User talk:Stuartyeates/Archive 22
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
Melinda S. Allen
Hi Stuart. Did you write this article yourself, or upload it on behalf of an editathon participant? Only it's a little strange – created under the wrong name, referred to Allen as "they", lots of minor typographical errors. – Joe (talk) 07:12, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- All the errors are my own. I was racing to finish it because a toddler came and demanded to be bounced on my knee, which makes editing more error-prone. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:52, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, well, please be careful. As you are autopatrolled, it's hit-and-miss whether anyone else will see your creations and correct any errors.
- Reviewing your recent creations, it looks like you're using some sort of template or semi-automated tool to create them? Did you go through any sort of approval process for that? It's consistently creating peculiar constructions like "archaeology academic" and referring to people with a known gender as "they". – Joe (talk) 09:15, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- User:Stuartyeates/sandbox/academicbio has been used for >100 biographies. Singular they is more widely used in New Zealand English, which these articles are written in, but I don't revert when other people 'correct' it. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:19, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- I've no problem with singular they, but as far as I'm aware it's not correct in any standard variety of English to use it to refer to a specific person with a known and definite gender. An exception might be when it is the preferred pronoun of a nonbinary person, but that isn't the case here. Would it be difficult to tweak your template to use the pronoun that the sources do?
- As I'm sure you're aware, semi-automated article creation tends to be controversial, in part because of how easy it is for quirks like this to creep in if they're not diligently checked by a human being. I'm wondering if it would be better for these to go through WP:NPP like normal articles, so they have a few more pairs of eyes on them. Would you object to that? – Joe (talk) 09:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- It's correct in New Zealand English. I'm a native speaker and can assure you of that. You've welcome to have my autopatrolled flag reset, someone else foisted it on my previously to avoid the predecessor to NPP filling up with my articles (that set were much more automated. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:51, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- I have to say I find that very surprising! I don't recall ever noticing any of my NZ friends do that and can't find any written evidence for it.
- Anyway, I'll go ahead and change your autopatrolled status, since you're okay with it. I don't think you're creating such a high frequency that it would cause problems for NPP any more, and peer review by a second pair of eyes never hurts. – Joe (talk) 11:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- It's correct in New Zealand English. I'm a native speaker and can assure you of that. You've welcome to have my autopatrolled flag reset, someone else foisted it on my previously to avoid the predecessor to NPP filling up with my articles (that set were much more automated. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:51, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- User:Stuartyeates/sandbox/academicbio has been used for >100 biographies. Singular they is more widely used in New Zealand English, which these articles are written in, but I don't revert when other people 'correct' it. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:19, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: July 2018
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Philippa Martin
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Philippa Martin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. JamesG5 (talk) 10:43, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
New Zealand professor articles & pronoun use
Hi, after I tagged the above article for a speedy I noticed you're apparently working thru a list of NZ professors proposed at a meetup. However, and as noted on the page, while it says (with no evidence) all the women in the list meet the minimum Wikipedia criteria for inclusion it notes that it may be difficult to find enough sources/links that meet the rules to show it. In the article I tagged and the one on Penelope Brothers you haven't done much to show why they meet WP:GNG. I'm not saying they don't, mind you, just that there's no evidence of it in what you're posting or the links you're using. You have, for instance, in the article I tagged a university bio, her own website bio, and a passing mention in one article. Better sourcing is needed. I am also curious as to why you chose they/them pronouns when neither their own writings nor any of the other links you posted refer to them that way? Not a criticism, just wondering if there was something I was missing since the sources don't indicate their preference for agendered pronouns. JamesG5 (talk) 10:51, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Others have addressed the notability issue. The singular they is relatively common in New Zealand English. I use it extensively, but I don't edit war over it. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm curious as to where notability was established? They might not fall under CSD, but from their resumes, many of them don't pass WP:NPROF and wouldn't pass AfD. Also, why not include more information than theses/educational history? They have awards/editorships/already listed in their linkedin pages that you're already linking. originalmesshow u doin that busta rhyme? 11:22, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Stuartyeates: Thanks for clarifying on the pronouns, it wasn't a complaint or criticism I just was unaware of that convention in NZ English so I was puzzled by it. @Originalmess: That was my thought, when the CSD was declined the comment made was that simply being a professor at a major university met the GNG but that didn't sound right. I could be wrong. JamesG5 (talk) 19:57, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm working through a list of >200 of these people. I believe them to be notable. None of first 150 have been found to be not notable. If you believe some or all are not notable, I'd encourage you to put them up at AfD. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:23, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- That's a lot to slog thru, but I'm wondering why no one's challenged them based on WP:PROF since as far as I can tell neither of the 2 examples I looked at meet those well defined criteria, unless there's something missing I'm not seeing. It looks like this is simply an attempt to list every woman academic in New Zealand as being automatically notable simply for being a professor, something which doesn't meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG. Is there more to the career of the 2 ladies I've seen articles on so far that you haven't cited that would qualify them at WP:PROF? JamesG5 (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- It started as an attempt to create articles on every female professor in the country, but some of them didn't meet the criteria, in my opinion, so had to be skipped. Note that professor in New Zealand has different meaning than in the US. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, I see that, but again going by the criteria list at WP:PROF (which is for all academics no matter what you call them) what am I missing for the 2 I saw that qualifies? Not trying to be a jerk, just trying to follow. JamesG5 (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I think what Stuart meant by that was that in NZ (and other Commonwealth countries), the title professor is reserved for the highest academic rank, equivalent to a "full professor" in the US. They are therefore very likely to be meet one or more of PROF's criteria. He is not creating an article for every woman academic in New Zealand, most of whom would indeed not be notable.
