User talk:Nikkimaria/Archive 28

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

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your review at Oxford College of Emory University[edit]

Thank you for your review of my featured article candidacy here. I believe have fixed your concerns, can you please revisit it to make sure that I have properly addressed everything? Thank you! --haha169 (talk) 00:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, my response time to your concerns was a little slow. I've addressed them now. Let me know if there are any further problems! --haha169 (talk) 23:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for continually bugging you, but is there anything else that needs to be done in the image department? Thank you! --haha169 (talk) 20:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey haha169, images look fine now, thanks. If no one has done a source review by Monday let me know and I'll pick it up. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking your time to review the article! I appreciate it, and I'll let you know! --haha169 (talk) 15:39, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nikkimaria. Monday has come and gone, and there hasn't been a source review done yet. Would you mind picking it up for me? This FAC hasn't been getting any love at all. Thank you! --haha169 (talk) 03:15, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your source review! I have fixed all of the problems you've found, except for the thing about the dead links being listed on the tool. I don't know how to get that to disappear, because all of the links have been properly sourced with archive links. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific?[edit]

HI, I'm trying to understand what to do about your comment here. Can you please be more specific on exactly what captions have issues, and what the issues may be? Maury Markowitz (talk) 01:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify Kirchweih[edit]

Please explain the change you made to the lead on Locus iste (Bruckner). Perhaps we have a language problem. Dedication of a church building is a one-time thing. Kirchweih is the annual celebration of it, typically on the patron saint's day. Locus iste is the regular gradual text for such events. Bruckner did NOT compose for Kirchweih, but for a specific dedication. Please repair. I have no more time, now and for the weekend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This should be done now. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:53, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 September 2014[edit]

Women military writers[edit]

Hi Nikki, Glad to see you're running for MILHIST Coordinator; you'll be a good addition to the team. As you're also a member of WMNWRITE, I wanted to draw your attention to a new cat I just created Category:Women military writers, which Ser will populate via AWB. It'll be a small but interesting cat, something we should strive to expand. I wanted to mention it to you as I thought you might find it interesting, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool! I might have an article or two to add there, in time. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 17:46, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bruckner's pages[edit]

Dear Nikki,

I am a Bruckner-fan since I was 15 (more than 50 years ago) beginning with the symphonies by Bruno Walter and later by Eugen Jochum. I know his vocal works since the 1970's when I acquired Jochum's LPs of Bruckner's Masses, 10 motets and Psalm 150.

In the meantime I have acquired at least one commercial or private recording of all Bruckner's works in their different versions (for some of them more than 10 recordings). I have so at least one commercial or private recording of all the vocal works, except the three early Name-day cantatas and about 10 secular choir works, for which there is no recording available as yet.

For the vocal and non-orchestral works I am in close contact with Hans Roelofs, i.e., at least once a week by e-mail or by phone. We are also exchanging private recordings, as the non-commercial recordings of Psalm 146 by Wallberg and Botstein, the recording of the Festive Cantata by Guschlbauer at the 1980 Brucknerfest, that of the 1st version (1866) of Mass No. 2 by Rademann, a private digitalisation of the String Quintet by the Vienna Philharmonia Quintet with the Intermezzo (which was not transferred to CD Decca 430 296-2), digitalisation of early LPs or not edited performances of the Requiem, and a compilation of 17 recordings of the Ave Maria No. 3 (WAB 7).

As a faithful Wikipedian with about 36,000 contributions on the sites of the Wikimedia foundation, I think that I am not a beginner. I have already received several barn-stars. I think you may trust me when I put something on Wikipedia and, in particular, about Bruckner's works.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 17:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Potential FAR close[edit]

Hello Nikki, I nominated John Mayer for FAR here back in August. Given how there has been no objection to delisting and no effort to try and resolve the concerns, is it perhaps time to delist or does it need more than one person who agrees that it doesn't meet FA criteria? Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed it's been a week without response. I don't mean to bug you, but am looking to know if this should be delisted yet. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, missed this...while still in the FAR stage, articles cannot be delisted - it's meant as a venue for improvement rather than voting. I've now moved this one to FARC, though. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:22, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Meg Stuart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Catholic University of Leuven. 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) 09:20, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations![edit]

Coordinator of the Military History Project, September 2014 – September 2015

Hi Nikki, in recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, please accept these co-ord stars. Thanks for standing and all the best for the coming year. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Ian. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:04, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Measures of gender equality[edit]

