User Talk: Peter G Werner

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{Archivebox|
2005–2006 ↗<br>
2007 ↗<br>
2008 ↗<br>
2009 ↗<br>
2010 ↗<br>
2011-2014 ↗<br>
2015-2016 ↗<br>
2017-2024 ↗
}}

Page mover granted

right|80px ↗
Hello, Peter G Werner. Your account has been <span class="plainlinks">granted ↗</span> the "{{mono|extendedmover}}" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages ↗. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect ↗, move subpages ↗ when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover ↗ for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect ↗. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures ↗ and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when <code>suppressredirect</code> is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere ↗. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password ↗. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked ↗.

Useful links:

Wikipedia:Requested moves ↗

:Category:Requested moves ↗, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! '''<span style="background:#4B0082; color:white;">Dr vulpes</span>''' (Talk) 04:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

:Thank you! Peter G Werner (talk) 04:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Article for the Arc Institute in Palo Alto

Hi, I saw that you are a member of WP:SFBA ↗ and have an interest in science. I drafted an article about the Arc Institute, a medical research organization based in Palo Alto. I was hoping that you might take a look at it and let me know if you think the subject is notable and if it looks like it would be ready to include on Wikipedia. I would love to know your thoughts on the draft I have posted here. As you will note, I have a conflict of interest and so would love to collaborate with impartial editors.

Thank you, JoeofArc21 (talk) 15:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

:I responded at User talk:JoeofArc21/Arc Institute draft. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Request for help with biography article

I found you through your list of interests at Wikiproject biography - figured you might be interested in commenting on Karl Menninger ↗? I've edited it quite a bit recently and would maybe like feedback? Maybe I'm feeling a bit like I don't know what's the priority for the article atm?

First time reaching out to other editors through a wikiproject, hope it's alright! I hope to reach out to like 3 active users, see if this makes sense. User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk ↗ 03:59, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

:I don't know much about psychiatry, so there's only so many specifics I can comment on. I did do a few edits and fixed some typos and added some useful internal links. A couple things that jump out at me - it doesn't look like you're familiar with Wikipedia's citation style. Usually article links (if they're publicly available) are linked into the article title itself, for example:
:* {{cite news |title=Karl Menninger, 96, Dies; Leader in U.S. Psychiatry |url= https://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/19/obituaries/karl-menninger-96-dies-leader-in-us-psychiatry.html |newspaper= New York Times |date= 1990-07-19}}
:Using existing templates is the preferred format (Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates ↗), though I realize editing these by hand is kind of a pain in practice. Are you familiar with Zotero ↗? You can use that app or even just the website to automatically format sources and then export them in Wikipedia template form.
:The other thing is that you seem to be writing in one-sentence paragraphs - try putting together several sentences on more or less the same topic into a paragraph. Single-sentence paragraphs aren't a writing no-no per se - sometimes a sentence covers a standalone topic - but they should be the exception rather than the rule.

:As for what to prioritize, read some existing obituaries of him, especially those that might be in academic journals, maybe even thumb through a book-length biography, and see what those source emphasize. Wikipedia articles should follow existing, high-quality secondary sources.

:Otherwise, I'd say you're contributions are quite good and I encourage you to keep up with your valuable expansion of the Menninger article. Cheers! Peter G Werner (talk) 06:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks a lot!User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk ↗ 00:53, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
::I linked the article's talk page to here, hope that's alright 🙏🏽User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk ↗ 00:59, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Colonia Dignidad ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gronau ↗.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

The SONGCOVER guideline

Note that the WP:SONGCOVER ↗ guideline sets a high bar to listing cover versions. It's not enough that the cover artist is famous, or the album containing the cover version is famous. The guideline says that the cover version must be described as remarkable in a reliable source. In practice, editors here generally allow any and all cover versions by people such as songwriters who were involved with the notable version. For instance, Randy Weeks gets to have his cover listed at Can't Let Go (Randy Weeks song) ↗. And we always allow charting covers. Binksternet (talk) 19:06, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