- Penelope Brothers is clearly notable in my opinion, having written several highly cited papers [1]. Philippa Martin I'm not so sure about, but being a Senior Member of the IEEE might meet WP:PROF#C3. – Joe (talk) 15:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, I see that, but again going by the criteria list at WP:PROF (which is for all academics no matter what you call them) what am I missing for the 2 I saw that qualifies? Not trying to be a jerk, just trying to follow. JamesG5 (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Joe Roe: Yeah, tho as he noted himself above it WAS originally (and my comment was based on the original project page) an attempt to list all of them. You may well be right about Penelope, my concern was sourcing to prove it. With Philippa I don't see it but again, sourcing & explanation. :-) JamesG5 (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- This was never an attempt to cover all female New Zealand academics, it was a an attempt to cover all current female New Zealand professors. The few I have skipped are mainly in fields like Law where I couldn't find the sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi I just changed the use of the pronoun they to she on this article Rhema Vaithianathan before I noticed this discussion. I did this because it seemed very odd (to me as a Br English speaker) becuase we know what gender this person is. I wondered if there was a specific gender issue with the person and that maybe she had said somewhere that she prefers to be known as "they" but as on her AUT profil here "she" is used I presumed it was the choice of the article creator. I would tend to say that its use in a biography where there is no sourced clear desire by the subject to use they or a gender issue might be a little confusing for a lot of readers who will ask themselves (as I did) if this person's gender might be questioned and that this choice was in line with MOS:GENDERID. As there was nothing in the article or in the sources it was a WP:SURPRISE to me. --Dom from Paris (talk) 13:35, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve Rukmani Gounder
Hi, I'm Crystallizedcarbon. Stuartyeates, thanks for creating Rukmani Gounder!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add references with in-depth coverage about the subject from independent reliable sources to the article to meet our verifiability and notablility requirements.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 12:08, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve Sally McCormick
Hi, I'm SkyGazer 512. Stuartyeates, thanks for creating Sally McCormick!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for creating this article. The article could benefit from having reliable, independent sources - not just her profiles and YouTube. Also, is there a specific reason why you were using "they" as her pronoun? I've changed it to "she" for now.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:24, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:SkyGazer 512: Singular they is relatively popular in New Zealand English and I'm a huge fan. I use singular they a lot, but I don't edit war for it. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi sorry to butt in but I believe that your use of this pronoun in articles where the person's gender is known is confusing because as it say on Singular they ""While editors have increasingly moved to accepting singular they when used in a generic fashion, voters in the Word of the Year proceedings singled out its newer usage as an identifier for someone who may identify as non-binary in gender terms.". (my bolding). Your systematic use for new articles brings up the question each time "does this person identify themselves as non-binary in gender terms?" I really believe that despite the fact that you are a big fan your use is confusing and gives the impression that this person's gender is non binary. None of the sources use "they" I believe, so maybe it is not as popular as that in NZ. One of the main principles of editing BLP is caution as per WP:BLPSTYLE. There are now 3 different editors who have found your use of they confusing so maybe as per WP:SURPRISE it would be better to avoid its use when the gender is known? Dom from Paris (talk) 09:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Also you may actually be doing a disservice to these women by removing all means of identifying them as women apart from their first names (which are sometimes not easily identifiable as female names). The idea of women in red as far as I believe is to close the gender gap and create articles about notable women but if we remove from those articles gender identifiable pronouns are we not doing being counter productive? Just a thought...Dom from Paris (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:Domdeparis: these biographies are in Category:New Zealand women academics . I have not removed "all means of identifying them as women apart from their first names". Stuartyeates (talk) 19:54, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry I should have been clearer, I meant in the text. Most casual readers probably don't even notice the categories, and those using a mobile device will not see them at all unless they switch to the desktop version. Unless I am mistaken something like 80% of Wikipedia users connect via a tablet or a phone. I have been here a while and I have to make a conscious effort to look at the categories. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:Domdeparis: You missed Wikipedia:WikiProject Women scientists on the talk page too? I believe in minimising gendered aspects of wikipedia articles. I respect that others have different points of view and priorities. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:31, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry I should have been clearer, I meant in the text. Most casual readers probably don't even notice the categories, and those using a mobile device will not see them at all unless they switch to the desktop version. Unless I am mistaken something like 80% of Wikipedia users connect via a tablet or a phone. I have been here a while and I have to make a conscious effort to look at the categories. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:Domdeparis: these biographies are in Category:New Zealand women academics . I have not removed "all means of identifying them as women apart from their first names". Stuartyeates (talk) 19:54, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Also you may actually be doing a disservice to these women by removing all means of identifying them as women apart from their first names (which are sometimes not easily identifiable as female names). The idea of women in red as far as I believe is to close the gender gap and create articles about notable women but if we remove from those articles gender identifiable pronouns are we not doing being counter productive? Just a thought...Dom from Paris (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi sorry to butt in but I believe that your use of this pronoun in articles where the person's gender is known is confusing because as it say on Singular they ""While editors have increasingly moved to accepting singular they when used in a generic fashion, voters in the Word of the Year proceedings singled out its newer usage as an identifier for someone who may identify as non-binary in gender terms.". (my bolding). Your systematic use for new articles brings up the question each time "does this person identify themselves as non-binary in gender terms?" I really believe that despite the fact that you are a big fan your use is confusing and gives the impression that this person's gender is non binary. None of the sources use "they" I believe, so maybe it is not as popular as that in NZ. One of the main principles of editing BLP is caution as per WP:BLPSTYLE. There are now 3 different editors who have found your use of they confusing so maybe as per WP:SURPRISE it would be better to avoid its use when the gender is known? Dom from Paris (talk) 09:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- User:SkyGazer 512: Singular they is relatively popular in New Zealand English and I'm a huge fan. I use singular they a lot, but I don't edit war for it. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
