User talk:Nikkimaria/Archive 17

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image (Oka)[edit]

Since you have already looked at the image ....just FYI Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:Oka stare down.jpg.Moxy (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Fleming[edit]

Hi Nikki, I wonder if you have a bit of spare time to undertake a reference review for an article at FAC, Ian Fleming? I'm reasonably confident of the refs, but there is always a chance that things have slipped through to add to any of my errors. Many thanks if you have the time! Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 08:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nikki—your comments are hugely useful and appreciated as ever: I think they are all now covered. Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 20:18, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance request[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, I was going through WP:FAC the other day, and I saw your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/IPad (3rd generation)/archive3. I was wondering if you could help me copyedit the article Samsung Galaxy S III or review the article Nexus 7 at Wikipedia:Peer review/Nexus 7/archive1. They're virtually complete, but need a major touch-up prior to a potential FAC. Cheers --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 08:09, 17 September 2012 (UTC) PS please disregard this message if you've got other commitments.[reply]

I've addressed most of your comments. I'm stuck with several issues though. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 00:45, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your time. I'll be informing you if either articles reach FA :) --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 01:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edna L. McRae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francis Parker School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for fast check[edit]

Just look at these and tell us (here) if you find any copyright concerns: link (report), link (report), link (report), link (report), link (report), link (report). Mohamed CJ (talk) 08:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Security Essentials[edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria

I'm bothering you about the FAC of Microsoft Security Essentials. Do you think we have sufficiently addressed your concerns? Or do you think some of your concerns are still not properly handled, especially in the light of the latest developments which you are no doubt aware of?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 14:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lisa, I'm planning on doing a run of reviews tomorrow, so will add yours to the list to revisit. I must admit to being rather confused by the recent developments there, as I was under the impression that the editor in question had previously supported/defended you, but no matter. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • My talk page might clear things up. Well, relatively speaking. Fortunately, Lisa and Malleus have done a great deal of work together on improving the article, something that might not have looked obvious from the FAC page either. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:51, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I did see the collaboration - very nice. But your talk page raises more questions than it answers. I mean, "Microsoft Security Essentials is better than every FA that you have ever written"? Opposing after that just seems pointy. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:00, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the clear implication is that all the changes I made degraded the article, dragging it down to my usual low and barely adequate standard. Malleus Fatuorum 16:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi. Thanks, Nikkimaria. Please keep us posted. And please never mind the recent developments themselves; they are easy to handle: Someone says "broken category", I'll fix it without even thinking whether it is FA-relevant or not. (Well, in this case someone beat me to it, but no difference.) Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi. I'm around for a while; so, I'll reply to FAC whenever necessary. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 16:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nikkimaria

Although the FAC is over, I don't still understand your objections to the citations. Can you please tell me what was it all about?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 16:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lisa, do you mean the reliability or the consistency issues? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I mean consistency. What did you exactly check? Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 03:25, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, references of the same "type" should be formatted as similarly as possible. Look at the last set of examples I gave (which MF has since fixed): "AV-TEST is italicized in FN 52 but not 53, FN68 capitalizes "Blog" while 64 does not, and Ars Technica is wikilinked in FN18 and 36 but not 49 (should be on first, all, or no occurrences, as you prefer).". All three examples concern comparisons between citations to the same website, but where the formatting used was slightly different; these concepts can be extended to "types" of references, as in web sources, magazines, etc. For example, if you decided to italicize AV-TEST, you would also need to italicize av-comparatives.org and the other website names. If you decided you wanted to wikilink terms on first occurrence in references only, you would apply that to everything you linked there. I think what ended up happening on that point was MF decided to wikilink each term on each occurrence, which is also fine - there's no requirement either way, just that within the article it be consistent. WP:MOS makes some general rules that you're expected to follow in a "perfect" article, but where it doesn't - that is, where there is deviation/inconsistency between articles - you're expected to stick with the same style within your single article. Does that make sense? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Yes, it does. That answers a lot of my questions.
But I have another question: As I understand, there is another requirement: Citations must give enough information to help fix a potential link rot, am I right? For instance, when citing an announcement by a company, Microsoft has multiple outlets of announcement while other companies may only have one. Microsoft has product pages, TechNet network, MSDN network, PR website, blogs, support website and product relate websites. (Compare Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.) So, I understand I must give enough information in case, for example, TechNet was divided into a ProNet and a ConsumerNet. Do you mind if I specify a |work= for such sources, at the cost including none for others?
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 11:41, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, as in that case there's a strong reason to deviate from the "basic" formatting. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 September 2012[edit]

Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Olongapo[edit]

Nikkimaria, sorry to bother you, but yours was the first name I recognized in the Coordinator list for WP:MILHIST. I'm a bit at sea (apologies for the pun) about the above article, in part because I'm wondering where the name "Battle of Olongapo" came from, and what the policy is on coming up with names for historical events. Can you please weigh in as someone who has experience with the issues involved? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion on the template is unchanged since the 19th, and something needs to happen one way or the other. I see that AustralianRupert visited the article's talk page on the 20th, and seems on the verge of giving it a B-class rating, though he doesn't address the naming issue. Since as noted I'm not up to speed on MilHist matters, I'm going to leave this to you to see to a conclusion. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Close paraphrase[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria

You tagged Hossam el-Hamalawy as a possible close paraphrase, but didn't indicate the possible source. Is it one of the references, another source, or the style? I want to look into it, but not sure where to start (I have tried CorenSearchBot, but it seems to be out of order.)--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:33, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See here, linked from talk; I think it was transcluded there at the time, but might be wrong. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I may return to this, but WP:CP is so backlogged, I'm looking for low-hanging fruit at the moment.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Matthew Brisbane[edit]

Nikkimaria, can you please do me a favor and take a look at this article? One of the new QPQers, Futurist110, took this one on. It's a long article and very comprehensively cited, though almost all inline cites are from a few offline sources. There are two blockquotes, one four paragraphs, and another a single paragraph. I was able to find an online source for the really big one, and it was written in 1833 (an account of a murder) so I'd imagine it's public domain—I found another version on Scribd—but it seems an awful lot to quote, and the ref given doesn't work. Still, what I know you'll be able to address is what needs to be done regarding the sourcing, and what is appropriate usage and citation for these blockquotes.

Thanks for anything you can do: I'd like to leave this in your hands, including whether a different icon should be used (even if it's an AGF tick!) for the review. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for commenting there; I really appreciate it. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your help, can I ask how you were able to do it so quickly? Wee Curry Monster talk 20:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do what quickly, evaluate the length of the quote? Given the age it's fairly obvious it's PD, but those quotes take up 3 screens on my laptop – it just feels excessive, and would flow better if it were at least partially original (and encyclopedic) narrative prose. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No the references, it takes me ages but you did it in a flash. Wee Curry Monster talk 21:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've memorized the formatting for most of the common citations, so that makes it easier; I also use wikEd, which makes them a different colour and thus easier to quickly isolate. Given the types of citations you're using you might consider {{sfn}} instead of the system you're using, but that's up to you. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:33, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've some articles in sandpits, would you mind taking a gander at them and suggesting how I might structure it better? Wee Curry Monster talk 14:34, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nikkimaria, can you please take a quick look at it now? Wee Curry Monster has done narrative prose, and I've gone through to smooth things out, improve transitions in and out of quotes, and adding the required inline cites at the end of each paragraph, but a once-over to make sure there isn't any overly close paraphrasing would be welcome. If it's good, you can reinstate the approval on the template. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy VII FAC:[edit]

Hi, I'm a unregistered user, but can you read the Final Fantasy VII article again and support (or oppose) its promotion to FA? 71.142.228.188 (talk) 19:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP! I don't much care whether you're registered or not, but if you read down the review a bit you'll note that I've already opposed. Based on the nominator's comments, I don't anticipate any need to revisit anytime soon. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Montebello Genocide Memorial[edit]

Nikkimaria, I was hoping you would be able to take a look at this nomination. I've already done a round of copyvio deletions, and the text has been paraphrased and returned. I wouldn't mind having an overall close paraphrase check. What I'm unsure of is the neutrality and the sourcing, all of which are Armenian-American authors or institutions. I think it is almost certainly a notable article, and there was an LA Times article in 2011 about the unveiling of the freeway sign to the memorial, which itself was noteworthy. (The press covered the unveiling on April 1 rather than the physical installation of the signs ten days earlier that the article concentrates on.) Can I ask you to do the icon honors as well, or do you think a complete new review is in order, or a reiterated request for more independent sources? BlueMoonset (talk) 04:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't sure whether you noticed that there had been a response to your most recent comment -- I suspect it's an inadequate one, since it removes some text but doesn't seem to address the sourcing issue, but I could be wrong. Thanks for taking another look. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:05, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page Curation newsletter[edit]

Hey Nikkimaria. I'm dropping you a note because you've been using the Page Curation suite recently - this is just to let you know that we've deployed the final version :). There's some help documentation here that shows off all the features, just in case there are things you're not familiar with. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:57, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Country name[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, I noticed that you changed Ivory Coast to the French version in the Crex article, and I wondered why. We normally refer to countries by their English name rather than what they call themselves — Germany and Burma, rather than Deutschland and Myanmar. I wonder what the logic is of making an exception for Cote D'Ivoire? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Burma-Myanmar issue is a bit more complex, but usually we go by common name. You can change it back if you prefer, I don't mind. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No big deal, I just wondered if I missed something (: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:31, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Links to relevant geographical articles[edit]

