![]() Archives |
||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Contents
- 1 Sorry about that edit conflict!
- 2 You were correct
- 3 Links to documents
- 4 Persondata RfC
- 5 The Wikipedia Library needs you!
- 6 Email
- 7 "In popular culture" sections
- 8 MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?
- 9 Data
- 10 This Thursday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ University of Chicago
- 11 This Friday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA
- 12 Typo?
- 13 Hey!
- 14 Vested contributors arbitration case opened
- 15 Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2
- 16 ArbCom elections are now open!
- 17 Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
- 18 IP Address registers by mistake
- 19 Help decide the future of Wikimania
- 20 Towards a New Wikimania results
- 21 Precious anniversary
- 22 Edit-a-thon at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago!
Sorry about that edit conflict!
On the gg talk page. That's a new one for me. I suspect it's not a big deal on the talk page, but should I just delete my question and get out of the way? Happy to do so. Just let me know, thank you. Dumuzid (talk) 20:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- I *think* I was able to restore it without removing anything else. Also no worries, it happens all the time. Protonk (talk) 20:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
You were correct
Thanks for allowing the section to stand. I admit that my "interjection" at Do we consider NPOV issues... may not have answered the direct question being asked at that point in the section. I apologize for that. I did feel that it may have spoken to the title of the section however, for whatever that may or may not have been worth. Next time I will place any such comments in a more appropriate location within a given setion. Scott P. (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- No problem. Though I'm not an admin nor am I a regular watcher of WT:NPOV, so I don't know if someone else will consider that new section germane or not. I can also understand why you replied as you did in that section, since the scope of the discussion wasn't made very clear w/ the section title or opening post. Protonk (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Links to documents
I put in the health document which you removed saying "rm purely decorative image. A screencap of a document, really?". The screencap is not the attraction - the document that a person gets by clicking through is. I put other documents in other places. There is no Wiki-policy about this because so far as I can tell, I am the only person who puts documents into articles. People often remove documents. I am not really sure why.
Currently pictures are encouraged, videos sometimes are, and other media is out of the Wikipedia article and probably not appropriate for external links. Personally I like providing pdfs which are relevant.
- Wikipedia:GLAM/smarthistory is a project to put external links to non-free videos in the body of articles - unorthodox but community supported, and an example of linking through to content in an article body
- I tried posting the arrest document for an issue at Devyani_Khobragade_incident#Arrest. It seemed obvious to me that 30+ journalists in popular media had never seen the original document despite it being short, free, readable, and rather unlike anyone's reporting. It was removed also, probably mostly for being a document.
- I try to pressure all health organizations to release copyright on their content and post it in-wiki, as at Antibiotic_misuse#Instances_of_antibiotic_misuse
I appreciate your attention. I would like more pressure on more organizations to make their documents have free licenses and that might contribute to my bias about including documents in articles. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Bluerasberry: Videos are tough to square with this interpretation, but I really feel articles should be written so that they're still sensible in print and on mobile (the mobile view for that page is a mess, requiring a reader scroll past 4 images before they reach the text in the lede). In print (or in a resource that consumes the page and presents it in a print-like format) the image does very little. I guess more broadly I feel that images should compliment the text above all else. In this regard the generated image of a miracle cure is probably also largely decorative, however the FDA's justification in making the image seemed good enough that it should be in the article (though probably not at the top of the page), since it is showing an image which is obviously at variance to the marketing material we see on bottles.
- I think we can and should re-host freely licensed documentation, but I'm not convinced that it's best for readers to display them as inline images. I think we should consider a reader browsing an article as the modal use case and write for that. Does the image, as it stands on the page, help inform the reader? For the case of documents embedded in an article I can't see it. If reading the document enlivens a reader who might choose to do so, we should place it in the external links. People probably don't follow external links as much as they might follow an image link to a document at the top of the page, but that's not reason enough (in my mind) to place it on the page.