with the exception of contributors I do not believe that most people visit the talk pages. If I am looking for information on something and not editing I never go to the talk page. We have to remember we are building an encyclopedia for all and not just for us the contributors hence the idea of least astonishment. Your personal choice of minimising gender in articles is just that, a personal choice, but it goes against this accepted manual of style. This use of they is not backed up by any sources and we are talking about a BLP article where we have to tread very carefully. It has already been pointed out by no less than 4 editors that your choice of wording gives the impression that this person may have a specific issue with gender and I believe that you should only use that pronoun when sources back up its use for a particular person. It should not be up to other editors to ensure that what you write complies with our MOS when it has been pointed out to you. Dom from Paris (talk) 21:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't even notice that there was a discussion directly above here about this. :P But yeah - I don't have any major objections if you revert to using "they" again, but I personally would agree with Dom from Paris here. Dom from Paris worded it much better than I could - but to me it just seems confusing to use "they" and it would benefit the reader more if a gender identifiable pronoun were used instead, even if the "singular they" is popular in New Zealand.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:03, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have spent almost my entire life in New Zealand, and I believe I have a good understanding of how New Zealanders use English. The use of singular they for people whose gender is not known is common, and it seems to me to be appropriate to use it for people who prefer not to be referred to as he or she. I do find it jarring to see singular they used for people who are referred to as he or she in reliable sources and who have no known history of preferring that gendered terms not be used for them, and I think use of singular they in these circumstances is not at all common.-gadfium 19:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Maryanne Garry for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maryanne Garry 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/Maryanne Garry until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Sgerbic (talk) 19:09, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve Sandhya Samarasinghe
Hi, I'm Vexations. Stuartyeates, thanks for creating Sandhya Samarasinghe!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Sorry, but I fail to see how Samarasinghe meets WP:PROF I am aware that notability issues have been raised for other articles you created on NZ academic, and you seem to have good arguments if favor of keeping the articles, even though they are not always immediately apparent to reviwers like myself. I have not been able to find any sources. Can you please clarify how Samarasinghe is notable?
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Vexations (talk) 02:23, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Use of they
Despite the numerous editors who have explained that your use of they instead of she is inappropriate you have continued to create articles using this divisive and confusing pronoun without any sources to back up its use such as Sandhya Samarasinghe. Please stop as this is becoming disruptive. Dom from Paris (talk) 05:49, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- While I'm not a fan of 'they' in this context, as I said above, to call it disruptive is going too far. Stuartyeates, thank you for your work creating articles on female academics, and I'm sorry that this minor grammatical issue seems to be drawing more attention than your efforts to address the gender bias of Wikipedia's coverage.-gadfium 22:13, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- I've pretty much switched to a pronoun-free approach now, see Shanthi Ameratunga. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:08, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- I am curious to know why you are doing this. First off you said youbuse it because it is common to use they in NZ and now you are trying to remove any pronoun. I understand why we should tend toward gender neutral language in non specific cases but why here? The whole idea of women in red is to improve the presence of women on Wikipedia and I think this is doing the opposite. As I said a lot of the given names are not obviously female and the categories are not visible to a lot of users and the talk pages are rarely consulted by most. Was this something this was discussed at a meeting because you started doing it in January? Dom from Paris (talk) 05:47, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- I've pretty much switched to a pronoun-free approach now, see Shanthi Ameratunga. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:08, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- (a) This is not a Women in Red thing. I've been working on systematic bias since before that group was founded. (b) I use gender non-specific language because their gender is irrelevant to their notability and the topic at hand. (c) A great many things were discussed at the Wikipedia:Meetup/Wellington/Women in Science, but I don't recall pronouns being touched on. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:38, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- If gender is irrelevent to notability and the topic at hand why add her to 2 categories that are reserved for women? I believe that your motivations are good but I honestly think that by removing visible references to the person's gender you are actually reducing the impact on closing the gender gap. I am going to open a discussion on the WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Gender gap task force to which you belong to see if anyone else has an opinion, I may be barking up the wrong tree totally and I do believe that closing the gap is extremely important so rather than go round in circles here better to discuss it there with others if you wish to. cheers Dom from Paris (talk) 09:07, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- (a) This is not a Women in Red thing. I've been working on systematic bias since before that group was founded. (b) I use gender non-specific language because their gender is irrelevant to their notability and the topic at hand. (c) A great many things were discussed at the Wikipedia:Meetup/Wellington/Women in Science, but I don't recall pronouns being touched on. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:38, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Stuart. First, thanks for creating articles about women. I do agree with Dom that it would be good if the articles said they were women. Yes, it may not be strictly relevant to their notability, but it is quite likely relevant to their lives, and these articles are supposed to be biographies, about them, not only about their work. In general when we write about a person, we try to write where they were born, where they grew up, where they went to school, whether they married or had children, include a picture of them, all the things that a biography really should cover, even though those things often don't directly impact the reason for their notability, just because these things were likely quite important to them, and a biography simply wouldn't be complete without them. In these cases, of course, these articles are short that I see you don't cover most of these details, you may well not know where Sandhya Samarasinghe was born or grew up, and finding a free licensed picture is hard. But presumably you know that she's a woman? And writing that is easy, not even a sentence, just changing a "they" to a "she" somewhere, and it adds a noticeable amount of information to the article, one noticeable step towards making that article complete. I mean, sure, others could follow your articles around and add that, but it takes even less space to type "she" than to type "they", and it conveys useful information. Could you, please? Thank you again. --GRuban (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Stuart, I'm adding my voice to the above. The issue isn't whether their gender is relevant to their notability. Their sex and gender matter to them and no doubt to most of their readers. Are you referring to men as "they" too? SarahSV (talk) 22:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- After a very quick look, I see you used male pronouns in Kevin Tate, one of your creations. SarahSV (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- Kevin Tate was created some time ago, and not as part of the current series of articles. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:20, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- You created it in January 2018. SarahSV (talk) 00:32, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- I've created like a hundred articles since then.Stuartyeates (talk) 09:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- I would say it doesn't make things better if you wrote about men using "they" the problem is identical. If there are no sources to show the person identifies as non-binary or that their gender is not important to them there is no justifiable reason not to use gender specific pronouns. This is more than just a quirk but a real choice based on your personal beliefs. Wikipedia is a place to find information and not to impose a vision that is particularly marginal i.e. gender doesn't matter. Dom from Paris (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Who was I imposing my vision on? I never changed anyone else's writing. I never said that anyone else should write in any particular style. I just started my articles in my own way and have since changed that way. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:26, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Readers expect to find the essential information in biographies. Gender is an essential fact. You have chosen not to mention gender and as such are imposing this on the readers. Can you maybe explain why you are doing this because I'm having problems understanding. Up until January you used she, there has to be a reason. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:44, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- How have I 'chosen not to mention gender' when the article is in multiple cats that clearly mention gender? When I link to all the sources? Stuartyeates (talk) 10:51, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- As I have explained several times the cats are not visible to those using mobile versions of WP and IMHO a lot of users don't even know that categories exist and multiple categories are not obligatory. If someone decides by conviction that the gender of female academics is not important to their notability and removes the gender specific categories who is going to know that it wasn't just a mistake on your part to add this category for those called Toni or Lesley etc. When a reader looks up information on a subject they go to Wikipedia to avoid having to search in other sources because editors like you and I have done that for them. Why would they then click on the sources? That is the whole idea of an encyclopedia. It is a condensed version of a collection of sources that give the essential and important information that people are looking for and the gender of the person is important and essential to the person despite what you think. You still haven't explaned why you do not want to use gender specific pronouns? Dom from Paris (talk) 11:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- I said above: "I believe in minimising gendered aspects of wikipedia articles." That continues to be my position. I'm more than happy for you to put gendered pronouns everywhere you like, including articles I have written. I do not intend to debate this further, however. Stuartyeates (talk) 11:25, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- As I have explained several times the cats are not visible to those using mobile versions of WP and IMHO a lot of users don't even know that categories exist and multiple categories are not obligatory. If someone decides by conviction that the gender of female academics is not important to their notability and removes the gender specific categories who is going to know that it wasn't just a mistake on your part to add this category for those called Toni or Lesley etc. When a reader looks up information on a subject they go to Wikipedia to avoid having to search in other sources because editors like you and I have done that for them. Why would they then click on the sources? That is the whole idea of an encyclopedia. It is a condensed version of a collection of sources that give the essential and important information that people are looking for and the gender of the person is important and essential to the person despite what you think. You still haven't explaned why you do not want to use gender specific pronouns? Dom from Paris (talk) 11:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- How have I 'chosen not to mention gender' when the article is in multiple cats that clearly mention gender? When I link to all the sources? Stuartyeates (talk) 10:51, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Readers expect to find the essential information in biographies. Gender is an essential fact. You have chosen not to mention gender and as such are imposing this on the readers. Can you maybe explain why you are doing this because I'm having problems understanding. Up until January you used she, there has to be a reason. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:44, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Who was I imposing my vision on? I never changed anyone else's writing. I never said that anyone else should write in any particular style. I just started my articles in my own way and have since changed that way. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:26, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- I would say it doesn't make things better if you wrote about men using "they" the problem is identical. If there are no sources to show the person identifies as non-binary or that their gender is not important to them there is no justifiable reason not to use gender specific pronouns. This is more than just a quirk but a real choice based on your personal beliefs. Wikipedia is a place to find information and not to impose a vision that is particularly marginal i.e. gender doesn't matter. Dom from Paris (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- I've created like a hundred articles since then.Stuartyeates (talk) 09:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- You created it in January 2018. SarahSV (talk) 00:32, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Kevin Tate was created some time ago, and not as part of the current series of articles. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:20, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: August 2018
| ||||||
Your contributed article, Kim King (New Zealand academic)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Kim King (New Zealand academic). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Carolyn King (zoologist). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Carolyn King (zoologist). If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.
If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. --Animalparty! (talk) 15:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks User:Animalparty. Embarrassingly, both of these were created by me as part of the same project.
Use of "currently"
As per MOS:REALTIME please Absolute specifications of time are preferred to relative constructions using recently, currently, and so on, because the latter may go out of date.