:Technically speaking, "We've Only Just Begun" is The Carpenters covering Paul Williams, so his version definitely belongs. As for the Grant Lee Buffalo version, that is from a significant Carpenters tribute album, and I know there are reliable sources for it - I just looked. Peter G Werner (talk) 20:44, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

::Curious to see what you might have found, I searched online to see that the ''Atlantic'' magazine says something nice about the cover version by Grant Lee Buffalo.https://web.archive.org/web/20191126185045/https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/06/the-carpenters-revisited-ctd/186057/ ↗ That source can be used. Binksternet (talk) 04:38, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Werner (name) ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heer ↗.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Holly Sugar Corporation ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colorado City ↗.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

the Batak are derived from a 7000 y.o. "Manchurian tribe"

Bosind (talk) 01:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
:I'm moving this discussion to Talk:Batak ↗, because it really belongs there. Peter G Werner (talk) 01:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:SeekingArrangement screenshot.jpg

64px|left|alt=|link= ↗
Thank you for uploading ''':File:SeekingArrangement screenshot.jpg ↗'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content ↗. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline ↗ is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag ↗; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page ↗. Thank you. --<span style="font-family: monospace, monospace; color:#69C">Min☠︎rax</span><sup>«¦'''talk'''¦»</sup> 01:06, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Policy

I suggest you read wp:policy ↗, and stop attacking other users on article talk pages. If you have a complaint, take it to ani. Yes this is a warning, I will remove anymore wp:soapboxing ↗. Slatersteven (talk) 15:42, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, so now you're escalating to retaliatory threats. Noted. Peter G Werner (talk) 15:44, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
::If you want to read it like that yes, it is a threat to remove anymore soapboxing. Comment on content not users. Slatersteven (talk) 15:47, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:::That's exactly how I read it, and yes, it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. And I also resent the claim that I'm the one that's saying the rules don't apply to me, when it's a general state of not adhering to Wikipedia's rules that I'm pointing out. Peter G Werner (talk) 15:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
::::The rule you are ignoring is the one that says that talk pages are not for commenting on editors (see wp:npa ↗). Slatersteven (talk) 16:01, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:::::I have removed the name of the individual editor. I am commenting on the state of the article and the tenuousness of this so called "consensus" that you're invoking. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:::::I'm just going to put this out there, as well - at this point, I consider your behavior toward me be nothing less than Wikipedia:WikiBullying ↗. And I guess you can consider yourself to have "won" the argument over on the Richard Hanania page, not by making a better argument about the state of the article, but by simply being so deeply unpleasant to deal with most people would not want to waste their time trying to negotiate with you. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:12, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Talk pages are not for whining about user actions, as you last edit there did "Although I think the above point comes across to me as gaslighting, as "rules not applying" is exactly what I see taking place already." or your treatment. That is non-negotiable. I am now out of here, you have been warned its up to you what now happens. Slatersteven (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
::::::::Yes, SIR. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. 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 '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Ambient musician draft

Hello Peter, I see you are interested in Ambient music, I'm the author of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Luca_Formentini, an Italian experimental composer and sound artist. I'd be grateful if you'd consider reviewing it, as I believe the draft now has adequate sourcing from independent publications including [Exposé Online / 15questions.net / Blow Up / Corriere della Sera]. Happy to discuss any concerns. Thank you. Silvia Dalle Montagne (talk) 17:17, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for your help Peter.
It is very very much appreciated. Yes, I was very surprised that the developer restricted it to iPhone/Mac users and this is the very first time I encountered it.
Believe me, there are currently multiple bible language versions only available on mobile app instead of desktop. I think they are still 'trialling' the translation before they 'release' it fully to all desktop users.
However this was the only bible language version that restricted their app to Mac users only. --DaveZ123 (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

:I hope the info was helpful. It's a fascinating topic, the way many of these German diaspora groups (mainly Mennonites, but including other groups as well) have kept very old High and Low German dialects alive, even where they've largely died out in their countries of origin.
:I'm German-American myself, and German history and culture is a big interest of mine. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:02, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adenostoma fasciculatum ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chamisa ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

:In this case, the pointer to the disambiguation page is intentional. Peter G Werner (talk) 10:58, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussions on Czechia

