User talk:Northamerica1000/Archive 74

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 70 ← Archive 72 Archive 73 Archive 74 Archive 75 Archive 76 → Archive 80

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

Administrator changes

added Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
removed Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Image

Since you enjoy creating content about food, I wanted to bring your attention to a most wonderful image I found in Commons. You can see it here.

Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 01:55, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
@Barbara (WVS): Thanks. Very nice, and very life-like. Hey, if you're into food-related images, check out the works of Pieter Aertsen, such as File:Pieter Aertsen - Market Scene - Google Art Project.jpg, File:Pieter aertsen, venditrice di verdura al mercato, 1567, 02.JPG, and File:A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms - Pieter Aertsen - Google Cultural Institute.jpg. North America1000 02:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I am glad that you liked it and I will look at the other images. I love the whole idea of a Cardinal in the kitchen! Do you have a sauce article to use it in? Commons is such a wonderful art gallery. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 02:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
The marvelous sauce. Oil on panel circa 1890 by Jehan Georges Vibert (30 September 1840 – 28 July 1902)
@Barbara (WVS): The sauce article does not have a history section, where this could potentially fit if said section existed. Perhaps the image you provided could be added to the gallery at Jehan Georges Vibert. North America1000 02:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Are you telling me that there isn't an article called Catholic Cardinals history of sauces? No reply needed, I've already taken up too much space on your talk page. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 09:55, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of List of press release agencies for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of press release agencies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of press release agencies until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 19:55, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Churnalism

Wikipedia:Churnalism, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Churnalism and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Churnalism during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 22:57, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

my talk p

Not to be persnickety, but I did say I was having the last word. DGG ( talk ) 14:42, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Cracked nipple (a complication of breasfeeding)

I moved properly sourced content from Fissure of the nipple to Cracked nipple. None of the other info in the fissure article was related to the most common use of the term. I believe that the redirect that exists on the fissure article is also irrelevant. Can you actually remove the fissure page or does there have to be a discussion? The talk page of the fissure article is slightly ridiculous, too.

Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 00:20, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Barbara (WVS): I recommend starting a discussion at WP:RFD. North America1000 00:23, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Matter of fact

confused face icon Just curious... why you didn't delete in response to this prod knowing OR was involved and the article is unsourced? Now it's sitting there as it has been all those years...unsourced OR. Doesn't make any sense to me. Atsme📞📧 11:57, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi Atsme: I engage in source searches for such topics when making assessments, and this came across as having some merit. So I added two sources to the article. The OR tag is in reference to the "Examples" and "How We Know" areas of the article. I was able to find some source mentions about these notions, but not a great deal. As such, this may constitute OR, or it may not. Notice how the tag is worded as "... possibly contains original research". Hope this helps to clarify matters. North America1000 19:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 August 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Archive 70 ← Archive 72 Archive 73 Archive 74 Archive 75 Archive 76 → Archive 80

Tech News: 2017-32

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Problems

  • You can get an email when a page on your watchlist was edited. You can choose not to get emails for minor edits. There is a bug that means that you then don't get an email when someone does a normal edit after a minor edit. The developers are working on fixing this. Until it has been fixed you can activate "Email me also for minor edits of pages and files" at the bottom of "User profile" in your preferences if you want to. [3]
  • The thanks button sometimes didn't work for mobile users. This was because of a new bug and has now been fixed. [4]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 8 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 9 August. It will be on all wikis from 10 August (calendar).

Future changes

  • Editors and readers who still use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP will not be able to use Wikipedia. Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP can't connect securely to the wikis. When we allow them to do so it means that we get less security for everyone else. If you use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP you can install Firefox 52 ESR instead. Around 0.1% of the traffic to the Wikimedia wikis comes from Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP. [5]
  • Links to sections on Wikipedia don't work well in languages that don't use the Latin script. The URL in the address bar in your browser shows Latin characters like .D0.A1.D1.81.D1.8B.D0.BB.D0.BA.D0.B8 instead of the section heading in the wiki's language. Links to sections in non-Latin scripts will be in the script of that wiki in the future. This will happen in the next few months. [6][7]
  • Wiki pages printed by the web browser "Print" function will have an updated style. This new style will be similar to the when you download a page as PDF. It will be better at showing tables, infoboxes and headings. [8][9]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:45, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 32, 2017)