Come on, this is getting silly. You know that there is no consensus for stripping out relevant geographical links from country articles; that has been demonstrated numerous times at the linking guideline page and elsewhere. I've no issue with you removing genuine over-linked material, but there are several of your ongoing edits that do not fit that profile. Again, I implore you to please stop; let's find a better way to work this out. --Ckatzchatspy 02:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, let's, but for two things: at Guinea, the status quo is not to have that term linked. There is no consensus for either stripping or adding those links en masse, so absent that, leave it unlinked there, as it was before either of us edited the article. Second, at Canada, there was a consensus for removing those links. I'm aware that you and some others do not agree with that, but that's the way it ended up. The guideline page provides guidelines, not dictates, and not specifics: it is up to the editors at individual pages to decide how to apply said guidelines, and in this case the decision didn't go your way. Citing the protection comment, which in this context really amounted to a super-vote, doesn't override that entire discussion, I'm afraid. I'm quite willing to walk away from the dispute elsewhere, but not in these two cases, and particularly not at Canada, where there is a consensus for my position. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know there was not a consensus for removal at Canada; to state otherwise is counter-productive. Even the most cursory scanning of the extensive discussions there would confirm that assertion. It was simply tthe offshoot of a rote application of Ohconfucius' delinking script. You are (or should) be aware that the stripping of relevant links in that manner is highly controversial, as demonstrated over and over again at the linking guideline page and elsewhere. --Ckatzchatspy 03:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, I believe that there was such a consensus, and you've shown me no reason to believe otherwise. It certainly wasn't unanimous, and then as now you disagreed, but the results were in favour of linking in Geo, not the lead. The discussion arose from the edits of a now-block sockpuppet; the terms in question had been unlinked for at least a couple of months prior to that (I haven't checked further). That, incidentally, would appear to make the unlinked version the "no consensus" status quo, if the discussion was not clear enough for you. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As stated clearly here and at the Canada talk page, the delinking was undiscussed and script-based, part of a controversial campaign to remove links that a handful of editors disagree with. If you peruse the entire extent of the discussion on the talk page, it becomes clear that there is no consensus to delink related and relevant terms that are generally accepted as suitable for the lead of a country article. --Ckatzchatspy 04:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Asserted here by you and contradicted by the opening statement of the discussion I linked (which specifically references Ubiquinoid's May edits, not any by Ohconfucius). Even if we leave that aside, having perused the entire extent of the discussion, and having participated in said discussion, whatever the impetus for it was it ended up showing consensus to delink these terms in the lead of the Canada article. As I've already stated, I'm perfectly willing to accept that there is no consensus to either link or delink these terms on a wide scale, but in this specific case there is, and you're edit-warring against it. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's no contradiction at all - the links were removed without discussion in March by OC, as part of the generic script-based delinking that a handful of individuals are pursuing. Just because the individual who noticed it a while later has since been blocked does not invalidate the fact that he/she drew attention to OC's inappropriate changes. I'd argue - based on your edits at Canada and elsewhere - that you are the one edit-warring, especially based on the nature of your edit summaries when doing so. Please note, again, that the extensive discussion on the Canada talk page clearly demonstrates both a lack of unanimous support for removing relevant links and a sense that a localized talk page is an inappropriate place for such a discussion. --Ckatzchatspy 16:09, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While minor, it is also important to note that the link we're disagreeing over in the lead of Guinea is also not the "status quo", as it too was stripped out by script a few months back. Single-minded applications of a controversial script do not automatically create a new "normal". --Ckatzchatspy 16:23, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I already pointed out that the discussion wasn't unanimous, but consensus is not unanimity. I've also already explained that guidelines are not blow-by-blow dictates, and that they are appropriately applied via consensus at the relevant article talk page – as would be happening here, if you would stop insisting that the discussion was wrong just because you think it should have ended differently. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Sixth Asian Science Camp[edit]

Nikkimaria, I dinged this one for close paraphrasing, but I've entered a busy day or two and am not able to give it the time it needs to check. Can I ask you to see whether it's okay to go, and give it the appropriate icon? Thanks, and apologies for dropping this in your lap. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:23, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for taking this one on. I ended up having to move it between prep areas so it wouldn't display during Israel's overnight hours... BlueMoonset (talk) 07:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Worlds refs[edit]

Hi -- can you take a look at the comment Jim Bleak made in the New Worlds FAC about using "US" and "UK" in the references? I don't know if there's a precedent to be followed here, and I know you do a lot of work with references and would probably know the answer. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 September 2012[edit]

5 Edits is started[edit]

Wikipedia 5 edits project is underway in the GEL. Looking forward to working with you. TomHaffie (talk) 19:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikki- I just have a quick question in regard to the 5 edits assignment. Would you be able to tell me how you change info. on a person's Wikipedia page (ie. I was hoping to change Dr.Phil's page by adding that he is now a grandpa). Could you also let me know how you change the principle of a school. It is located in a box on the right hand side (ie. St. Michaels Catholic Secondary School). Thanks in advance! ibertens (talk)

Ambassador Inquiry[edit]

Hello NikkiMaria. I'm the instructor for a section of students at Ball State University in Indiana USA who are beginning a collaborative research project on Wikipedia for our Introduction to Digital Literacies class. I've been teaching with WP since Spring 2011; from my user page you can see a few example projects highlighted. We are currently in need of an online ambassador to advise five class groups on selecting topics and putting articles together: this means there will be five topics for an ambassador to assist with. Might you be interested in helping us? You can see the project timeline in my user area project subpage.

I have gone through the appropriate channels and application documents with the Wikimedia folks in charge of education programs, but have not heard back in nearly two weeks (I've emailed Jamie Mathewson twice). But time is getting short and we must begin—thus I'm taking the liberty of contacting potential ambassadors directly. Thanks for your consideration and good luck with your projects! (Pardon the duplication—I will also send this by email). –Webster Newbold (talk) 16:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User talk:Wnewbold#Digital Literacies[edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria. You have new messages at Wnewbold's talk page.
Message added 20:46, 28 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Congratulations[edit]

Coordinator of the Military history Project, September 2012 – September 2013

In recognition of your election as a co-ordinator of the Military history project for the September 2012 to September 2013 period, please accept these co-ord stars. Thank you for standing and I hope it will be another fruitful year. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:03, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Looking forward to working with you and the other victims coords. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:28, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Mah Laqa Bai[edit]

Nikkimaria, I've just realized that I forgot about this one, and I'm flat out of time right now. Since it's your specialty, can I ask you to take a look, and give the appropriate icon? It also means that I can promote it, and the building screams "lead hook" to me. (I was disappointed when I realized the article had problems and I couldn't select it as I had wanted to do.) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mulugeta Buli[edit]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bruce Carey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamilton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 14:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Red Dress (song)[edit]

Believe I fixed the issues. Till 07:22, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 October 2012[edit]

editing[edit]

Hello do I actually have to create a sandbox inorder to do the edits or can I just click on the edit button and type something in and how would I link the page to our course homepage if I have to add the link under my name? Azafar8 (talk) 23:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Hi, Nikkimaria. When you find the time, could I bother you for a source and image review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Going, Going, Gone (Grey's Anatomy)/archive1? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Hello my second question was about posting a link on my course homepage under my name where we can do free edits how would I post the link on to my course page if I edit an article? How will I be able to see it once I log into the course page under free edits.Azafar8 (talk) 14:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Hello I tried editing one the articles on wikipedia called Canadian Indian residential school systems and I tried adding the link to my course page just as you suggested,but I had encountered two problems one that it kept saying that the page didn't exsist even though when I searched it up I was able to find it so it wouldn't let me link the article to my course page second any edit that I made from myself under one of the sections of the article and saved the page it was removed couple of minutes later even though the sentences were not from any specific website I think it still requires me to cite how am I able to do that if the info is from myself when I am adding stuff from myself what am I supposed to do then?Azafar8 (talk) 00:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FAR[edit]

Hi Nikki - Just a note that I'm leaving Wikipedia:Featured article review/Search engine optimization/archive2 and WP:Featured article review/Barack Obama/archive10 up to you. I started the former, and was involved in some pre-FAR discussion on the second (although that was in a delegate capacity, so I'm not completely sure I have a COI, but would still rather be safe than sorry). Let me know if there are any that you're involved in that I've missed - I plan to make a run through later today in any case. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 13:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Core Contest![edit]

Third Prize - Core Contest
Congratulations for winning the August 2012 incarnation of the Core Contest! Your voucher will be on its way soon.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nice job you did to improve Bob Hope by cleaning the article up! Binksternet (talk) 15:56, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, are you guys in the right place? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh! Teach me to do these things at 1am. I am so sorry, a Homer Simpson moment . Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:57, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcoming students[edit]

I see you welcomed a bunch. You may want to use {{welcome student}} or the ambassador variant linked there instead of a generic welcome template. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:56, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Mostafa Hussein Kamel[edit]

I see that this has just been approved, though without a concurrence from you. Has it conquered all the close paraphrasing issues you identified, or do some still exist? BlueMoonset (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Already checked, it looks much better now. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. In that case, I feel safe about promoting it if it's still around when I build my next set. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Parable of the sunfish[edit]

Could you take a look at this nomination when you get a chance? The associate article uses an unusually large number of inline and block quotations and I would appreciate your option on whether this represents a problem with close paraphrasing or other similar issues. Nomination is currently held up with concerns over the article's citation density and style, so no big rush on this request. --Allen3 talk 23:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look shortly. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:59, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. It's not a paraphrasing/copyvio issue. It may be a stylistic issue, and I'm a little uncomfortable with the synthesis approach in the Criticism section - up to you whether you want to raise these issues within the DYK review. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:18, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

minnowed[edit]

Follow me to join the secret cabal!

Plip!

Br'er Rabbit (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aw, did your trouts have a baby? How cute! Nikkimaria (talk) 16:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

 The WikiChevrons 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews of Military history project articles for the period Jul–Sep 12, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:59, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Pipkin Ball State Group Pathfinder[edit]

Hello!

I just wanted to touch base with you and let you know that I am one of the pathfinders for our class. Thanks for working with us!

Zcbp (talk) 02:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, looking forward to it! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:42, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here are our three possible topics... What do you feel would be the best option for us? Thanks!

Okay, here are our 3 possibilities for an article... 1. Fruit Gushers (http://www.generalmills.com/Home/Brands/Snacks/Fruit%20Snacks/Brand%20Product%20List%20Page.aspx#%7B57546B5C-D377-4D5E-B280-9CCF6C771C94%7D) (http://www.generalmills.com/default.aspx) (http://www.fruitsnackia.com/) 2. Pizza Rolls (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/jeno-paulucci-food-visionary-behind-the-pizza-roll-dies-at-93/2011/11/30/gIQAkU4XEO_story.html) (http://www.totinos.com/products.aspx?id=F8E0AA63-A497-480F-A341-A8F917120C46) (http://kotaku.com/5945929/totinos-pizza-rolls-the-snacktaku-review) 3. Gardettos (http://www.generalmills.com/Brands/Snacks/Gardettos.aspx) (http://eatthis.menshealth.com/content/worst-snacks-supermarket?article=10&page=1) (http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=2381a8b3-3603-46be-abcf-e61d9d725be5%40sessionmgr10&vid=1&hid=10&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=f5h&AN=2330777) Zcbp (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

We have made a rough draft of our article (we switched topics) and have it posted in my sandbox. Could you please take a look and tell me what you think? Thanks! Zcbp (talk) 14:55, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have "finished" our article and posted it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mud_salamander. Please take a look and see if there are any problems with what we did, or if there are old templates/banners still associated with the article. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zcbp (talk • contribs) 15:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

<Ashley Kilhoffer> Ball State Group Pathfinder[edit]

Hi! I'm one of the pathfinders for the Ball State Group. I just wanted to introduce myself and say thanks for taking the time to be our ambassador.