- I'm not sure if there is a guideline or policy proscribing this. There are hundreds of those pages I've never read (not even counting the MOS). Maybe there is (maybe it even follows my above argument). But I have no idea. Protonk (talk) 17:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Persondata RfC
Hi, You participated in the previous Persondata RfC. I just wanted to notify you that a new RfC regarding the methodical removal of Persondata is taking place at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Thanks, —Msmarmalade (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
- Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
- Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
- Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
- Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
- Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
- Research coordinators: run reference services
Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Sent you an email. Posting this as plain text as I don't like the ygm template. Feel free to respond or ignore as you choose. -- Euryalus (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.. Don't call Sitush a dick. It is Ricky who is the real dick. His laziness and refusal to listen to Sitush is the problem herez
"In popular culture" sections
Hello: some time ago (2008, which seems like an eternity) you took part in a discussion about inclusion criteria for "in popular culture" content (see Wikipedia talk:"In popular culture" content/Archive 3). I have just started an RfC on a related issue: see Wikipedia talk:Verifiability#RfC: Are "in popular culture" entries "self-sourcing" or do they require a reference under Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources? I thought I'd alert you as a courtesy in case you wished to make a comment. Neutralitytalk 00:13, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. Seems like I got to the party 2 days late, so I won't add my voice to the din there. Protonk (talk) 20:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?
You are being contacted because you contributed to a recent discussion of MOS:IDENTITY that closed with the recommendation that Wikipedia's policy on transgender individuals be revisited.
Two threads have been opened at the Village Pump:Policy. The first addresses how the Manual of Style should instruct editors to refer to transgender people in articles about themselves (which name, which pronoun, etc.). The second addresses how to instruct editors to refer to transgender people when they are mentioned in passing in other articles. Your participation is welcome. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Data
Where's the data that Aaron Halfaker uploaded, on active users? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC).
- @Rich Farmbrough: Documentation here (with links to the dataset and code). Protonk (talk) 01:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
- TYVM! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC).
I see I get a mention for my Afar edits... All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC).
- TYVM! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC).
This Thursday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ University of Chicago
You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ University of Chicago on October 15! (drop-in any time, 3-7pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
This Friday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA
You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Typo?
In Wikipedia:2015 administrator election reform/Phase I/RfC you said "It's silly to keep tools unbundled beyond the minimum necessary for legal issues."
Did you mean to say "It's silly to keep tools bundled beyond ...."?
davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:32, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Hey!
You're supposed to edit the "Statement by other editor" section, not mine. Thanks for the edit conflict ;) NE Ent 21:07, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- I thought I did! And I have the automated edit summary to prove it! :) Protonk (talk) 21:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Vested contributors arbitration case opened
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 12:36, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
You are receiving this message because you are a party or offered a preliminary statement and/or evidence in the Arbitration enforcement 2 case. This is a one-time message.
The Arbitration enforcement 2 arbitration case (t) (ev / t) (w / t) (pd / t) has been closed, and the following remedies have been enacted:
1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.
3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.
6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 02:41, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed
IP Address registers by mistake
How do I remove my IP address if I've mistakenly commented without being logged in? Req: Science Law Chess (talk) 14:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Req: Science Law Chess. Sorry for not seeing this earlier. You can send me an email with the revisions in question and I'll make sure they're deleted. Protonk (talk) 21:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Help decide the future of Wikimania
The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).
After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.
In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.
With thanks,
I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 23:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Towards a New Wikimania results
Last December, I invited you to share your views on the value of Wikimedia conferences and the planning process of Wikimania. We have completed analysis of these results and have prepared this report summarizing your feedback and important changes for Wikimania starting in 2018 as an experiment. Feedback and comments are welcome at the discussion page. Thank you so much for your participation. I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, 22:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
![]() |
|
Dragon kill points | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 775 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Edit-a-thon at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago!
Come join us on Saturday, March 5th between 12PM - 5PM for the Art+Feminism 2016 edit-a-thon at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago! We'll be focusing our efforts on women involved in the arts, and a list of articles for artists in Chicago and the U.S. Midwest has been compiled at the project page. The event is free, but only if you register at the project page ahead of time. I'll be there, and I hope to see you there too! I JethroBT (talk) 06:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)