Films based upon the theme of blackmail have been made, such as the 1929 film Blackmail.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Blackmail

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Genocide Convention • Search algorithm

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 7 August 2017 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

DYK nomination of Cheese and crackers

Hello! Your submission of Cheese and crackers at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Giuseppe Mazzotta

Hey, I saw this because ST's page is on my watchlist: being a Sterling Professor at Yale is a clear claim of significance, and probably a pass of WP:PROF in itself. Just letting you know why I removed it. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:35, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Bagel and cream cheese

On 2 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bagel and cream cheese, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the bagel and cream cheese (example pictured) was very popular dish in the United States in the early 1950s, having permeated American culture? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bagel and cream cheese. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bagel and cream cheese), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

"Well, here's one. I hope you like it. I think it's gonna be good." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtGswl3k1Q0 — Mudwater (Talk) 10:30, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Gosh darned deadhead hippies posting wack songs on my talk page about the bagel and cream cheese... All right! Thanks for your additions to the article. North America1000 10:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Also, there's an article about Jewish cuisine, but no article for American Jewish cuisine. Here's the cat page: Category:Jewish American cuisine. Maybe a new article should be started... North America1000 10:44, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Nom nom nom

Yes, maybe it should! I'm getting hungry just thinking about it.... — Mudwater (Talk) 11:36, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Jewish American cuisine (red link)

@Mudwater: Re: Jewish American cuisine, it's an idea. I may be taking a break from creating new articles for a while, though. If you create it, I can contribute to it.

Note that from some cursory searches, it seems that more sources are available for the term "Jewish American cuisine" than for the term "American Jewish cuisine". North America1000 22:51, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I will seriously consider creating the article. No promises, though. For me it's a matter of "so many internets, so little time". And then there's my pesky obligations in the so-called real world. Let me ponder this further. Who knows, maybe I can put something together in my spare time. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Anyway, here's some stuff below. North America1000 23:20, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the links. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:29, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
No problemo. North America1000 23:30, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

You know what, maybe this isn't such a bad idea. Let me try to put something together. I'll post back if and when I publish it. — Mudwater (Talk) 15:47, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi @Mudwater: Yeah, a nice article seems like it could come into fruition. I'm pretty good at researching food articles, but I'm not the most knowledgeable person regarding religion and Judaism, Jewish food customs, kashrut, etc. I could research the cultural history about the foods and the like, though. In unrelated matters, I also know a bit about Jewish GD fans... North America1000 20:27, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

American Jewish cuisine (blue link)

Voila! (I decided to go with "American Jewish cuisine". Anyway, thanks for the suggestion! ) — Mudwater (Talk) 22:56, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Thanks very much for creating the new article. North America1000 23:44, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: I have added links to various articles linking to the new article. See Pages that link to "American Jewish cuisine". North America1000 01:05, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Dude, and thanks for the barnstar. Hey, about "pages that link to x", why is it that when I click "hide transclusions", it doesn't hide the transclusions? What I'm thinking is that if "hide transclusions" is clicked, that should filter out the many pages that link to x only because they transclude the same navboxes, and only show pages with actual direct links. But it doesn't. Am I missing something? — Mudwater (Talk) 01:16, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: I'd need more time to correctly answer this; I don't use this parameter myself. Could be that the transclusions only pertain to actual WP:TRANSCLUSIONs, in which the article page is literally transcluded onto other pages. If this is the case, then it makes sense that nothing would be hidden on the page. North America1000 13:15, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Just to make sure that I'm being clear, and that you and I are actually getting the same results, I'm going to say the same thing in a different way. Forgive me if I'm belaboring the obvious. What I would really like would be the ability to see which articles contain direct links to "article x" -- but, sadly, I don't see any way to do that. For example, for American Jewish cuisine, I'd like to see a list of the few articles -- such as Lox and Bagel and cream cheese -- that have actual links to it. If I go to the "American Jewish cuisine" article and click on "What links here" (you've provided the same link above), I see a huge list of articles -- more than 500 of them. I'm pretty sure that's because those links are transcluded in the "Cuisines" and "List of prepared foods" navboxes. That actually might have some value, but when I click on "Hide transclusions" to filter out those links, nothing seems to happen, I'm still seeing the same huge list. Am I doing it wrong? And perhaps more importantly, is there a way to see a list of only the articles with direct links? Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide, at your convenience of course. — Mudwater (Talk) 14:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Mudwater: I don't think you're doing anything wrong, I think it's just that the page is not transluded anywhere (as per my comment above). As per the above, I don't use this function, and I'm probably not going to research this matter. For what it's worth, regarding the navbars, I'm for the article being listed in the two at the end of the article, which provides more article exposure, and it's a relevant topic to include in those navbars. North America1000 01:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK

  • @Mudwater: I'd like to nominate this for DYK, and have performed a QPQ review, so all that is needed is a decent hook. I just went through the article, and a cool hook would be the following listed below (from the article lead), but this would need an inline citation to a reliable source in the article to move forward. North America1000 23:00, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
  • ... that American Jewish cuisine was heavily influenced by the cuisine of Jewish immigrants who came to the United States from Eastern Europe around the turn of the 20th century?
Hmm.... It's funny, but it seems like that fact is sort of assumed in a lot of the references for the article. But, how about this? — Mudwater (Talk) 23:23, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Mudwater: The Foodbycountry.com source probably wouldn't qualify as a reliable source. I tried searching using this, but not finding much. North America1000 23:28, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Okay, that makes sense. Let me ponder this further. Feel free to do the same. "P.S." Should I take that reference back out, do you think? — Mudwater (Talk) 23:34, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Not to be a stickler, but that source is probably best in the External links section. North America1000 23:37, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
I'd just as soon take it out entirely. I'm not all that crazy about it as a reference, or as an external link. Meanwhile I'll look around some more for something suitable. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:40, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Found a source: [10]. Per the above, I removed the Foodbycountry.com source. Off to DYK I go. North America1000 23:55, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

N.b. See Template:Did you know nominations/American Jewish cuisine. North America1000 00:02, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Very good. Thanks! — Mudwater (Talk) 00:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: No problemo! North America1000 00:05, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Merge school template removal

Why are you removing {{merge school}} templates and closing down discussions that have hardly even begun? CalzGuy (talk) 08:07, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

  • @CalzGuy: Which article are you referring to? North America1000 09:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Upon looking into matters, it appears that you are referring to the Westende Junior School article. Lots of times, people place merge templates, which then sometimes sit on articles for years without any merger or merger discussion occurring. Sometimes the template is placed in a drive-by fashion and the user that posted it never even revisits the article. As per recommendations at WP:MERGE, discussions that have exceeded thirty days can be closed. My removal was essentially tag cleanup, as maintenance templates are not meant to be on Wikipedia article pages forever. North America1000 09:57, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
It certainly wasn't there for years. It was placed by me in March. AnomeBOT dated it shortly afterwards and no one had edited (possibly even looked at it) since then. I check back regularly but if there is no engagenment on a non-notable article with minimal readership it not a no consensus- it's no interest. No one cares, probably because it's non-notable. I could just as easily have redirected and merged the article back in March but it is polite and collegial to give those with an interest an opportunity to object. I think that with an article like this one you were very hasty and made the wrong call. It wasn't a formal merge proposal. It was a suggestion, as the template makes clear. CalzGuy (talk) 19:38, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
@CalzGuy: Well, if you feel that way, why not just perform the merge that you propose? The tag has been in place for almost five months. Note that at WP:MERGE it states:
  • "If you propose a merger, and nobody objects within 30 days, then it is unlikely that any editor will object to you boldly performing the merger."
  • "If you see a merger proposal that is older than 30 days, and nobody has objected, and you personally believe the merger is appropriate, then it is unlikely anyone will object if you boldly perform the merger."
Also note that at Template:Merge, it states:
  • "After adding the merge template, please create a section on the talkpage explaining your rationale for the merge proposal. If the rationale is so obvious that it requires no explanation, then you should consider boldly merging the pages yourself rather than setting up a discussion."
– North America1000 19:51, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Because it wasn't using Template:Merge. It was using {{merge school}} which is different. It's a suggestion not a proposal. CalzGuy (talk) 19:57, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Teddy's Bigger Burgers logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Teddy's Bigger Burgers logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Abuse of warning templates