Ashleynk (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Ashley! Nikkimaria (talk) 11:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These are ideas my group had for either starting a wiki page or adding on to one

1. Ball State College of Communication, Information, and Media building http://www.msktd.com/project/academic/Ball+State+University+-+Letterman+Communication+and+Media+Building http://cms.bsu.edu/Academics/CollegesandDepartments/CCIM.aspx http://www.bsudailynews.com/ball-state-students-take-home-emmys-1.2742800#.UHbZ52g_5UQ

2. Stargazer Lily http://www.gardenguides.com/75313-stargazer-lilies.html http://thefieldofflowers.wordpress.com/2011/05/21/flowering-facts-stargazer-lilies-a-type-of-oriental-lilies/

3. Bath and Body Works http://www.limitedbrands.com/our_company/about_us/timeline.aspx http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/archives/fdaDrugInfo.cfm?archiveid=40732 Ashleynk (talk) 01:20, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was more for the college! I think I was on cruise control when I typed building, but it would be about the Ball State College of Communication, Information, and Media and it's sub departments and activities as well as awards. and functions. Ashleynk (talk) 23:55, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My group has a draft of our article in my sandbox if you could please review it and give us suggestions/corrections. Thanks! Ashleynk (talk) 01:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are 1,300 majors/minors (Journalism, Audio, Video, etc;) and 2,100 actual students enrolled in those programs. They are different numbers for different things. We are working on editing and I'll get back to you when it's ready to be reviewed again. Thank you! Ashleynk (talk) 22:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you review our groups' article again? Thank you! Ashleynk (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our article is published! Could you check it for any errors or old templates/banners? Thanks! Ball State University College of Communication, Information, and Media Ashleynk (talk) 15:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative[edit]

WikiWomen Unite!
Hi Nikkimaria! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gaston Hamelin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Selmer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:41, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ambassador[edit]

<Megan Tolley> Ball State group pathfinder

Hello,

My name is Megan Tolley and I am in english 213 Digital literacies. I believe you are our ambassador for our class project!! I was just emailing you to let you know that I am the path finder for our group! MeganTolley5 (talk) 13:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Megan! Nikkimaria (talk) 13:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chad Ragan Ball State Pathfinder[edit]

<ChadRagan> Ball State University Hi Nikkimaria. I am one of the Pathfinders for my ENG213 Digital Literacies class with Dr. Newbold. I appreciate you agreeing to offer your expertise and guidance with this project our class is working on! I look look forward to hearing from you. Thank you again. (ChadRagan (talk) 14:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Hey Chad! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My group has a few topic ideas that are located in my sandbox area. We would all appreciate it if you took the time to look over the possible topics. Thanks for your help! ChadRagan (talk) 14:46, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Nikkimaria. Can you please check out my groups finished wikipedia page for our Ball State project!! Ball Brothers :)

Thank yoU! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChadRagan (talk • contribs) 18:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

<Kameron McBride> Ball State Group Pathfinder[edit]

Hello,

My name is Kameron McBride and I am the pathfinder for my group and I just wanted to thank you for being willing to be our ambassador and I hope this project goes well!

Thanks!

Sincerely

Welcome Kameron! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 October 2012[edit]

We Can Do It! now FA[edit]

Thanks for your review of the "We Can Do It!" article. It made FA status today but it can still be improved. You made several observations at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/We Can Do It!/archive1 but I'm not certain they were all answered. Cheers - Binksternet (talk) 18:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Close some applications?[edit]

Hey Nikki. There's a couple open applications at WT:Online Ambassadors. I've commented, so I shouldn't close them. Could you? Best, The Interior (Talk) 04:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thankee. The Interior (Talk) 14:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ambassador[edit]

Hello,


Our group (for English 213 Digital Literacies) has come up with three topics for our project. The topics are Hot Sauce, Zebra gum or the plastic balls used in the ball pits. We would really like to do a certain type of Hot Sauce (a specific brand). Please let us know what you think.


(MeganTolley5 (talk) 14:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Franz Kafka FAC[edit]

Hi Nikki. You did such a great job on reviewing and doing a source check on Yogo sapphire that I was hoping you'd do the source check in this Kafka FAC. It has two supports and an image check already. It's a dual nom of Gerda and I. We'd appreciate it. Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 10:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, but remind me if I haven't gotten there in the next ~24-48 hours. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No rush, we are both away for the weekend, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. It's got 4 supports now.PumpkinSky talk 23:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Graham already promoted this. If you still want to check it to make it better, just drop it on Talk:Franz Kafka or on my talk page. I'm all up for making it better. PumpkinSky talk 19:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New User[edit]

Hey Nikki,

I'm doing a project for my english class. I chose to setup a page on Clemson University's Experimental Forest. My layout is in my sandbox. How would you grade it? Is there anything I need to take out or add? Your help is very appreciated.

Here is a link to my page: user:bennyvu/sandbox Ben Vukov Bennyvu (talk) 16:36, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Gaston Hamelin[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Fed up...[edit]

Really? Go on then, block me... to be honest I will take it as a badge of honour because Wikipedia has just been reduced to bunch of trolling idiots over the past couple of years. I feel I have been hounded by J3Mrs (and to some extent Malleus Fatuorum who is his sidekick friend and a reputation for being uncivil to others) for over a year now. No one ever does anything about it. MediaCityUK (August 2011 onwards and Rangoon11 was a victim too), One Angel Square, even List of warehouses in Manchester the other day, J3Mrs was straight onto me like a hawk and suggested the list was not even required. I do not enjoy it and it seems to me their ulterior to drive any editor away who they don't like. If that's the Wikipedia you want where current and prospective editors are turned away then you can forget it. I feel I am a productive editor. I have been on here for over 6 years and have made 7000+ edits but I am at the end of my tether. I have just about had enough.... Stevo1000 (talk) 16:29, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And just as I finished writing that paragraph:
Your opinion is duly noted. Now fuck off. Malleus Fatuorum 16:27, 13 October 2012 (UTC) [1][reply]
Is this the Wikipedia you stand for? I never used profanity on Wikipedia to other editors yet I am being told I could be the one who gets banned. Laughable... Stevo1000 (talk) 16:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Banned, no. Blocked, if you persist? Certainly. You've been pointed to Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, and you really need to read it, thoroughly, and provide correct attribution when you copy between articles. If you don't feel you can do that and move on, you need to back away and find some way to calm down for a few hours, because at the moment you're earning your own "uncivil" reputation. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:05, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm earning an "uncivil" reputation for telling the truth? Have I told anyone to fuck off? Only on Wikipedia I guess... It would be nice if you read this too: Wikipedia:Why is Wikipedia losing contributors - Thinking about remedies. Regards. Stevo1000 (talk) 21:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are you certain you know what the truth is? Malleus Fatuorum 00:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Profanity and incivility are not the same thing. You may not have used the words "fuck off" (though I'll note that you did indeed tell someone to do so), but things like this or this do the same job in more words. Again: if you can't keep it together, you need to know when to step back. One of the pieces of advice offered by the page you linked is to slow down and allow yourself time to think before you say or do something rash – are you following that advice? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:44, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're just trying to be a smart Alec now. Why don't you just fuck off? Profanity seems to be happily condoned on Wikipeida now. Stevo1000 (talk) 20:30, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just pointing out why your complaints aren't being well received. As I've already told you, profanity is not a problem in and of itself – it's all a matter of how words are applied, and in this case your application is the poorer. And where exactly would you like me to fuck off to? This is my talk page, on which you're choosing to post. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:51, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Complaints are never well received. It doesn't surprise me Wikipedia is losing editors. Stevo1000 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Me neither, though I suspect for different reasons. Are you prepared to follow policy and move on now, or am I going to be hosting for a while yet? I'll whip up some lemonade. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cyclone Rewa[edit]

Hi there, would you be able to give Cyclone Rewa a copyedit please? Many Thanks in advance.Jason Rees (talk) 22:17, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Worlds promoted[edit]

It made it. Thanks for your help! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! Nikkimaria (talk) 18:10, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Project Subjects[edit]

Hi there Nikkimaria I am one of the Ball State students working on our Wikipedia project and I had a few potential research topics I wanted to run by you (included are some sites form preliminary research we conducted):

Scopophobia

http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/1131/ —http://www.pep-web.org/document.php?id=paq.045.0634a —http://sb6nw2tx4e.scholar.serialssolutions.com/?sid=google&auinit=A&aulast=Albrechtslund&atitle=Surveillance+and+ethics+in+film:+Rear+window+and+the+conversation&title=Journal+of+criminal+justice+and+popular+culture&*

White Widow (Cannibis)—I don't feel great about this project, but it was just a random idea thrown out 

http://www.kindgreenbuds.com/marijuana-strains/whitewidow.html http://www.medicalmarijuanastrains.com/white-widow/ http://www.ministryofcannabis.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=19&lang=en&limitstart=0&vmcchk=1&Itemid=19

And another one we're thinking about is the idea of Family Secrets

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-long-reach-childhood/201010/family-secrets

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/family-secrets

http://www.psychologytoday.com/collections/201107/family-secrets

We tried to pick topics that we could really expand upon.


Thanks for your input!


Kameron (*Kameron.McBride (talk) 01:17, 16 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Ambassador for Eng class 213[edit]

Hello,


After much thought, our group for the English 213 Digital Literacies class has decided to try out three new topics and this time I have also provided some possible references. I appreciate your patience and look forward to reading your input!


Three Topics 1. expanding the Indiana Beach (local amusement park) page 2. Indy Scream Park 3. The Indianapolis Zoo


Three References 1.http://www.indianabeach.com 2.http://www.indyscreampark.com 3.http://www.indyzoo.com/SitePages/home.aspx


(MeganTolley5 (talk) 02:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Downtown Community House[edit]

Nikkimaria, this is an odd situation. The author of the article seems to have commissioned the report that's so much of the article (details on the article's talk page and author's talk page), but as far as I can tell there is no release in the report PDF for the photo in the nomination (despite a pointer to the report), or for that matter, the report itself.

As the article appears to be almost completely a copy of sections of this report, I'm about to flunk it because I seriously doubt there are 1500 prose characters original to Wikipedia, but I'm worried that there are more serious issues involved. Can you please take a look and do whatever is appropriate? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not ignoring this, really - will get to it in a few hours (*fingers crossed*). Nikkimaria (talk) 22:11, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Clarinet Concerto No. 2 (Arnold)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georges Grisez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Williams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP referencing in the GEL[edit]

Hi Nikki

I hope your clarinet is sounding great these days.