Dom from Paris (talk) 14:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
A page you started (Angela McCarthy) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Angela McCarthy, Stuartyeates!
Wikipedia editor Domdeparis just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Please avoid using words such as "currently" as per MOS:REALTIME and alos please avoid using words such as "significant" as per WP:EDITORIALIZING you may consider $612k ohers may not. try and be precise I have added the year and the amount mentioned in the source. I would suggest that rather than concentrate on quantity you might work on quality first.
To reply, leave a comment on Domdeparis's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Dom from Paris (talk) 09:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve Alison Rich
Hi, I'm Domdeparis. Stuartyeates, thanks for creating Alison Rich!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please avoid editorialising you should try and stick to the information in the source. You wrote "Since at least 2014 Rich has held senior management positions in the department" without saying which department and the source only says that she was made acting dean until an appointment is made. Your use of the plural is not supported by the source and the vague "Since at least 2014" suggests that there were other positions not mentioned in the source. Please be more careful and stick to the information provided in the sources
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Dom from Paris (talk) 09:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
A page you started (Longman Paul) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Longman Paul, Stuartyeates!
Wikipedia editor Domdeparis just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
not mentioned in the target which could be confusing. It would have been useful to add something fiste in the taget as well. After a search it seems more appropriate to redirect to the new target
To reply, leave a comment on Domdeparis's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Dom from Paris (talk) 10:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Child abuse & neglect listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Child abuse & neglect. Since you had some involvement with the Child abuse & neglect redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:08, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
The article Charlotte Macdonald has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sheldybett (talk) 12:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
New DNZB entries
Hi there. If you weren't already aware there have been 25 new biographies added to the DNZB to celebrate Suffrage 125 located here. Kiwichris (talk) 06:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- I'd heard on the grapevine that they were in the pipeline, but I hadn't seen them. Some great women on that list. Some, like Carmen Rupe I bet DNZB off the mark with. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:06, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Beatrice Mary Barth for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beatrice Mary Barth 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/Beatrice Mary Barth until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Kirbanzo (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:37, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Dory Reeves "ownerhsip"?
You've got "ownerhsip" in the body, and "ownership" in the infobox. I clicked all 4 links citing the sentence in the body, and couldn't find the title of the thesis. Could you check? Thanks! --GRuban (talk) 13:50, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
- Hi User:GRuban. The title of the thesis is spelt wrong in the library catalog, the link is http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=no%3A277167946 https://find.shef.ac.uk:443/SFD_VU2:SCOP_EVERYTHING:44SFD_ALMA_DS21185197860001441 The link in the infobox takes you there. I corrected the spelling in the infobox, because the infobox is sucked into wikidata where the I believe that the correct spelling will be more useful. Also by having both spellings in the article, it makes the article findable using either spelling. I will contact the uni and get them to fix the spelling. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
- Hi User:GRuban. https://twitter.com/stuartayeates/status/1050937504424058880 Stuartyeates (talk) 02:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: September 2018
| ||||||
Bare URLs
Please don't leave bare URLs for others to fix like here. Schwede66 02:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- Usually I use refill, but I got distracted IRL. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:58, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| For your contributions. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 09:05, 24 October 2018 (UTC) |
Invitation to New AI-Labelling Campaign for Newcomer Sessions
Hello, I'm reaching out to you because I saw that you signed up as a labelling volunteer at Wikipedia:Labels/Edit quality. I'm starting a new project that builds on Edit quality, to predict Newcomer quality. That is, to predict the damagingness and goodfaithness of "sessions" (multiple related edits) of users within 1 day of their registration. With this AI trained, we could help automatically distinguish betewen productive and unproductive new users. If you wouldn't mind taking a look at this new labelling campaign and label a few sessions I would be very grateful. In addition if you have any feedback or discover any bugs in the process I would appreciate that too. You can find the project page at Wikipedia:Labels/Newcomer_session_quality or go directly to labels.wmflabs.org/ui/enwiki/ and look for the campaign titled "Newcomer Session quality (2018)". Thanks so much!
Maximilianklein (talk) 20:06, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: October 2018
| ||||||
You've been mentioned in the news along with some others
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/107975952/who-do-we-honour-and-who-decides - NealeFamily (talk) 00:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yep, I saw this. Great that we're attracting more attention. There's a tweet about it at https://twitter.com/adzebill/status/1061001543770562560 Stuartyeates (talk) 01:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Heidi Thomson moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Heidi Thomson, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Gillian Whalley moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Gillian Whalley, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Erin G. Carlston moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Erin G. Carlston, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Notability issues again
You are creating more articles about academics that are seriously lacking in the necessary sourcing to show they meet WP:NACADEMIC. Please slow down take the time to correctly source the articles before creating another one. Those that are really poorly sourced I will move to draft space to allow you the time to do this rather than waste other editor's time in deletion discussions or doing the work for you. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
- This is not an excuse to create poorly sourced articles but may explain your haste. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Stuartyeates. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Karanina Sumeo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tertiary Education Commission (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Learning Quarterly: November 2018
L&E Newsletter / Volume 5 / Issue 17 / November 2018
Learning Quarterly
Frontpage:
#CEInsights18
#GenderEquity
Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!
Leave your mark on Meta!