Information icon Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to User talk:32.218.36.78. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. 32.218.36.78 (talk) 04:17, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Nb. Proper notifications are not improper. I have reported this user to WP:AIV. North America1000 04:18, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:DELSORT

Hi. Here is another AfD: (WP:Articles for deletion/KASAPA 102.3 FM) that might use the same DELSORT categories as this one: WP:Articles for deletion/STARR 103.5 FM - if you care to do the honors. I think these are good categories for these AfD topics. ---Steve Quinn (talk)

Userspace deletion without a note

Hello. In future, please seek consensus first, as per "Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding {{uw-userpage}} to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using [...]."

Thanks. Zezen (talk) 09:47, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Zezen: Sorry for any hassle. I was patrolling pages at Category:Stale userspace drafts, based upon recommendations listed at Template:Userpage blanked. North America1000 09:58, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for civility in this reply, then! Zezen (talk) 10:09, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposal for a Category:Wikipedia stub templates by topic

Hi Northamerica1000. I have just proposed a new category for organizing stub templates, what do you say? Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 13:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

  • I'm undecided on whether or not I will contribute to the discussion. North America1000 10:01, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Other articles about food

I've got some more food articles about feeding babies. Is breastfeeding about food, in your opinion? It's a food delivery system...and there is already an article on breastmilk. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 01:23, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi Barbara (WVS): I feel that formula qualifies as food. I don't know about breasfeeding, since it's an action, but the milk is surely a food (for babies), right? North America1000 01:25, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
    • I know we aren't supposed to insert original research into articles but I do have to confirm, based upon my own experience, that milk is surely a good food for babies - although if it isn't I definitely messed up about six kids. I'll template the baby stuff and if its wrong let me know or revert. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 01:29, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
      • Barbara (WVS): I've seen studies/reports stating that breast milk is nutritionally superior to formula. North America1000 01:31, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
      • Yes, and DYK that body-builders are purchasing breastmilk to boost their (what-ever-body-builders-want to-boost) and improve their performance. And DYK that breastmilk contains living, white blood cells that are delivered to a newborn that helps the baby fight infection? Not so much with formula. How about milk banks? That is definitely about food. Moms donate breastmilk to other premature babies. Its screened just like blood donations. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 01:40, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

MfD

I moved it to User:Northamerica1000/Churnalism. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:52, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello CambridgeBayWeather: Thanks for the notification. North America1000 11:31, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
    • A followup from the MfD WP:PRONLY currently points to a redlink. Its G8 eligible currently, but I didn't want to tag it that way without giving you a chance to fix it. As I mentioned at the MfD, I don't really think its appropriate for a user space essay to have an ATA-type redirect, so I'd likely send it to RfD, but I don't want it to be speedy deleted if you still think it is a useful shortcut. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Salutations!

You kept appearing on my watchlist, so I followed you up. First thing I noticed was an edit count of half-a-million. Half a million! (That's a conversation-stopper all by itself!!) Maybe I'll come back and say something (hopefully) intelligent when I've absorbed that bit of data - certainly at the moment I've forgotten what I came here to say! (Half a million!) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:07, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh yeah - I did find your user page interesting. (Half a million ... ) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:09, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
@Pdfpdf: It ain't exactly as it seems: I have performed a lot of automated edits (e.g. deletion sorting, AfD discussion relisting, etc. etc.) North America1000 12:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Hmmm. Never-the-less, I did find your user page interesting. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:14, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
@Pdfpdf: I like the pointless animations user box on your page, and the images there. North America1000 12:17, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I wish I could take credit for them. As you might expect, I am indebted to several other wikipedians for entertaining me, and apparently you too! Pdfpdf (talk) 12:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Your pages are vague on which part of the US of A you are from. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm shy. North America1000 12:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Understandable. If Trump was my head-of-state, I'm sure I'd be more than just shy. Conversely, despite being highly disappointed with the reality of Malcolm Turnbull, (and the shortcomings of the State government), I'm not at all shy to broadcast the virtues of living in Adelaide ... Pdfpdf (talk) 12:43, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