I'll be doing my best to impersonate you on thursday with a session on referencing in WP. Would you be able to meet with me before then. Maybe I can just do a similar exercise to the one you did last year?

I'm available Wed 2 - 4 and Thurs am before 10:30. Again at 12 until 3:30.

Just pick something that works for you and let me know by email.

Thanks

TomHaffie (talk) 18:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Georges Grisez[edit]

Hi: This article appears to me not to meet the DYK minimum of 1,500 characters. Is my Microsoft Word malfunctioning? I count 1,386. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) DYKcheck's count is 1,384. The article is also classified as a stub on its talk page. These should really be fixed, or the nomination temporarily pulled back; the hook's just been promoted to Queue 3. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded, not sure what happened there. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:56, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh great, now I can undo the not very good swap I did! Going over to have a look now. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DYKcheck still says the article is a stub. Can that please be taken care of too? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:11, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is done? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nikkimaria. All set: DYKcheck is certainly satisfied. :-) Basically, if it's considered a stub by any of the WikiProjects on the talk page, or has a stub template on the main article page, DYKcheck picks it up and points out the issue, which is very handy when reviewing a nomination. (It also checks In the News and does other useful things.) BlueMoonset (talk) 03:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 October 2012[edit]

Thanks for Anne Hutchinson comments[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, and thanks very much for the helpful comments on the sourcing and images for the subject article. I think I've answered the mail, except am trying to get some help with the Hutchinson statue image. I greatly appreciate your detailed comments.Sarnold17 (talk) 00:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

Hi Nikki, quick request. I'm not around much these days - or hoped not to be around much. If ILT sees this situation (sigh!), and leaves abusive messages on my page, will you please protect. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 20:20, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks x 2. Hopefully there won't be any fallout. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Georges Grisez[edit]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi From Clemson[edit]

Hello Ms. Maria. My name is Brodie Davila and I am currently working on two pages. I am editing the page for Suwanee, Georgia, as well as creating a new page for the 2004 State of The Union Address. I was hoping you could give me any feedback or ideas for things to include in my pages. I'm nowhere near done, but I would really appreciate any feedback. Thank you so much! My page is: User:Btdavila/sandbox Btdavila (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, My name is Mimieux Land. I am currently working on an assignment for my Eng course. I would really appreciate you advice and feedback on my contributions so far. Thank you. User:Mxland/sandbox

Hi there, I'm Jake Collins and I am working on an article for James U. Jackson. I would appreciate any advice or feedback on what I have written so far. Thanks! User:Jake29841/sandbox

Jake29841 (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ms.Maria I am Alex Watson and I am working on creating and article on forensic limnology. I would appreciate any feedback or help you are willing to offer. Thanks! AWATSO6 (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ms. Maria, my name is Brad Tedstone and I am editing the Harbour Town Golf Links Wikipedia page for my English class. If you have any advise or help that would be awesome. Thanks BTedstone (talk) 21:17, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ms. Maria my name is Frank Marrero and I am working with (Groom's Cake) paage. The link to my sadbox is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fmarrero/sandbox and can you help with any feedback. ThanksFrank Marrero (talk) 14:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my name is Andre Bourg. I am editing a page entitled, "Night Markets in Taiwan." I would really appreciate any help. Here is a link to my sandbox, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Andrebourg/sandbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrebourg (talk • contribs) 14:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ms. Maria, my name is Vicky Schwehr and I am recreating the Leonidas (chocolate maker) page. The link to my sandbox is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vickyleighgirl/sandbox and I would really appreciate any feedback you have. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickyleighgirl (talk • contribs) 14:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


HI NIki, Meet my newest group of students at Clemson. Pfancher (talk) 13:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my name is Andrea Cooper and I am a student at Clemson University. My english class is doing a project on Wikipedia creating or editing an article. I found that the page on the hawk needed some work so i choose that one. I still have a good bit of work to do but if you had any suggestions on my sandbox i would love to hear them. Thank You My name is John Schappler and the article I am doing in on Irasburg Vermont. Any feedback that you have would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Her is the link to my project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Johnnyschapps/sandbox Johnnyschapps (talk) 12:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Hi there Ms. Maria, I'm working on an article for my ENG101 class on a film. I was wondering if you would be able to review my to-date work in my sandbox? Thank you for your time! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Traddalonious/sandbox Traddalonious (talk) 12:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nikkimaria! I'm Mary Kate (a freshman at Clemson University) and I wanted to thank you so much for helping us out on our assignment. My topic is Desserts and its been a little difficult since its such a broad topic so any help or suggestions you have would be awesome. Here's my sandbox and what I've been working on lately. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mkt324/sandbox (talk) 12:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkt324 (talk • contribs)

Hi my name is Christy Czarnecki and I am working on the article for Hacklebarney State Park. Here is the link to my sandbox user:christyczar/sandbox if you have any suggestions please let me know! Thank you.Christyczar (talk) 12:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Nikkimaria, my name is Parker Jones and I am in Professor Fancher's english class working with wikipedia. I am working on the article for the Mars Exploration Program. Here is the link to my sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pacojo29/sandbox; please let me know if you have any suggestions or feedback, any help is appreciated. Pacojo29 (talk) 12:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nikkimaria! I'm Mary Kate (a freshman at Clemson University) and I wanted to thank you so much for helping us out on our assignment. My topic is Desserts and its been a little difficult since its such a broad topic so any help or suggestions you have would be awesome. Here's my sandbox and what I've been working on lately. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mkt324/sandbox (talk) 12:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I'm Corey Stoner and I am a student at Clemson University. My class is currently working on a wikipedia article, and mine is about a comic book group, Mandarin's Avengers. Do you have any suggestions or ideas. User:Clevebluff2012/sandboxClevebluff2012 (talk) 13:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikki, my name is Zee Sneed. I'm editing the article on the comedian Kevin Hart. If you have any advice for what to add or how to word my writing or anything at all, it would be very appreciated! Msneed19 (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my name is Reece Wilber and I'm working on the Environmental Law article. If you have any advice or suggestions it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Reecelw/sandbox

Hey, my name is Will Clevidence and here's my sandbox to my Chia Seed article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wclevid/sandbox Any advice, critique, etc. would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!Wclevid (talk) 14:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my name is Thomas Rapp and I chose to work on articles concerning the Summer of Love and the Second Summer of Love. Any advice or suggestions would be awesome. Thanks so much! Tsrapp (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikkimaria, my name is Sarah Jean Hinson and I'm a freshman at Clemson University. My class is currently doing a project on working within wikipedia. Thank you so much for your time and effort. I have chosen to work on the article for Johns Island, South Carolina. Here is the link to my sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sjhinso/sandbox; any feedback or suggestions are greatly appreciated. Thanks! Sjhinso (talk) 14:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To all: Welcome to Wikipedia! I'll do my best to respond to each of you individually over the next little while, so make sure to watch your talk page. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 15:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my name is Ian Finley. I am currently working on an article on Custom Robo in my sandbox. Do you have any advice for using sources in foreign languages? My topic is about a Japanese game that was not released in America, so there are very few sources in English. I really appreciate all the hard work you do to help us, and I hope to hear from you soon! Kaitoyuuki (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my name is Andrea Cooper and I am a student at Clemson University. My english class is doing a project on Wikipedia creating or editing an article. I found that the page on the hawk needed some work so i choose that one. I still have a good bit of work to do but if you had any suggestions on my sandbox i would love to hear them. Thank You Andi7855 Andi7855 (talk) 17:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NikkiMaria, my name is Julia Simpson and I am working on the article Fauna of Belize for a class assignment. I was wondering if you had any suggestions or comments for my work. The link to my sandbox. User:Jsimps8174/sandbox Jsimps8174 (talk) 18:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my name is Cody Key and I am working on a class project at Clemson University. I am working on the article for my former high school, Goose Creek High School. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. The link to my sandbox is User:Ckey11/sandbox. Thanks.Ckey11 (talk) 20:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jason Moustafa and Ive started a page for Matt Chandler in my sandbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ClemsonScholar4/sandbox any feedback and advice is much appreciated. Thank you, ClemsonScholar4 (talk) 21:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ms. Maria my name is Ethan McAlhaney and I have just created the page for the SweetWater Brewing Company if you have any advice I would appreciate it. Mcbadphish (talk) 21:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! My name is Cole Swartwood and I'm a freshman at Clemson University. In my english class we are doing a project with Wikipedia where we have to edit and add material to a page. I chose to work on the page Sports in Venezuela and here is the link to my sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cworld7/sandbox, your advice or any suggestions you have would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for all that you do with Wikipedia! Cworld7 (talk) 23:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my name is Trevor Hanna. I am currently working on a project for an English course at Clemson University that requires a change to a wikipedia page. Can you please look in my sandbox and see if there is anything that I can improve on. Thank you for your time. User:Tqhtherock17/sandbox Tqhtherock17 (talk) 00:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello NikkiMaria, my name is Nicole Bronola and I am working on a project for my English 103 class. I am writing about Lee III Hall at Clemson University. Your advice would be greatly appreciated! This is a link to my sanbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nicobro1/sandbox Thank You! User:Nicobro1/sandbox

Hello! My name is Shannon Fischer, and I am working on the Cahaba River Page. I would appreciate any advice you have! Thank you so much! Stfisch (talk) 17:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, My name is David Bell. I am working on the article for "Carbon neutral fuel" for my project for English. I would appreciate any advice, Thank you. User:Davidbell1383 — Preceding unsigned comment added by David1383 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Hi! My name is Nicole Chimenti. For my English 103 class I am writing the article about cross country running shoes. I haven't posted a lot of my information yet, but I would be so grateful if you could give me some advice on my article! Thank you so much for your time and help. Nchimen (talk) 19:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Sean McDowell and, yes, I am also from Clemson University. I am currently working on the American cockroach page. I would also appreciate any advice that you are able to give, mostly about what I could add because I am currently drawing a blank. Thank you for all the help that you are giving us! Clemsontiger8 (talk) 00:18, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! My name is Bennett Love and I am a student from Clemson University. At the moment, I am working on the mixed-sex education page. Currently, I am somewhat struggling as far as where I should look to get information for this article. Also, I would love it if you could tell me how to cite my data on Wikipedia. Any other advice you could give me would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for all the help! User:ttenneb42 / User:ttenneb42/sandbox —Preceding undated comment added 21:04, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Truman FAC[edit]

Harry S. Truman is at FAC now. If you'd look that over it'd be appreciated. PumpkinSky talk 12:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I have a question[edit]

