Template:Did you know nominations/Federated Legion of Women
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Czar (talk) 21:44, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Federated Legion of Women
- ... that the Federated Legion of Women was an armed group of women active during the Paris Commune to arrest or report deserters of the National Guard?
Created by Asilvering (talk). Nominated by SL93 (talk) at 23:41, 20 April 2022 (UTC).
- As the creator/translator of this article I would like to request - beg, even - that the nom withdraw their nomination. I plea D7, but I would also like to point out that the sources are still nearly entirely in French. -- asilvering (talk) 02:55, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I refuse per WP:OWN. SL93 (talk) 03:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yikes. Isn't the fourth goal of DYK
To acknowledge the work that editors do to expand and improve Wikipedia, encouraging them to continue their efforts and thereby contributing to editor retention and ongoing content improvement
? This isn't encouraging; it's distressing. -- asilvering (talk) 03:44, 21 April 2022 (UTC)- You redacted your reasons on your talk page. I have yet to hear why it's distressing. SL93 (talk) 03:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I am willing to work with you on the issue if you tell me what the issue actually is. I don't feel bad if it's simply an ownership issue because that is something no editor should do. SL93 (talk) 03:55, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- WP:OWN is about claiming ownership of article content. Anyone is free to improve this article - I'd love that! I think it needs a lot of work! Past that, I'm not really sure what would be most helpful for me to say here. I could give other reasons, yes. I could explain my discomfort. But at this point I'm not sure that's in my best interest: it seems like doing so would just prolong this situation as you try to invalidate every possible thing I might say. What I really don't understand at all is what makes you so intent on nominating an article you had no hand in, against the objections of an editor who did contribute to it. What's the point? I really do not think it is "ownership behaviour", or too much to ask, for an editor who has done significant work on an article to request that a completely uninvolved editor retract a DYK nom for it. I'd like to stick to that core point: I do not think this is kind behaviour, and I do not think it is helpful behaviour. -- asilvering (talk) 04:48, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yikes. Isn't the fourth goal of DYK
- I refuse per WP:OWN. SL93 (talk) 03:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Withdrawn: This is withdrawn. SL93 (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)