Nikkimaria, Piotrus has posted that he dealt with the CWW issues in his nomination, but my concern is that if the article is built on text copied from these other articles, more than 20% will be taken from these sources, and since it is not original, it won't meet the 5x expansion rule requiring at least 80% newly written material. Can I ask you to please check this for the review? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe he nominated it as an expansion and not a creation, and with the CWW material removed it's still over 1500 characters. However, I've now also found some copying from external sources in the material not coming from other Wikipedia articles, including both cited and uncited sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look; those are serious issues. Regardless of how it's nominated (and it's as creation), WP:DYKSG#A5 says: If some of the text were copied from another Wikipedia article, then it must be expanded fivefold as if the copied text had been a separate article. To me, that says that even if you have the minimum 1500, because you copied from other articles, you end up being caught by the 5x rule (you're expanding on that pre-existing material) for what you copied. In this case, the lion's share of the GDI and GEM sections are exact copies (837 and 1423 characters respectively are copied), and the SIGI section copies four segments (two 16 word and two 6 word) for another 276. In this case, 2536 of 6821 are copied from pre-existing articles, which I think precludes its consideration even without the other issues. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, good to know. Thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:13, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Leigh Leigh FAC[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. Sorry to be a pain but just hoping you can follow up my last comment regarding the image at the Murder of Leigh Leigh FAC. I only ask as another user's support is pending approval of the images, which I simply assumed I had as there were no objections after my last change, and the nomination is fast approaching the end of its life cycle. If you can clarify if you support the image or not that would be appreciated. Also see my request regarding a full review, but no worries if you don't have time for that. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 13:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just following this up. Don't worry about a full review, a third reviewer joined in, and I am currently waiting for his final assessment. The nomination is currently fourth from the bottom and likely to be closed fairly soon after the third reviewer either supports or opposes, so if you can either support the info box image or tell me what is wrong with it, I would appreciate it. Again, I only ask as one of my other two reviewer's support is pending approval of the info box image. Freikorp (talk) 13:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July to September 2014 MilHist reviews[edit]

 The WikiChevrons 
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period July to September 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook a very impressive 26 reviews. Without reviewers like you it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high-quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the reviews, and very happy to see you back in the coord ranks. - Dank (push to talk) 15:48, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers both. Looking forward to working with you again. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/The Pheasantry[edit]

Nikkimaria, I am hoping that you are willing to check this article for close paraphrasing. As you can see from the nomination, I was ready to close it on the spot after I found that it contained significant close paraphrasing. However, I offered Philafrenzy, despite excuses, at least a full week to clear the article of it, but said I would then ask you to check the article: if you discovered any significant instances remaining, I'd close it immediately.

Philafrenzy has made a large number of edits to the article, and is calling for a new reviewer. I'm just looking for a close paraphrasing review; I don't think you need to do any more unless you want. If Philafrenzy has indeed eliminated all such paraphrasing, so much the better—with any luck, it will become a habit. Thank you very much for all you do here at Wikipedia. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:19, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 October 2014[edit]

Template:Did you know nominations/Russell L. Blaisdell[edit]

Nikkimaria, while I usually ask you to take a look at articles during the DYK nomination process, I've already marked this one for closure due to issues previously raised. The problem here is that while the nomination was characterized as having close paraphrasing, when I checked one of the three sources said to be problematic, FN2, Duplication detector returned quite a bit for close paraphrasing. Even though I've just tagged the article for close paraphrasing, I wanted to be sure it didn't cross the border into actual copyvio. I hope you have time to check it over. Many thanks, regardless. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:45, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was copyvio there, including from an uncited source; further checking finds at least two other problematic articles by the same author. Not enough for a CCI at this point, but quite concerning. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into it, and removing the offending passages. I noticed that you had to do so a second time after Mztourist reverted your edits, including to the Blaisdell article. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:19, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, copyvio isn't a "discuss if you disagree" situation - it goes out and stays out, period, unless proven not to be copyvio (eg. if he can provide PD sources - the ones used aren't). In the meantime I've found at least one instance of very close paraphrasing of an offline source, so this might be headed to CCI after all. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just found a copyvio when reviewing Template:Did you know nominations/Cemetery for North Korean and Chinese Soldiers for DYK: it was a full sentence from the New York Times, where the only difference in the article here was an interpolated phrase in the middle of the original. I didn't bother to look for close paraphrasing after that, but if the copyvio is fixed, I'll probably want you to take a look at the article before I consider approving it. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I've filed a CCI for this editor. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Locus iste[edit]

The article talk page is not the right place to tell you (again) that you seem to have little understanding for what an infobox adds to an article (not for you but for others). Perhaps talk to those who recently added infoboxes to Carmen and Il trovatore. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand quite well what you believe, I simply disagree. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:51, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mason County Sculpture Trail may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • JPG|thumb|left|"Hooked on Hamlin" with empty stump, [photo opportunity]] waiting for a subject]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:14, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Stanford Norman McLeod Nairne may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • 1862, pg 6417]: "Stanford, Norman McLeod Nairne, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Farrer."]</ref> He was promoted to Lieutenant in 1869.<ref>published in The Edinburgh Gazette of 5th Jan
  • James MacSwiney) and 18 men later died. One officer and 105 men became prisoners of the Boers. (The information on these three military engagements has been summarised from the following article:<