Hi Im one of the students you are an ambassador to and I was wandering if you could explain how to make charts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amleplat (talk • contribs) 03:44, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Olongapo[edit]

Nikkimaria, this nomination has been moribund for three and a half weeks. Can some final action be taken on it? The basic positions seem to be laid out: the question is the proper characterization of the event, and whether it should be a separate article or merged somewhere. Thanks for whatever you can do to get this settled; if you need to bring in some of your MILHIST colleagues, please do so. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:14, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for input from MILHIST, mostly because I'm not sure what to do with it and don't have time to do background research atm. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking for the new input. I was wondering whether you would have time: it looked like you might be overwhelmed with Clemson activities at the moment. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:26, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Was FutureTrillionaire the MILHIST colleague? I really think we need someone to comment on whether this is an actual battle and a legitimate title for the article (and if not, what it should be called, if anything), and the comment made, while a valid point, does not address the basic issue here. It doesn't make sense to go back to Arius1998 and talk about a hook being uninteresting if the article itself has a fundamental problem that's going to keep it from ever qualifying as a DYK—because the "battle" wasn't and/or didn't last for six days and/or isn't sufficiently notable for inclusion in a standalone article. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't know them, and my post doesn't appear to have attracted any response. I completely agree that we need someone to comment on this, but I'm kind of at a loss as to who that might be - it's not a conflict I know much about, and offhand I can't think of someone who might know. Sorry I can't be more helpful here...Nikkimaria (talk) 20:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up re The Story of Miss Moppet[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, I've nomed for FAR [2]. I don't think discussion is required; should be a straight delisting. But not sure you guys have ever had anything like this. Maybe the FAR page is a good place to document the history of the article. Don't quite know how something like this is done, but giving you a heads up. Truthkeeper (talk) 00:13, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TK - Even when we've had articles with significant copyvio in the past, we've left them up for the full time...don't know if we want to do that this time or if a straight delisting is the best option. I would suggest documenting the full history on the FAR page, just for anyone who stumbles across it without knowing the history. I know I've seen bits and pieces here and there, but I'm not sure if even I know the entire history, much less some newbie who stumbles across it and goes "wait, it's a great article...what do you mean it can never be TFA". Is there any discussion ongoing with MRG, etc. to see if it's possible to scrub the whole history, since the current version is clean? Dana boomer (talk) 00:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
She's left it me. Ruhrfisch rev-deleted the history, but Iridescent thought it might still be problematic. I don't know the technical aspects, but if it's an issue of keeping if from the front page, this is the only option I can think of, besides copy/pasting the text, having the page deleted and pasting in text. I do think having it go the full time is fine; maybe people will decide not to delist it. We'll see. As I'm typing realize that some of this should go the FAR page. Thanks for the response. Truthkeeper (talk) 00:33, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Truthkeeper, I recall this when it happened. I can oversight all the revdels - that way all the copyvio edits will disappear completely from the history - only the handful of oversighters can see them. At that point it can safely go even on the main page I would have said. Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think because it was questioned: [3], [4], [5], [6], the community should be allowed to respond. Posting your suggestion there would be helpful. Thanks. I'll also alert MathewTownsend and cross post these diffs. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have posted there as well. Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So I see. Thanks. I'm lagging a bit. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Elen, as per my earlier comments on this I completely disagree that oversight is a solution. If Suzanne's edits are oversighted, the content will remain but will instead be attributed to whoever happened to touch the article after her. Thus, for instance, revdeleting this sequence of edits will still keep the copyvio in the history, but instead attribute uploading huge quantities of problematic to User:Parrot of Doom. The only thing which would fix the copyvio issue would be to revdelete every edit which contained any of the problematic content, which would destroy the article history and effectively mean deletion-and-recreation. As I said to Maggie, this is a situation where the legal requirements to "have no copyvios visible in the history" and "have all edits to the existing article attributed" are mutually exclusive, since some of the material in the current article was added to versions which still complain some of the copyvio content. As there's no solution that doesn't lead to both legal requirements and the terms of use being broken – and the WMF don't want to make the call as to whether to preserve the copyvios in the interests of attribution, or to destroy the attribution in the interests of deleting the copyvios, this either needs an Arbcom motion or a strong community consensus as to which way to go. Miss Moppet is only a test case because it happens to be the one to come to notice – there are many, many articles that would be affected if copyvios-in-the-history was enforced at policy says it should. – iridescent 18:21, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FAR President Obama[edit]

I have a disclaimer to state. I am not an American and do not live in the United States. This makes me, along with my personal desire to be objective, totally neutral. I am not a Democrat or Republican. If forced to state, the political parties of my country lean closer to the Democratic Party, even the more consrvative parties.

The FAR process is supposed to (according to the instructions) take 2-3 weeks. Nearly 3 months have passed so this process has exceeded the time frame by about 4-5 times. One positive thing is that everyone has been civil.

The FAR instructions say that if there is no consensus, the process should proceed to the 3rd step. There is a fairly good consensus to proceed to the third step although some don't want that to happen for around 3 weeks because they are afraid of inciviity during the election. Note, however, that the FAR discussion has been very civil, much more civil that even the talk page.

Raul 654 has not edited since August.

Please declare the Barack Obama FAR to go to the 3rd and next step. It's my hope that we can really start to discussion on some key improvements so that the article will keep its FA status. The current FA status is based on a version several years old. Furthermore, there has been so much added on that it is no longer a comprehensive biography but rather a choppy and incomplete mix of stuff. Thank you.

Wawaxi (talk) 01:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Give peace a chance[edit]

One chance soon, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FAR of Microsoft Security Essentials[edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria

As a party involved in the 2nd WP:FAC of Microsoft Security Essentials, you might be willing to participate in Wikipedia:Featured article review/Microsoft Security Essentials/archive1.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reply to your comment on SilkTork's page[edit]

  • SilkTork asked that we not continue there. So, to answer:[7] You say that I've been in conflict with a few dozen people? Really? Please clarify. I had trouble with User:Lhb1239 when I first started, but he turned out to be a sockpuppet. I had trouble with User:Cindamuse when I failed Talk:Douglas W. Owsley/GA1 but then you came along immediately after and failed it also Talk:Douglas W. Owsley/GA2. User:WLU did file a DR over Dissociative identity disorder but the opposing party didn't bother to refute it and the DR was resolved in favor of WLU and me (that WP:MEDRS was to be used as the standard for citations). Since then, I've just had trouble with you and Malleus. There was confusion very recently because I didn't understand the issues around my nomination of the FA Miss Moppet for TFA and since clarifications were conducted by email they didn't enlighten me. So for a while I was badly confused and didn't understand what was going on. User:Truthkeeper88 just thanked me for bringing up Miss Moppet and said "I realize you think you've been badly treated" and asked me to help out at the FAR and in rewriting the article. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • To clarify: not that particular article Mathew, but the others. That one has been scrubbed. Also, I did ask to drop the acrimony. Please. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I was replying to something Nikkimaria said on SilkTork's page that needed a clarification. SilkTork asked that the conversation be continued elsewhere, so I clarified here. I'm perfectly willing to drop it if Nikkimaria will. Also I apologize that I didn't understand what article you meant in your message to me. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given your desire to drop it, do you still want an answer, MT? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I'm just happy that Truthkeeper88 is standing up for me. That's good enough for me. MathewTownsend (talk) 02:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay. It's good to hear that she is willing to work with you. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Grootegeluk Coal Mine, Waterberg Coalfield[edit]

Nikkimaria, I was hoping you could, sometime in the next few hours, take a quick look at the three articles in this nomination for close paraphrasing before this is promoted to the main page in a little over five hours.

Normally, I wouldn't ask, but a hook by the same author was just pulled from the main page: the nomination template was Template:Did you know nominations/Muhlenbergia pungens, and the article was hit with a copyvio complaint, though Crisco 1492 disagrees with it, as it appears that what was involved was a bit of close paraphrasing that slipped through.

If you're feeling ambitious, Template:Did you know nominations/Giovan Giacomo Paleari Fratino by the same author has just been approved after an initial review that questioned some close paraphrasing in one source. I'm not left with a warm fuzzy feeling when I see an approval with the words "I guess", even with the Duplication Detector report provided, which made me reluctant to promote it even with the impressive photo image. I'm not sure others will be as hesitant, which is why a trustworthy vetting would be nice. Thanks for anything you can do, especially with the already queued nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done the first. I'll take a closer look at the second in the morning, but on a quick glance this source seems a bit close. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for taking on the imminent one; I'm glad to know one way or the other, even if it isn't good news. Thanks also for moving up a new hook in its place; I've filled in the gap that left in the prep area you got it from, so anyone wanting to promote that prep area to a queue overnight can do so.
I'm glad you're going to look at the Fratino one soon. I've checked the nominations page, but the only other ones by the same author are a bunch in the Gilbraltar holding area, but most don't even have their first review, and I know you prefer to wait until after promotion before doing paraphrase checking. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking at them both. Your comments have both received responses. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aymatth2 says a careful comb-through has been done for the three articles in the Grootegeluk Coal Mine nom. Any chance you can recheck? (I could understand why you would not want to.) BlueMoonset (talk) 00:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Was wondering whether you'd seen this. If you're not interested in revisiting, under the circumstances, please let me know and I'll try to find someone else. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:05, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, missed the earlier message. I'll try to take a look later today. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks you very much. For older sections like this, would it be easier for you if I started up a new section at the bottom, or do you prefer it here with the context from the earlier thread? BlueMoonset (talk) 05:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For the few that are more than a couple weeks old, probably a new section would be better - usually if it's only a few sections up I'll spot it, but this one's further. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:21, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Nikkimaria...in your edit at Jclemens, you didn't see that one editor came forward and said that the first email was theirs...also, I would like to see the barnstar I awarded Jclemens restored if you don't mind please.--MONGO 03:11, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well...its mostly been taken care of already. Best wishes.--MONGO 03:30, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's very odd - I wasn't trying to remove so much with that edit. Looks like it isn't the first time that's happened on that page either, wonder what's going on? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:18, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know tech stuff, least not since I worked on convincing the developers the feasibility and need for semi-protection implementation. Anyway, you are correct that without attribution he can't post emails, though one editor came forward and admitted the first one was theirs...all he can do is summarize, but thats risky too.--MONGO 04:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 October 2012[edit]

Note[edit]

I don't disagree with your interpretation here [8] but changing text attributed to other editors isn't good. I'd appreciate it if you'd revert; if not, please let it go if someone else does. Nobody Ent 12:56, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Er, Signpost articles are frequently edited by people other than the credited authors (quick examples: here and here). I'm certainly not going to war over it if someone changes it back, but I don't think there's a need for me to revert. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is it, some sort of wiki? Okay, thanks. Seems odd to be editing attributed work, but if that's the WP way, that's the WP way. Nobody Ent 15:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Biodiversity of Wales[edit]

Nikkimaria, I'm actually writing this as I'm about to reject this particular article, because I think someone well versed in copyvio and close paraphrasing needs to decide whether Biodiversity of Wales is salvageable, or if something more serious needs to be done. The entire Evolution section has been commented out by Kevmin after Sasata identified copyvio problems that weren't addressed, and I've just taken a quick look at one other source, ref 9, a copyrighted page, with Duplication Detector and the number of identical long phrases that show up, even not counting the overly close paraphrasing to either side of some of them, leads me to believe that the issues are serious indeed. Thanks for whatever you can do with this one. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you posted a concerned comment to User talk:RexRowan, and thought you should know that Rex has just emptied his talk page and posted a banner saying he's retired from editing. He has one outstanding DYK, on his Darold Treffert article, which had already received an orange X and that I'm about to formally reject, and I'll leave it to you to handle the various articles left behind. Thanks for taking this on. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what's up with that - he responded quite positively to the initial comment, and then just disappeared. I've already dealt with the articles he himself created, but there are definitely copying-between-articles-without-attribution issues in some of his edits, and that's going to be a pain to sort out. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:48, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zoo[edit]

Hello ambassador Nikki! This is Megan from Eng 213 the digital literacies class. So you mentioned that the zoo needs some TLC - what exactly do you mean? Possibly on the zoo itself? Instead of the all of the animals do a review on the zoo itself?