(Nice talking to you. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2017 (UTC))

Likewise. I'm working on stuff right now, hence the delay in replying. North America1000 13:13, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
@Pdfpdf: What's the nightlife like in your area of the world? North America1000 13:15, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Answer: "How long is a piece of string?" (Will have sent you an email soon.) Pdfpdf (talk) 13:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
All right. Just let me know on-wiki when you email...I prefer to communicate on-wiki, and don't check email regularly. North America1000 13:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Me neither. (email has been sent.) Pdfpdf (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
BTW: It's 23:11 here. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:41, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

As I said/implied earlier, nice taking to you. Have a great weekend. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:54, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:PROF and CSd

Placing on CSD a7 tag on a article about a person who unambiguously meets WP:PROF is disruptive. Even if the person did not meet the requirement of a named professorship at a major research universe, or any of the other specific criteria, the assertion that someone is a professor at a university is a credible indication of plausible importance, and therefore passes the extremely weak standard of CSD A7., I am aware from other discussions that you do not consider the WP:PROF standard to be a good guideline; it is therefore appropriate to challenge it at the appropriate place, and also to test views by challenging it at a reasonable number of AfDs. I and others have done similarly sometimes, but I and others have been careful to do so only at a very limited number, and not repeat an unsuccessful challenge except at long intervals usually of several years to see if consensus might have changed. I at least have always chosen the weakest cases to challenge first, in the hope of building a case, and I consider it the way most likely to be successful if one actually wants to change the effective policy or guideline. Trying to challenge the strongest ones, and especially challenging repeatedly, I would usually consider disruptive. Trying to use speedy in a case where it does not apply is either careless, or, if done deliberately, disruptive. Challenging preferentially the work of a particular editor in a disruptive way is harassment.

Please note that none of this means the other party was right to themselves remove the csd tag, however wrong it was. You would have been well within your rights to restore it, except that you should not have added it in the first place.

I would be very glad to work with you in challenging those faculty articles that are primarily promotional, or are attempts to unreasonably expand credentials to make it look like they pass. WP:PROF , like all guidelines, needs to be used reasonably. The best way to get consensus to remove the untenable articles is to not challenge the tenable ones.

If this were a situation where I were not somewhat involved I would have placed a formal warning about the possibility of administrative action. But I cannot actually do such actions here, and though it is considered acceptable for an admin to place a warning even when they cannot personally act, I don't like to do that; I'm very conservative about this sort of thing--I consider it too heavy-handed. DGG ( talk ) 05:08, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

  • I still feel that the John Boland (chemist) article lacks a claim of importance for the subject, per WP:A7. It's a cv and directory listing that basically states that the subject was a former professor at the University of North Carolina and presently a "chemist currently at Trinity College Dublin". That's it. What is the subject presently doing at Trinity College Dublin? Basically, the article has no claim of importance, other than that they have served as a professor. While the sources may present a claim of importance, this needs to be included in the article prose itself. As such, I feel that the template was warranted. However, I respect your opinion, and will definitely keep your third ¶ above in mind. North America1000 05:10, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @DGG: Also, regarding the subject being a J. J. Hermans Professor of Chemistry, I didn't find much information about any relevance of being a J. J. Hermans Professor of Chemistry, or how this would be considered notable or an assertion of importance. See source search examples below. North America1000 05:18, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Also, regarding " I am aware from other discussions that you do not consider the WP:PROF standard to be a good guideline" in your comment, I do not believe I have ever stated this an AfD discussion. I actually consider WP:PROF, WP:NACADEMIC and the following text and sections to be one of the better notability guidelines in terms of being comprehensive and accurate. Perhaps you have confused me with another user? Anyway, just so you know, I do respect your point of view and opinions regarding this and other matters. North America1000 05:31, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) The reason a distinguished professorship at UNC typically makes an individual notable is because among major research universities in the States, they actually have one of the more competitive faculty rank requirements. I know of several individuals who at peer or better institutions would have made full professor who retired at associate. The distinguished chairs in recent years have become even more competitive because of issues with how state dollars get matched with private funds, to the point where the number of individuals who are eligible on paper/have been recommended for one but can't be awarded one because of intricacies involving private and public funding at a state institution. While I agree with your point, NA1000, that this particular professorship might not be notable in itself, what it indicates is that the individual who holds it is one of the top scholars in his chosen field, which would lead to passing PROF on other grounds. I'm not a fan of the academic sub-stubs either, but if you're going to make a case out of distinguished professorships, Chapel Hill likely isn't the best school to start at. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:43, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @TonyBallioni: Thanks for the correction you made to the article. Also, I appreciate your advice herein and the work you do to improve Wikipedia biographical articles. I added a redlink to the article for J. J. Hermans, but perhaps it should be removed, as the J. J. Hermans Professor of Chemistry itself may not be notable. Ideas? North America1000 05:46, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Not a problem: I'm not familiar with this particular professorship, but the red link could likely be removed: if it is a professorship named after a donor, that person has at least an equally likely chance of not being notable as they have of being notable. Since that tends to be the case with these things, you'd probably be safe removing the red link. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:58, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-33

