of both empires. Galicia’s status as a frontier zone meant that state development of infrastructure often met military needs, not economic ones. Conscription added a demographic pressure as the army took in the region’s most productive males for a significant part of the year. This was important given Austria-Hungary’s fit into the wider pattern of relatively late industrial development where state investment provided important capital and direction for economic growth, or lack thereof. Galicia exemplifies the East-West economic split of the Austro-Hungarian economy with a relatively prosperous western half and chronic under-development of the east. The fact that Galicia contributed so little tax revenue to Vienna’s coffers reenforced the state’s reluctance to invest in the region. What little investment the state put into the region far exceeded what it received in return.
However, the causes of Galician poverty were not just geographic in nature. The local political conditions and how they fit within the wider ethnic politics of the empire contributed greatly to the region’s flagging economy. Galicia’s ethnic composition was a mix between Poles and Ukrainian/Ruthenes (the distinction between Ruthenes and Ukrainian is a confusing one and worth a question in itself) with Jews as an important minority. The Polish nobility was at the apex of the Galician economy, controlling a majority of the forests and profitable estates. At mid-century, the region’s nobility controlled some 90% of the forest land and 40% of the arable soil. As the nineteenth century progressed, these magnates branched out into alcohol and other economic enterprises that favored short-term returns. The Habsburgs kept their distance from the Poles of Galicia, granting them relative autonomy but were leery of replicating the experience of Hungary wherein the an ethnically-defined nobility could extract concessions from the Habsburgs. Therefore, Polish economic preeminence did not have much corresponding political connections to Vienna. The Polish nobility had little incentive to improve the land as they were far richer than the peasantry, nor the channels to the state to facilitate investment if they were inclined to develop the region. The result was there was there was a land squeeze as the peasantry had to work increasingly marginal tracts of land and enjoyed little access to local and political power. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that when the Polish nobility tried to raise the peasantry against the Habsburgs in 1848, the peasantry actually attacked and in some famous instances decapitated the nobles.
The polyglot nature of the Galicia also meant that foreign investment found it difficult to establish a foothold. The ethnic tensions between Poles and the Ukrainian/Ruthenes meant that Galicians were very skeptical of outside investors. The language difficulties compounded this problem and Vienna was unwilling to sort this out. The state’s policy of relative autonomy also meant that it delegated responsibility for local affairs to the nobility and the latter were disinclined to develop infrastructure for schools and other educational outlets beyond the major cities. The literacy rate for Galicia was well below the averages for the rest of the Empire.
The one bright spot in the nineteenth-century Galician economy was the petroleum sector. Galicia had a relatively abundant source of oil and development of this industry allowed Austria-Hungary to convert from coal to petroleum as an energy source earlier than its neighbors. Yet many of the problems laid out above meant that oil wealth did not trickle down into the region. The state allowed various wildcat independent prospector which hindered the development of the oil industry in two significant ways. Firstly, the need for quick profits by these new oil concerns damaged the future ability to access the oil fields; haphazard drilling and pumping meant that it was much harder to reach deeper oil deposits. This put a ceiling on the development of this industry. Second, the oil industry in the nineteenth century was a notorious polluter and the Galician oil and refining concerns were no exception. The resulting pollution degraded the surrounding land and made it much harder for the non-petroleum industry to adapt to the twentieth century economy.
The net result of these factors was that Galicia became an economic backwater and peripheral component of the Empire’s economy so vividly portrayed in the historical novels of Joseph Roth. There was a sense among intellectuals that the region could prosper if the Empire were to break up, but the structural problems of the region continued after the collapse of the Habsburg state in 1918. 2604:3D09:D07E:2410:BC42:8F11:5EF5:6716 (talk) 12:57, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Welcome, 2604:3D09:D07E:2410:BC42:8F11:5EF5:6716, you are welcome to add information to Wikipedia articles related to this subject, provided you have citations to support them. —GoldRingChip 15:36, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you GoldRingChip, I’ve add the above information on the talk page of this subject In addition I also sent the information to the specific person via his talk page but got deleted by him (this person seemed to have a tendency of re-edit or deleting other people’s works on the articles and had received several complains). Anyway, I only brought this up because the wiki summary on this is an oversimplification of the complexities on the situation despite provision of additionally valued details made by some others (e.g. 90% of the forest land and 40% of the arable soil controlled by the region’s nobility after mid 19 century or comparison of per capita income with Balkans, Russia, South Europe and some parts of the empire like Dalmatia etc.)
- And yes the person who wrote this on reddit had some of the sources listed: Frank, Alison Fleig. Oil Empire: Visions of Prosperity in Austrian Galicia. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2005.(I’ve read this one)
- Good, David F. The Economic Rise of the Habsburg Empire, 1750-1914. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.
- Stauter-Halsted, Keely. The Nation in the Village: The Genesis of Peasant National Identity in Austrian Poland, 1848-1914. Ithaca [N.Y.]: Cornell University Press, 2001.(I read some passage of this one and another book on the subject)
- Wolff, Larry. The Idea of Galicia: History and Fantasy in Habsburg Political Culture. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 2010. 2604:3D09:D07E:2410:8809:4DB:AB6A:DE3C (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
-
- Again, welcome, 2604:3D09:D07E:2410:BC42:8F11:5EF5:6716!
- I suggest you establish a user account to help discussions to resolve this (and other) conflicts. Become a Wikipedian!
- I don’t know what article you wish to contribute this information, you haven’t mentioned it or linked anything.
- You don’t need to put it in the talk page, you can put it directly in the article, on your own (WP:WWW) if you have legitimate sources.
- Finally, I am not personally interested in this topic and I will not intervene. —GoldRingChip 19:41, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. I was referring to the “poverty in Galicia” article. But since I am busy irl I will let it go. Anyway, I think whoever really interested will read the books themselves (especially the one by Alison Fleig and a few other listed for Galicia’s economical problems) for a much more accurate, complex, detailed and case by case analysis. Reading books either through z-library or other online tools or from actual facilities irl are always better choices anyway. 2604:3D09:D07E:2410:8809:4DB:AB6A:DE3C (talk) 20:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
- Again, welcome, 2604:3D09:D07E:2410:BC42:8F11:5EF5:6716!
In the graphic from James Capet-Bourbon 1319-1362, the descendant line to his son John Capet-Bourbon Count of la Marche 1344-1393 has been interrupted. I am a long time editor, who is updating my family history and my relation to this bloodline, but I don’t know how to fix the graphic and I don’t want to make a mess of it either. Thanks (Regushee (talk) 18:59, 9 September 2025 (UTC))
- In which article, please? I can’t find it. —GoldRingChip 10:26, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry
- Family tree of French monarchs
- It looks like this article has been fixed by another editor. —GoldRingChip 14:08, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- File:Family tree of French monarchs.png Regushee (talk) 18:32, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
- This image should not have been created; I assume it was a screenshot. —GoldRingChip 14:08, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
Hello, GoldRingChip. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.
Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users’ IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.
How do temporary accounts work?
- When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user’s browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account’s name will follow the pattern:
~2025-12345-67(a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5). - All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
- A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
- As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
- There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
- There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.
Temporary account IP viewer user right
Impact for administrators
- It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won’t be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
- It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
- Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).
Rules about IP information disclosure
- Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67’s IP address is 192.0.2.1).
- Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if “reasonably believed to be necessary”. (e.g.
~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR
, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67) - See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can’t be said for more detailed guidelines.
Useful tools for patrollers
- It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options →
Enable the user info card
- This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
- Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
- Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account’s activity.
- The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.
Videos
Further information and discussion
Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