Also, we will be expanding on the Indianapolis Zoo - this is our final choice for the project so any suggestions are much appreciated! (MeganTolley5 (talk) 14:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Trivia[edit]

Please read and undertand what tag says. Do you want me to copy it here for you? Please stop deleting immediately relevant information someone lazy mislabeled as "trivia". Staszek Lem (talk) 18:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have both read and understood the tag, thank you. It specifically says "relevant" information should be included, which would imply that irrelevant information should not be included. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain how information about a role of an actor can be irrelevant in the article about actor. I may understand that the piece "His name was mentioned in song LaLa" is irrelevant. But "He had a cameo appearance in film Juju" is perfectly relevant: it is part of his job. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because we don't need to list every single thing an actor appears in just because he's an actor; some appearances are more notable, and deserve more weight, than things like cameos or bit parts. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, disagreed. Wikipedia is not paper. Everything of direct relevance and referenced has its place in wikipedia. Precisely "just because he is actor" (i.e., it is one of his main characteristics), his work as an actor can be described in any level of detail. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:31, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a lot of things. If you'd like to try to incorporate these factoids into the article proper, you're welcome to do so. Until such time, I invite you to consider how your opening comment applies to your own actions. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I am doing following your destructive edits. Obviously we have different opinions on value of facts (which you prefere to call disparagingly "factoids"). Therefore please stop deleting content I am trying to improve without solid justification, i.e., other than your personal opinion of what's not and what is. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you're always such a model of good faith and politeness, Staszek. It's been lovely chatting with you - now down you go. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, colleague, your revert warring made me to reconsider the amount of my good faith towards you. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Given your starting point, I can't imagine that took too long. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moving things along[edit]

I responded some time ago to your comments on the DYK nominations for Template:Did you know nominations/Grootegeluk Coal Mine, Waterberg Coalfield and Template:Did you know nominations/Giovan Giacomo Paleari Fratino. Are you satisfied that these articles are ready for the front page? If not, can you specify the changes that would be needed to satisfy you? If there are any problems you are confident you can fix yourself, please go ahead. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 01:25, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Aymatth2, I'll take a look at this tomorrow. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant canvassing[edit]

Welcome your thoughts here Wikipedia_talk:Emailing_users#email_privacy. (Not trying to stir anything else up here, just seems like our existing documented policy is really vague and it would be good if folks knew what the rules were.) Nobody Ent 02:04, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"In popular culture" sections[edit]

If you shorten a section that contains trivial, minor or unrelated references in popular culture, you end up with a shorter section that contains trivial, minor or unrelated references in popular culture. In such instances the section should still be tagged as an "in popular culture" section. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:05, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Summer! If you look about three sections up from here, you'll see commentary from someone named Staszek. Staszek, meet Summer; Summer, Staszek. I'll leave you two to fight over exactly how much "facts" or "relevant" information (per Staszek) or "trivial, minor or unrelated references" (per Summer) should be included on Wikipedia. Once you've concluded your cage fight/arm wrestle/televised debate/DR method of your choice, the winner should come back and notify me. In the meantime, absent any consensus on the matter. I'm going to continue dealing with material of this type in the manner I believe to be most beneficial to the encyclopedia. Kthnxbai. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • 👍 Like — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:38, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, source 'em, prosify 'em, and I'm happy. --Lexein (talk) 03:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nikkimaria in their varrior attitude fails to notice that I don't have contadiction with any other people mentioned here. I am dointg exctly what Lexein adviced (prosify, source (and, additionally, tag if I cannot source right away)), as you may see in my most recent edit history. What I am absolutely against is blanket deletion of "trivia" sections. Nikkimaria seems to love removing my comments from their talk page. Otherwise you would have seen my quite respectful text acknowledging their hard work and noticing that only three of big number of their deletions I disagreed with. Instead, the colleague prefers to leave only my remarks which make me appear as bully. Well, I cannot change their attitude. But I will continue to oppose baseless, mechanical deletion of valid, relevant, and sourced information. And since Nikkimaria seems is not willing to give an inch in their editing style, I will review all their deletions in articles on topics I minimally care about. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello again, Staszek! I don't quite see how you think I failed to take into account Lexein's comment when making my statement, seeing as my comment was before his - unfortunately, my crystal ball is broken. Second, I reserve the right (as all are allowed, per WP:TPG) to remove any and all comments from my talk page I please - if you'd like to avoid that fate, you could follow some general principles of politeness, like getting your facts straight, avoiding making bad-faith statements, and actually talking to me like I'm a human being rather than ranting about me in the third person as you did above. Finally, you're free to review any of my edits as you see fit, but you really oughtn't be making broad reverts as you did here, for example (if you think the tag is wrong, remove the tag, don't just re-add the whole thing!), you should observe appropriate policies, and you should keep in mind that you've no more license to war than I do. I'm going to go revert this now, see you soon. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't see why you are talking about crystal balls. Instead, I do see that you don't see that I am editing in a correct way regardles and not not expecting Lexein teach me how to do it properly. If I don't have my facts straight, sue me. YOu are an admin you know the ropes. I have no objection to your deletion of anything from your page; I am just taking a note how selectively you are doing this and drawing conclusions about your attitude towards opponents: it seems you have no desire to meet on a middle ground. I am "ranting" in third person because you are ranting about me in third person, so I learn from admins. I will do broad reverts as long as your deletions present no valid reasons which can be discussed. As for kettles, who is an admin here to demonstrate a proper way of carring out discussions in article talk pages? Your massive deletion of valid information is not justified neither by wikipedia policies not by its spirit. I think I have to file a RFC to clear our fundamental disagreements towards knowledge, since you seem have no desire to go beyond alphabet soups , cryptic edit summaries and counterattacks. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:29, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You do what you need to do, Staszek. While you're at it, look up crystal ball and grammatical person, read the policies I've linked you to (which were a response to your complaint that I gave no reason for deletion), and calm yourself down. Policies apply to all editors, not just admins, and you don't seem able to see things clearly and discuss rationally when so upset. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am doing what I have to do, i.e., preserving information in wikipedia. You you are deleting it on purely formal grounds, which I see very clearly, and I have no reason to be upset, because your deeds are easily undone. I cannot discuss rationally your deletions when you don't give specific reasons. A footlong alphabet soup is next to impossible to discuss, and you fail to see it clearly despite my multiple requests to give specific reasons, co that I could rationally agree or disagree. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What about this? In popular culture sections are almost invariably crap magnets written by those who have no idea of how to write. Most importantly, and think about this Staszek Lem, they're almost always pointing the wrong way. To give you just one contemporary example, it tells me nothing about Guy Fawkes to know that a character in V for Vendetta wore a mask that looked nothing like Guy Fawkes, but that would be an interesting addition to the article about the film. Malleus Fatuorum 00:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least you got one point. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:33, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An interesting blind spot. It seems very obvious to me that trivia is often only trivia because it's pointing in the wrong direction. In other words, an article about a Morrissey song that refers to serial murderers ought to explain that reference, but not the other way around. Surely I can't be the only one sick to death of seeing crap like "Rapper B.o.B mentions the 'old lady who lived in a shoe' in his song titled 'Cold as Ice'" in article about a nursery rhyme. Malleus Fatuorum 05:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Malleus, you are barking on a wrong tree. I 100% agree with you. The issue of contention between me and Nikkimaria is that this person deletes sections "Trivia" and other information they don't like right on the spot, without bothering to move it elsewhere. I agree that Trivia and Popculture are crap magnets, but the crap attracted does not justify deletion of certain useful and relevant tidbits which were placed in this section out of ignorance or laziness, and which may be easily incorporated into the main text (NB: according to the policy). That's what I was doing several times in my spare time after catching a glimpse of a departing broomstick. Certainly text restructuring requires some thinking and source double-checking, and it is way more easier for a mop-wielding person just kill them all. Surprizinly often nobody cares; but IMO this is a general recent trend in wikipedia: attention polarization between "owned" and "wild" articles. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Staszek, there's a reply for you at the Zimmerman talk page. You can add that to your reading list (do feel free to start completing it anytime). Nikkimaria (talk) 03:55, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well thank, you. How nice of you. Doing it right away. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:17, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment[edit]

See Wikipedia talk:Close paraphrasing#Request for comment - clearer expression of principles. Your comment on one of the DYK articles I started got me thinking, and this is the result. I am genuinely interested in views on what should be done, if anything, not trying to push a particular point of view. Clarity is, to me, by far the most important goal. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Giovan Giacomo Paleari Fratino[edit]

Please review the tweak made here in response to your comment. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 11:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure you saw this, Nikkimaria. Has the problem been fixed? BlueMoonset (talk) 16:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Email[edit]

The issue has been discussed on the talk page. I have not seen you participate though [9]. You are also abusing a help page by giving advice that overrides the policy WP:POSTEMAIL and by removing the link to it. Tijfo098 (talk) 15:47, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't remove the link, I moved it further up - please check diffs carefully before making false accusations. Given that the policy says only "ArbCom says not to do this, others may disagree", I don't really see what your complaint is, but if you'd like to remove that point you should gain consensus to do so on talk - the discussion you link shows only you supporting that approach, and you've been reverted by two different editors. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Broom fighting with the Octoechos Monster[edit]

Dear Nikkimaria

Thank you very much for making the broom in the article Octoechos. I changed some of your brief titles, but in general I agree with most your edits and shortened some more titles. Only concerning your selection in the section "see also" I wondered what have been your preferences.