AffCom corner and Wikimania Poster session
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:56, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: November 2018
| ||||||
PROD AccessApps
I noticed you've done some work on AccessApps. I'm just letting you know that I've proposed that this article be deleted.CircleGirl (talk) 03:10, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
HIV/AIDS activist listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect HIV/AIDS activist. Since you had some involvement with the HIV/AIDS activist redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 06:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: December 2018
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:44, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: January 2019
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:27, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: February 2019
| ||||||
New Wikipedia Library Accounts Available Now (March 2019)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for new accounts and research materials on the Library Card platform:
- Kinige – Primarily Indian-language ebooks - 10 books per month
- Gale – Times Digital Archive collection added (covering 1785-2013)
- JSTOR – New applications now being taken again
Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page, including Baylor University Press, Taylor & Francis, Cairn, Annual Reviews and Bloomsbury. You can request new partnerships on our Suggestions page.
Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 17:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
- This message was delivered via the Global Mass Message tool to The Wikipedia Library Global Delivery List.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:56, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Martha Savage article
Dear Stuart Yeates,
Thank you for writing an article about me, and especially for including the work I'm doing to try to change the Japanese psychiatric system. If you want to include more about my work, you could use this CV, which is available on my university's web pages.
https://www.victoria.ac.nz/sgees/about/staff/staff-cvs/Martha-Savage-CV-2018.PDF
Martha.Savage (talk) 05:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Full Professors
Forgive my bureaucratic nature on the Julieanna Preston page, I do not like being on “the rules are the rules” side of an argument. I just came across your new pages on NZ full professors through the New Zealand project. It seems that you, like me, would like Wikipedia to acknowledge full professors (NZ, UK and OZ etc) as instantly notable as we do for professional sports people etc. If there is ever a movement to change the rules on this let me know. (Dushan Jugum (talk) 03:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)).
Just to keep you informed
Hi,
First of all thanks for your recent visit to article Aurat March. As such I was already aware of areas of improvement, and was working on it step by step, your review has helped in being more specific & thanks for the same.
- 1) I have already identified secondary sources as per Wikipedia help article.
- 2) Will take requisite care to keep context clear for those unfamiliar with the subject. Also will add translations of local language terms where those are missing, besides will be updating history of feminism in Pakistan in separate article.
- 3) Actually article had inline references only, but as a temporary measure was taken to google docs for reforming a bit & then brought back. Process of restoring inline refs is already in process.
I hope in coming few weeks most of your concerns would have been addressed. Thanks for your concerns & valuable time. Best wishes & regards
Bookku (talk) 10:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: March 2019
| ||||||
Nomination of Christine Stephens for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christine Stephens 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/Christine Stephens until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:16, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Authority control
Kia ora Stuart, could you please note that authority control data (e.g. VIAF) are to be stored in Wikidata? Once there, the {{Authority control}} template automatically links to what's on Wikidata. Schwede66 23:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi User:Schwede66. I've been using {{Authority control}} since before Wikidata, there used to be a bot which transferred fields in {{Authority control}} to Wikidata in an automated fashion. Does that not still work? Stuartyeates (talk) 03:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not that I'm aware of. I've shifted heaps of your authority control entries manually to Wikidata. That's why I thought I'd point this out to you. I've come across this before on other issues; there used to be a bot doing a perfectly sensible thing but it stopped at some point when the bot operator walked away. Schwede66 10:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, User:Schwede66. The initial shift to wikidata involved bot work and I assumed that the bot kept working. My mistake. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not that I'm aware of. I've shifted heaps of your authority control entries manually to Wikidata. That's why I thought I'd point this out to you. I've come across this before on other issues; there used to be a bot doing a perfectly sensible thing but it stopped at some point when the bot operator walked away. Schwede66 10:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Stuartyeates, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 01:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: April 2019
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Erin G. Carlston
Hello, Stuartyeates. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Erin G. Carlston".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
A page you started (Janet Carter) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Janet Carter.
User:JSFarman while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:
Hi. I just reviewed the Janet Carter article. I did a bit of research in the hope of adding citations, and in the process discovered her work related to earthquakes aftershock anxiety. I am fascinated -- I live in Southern California, and I still have aftershock anxiety related to the 1994 Northridge earthquake.
But beside the point! Have you considered requesting autopatrol? You are way way beyond eligible.
Thanks for the introduction to Janet Carter's work!
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|JSFarman}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
JSFarman (talk) 01:41, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
neurologist/neuroscientist
With respect to Elizabeth Franz (scientist): a neurologist is a physician . A neuroscientist is a person with a PhD, who may or may not be a physician. DGG ( talk ) 17:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin G. Carlston has been accepted
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 17:35, 6 June 2019 (UTC)This Month in GLAM: May 2019
| ||||||
Nomination of Elizabeth Turnbull for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Turnbull 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/Elizabeth Turnbull until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. The Banner talk 12:09, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Have an upgrade!
I do some assessment work in WOMSCI and I noticed that you produce a lot of articles of academics in New Zealand. That's great work! I also noticed that you use Kephir's Rater tool. I highly recommend switching to the updated fork by Evad37. It is much easier to use and has predictions by ORES. I would also appreciate it if you attempted to fill out some of the assessment values yourself. If you find that a little intimidating, I have prepared a (draft) guide. I recommend you skim through the official documentation as well. If you have any questions, Evad37 is away but I have used this tool for thousands of articles and I can likely answer them. Good luck and happy editing! Prometheus720 (talk) 17:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Prometheus720. I have compiled a list of all female professors in New Zealand and am working my way through them. I'll take a look at the new rater. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:17, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Upcoming Wellington events
Just a note to let you know about some things coming up in Wellington you might be interested in.