There has been discussions on the Czech stance on Palestine over the years, most recent one here: Archive 5 ↗. Semsûrî (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

:Also this diplomatic list is 7 days old and is explicitly states "State of Palestine"https://mzv.gov.cz/file/442309/Diplomatic_List ↗. Semsûrî (talk) 16:18, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
:Your revert was completely uncalled for. The Czech Republic did not exist in 1988, Czechoslovakia did, and that state's recognition of Palestine is on record. The position of the Czech Republic, one of its its successor states, is ambiguous. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:29, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::Please read the note for Czechia at International recognition of Palestine#States that recognize Palestine ↗ which notes "that it would continue to recognize all states which had been recognized by Czechoslovakia". Semsûrî (talk) 16:33, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
:::I'm going to take this discussion to the talk page of the article in question. If initial recognition was by Czechoslovakia, that's what the page needs to say. Just because you ''infer'' that this automatically applies to the current Czech Republic is poor reasoning and Wikipedia:SYNTH ↗ on your part. And, frankly, the fact that you're so ready to revert when there are clear factual problems with the version that you reverted to shows a little too much investment in this topic on your part. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:40, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
:::BTW, I'm requesting that you refrain from any reverting until this discussion on the talk page has taken place. And please allow me due time to draft a response on this page because it's a complicated enough topic requiring outside references that I'm not going to have a talk page article up instantaneously. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:52, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::::Sure but I have added a date for diplomatic relations with Czechia instead of Czechoslovakia. Semsûrî (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
:::::I really don't think getting rid of Czechoslovakia is at all called for, even if adding an separate entry for Czech Republic/Czechia is. I've made an edit to that effect. Which unfortunately puts Czechslovakia down at the very bottom of the existing list, since the unfortunate formatting of the list makes it so that you have to renumber every single entry in order to place a country in order of its date of recognition. It would be better to have a list simply default to order by date, but I'm guessing the numbered list was a work-around for the fact that several entries are listed as "unknown". Peter G Werner (talk) 17:14, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::::::The list was not intended to have former countries included but only current UN members and the Vatican, Kosovo and SMOM ↗ and so on. I believe it would be confusing, for example, if we had both Serbian predecessor states of Yugoslavia ↗ and Serbia and Montenegro ↗ listed as well. What about a note for Czechia that mentions Czechoslovakia and its date in 1988? Semsûrî (talk) 17:24, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Firstly, I'm not sure why former countries are excluded, since the topic of the article is foreign relations of Palestine in general, not ''current'' foreign relations. But OK, I can live with a list of current states that recognize Palestine, but what you cannot do is simply treat recogniztion by earlier states as automatically applying to the successor state full stop, especially since the earlier language of the list suggests that the Czech Republic was an existing entity in 1988. All of this goes for Russia, too, where the date that's there now (possibly the wrong one, BTW) of ''Soviet'' recognition of Palestine. (I'll note that other sources I've seen say that Soviet recognition of Palestine took place in 1988.) Use of footnotes for clarification is absolutely called for here.
:::::::I still plan on raising the issue on the talk page later. You've pointed to earlier ''discussion'' of the issue of Czech recognition, but what I do not see anywhere in that discussion is the reaching of any kind of Wikipedia:Consensus ↗. My understanding - Czech Republic has a ''de facto'' recognition of Palestine, with embassies in each other's countries. But the Czech Republic has also issued explicit statements that the 1988 recognition by Czechoslovakia does not apply to the Czech Republic. So whether that country actually recognizes Palestine ''de jure'' is highly arguable.
:::::::The same principal needs to be kept in mind with dates that might be entered in the future for Yemen, since earlier recognition by the former South and/or North Yemen is likely. Peter G Werner (talk) 17:47, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::::::::This page is not about recognition but diplomatic relations. ''Russian'' recognition took place in 1988 per Medvedevhttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-12212907 ↗, which obviously means they use the Soviet date. The 1990 date in the article is the date of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries (Soviet Union). Semsûrî (talk) 18:21, 6 July 2026 (UTC)