There are still some mistakes in the content to correct and when I have finished my work, I will let you know. I would like to ask you, which are the subsections or passages which sound absolutely cryptic for you. You will do a nice present for me, also because I am not a native speaker. Platonykiss (talk) 13:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your answer. Concerning the second part (Papadic Octoechos), you are quite right and I am working on it. Today I removed some very strange and incomprehensible periods (probably I pasted it in the wrong place by accident). In any case it is not easy stuff, and I would like that a native speaker interested in the topic could revise it. If it is fine for you, I will ask you, when it is finished. Platonykiss (talk) 17:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 October 2012[edit]

Request for Comment[edit]

Hey Nikkimaria, I was wondering if you had any time could you look at my sandbox where we have been working on our article on Scopophobia and just see if we're on the right track thus far?

Thanks!

(*Kameron.McBride (talk) 13:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Comment[edit]

I checked out the link, and I have no clue why it claims I changed someone's post. The link says a replaced every instance of @#!*% with @#!*%, but that doesn't seem like a change, and in any case I have no recollection at all of editing those posts. Maybe there's a bug somewhere in the website? ypnypn (talk) 03:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cat and mouse discussion[edit]

You may want to chime in at User talk:BlueMoonset#Stalled DYK nominations. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 23:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not hungry, sorry. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/The Making of a Teacher[edit]

Nikkimaria, can you take a look at this to see whether the amount of quoting from a single source is excessive? I removed a "selected quotations" section because that seemed to me to be black-and-white copyvio and likely inappropriate for an encylopedia article besides (if I'm wrong on both, just reverse me), but I was worried about the rest of it. If you could comment there, and restore the tick if the article is on the correct side of the fair use divide, I'd appreciate it. I should not that I have not done a close paraphrasing check myself; based on the review I wouldn't count on one having been done, so you may not want to apply a tick under that circumstance, which I would completely understand. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:40, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria, I didn't notice that Presearch had replied on this one, and has just now pinged me on the page. I'm still not in a position to check this myself, and was hoping you could give it another look. Thank you so much. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Nikkimaria, your response is needed at Template:Did you know nominations/The Making of a Teacher. Thank you! -- Presearch (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Project guidelines and infoboxes[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, would you show me the guidelines you are talking about regarding removing the infobox at Toni Castells? I am curious about them and I couldn't find anything anywhere that references not having an infobox. Thank you! heather walls (talk) 18:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Composers WikiProject guideline for the content issue, and WP:BRD for the behavioural issue. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I believe what Nikkimaria is referring to is this RfC, the consensus of which is that infoboxes on composer articles are generally discouraged, but that this recommendation does not overrule talk page consensus on any particular article. The general policy on infoboxes, both within WikiProject Composers and throughout Wikipedia, states: "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article. Whether to include an infobox, which infobox to include, and which parts of the infobox to use, is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." Hope that clarifies. Accedietalk to me 23:45, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) and it's more widespread than just composers. Hundreds of articles at GA or FA quality levels, in fields from literature to artworks to biography to opera, have chosen to not use an infobox. Many of our most prolific contributors of high-quality content, conclude on certain topics that an infobox is not warranted. —Quiddity (talk) 00:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Too bad this isn't being honored at Nick Drake, [10]. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Colonel Bogey March[edit]

Please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Thanks! - SummerPhD (talk) 05:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Percy[edit]

Thanks for that. TFAs really should be protected as a matter of course (in my opinion). Parrot of Doom 16:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ball State Project Finishing Stage[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. Our 213 groups are moving toward the finishing stages of their project work this week. I'll ask them to contact you when they are ready to go on-wiki, but here is a glimpse of what's coming

  • Two groups are writing new articles (Zcpb's and Ashleynk's). Should they follow the "Moving out of your sandbox" handout to create the article? Or is there another procedure you think they should use?

  • There is probably an issue with the images in Zcpb's group's article on the midland mud salamander. They are from Google images. There are also images of the red salamander on Flickr, but all the ones I've seen say "rights reserved." Is there any possibility of using these images or finding suitable ones elsewhere? Any images in Ashleynk's article shouldn't be a problem as they will be owned by the students themselves.

—Webster Newbold (talk) 04:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Hello ambassador,

This is Megan from the Ball State University digital literacy class. We have decided to permanently work on the indianapolis zoo wiki site. We have decided to add citations and reorganize the page to be more aesthetically pleasing. We would like to add a table, instead of one long list. If you have any hints as to how to do this or know of any applicable resources. Please let us know!! Thank Also, what is the best way to go about reorganizing a web page on Wiki- the page has a lot of lists that take away from the main topic of the zoo? Let me know what you think and have a great day!


(MeganTolley5 (talk) 14:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]

NOTBROKEN[edit]

I wasn't aware of the policy/guideline on avoiding redirects, but I don't see why NOTBROKEN merits reverting them back either. I'm giving up on it anyway given that it's going to be a waste of my time to try to change all 500+ instances. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because, in addition to NOTBROKEN and the lack of consensus for large-scale changes of that type, you're also breaking things at many of the articles in question - particularly alphabetical lists which were de-alphabetized by those edits. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding WP:NOTBROKEN, you should practice what you preach (i.e., changing "Ivory Coast" to the French spelling). Strange coincidence that you are affiliated with U of Western Ontario, just as this blocked user is. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
More strange that you don't appear to have actually read WP:NOTBROKEN, and from the looks of things a few policy pages besides. To answer your not-so-subtle insinuation anyway: even if I were inclined to harass you via IP, I simply haven't had the time to spare. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:27, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll put it plainly. I noticed that an individual editing from U of Western Ontario was logging in from multiple IPs and making good edits mixed in with changing "Ivory Coast" to the French spelling. The Ivory Coast article has established a consensus for the English spelling in en.wikipedia. I made a series of edits in good faith to try to align en Wikipedia with the Ivory Coast consensus (i.e., using common English spelling versus French spelling); you reverted all of them based on WP:NOTBROKEN. Fair enough. I'm merely pointing out that you made almost exactly the kind of edit that the blocked IP made (lots of reasonable changes, mixed with a NOTBROKEN violation of changing Ivory Coast to the French spelling). Pray tell how I didn't read "NOTBROKEN." I'm not concerned with you harassing me via IP, especially given the attention given to the blocked IP from multiple admins.OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Simple: had you actually read NOTBROKEN, you would have realized that changing Ivory Coast to the French spelling isn't actually a violation of it, as the whole point of NOTBROKEN concerns changing redirects to direct links, not the other way around. I'd actually disagree with changing it either way in a systematic fashion, but only one falls under NOTBROKEN. The broader point you're making is an interesting one, because we don't actually demand encyclopedia-wide standardization in much of anything language-wise - Taiwan vs RoC, airplane vs aeroplane, you name it. I see how it could be argued that the CI -> IC move supports changing it in other articles, but on the other side, even the closer of that discussion has IIRC opined that the result does not support other wide-scale changes. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a convincing technicality (that changing a direct link to an indirect one doesn't violate policy a guidelines while the reverse does). What's the point of changing a direct link to an indirect one then unless you have an agenda? OhNoitsJamie Talk 10:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point. Making the change (really, any change) systematically across multiple articles without a consensus to do so is a poor idea - so it's a bit more than a technicality. Making a change as part of a broader edit to improve an article (that is, as part of normal editing) is more in line with our philosophies, and objections can be resolved by consensus at the article in question (as they would be with other issues of style or content). Nikkimaria (talk) 13:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the point about systematic changes, which I why I stopped changing links to articles that had not been changed by the IP from U of Western Ontario. I see your not interested in answering my question, so I'll drop it. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article nomination of Blockhaus d'Éperlecques[edit]

You kindly commented on my successful FAC nomination at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/La Coupole/archive1 back in September. I've now nominated the second of the three articles in this series, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Blockhaus d'Éperlecques/archive1. I'd be grateful for any comments you could provide in the review. Prioryman (talk) 23:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 November 2012[edit]

Move/Merge?[edit]

Hey Nikkimaria. I may have let Prof Newbold's students get into a bit of a quandary. They've begun to draft a new article on The Dark Side of Chocolate (not theirs), a doc about choc. Here's their draft page: User:Kjrichardso2/sandbox. I failed to notice there was already an extant article. What do think is the best course - ask each student to place their own contribs into the existing article, or do some sort of page merge? (I have no experience with those, do you?) The Interior (Talk) 20:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't they just use the procedure outlined at WP:MERGETEXT? I could probably manage a histmerge if we needed one, but I'm not sure it's necessary in this case - am I missing something? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Languages of Armenia[edit]

A post there says your close paraphrasing concerns have been addressed on this nomination. Can you check to see if this is indeed the case? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scopophobia[edit]

Hello NikkiMaria!

We just finished editing our article on Scopophobia and are now live! We pasted in our information to the page and were wondering if you could look over it to see if there are any problems and/or any banners—like the stub ones—that may need to be removed.

Thanks so much for helping us with this page, you've been awesome!

Kameron.McBride (talk) 15:26, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, ambassador


This is Megan from the BSU digital literacy class (our group is working on the Indianapolis Zoo.) So we edited some of the content on the site however, last night I went to add tables to all of the links- to make it to where the website isn't just one continuous list. This morning someone else decided to undue the little that I had done and include drop tables. The question to you is- should I leave the drop down bar or should I edit it to where all of the text is showing. If I should edit it, how would I go about deleting this drop bar edit, without deleting my fellow teammates work on the site?