- Saturday 22 June: Wellington Meetup, the first in a series of regular informal meetups for Wellington Wikipedia editors, organised by organised by Einebillion (Victoria Leachman) and Ambrosia10 (Siobhan Leachman). 10:00–12:00, net-work space, National Library.
- Sunday 7 July: Archives New Zealand Edit-a-thon, 10:30–3:00, Archives New Zealand, 10 Mulgrave St. BYO laptop, nibbles provided. There'll be a mix of brand-new and experienced editors working on the amazing Archives resources.
- Saturday 6 July: another Wellington Meetup, same time and place – these will ideally run fortnightly. Mark your calendar.
Cheers, Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 00:02, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Ways to improve Nazimah Hamid
Hello, Stuartyeates,
Thanks for creating Nazimah Hamid! I edit here too, under the username Graeme Bartlett and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Independent references are needed to prove the significance of this person. I am assuming that being a professor in New Zealand is significant (unlike in USA), but hopefully their work has been reviewed.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Graeme Bartlett}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:46, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
A page you started (Post-docs) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Post-docs.
User:Rosguill while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:
I'm amazed that this didn't exist yet.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
signed, Rosguill talk 20:12, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Gillian Whalley
Hello, Stuartyeates. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gillian Whalley".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Lapablo (talk) 23:05, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2019
| ||||||
Vissers
re your article on Vissers - can you show that she meets the criteria in WP:ACADEMIC? Thanks. DS (talk) 15:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- I believe that WP:ACADEMIC is met. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:12, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Phillippa Jane Poole for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phillippa Jane Poole 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/Phillippa Jane Poole until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. DGG ( talk ) 08:58, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The article James Farrell (police officer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable policeman from New Zealand with only one source that doesn’t assert notability
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 10:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: July 2019
| ||||||
Hello, Stuartyeates,
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Taiarahia Black, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.
If you wish to prevent the deletion:
- Edit the page
- Remove the text that looks like this:
{{proposed deletion/dated...}} - Click
Publish Changesbutton.
But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Onel5969 TT me 16:04, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:Makere Stewart-Harawira has a new comment
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:24, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Thanks for creating Hinematau McNeill.
User:Kudpung while examining this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:
Please put the titles of written works in italics (WP:MoS]].
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Kudpung}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
I changed the redirect Tāwhiri to Pittosporum tenuifolium, which lists this as a synonym, rather than Ixerba, which has the Māori name 'tāwari'. See also [2]. If tāwhiri can mean either, then perhaps we should make it a disambiguation page, and include tāwhiri karo as a name for Pittosporum cornifolium as well.-gadfium 05:25, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: August 2019
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Photography museums and galleries in Korea requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Grutness...wha? 10:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: September 2019
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:58, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Category:Language-oriented digital libraries has been nominated for discussion
Category:Language-oriented digital libraries, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 09:30, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
New Page Review newsletter November 2019
Hello Stuartyeates,
This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.
- Getting the queue to 0
There are now 819 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.
- Coordinator
Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.
- This month's refresher course
Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.
- Tools
- It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
- It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
- Reviewer Feedback
Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.
- Second set of eyes
- Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
- Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
- Arbitration Committee
The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.
- Community Wish list
There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.
To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: October 2019
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Your thread has been archived
|
Hi Stuartyeates! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Request for Review
Hi, hope you are doing well. I have created the following pages within the last few days. But no one was reviewing them. The pages include: Shah Sultan Rumi, Faouzi Skali, Hermann Landolt, Şefik Can, Feeroozeh Golmohammadi, M. Thomas Thangaraj, Oruç Güvenç, Knut Vikør. Would you please review them? Given that you had time. Thanks and greetings. Mosesheron (talk) 11:20, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Not notable. No evidence of awards, charting or in depth coverage in independent reliable sources.
Hi, hope you are doing well, this is my wiki links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canam_Consultants.. I got the message from your side about the awards evidence. And I was not updated any awards in this page. Yes, I add their membership lists. So I can find that link if they allow me the website link, then I can add here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anuraj Sandhu (talk • contribs) 05:04, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: November 2019
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:26, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
New Page Review newsletter December 2019
- Reviewer of the Year
This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.
Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.
Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.
Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.
| Rank | Username | Num reviews | Log |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rosguill (talk) | 47,395 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 2 | Onel5969 (talk) | 41,883 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 3 | JTtheOG (talk) | 11,493 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 4 | Arthistorian1977 (talk) | 5,562 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 5 | DannyS712 (talk) | 4,866 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 6 | CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk) | 3,995 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 7 | DragonflySixtyseven (talk) | 3,812 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 8 | Boleyn (talk) | 3,655 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 9 | Ymblanter (talk) | 3,553 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 10 | Cwmhiraeth (talk) | 3,522 | Patrol Page Curation |
(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)
- Redirect autopatrol
A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.
- Source Guide Discussion
Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.
- This month's refresher course
While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Merry!
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! |
|
Hello Stuartyeates, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Primary sources
Hi Stuartyeates!
