Kategorie Diskussion:RE:Stammdaten überprüfen

First doubts on Stammdaten

Hi again (and also @THE IT:! Guided by the phrase "If you find an article, which has two parts or is too complex, just skip it. There are seasoned editors around to tackle those." in our new Kategorie:RE:Stammdaten überprüfen, I was thinking that maybe we could also add to that phrase a link to a page where a user can directly post requests for help regarding specific articles. It could be the talk page of the category itself, or somewhere else, what you think better. I would have the first two problematic cases:

• RE:Lokroi 1 I see at the end a "[Abgeschl. Mai 1923.]" and I am unsure how to codify it; Oldfather is anyway indicated at the end of RE:Lokroi 2
• RE:Legio 1 I am getting very confused by the registers, it seems a very complex case

Thanks as always! Epìdosis (Diskussion) 10:12, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST) ELexikon (Diskussion) 10:38, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

Thank you!

Lokroi 1: the note "[Abgeschl. Mai 1923.]" is just an excuse, that the content is maybe a bit outdated as the volume was published in 1927. Beside it is normal, that the Author Oldfather is noted only after 2) and not after 1).

Legio 1: Two authors, Emil Ritterling and Wilhelm Kubitschek contributed together to this article. We will have some work to outline the article correctly. In my opinion, the registers should be correct - we will see. @Epìdosis, @THE IT. ELexikon (Diskussion) 11:02, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

Legio actually stretches over to issues :-D ... how ridiculous. I will try to give this one a decent structure. THE IT (Diskussion) 13:19, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

Legio is done. What I love to see ... Legio was referenced already a tone and now it is present ... at least its core meta data. And yes ... this is for sure one of the more complicated articles.THE IT (Diskussion) 13:46, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

End Page missing in Registers

You will find many articles having no end page in the register and in the Stammdaten. This has to be done manually, as it was not entered years ago. RE:LEGIO 1 is an example. ELexikon (Diskussion) 12:51, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

This is one of the issues I mentioned to you @Epìdosis: Registers aren't as correct, as we like them to be. THE IT (Diskussion) 13:20, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

@ELexikon, THE IT: Sure, and in one case I have found also the opposite, i.e. the end page had become the start page (RE:Pontarches 2); and sometimes a {{REAbschnitt}} needs to be added (e.g. RE:Publicius 21). It requires to be careful, sure. Which is presently the number of created articles per day? I think that 50 could be well manageable, maintaining the cap of 1000 articles in the category. Epìdosis (Diskussion) 18:22, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

We currently starting with 10 per day. I want to make sure the bot doesn't cause havoc. THE IT (Diskussion) 21:17, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

@Epìdosis: ... I can see with your tempo, that we should up it to 50. THE IT (Diskussion) 21:58, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

Introduction before numbered articles

Hi @ELexikon, THE IT:, I am not fully sure about the standard that we have when there is an article X with a quite long text, followed by the numbered ones (1, 2, 3 etc.). My case is RE:Hellespontos 1: would it make sense to split RE:Hellespontos? In some cases I see them divided, in some other cases not. Thank! Epìdosis (Diskussion) 18:54, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

Good and valid question. In this case I would put it only in the first article. THE IT (Diskussion) 21:20, 6. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

Yes, in general they should be divided and where this is not done yet, it should be corrected. Best, --Tolanor 23:13, 7. Sep. 2025 (CEST)

OK, RE:Hellespontos created now. Epìdosis (Diskussion) 23:45, 7. Sep. 2025 (CEST)