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Bureaucrats can now set users as confirmed. Previously only stewards could do this on most wikis. Nothing will change for wikis that have previously decided to let administrators set users as confirmed. [11]

Problems

  • The symbols in the language list that show that an article is good or featured in that language doesn't work. Links to the Commons category in the sidebar doesn't work either. The developers are working on fixing it. [12][13]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 15 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 16 August. It will be on all wikis from 17 August (calendar).

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

23:29, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PDQ restaurants logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PDQ restaurants logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cherry ice cream

On 7 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cherry ice cream, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "Cherry Garcia" (pictured) is a cherry ice cream named after Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cherry ice cream. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cherry ice cream), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

As it happens, I did know that particular fact. Nevertheless, I would say, "good one". 💀😀 — Mudwater (Talk) 00:21, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mudwater: Are you b.s.-ing me? I'd of never thought that you would know about this factoid. North America1000 00:28, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 33, 2017)

An automobile engine is an example of an intermediate good, and is used in the production of the final good, the assembled automobile.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Intermediate good

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Blackmail • Genocide Convention

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 14 August 2017 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Question about a close

Last thing I want to do is challenge your decision on a close but this one has me spinning and laughing out loud. I realize you lean closer to being an inclusionist than a deletionist but the delete/merge arguments were incredibly convincing, not to mention the topic itself. What argument swayed you most to make the determination that "Opinions are divided, and no consensus". If we go by the division, 30 delete to 18.5 keeps but not counting !iVotes, the following arguments are convincing, particularly since several who provided those arguments are respected NPP editors: [14], [15],[16]. Of the 18.5 keeps, one was by the article creator who has a total of 377 edits, has created 2 articles, one of which was deleted. Another questionable action was by the nom who had trouble coming to a decision as evidenced here. But I think this argument should have clinched it as a delete because it is clearly WP:POVFORK and noncompliant with WP:NPOV as indicated in this statement, as well as here, and even more so here. All of it is capped by an excellent explanation of why it should be deleted here. With the utmost respect, I am asking you to reconsider your close. Atsme📞📧 15:03, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