I'm a little confused by the tag you recently put on an article I was largely responsible for. I can see how BDM advertisements come under that heading, but newspaper reports are written by journalists and approved by editors. Doug butler (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm assuming that you're talking about C. A. Hornabrook, if not, ignore all this and give me the correct article. Newspaper articles are not necessarily written by professional editors and "From our Special Correspondent" and/or no name or initials is a sign that the subject may be the author. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:20, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
- I removed the template with the explanation 'Removed Template:Primary sources -- Most refs are newspaper articles, some newspaper BDM, WikiTree ref not a reliable source removed' Paul foord (talk) 03:19, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
- Looking at Template:Primary sources I would regard the contemporaneous newspaper articles as primary, the obituaries can be both primary and secondary sources, primary for the death, secondary for the biographical details. Paul foord (talk) 03:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
So Who's Who and George E. Loyau's Notable South Australians (and similar peacock publications through history) are out? Doug butler (talk) 09:20, 8 January 2020 (UTC) I take that back. Reading Template:Primary sources it seems that the problem is proximity to the event, not personal connection to the protagonist/s. I can see how that is important in the broad overview of history, but not in the minutiae of buildings erected, dates of death and how a person was addressed. Doug butler (talk) 09:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
- It entirely depends on the work, the context, etc, etc. Works such as The Cyclopedia of New Zealand are now seen as vanity press, even though they appear to have been taken as gospel truth for many years by many parties. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:35, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Edward Lewis (minister) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edward Lewis (minister) 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/Edward Lewis (minister) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Theprussian (talk) 18:48, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: December 2019
| ||||||
Media story about NZ Wikipedians
Kia ora Stuart, just thought I'd let you know that Stuff is writing a story about NZers involved with Wikipedia. Would you be interested in talking to the reporter? If so, I'll send you her phone number by email. Cheers! MurielMary (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi MurielMary. Thanks for the offer, but I'm not at my best on the phone. Twitter and/or email is fine if they want to engage me like that but I'm not really a phone person. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sure, no worries. Her name is Brittany and email address is brittany.deguara@stuff.co.nz. MurielMary (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi MurielMary. Thanks for the offer, but I'm not at my best on the phone. Twitter and/or email is fine if they want to engage me like that but I'm not really a phone person. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Correction - make that Brittney. Schwede66 00:54, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Derek Leask, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:49, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Darrin Hodgetts for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Darrin Hodgetts 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/Darrin Hodgetts until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Dawnseeker2000 09:18, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: January 2020
| ||||||
New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020
Hello Stuartyeates,
- Source Guide Discussion
The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.
- Redirects
New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.
- Discussions and Resources
- There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
- A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
- A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
- A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.
- Refresher
Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Makere Stewart-Harawira
Hello, Stuartyeates. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Makere Stewart-Harawira".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Waikino school shooting (March 4)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Waikino school shooting and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Waikino school shooting, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello, Stuartyeates!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dan arndt (talk) 07:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
|
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: February 2020
| ||||||
Nelson-born
Hello! I reverted this edit because it does means different things to a global audience, which is what we have. When I read it, for example, I thought of Nelson, BC. Wikipedia has 28 articles on places called Nelson. New Zealand on its own is perfectly clear. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of William James Broughton for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William James Broughton 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/William James Broughton until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) 22:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:31, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: March 2020
| ||||||
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Well done!
I just read your twitter thread working through the U of Canty alumni category - great work, that's quite an achievement! MurielMary (talk) 12:06, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Big task! Schwede66 17:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks User:MurielMary and User:Schwede66, I'm at my best with a long list of relatively small editing tasks to work my way through. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I enjoy working with lists too, they provide useful direction. How are you getting on with your work on women professors? I remember you had a goal of writing up all current NZ uni women professors? MurielMary (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Indeed. Lists are useful. Once you've got stuff in a list, it's easy to use that for Wikidata and also to create tables for Wikipedia. For example, this work list comes straight from my spreadsheet. Schwede66 23:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I enjoy working with lists too, they provide useful direction. How are you getting on with your work on women professors? I remember you had a goal of writing up all current NZ uni women professors? MurielMary (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks User:MurielMary and User:Schwede66, I'm at my best with a long list of relatively small editing tasks to work my way through. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- User:MurielMary, my female professors stuff got written up at https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/20/15-years-of-editing-wikipedia/ / https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/19/what-to-put-in-a-wikipedia-biography-and-what-gets-left-out/ / https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/18/how-i-came-to-be-writing-wikipedia-biographies-for-female-new-zealand-professors/ Stuartyeates (talk) 01:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: April 2020
| ||||||
Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi Stuartyeates, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.
Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.
To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!
Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mugixert (talk • contribs) 10:18, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: May 2020
| ||||||
Hello Stuartyeates and hope you're doing well.
You have Proposed Christian Delton Kacher for deletion, could you please take a look at this source, I think he meets #2 criteria of WP:MUSICBIO. Regards. MackVenus (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- WP:MUSICBIO says "Musicians [...] may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria. [...] #2 Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." Yes, they meet #2, but that isn't a free pass. I can literally find no independent coverage of any of their songs except in music databases. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello, please consider removing the hoax tag. I'm not saying Gasiński's claims themselves are not a hoax.
I'm saying the article covers these claims, and the reaction to them, accurately.
Some things I added to the article: - long, translated quotes from the book (as only part of it is available online, and that's in Polish) - Gasiński's letter to the DA's office and to the media, which unlike the book it was quoted in is not copyrighted, so I put its full text in Wikisources - an article from what is the Polish "newspaper of record" (sadly) - "Gazeta Wyborcza". The article is critical of Gasiński but mentions his claims. - English translation of the sources everywhere I could (mostly machine translation, sometimes human translation of important fragments)
Periwinklewrinkles (talk) 01:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
- I lack a crucial skill to be able to evaluate the article properly, so I've posted at note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Poland#Bogdan_Gasiński and hopefully a Polish speaker will be along soon to look at it. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)