(MeganTolley5 (talk) 18:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Highbeam[edit]

Hi Nikki, if you get a chance, can you see if I'm being too harsh here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Debora Green/archive2, and article I've already supported. Thanks. Ceoil (talk) 05:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tks. Ceoil (talk) 14:43, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen H. Wendover[edit]

Hi. You have now hit 3 reverts of the infobox in less than 24 hours over at Stephen H. Wendover. If you are against inclusion of the infobox can you please engage in discussion at the talk page? I have no opinion on the issue myself but the weight of the discussion currently seems to be against your actions. Road Wizard (talk) 03:03, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would, but that discussion is being inappropriately framed, and I have my doubts that it will amount to anything productive - RAN seems determined to impose the box despite the objections of the article's author. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are no authors or article-owners, we are all collaborative editors. The person who puts down the first edit is not the author, and their editorial opinion carries no more weight than any other editor. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:00, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to mention your objections on the talk page. At the moment you look a little isolated, especially when your edit summary refers to a discussion that is against your actions. If you are not happy with the way the discussion is being conducted there is always the option of ignoring the straw poll and starting an RfC instead. Road Wizard (talk) 03:24, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

XIII[edit]

Hello,

please take a look. I did some small changes. It would be nice if you list the issues. The article is not very large. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 12:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 November 2012[edit]

Hi[edit]

Hey Nikki. I know you participated in the previous The Emancipation of Mimi FAC, and would love it if you could do a review for it. I'm struggling to find good reviews. I remember you were always nitpicking with sources so I've made sure to keep em perfect :) Let me know what's up!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 08:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit busy IRL at the moment, but remind me in a few days and I'll try to review. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing! I'll ping you again later on in the week. Thanks!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey again Nikki. Thanks for the ref reviews. I was wondering, do your typical reviews ever go into more detail? Anyways, what you have done is appreciated!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 05:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes, but usually when it's a subject I know more about - I wouldn't generally support only on sources or media, and can't easily speak to content on an article like this. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Thanks anyway though :) PS, I addressed your concerns :P--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 05:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New script[edit]

Hi, I am in the late stage of developing a sources script, and was wondering if you would be interested in being one of my testers. I've written up most of the documentation and built up most of the script functionality. There are some minor missing features. I have already created and stocked three extensive in-built libraries/vocabularies (1,2,3) which I will continue extending. There's still work to be done to rationalise linkages and optimise the precision in dab situations. I'd value your input regarding any aspect, whether the documentation, objectives, structure or the library itself, and of course how it works. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 09:03, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno much about scripts, but I'll give it a shot. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages[edit]

Thank you for your recent articles, including Henri Akoka. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:25, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

I don't want to revert you on your article, but please consider that keeping refs inline makes the article more scary for new editors, and even for old hands like me, it makes it more of a chore to edit. Reducing the ref presence in the main text makes the article one step closer to WYSIWYG level, makes it easier to work on multiple references, and there is nothing we lose. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there is something we lose, although it's not as obvious on short articles like this one: it increases page size and consequently load time for all editors, and once the page is larger will tend to make it more difficult to edit because you need to be working with multiple sections at once. That's why imposing that ref style on larger pages, particularly without discussion, is a bad idea. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am rather aggregated at your reverts. Feel free to start an RfC about that if you feel so strongly, but please do not revert me en masse. My reverts are in line with our policies, and a number of articles use this style. I have considered the increased file size, and I believe this is much less of an issue than having the edit text look more friendly; editors can edit individual sections and the load length will be not affected; in fact my +10% or so size increase does not significantly change the already bad load time for most large articles - it just makes editing their sections more friendly. Please revert your reverts of myself, and then ask the community for input. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless there's been a massive policy change recently - because that ref style was not, last I checked, mandated by policy, but not changing established citation style without discussion certainly is. You are of the opinion that that style is easier to use; feel free to use it on articles you create. Others have differing opinions, so don't impose it without discussing first. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If anybody has strong objections, they can revert me and raise the issue on talk. Mass reverting is NOT friendly. WP:LDR are perfectly acceptable, and recommended by Wikipedia:CITE#Avoiding_clutter: "Inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can be extremely difficult and confusing. There are three methods that avoid clutter in the edit window: list-defined references ...". You are confusing the use of style (ex. harvard or not), which is more of an issue of personal preference, with a technical edit that does not go against any of our policies, and as I noted above, is actually recommended. Unless you can cite a policy that states that list-defined references are discouraged, I am afraid it is your mass revert of my edits that is more disruptive than not (and certainly, in my view, discourteus; you could've asked me first, but you just mass reverted me without even bothering to leave me a talk message, let me state that I feel somewhat offended at your actions). I once again ask you to revert yourself, and if you want to ask a community for the input, I suggest a RfC (probably at talk of WP:CITE?). PS. One final thing: WP:CITEVAR which you alluded to and I'll link here specifically focuses about the styles, not technicalities; it also notes that it is generally helpful and recommended to standardize different styles, and at least some of the articles I fixed were already using a partial list-defined style; thus your revert of me also goes against that part of WP:CITE, and reintroduces chaos (multiple technical ref formatting) in place of the one standardized system I implemented. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Piotrus, Nikki is absolutely right here. Changing the referencing style in an established article without prior discussion has been deemed disruptive by community consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, Nikki is correct - list defined isn't "recommended" - I note the rest of the sentence from WP:CITE that you didn't quote - "There are three methods that avoid clutter in the edit window: list-defined references, short citations or parenthetical references. (As with other citation formats, articles should not undergo large scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so.)". You need to gain consensus FIRST. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:57, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mass changing is also "NOT friendly". I'm aware that LDR is acceptable, but many cite systems are, per WP:CITE; none are, to my knowledge, required. Read a little further in the section you cited: "As with other citation formats, articles should not undergo large scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so". If you'll review previous discussions at WT:CITE, you'll find that technical systems of citation are also held to constitute styles. I repeat: you do not have community consensus for making mass changes like this, and until you do, I have no intention of restoring your edits. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:59, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would definitely agree with Nikkimaria - switching from inline to list is against the "first editor style" approach at MOS. You may think the changes are fine, but these are the types of things that lead to edit wars. If you feel a page needs to have list style refs, get consensus on the talk page for it. --MASEM (t) 04:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All right. Since you seem to be all in consensus here, and I did miss the parenthesis part in CITE, I'll go and ask for consensus on the talk pages; with the exception of three articles which already had partial LDR and where my edits simply standardized the existing system to one of two prexisting choices, which as I noted before is clearly recommended even by CITEVAR. I still consider the mass revert of my edits without any message on my talk to be offensive, but let's chalk this up to my weird habit of hoping other editors will actually be courteous. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
User:Piotrus has a program that he is using to make major footnote format changes to major articles on which he has never before worked. He dos this in violation of the requirement that a consensus be reached. I thinks this calls for ANI action. Rjensen (talk) 06:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you'd like to do that, go ahead - I'd prefer to wait to see what happens going forward. Although the large-scale changes without discussion were rather discourteous, if he's willing to discuss first and respect consensus now that would be preferable to seeking sanctions IMO. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ever notice how ...[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. I just went through your talk page and like the classy way you navigate arguments. I thought hey why not drop in and say hi. Oh and by the way, ever notice how some users have redundant userboxes? Like for example Am New Zealander, Speaks New Zealand English, Lives in New Zealand, Lives in South Island, Lives in the eastern part of South Island, Lives in Christchurch. Or Am American, Speaks American English, Lives in the States, Lives in the Mid West, Lives in Indiana, Live in Indianapolis. SlightSmile 02:02, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Slightsmile, can't say I've noticed it much, and I'm thinking I probably have a few of those redundant boxes myself! Nikkimaria (talk) 04:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well maybe just a few. I'm always going into userpages to see what neat things I'll find and I see that kind of redundance all the time. I've noticed you a while and it's good to finaly meet you. Did I mention I got the best userpage in the world? SlightSmile 01:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some pretty paintings there. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Henri Akoka[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:22, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Image issues on Shunzhi Emperor all addressed[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. I think I've addressed all the issues you raised in your image review of Shunzhi Emperor. There were two pending issues: a dead source link for a flag image and missing sources for this map. I deleted the flag from the infobox (because that flag was only created around 1890), and I asked the map's creator to provide sources, which he has. You're welcome to look at his sources and to let me know if the map is now acceptable. The FAC review page is here. Thank you! Cheers, Madalibi (talk) 01:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Madalibi (talk) 05:35, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Microsoft Security Essentials". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!

Guide for participants

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:
  • It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.
What this noticeboard is not:
  • It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
  • It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
  • It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
  • It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.
Things to remember:
  • Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
  • Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
  • Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~".
  • If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.
EarwigBot operator / talk 19:47, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 November 2012[edit]

DYK for Vito Pascucci[edit]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Philadelphia Phillies all-time roster[edit]

Since the 17 articles in this category really constitute one long list broken down into convenient alphabetical chunks, and I've performed my ref cleanup on two of them without any objection, can we save ourselves unnecessary conflict by agreeing that the remaining 15 don't individually need prior permission? Colonies Chris (talk) 15:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are politeness and policy really such onerous requirements? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi Nikki, I just wanted to thank you for your help on getting Debora Green through FAC. I can only wish I had the eagle-like typo-spotting eyes you're graced with! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 17:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A question[edit]

Concerning the question of parents in Talk:Stephen H. Wendover, it seems you (and likely Carrite, per your suggestion) favor the removal from the infobox, and I have spoken up against. Would it be acceptable to you if I were to ask Bbb23 and Kraxler for their opinion on the matter? It seems likely they will not be in support of my position, but it would look better for a consensus with more than three of us discussing the idea. (I don't know that either would chime in, but it seems worth a shot since both have posted to the page before). --Nouniquenames 05:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you like. Since you didn't say so specifically in that discussion: what is your position on the "resting place"? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've posted to the talk pages of both users.
The resting place poses an interesting point in my mind. I'm less comfortable with the tombstone given what I pointed out in reaction to Kraxler. I still like it better than no picture (at least for now), but it's not so much a reliable source. Of the reliable sources I've checked, only the city and state have turned up, nothing so specific as we have currently in the info box. If the information stays, it should (in my opinion) be cut back to what can be reliably sourced. That would be my preference, but I wouldn't fight removal of the contents of the resting place field entirely from the info box. If no one else comments concerning that portion, I'm fine with whichever you choose. --Nouniquenames 06:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ping2: Template:Did you know nominations/The Making of a Teacher[edit]

Dear Nikkimaria, please permit me to ping you again (it was done before on 22 Nov): your response is needed at Template:Did you know nominations/The Making of a Teacher. Thank you! -- Presearch (talk) 06:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Be well -- Presearch (talk) 00:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GEL course page is missing content[edit]

Hi Nikki

I hope the term is winding down peacefully for you.

I've discovered that our Course Page in the GEL is now missing all of the students' entries for their "5 Edits" exercise.

I can't decipher what has happened and hope that you can have a look.

Thanks

TomHaffie (talk) 12:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tom - looks like it was removed in this edit by an IP who I'm assuming is one of your students logged out. Now fixed. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 November 2012[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for November 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexandru Hrisanide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romanian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:18, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal[edit]

Please remove this external link Call of Duty wiki thanks. FPSFAN321 (talk) 11:37, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nikkimaria/Archive_17&oldid=1140207491"