  • @Atsme: Based upon the overall discussion, a no consensus close was the most accurate. Note that while AfD discussions are not based upon an !vote count, the contrasting opinions that existed in the discussion does have some play in the matter, and opinions were quite divided, in my opinion. Also, the statistics you provided above are incorrect. See this page for accurate stats. Some points:
  • Note that six of the delete !votes also suggested the possiblity of merging.
  • Some delete !votes did not provide any policy- or guideline-based rationales: for example, some just stated that the article is "trivial" or "unencyclopedic", but this is not particularly covered in WP:NOT, and WP:TRIVIA applies to trivia sections in articles, rather than entire articles. See also the following links to the Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions essay page, which provides some opinion about this matter: WP:NOTENCYCLOPEDIC, WP:IDL. The essay page is certainly not a policy or a guideline, but it provides some content that may be useful to you.
  • Conversely to the point directly above, most of the keep !votes provided guideline-based rationales for article retention.
Also, regarding, "... you lean closer to being an inclusionist than a deletionist ...", I disagree with this, because I'm neither, and my close is not correlated with any opinions or edits I have performed when contributing to other AfD discussions. North America1000 23:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
My apologies for the mischaracterisation and for not recognizing that you don't lean, Northamerica1000. I should've known that, but I mistakenly based my comment on a single experience; i.e., your denial of my prod at the midnight hour, and that wasn't fair to you. Back on point...I respectfully disagree with your decision to keep Donald Trump's handshakes based on the consensus. I am also troubled by the article's blatant use of WP:SYNTH in the section Explanation given by Donald Trump, the use of questionable and unreliable sources throughout the article, the possible WP:FRINGE aspects and medical analysis without using high quality sources per WP:MEDRS and the overall attempt to disparage the subject in complete noncompliance with BLP, NPOV, and SYNTH. With the latter in mind, and after taking into consideration your reasons for closing as keep, I have decided, after much deliberation, to challenge the close at AN. I will give you an opportunity to read my comment and respond before I proceed. Atsme📞📧 17:46, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Atsme: Note that I closed the discussion as no consensus, not as keep that you wrote above. Do whatever you want, but usually, concerns with article content are discussed on article talk pages, rather than at AN. You are much more likely to find users interested in the article and its content on its talk page as well. There's also deletion review as an option, if you're not aware of it. North America1000 00:13, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Northamerica1000, you're absolutely correct about "no consensus" which I would make sure to properly mention despite there not being any difference between that and "keep" since the end result is still "keep", right? Is there an advantage or particular reason for saying "no consensus" in lieu of keep? You said "deletion review"? That's what I thought challenging the close was about, so it appears I'm not aware of it. I actually did read what I thought were the options. Please point me to the review request - I'd much rather go that route. Atsme📞📧 00:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
  • @Atsme: See WP:DRV; this is typically where AfD closures are contested. Keep and no consensus closes both result in the page being retained, but they are different types of closes. Nc closes are much more likely to be challenged later compared to keep ones. North America1000 00:45, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

I followed your advice and the review has been requested. Thank you. Atsme📞📧 01:23, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Beer ice cream

On 8 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Beer ice cream, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that beer ice cream has been served at the Great American Beer Festival? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Beer ice cream. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Beer ice cream), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 34, 2017)

East Germany erected the Berlin Wall to prevent emigration westward.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Emigration

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Intermediate good • Blackmail

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 21 August 2017 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Tech News: 2017-34

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now test the new Timeless skin on the test wiki and mediawiki.org. You can turn it on in your preferences. You can report bugs in Phabricator. It will come to more wikis soon. [17][18]
  • Your watchlist can now have the option to unwatch pages. You have to turn this on in your preferences. [19]
  • If a table has several columns you can often choose which column you want to use to sort the table. This has not worked for some columns for readers who have used Firefox or Safari. This has now been fixed. [20]
  • The RelatedArticles extension has shown related pages on Wikivoyages. You will now see the related pages at the end of the article together with an image. Previously the links were in the sidebar. Wikis that want this extension can request it on Phabricator.

Changes later this week

  • Videos will now be played in the WebM format in all browsers. Previously some browsers used Ogg Theora (.ogv). If you use Safari, Internet Explorer or Edge you may see slower playback speed at high resolutions. Instead we will get better quality and smaller file size. You can still upload video as Ogg files. They are automatically converted to WebM. This doesn't affect Ogg audio files. [21]
  • The default font in the edit window will change for some users this week. Instead of using the browser default, it will be monospace. Users can change this in their preferences. This should only change this for some users on Macs and iOS devices. [22]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 22 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 23 August. It will be on all wikis from 24 August (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 23 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 22 August at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:01, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Chocolate gateau

Hi Northamerica1000. Thanks for your copyedit and tagging on the article about Chocolate gateau just now. I was actually just about to reinstate the redirect to Chocolate cake as per Talk:Chocolate gateau. As you are the last editor, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on this delicious topic? pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 09:51, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

  • @Jake Brockman: I'm undecided at this point; need more time. I added this source to the article, which provides more overview information. I recommend letting the merge template sit for awhile, perhaps for a month, as per recommendations at WP:MERGE. I may add more sources to the article and comment regarding a potential merge at a later time. North America1000 09:59, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Northamerica1000/Archive_74&oldid=1144236206"