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Animal Jam may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • * '''D] 3 the [[Leopard]]''' (performed by [[Andy Stone]]{{dn|date=February 2014}}) – One of the DJs on

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Edith Head may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Hollywood—for just the second time—to be shown exclusively at the Decorative Arts Center of Ohio] in Lancaster. This exhibition, Designing Woman: Edith Head at Paramount 1924-1967 is presented by

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:02, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference query[edit]

Having seen two of Britain's three vagrant Masked Shrikes inspired me to start working up that article to FA. I've immediately run into a problem referencing a film, something I've not done before. I found a template, but it doesn't appear to include a timing parameter. I'd be grateful for any help (it's the last ref in the article. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look now. The default text for the time parameter is a bit clumsy - if you prefer you can use the minutes parameter (which produces "XX-XX minutes in"), or for even more flexibility use timecaption to set the text yourself. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:26, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Nikkimaria, looks more convincing now. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Nigel Miguel[edit]

Nikkimaria, this isn't an immediate request, but I did pull this nomination from prep today due to close paraphrasing. Once the fixes have been made, assuming they are, would you be willing to give it a more comprehensive examination? Under the circumstances, I'd like to have someone who's experienced checking it over. (I did mention there that I'd be asking you.) I'm happy to ping you again when it's ready for you. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was quick. Please consider yourself pinged; the editor has made fixes to the two specific phrases I highlighted, but didn't find any more. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 8[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 8, August-September2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • TWL now a Wikimedia Foundation program, moves on from grant status
  • Four new donations, including large DeGruyter parntership, pilot with Elsevier
  • New TWL coordinators, Wikimania news, new library platform discussions, Wiki Loves Libraries update, and more
  • Spotlight: "Traveling Through History" - an editor talks about his experiences with a TWL newspaper archive, Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter



MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Highbeam renewal -- problem[edit]

Hi Nikki, I received your email about renewing my Highbeam account two weeks ago (my account expired October 3). The email read "Hi, Per your request at Wikipedia:HighBeam, here is your HighBeam code: xxxxxxxxxx. Before renewing your account, please make sure you've reviewed the expectations listed at Wikipedia:HighBeam. Let me know if you have any questions or problems with your registration." I'm not sure how to renew my account, however. When I input my email address and the code from that email into Highbeam, it tells me to "complete" my registration and sends me to a page to pay and input my billing information. How do I renew my account as a free Wikipedia account? Thanks, Softlavender (talk) 01:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Softlavender, sorry you're having trouble. On what page of Highbeam are you trying to input the code (ie. what URL), and are you logged in or not logged in when you're trying it? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was inputting my details into the normal log-in (link at top right of every Highbeam page) page as I always do. After calling Customer Service and getting no help, I finally had to Google Highbeam Wikipedia and found this page: Wikipedia:HighBeam/Support, which I did not know I was required to use. In the future, could you link to that page when you email Wikipedians about registering or renewing on Highbeam? Thanks very much. Softlavender (talk) 01:35, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. That page is linked from the new registration email, but not from the shorter renewal message; I can certainly add it there. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! Thanks for all of the helpful work you do on this and in other Wikipedia areas! Softlavender (talk) 02:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well done![edit]

The Original Barnstar
For taking the time to start Regis Groff. Kudos! Carrite (talk) 05:10, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Kızıl Kilise redux[edit]

Nikkimaria, after a few weeks, someone new did an extensive revision of the article. (I hesitate to say "copyedit" because some of the new phrasing is far from ideal.) Can you please take a look at it, at least from a close paraphrasing perspective, to see whether it now passes muster? (If you want to comment further, please go ahead.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:31, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Unfortunately, I couldn't be engaged in the correction process of the DYK nom for a long time because I had no access. I appreciate very much your efforts to get the nom passed. Thank you very much indeed. --CeeGee 16:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 October 2014[edit]

This Month in GLAM: September 2014[edit]



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 17:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OPERA's referencing policy[edit]

Regardless of what you have changed, the Project (a consensus of editors over several years - 9 in my case) decided on the format the "Ref" section of articles, so if you wish to change it, please go the Project's Talk page and discuss/propose and await consensus.

Please do not continue to change the Project's guidelines page.Viva-Verdi (talk) 19:53, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Viva-Verdi, as the guideline that refers to (MOS:LAYOUT) indicates, the formatting you suggest causes accessibility problems. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:10, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phoenix Sinclair, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wellington School. 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) 09:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations[edit]

Barnstar of Brillance
Your summary of the troubles at the GGTF is brillliant. Thanks for the illumination. Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 04:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Cemetery for North Korean and Chinese Soldiers[edit]

Nikkimaria, this is a nomination by Mztourist, who you filed a CCI on last week. I mentioned this one as having found a problematic sentence in the Blaisdall discussion above. The sentence has been edited, but before I continue the review, I'd like to know that the article doesn't have any remaining close paraphrasing or copyvio issues. I'm hoping you'd be willing to check it. I didn't see anything obvious, but I've missed things before that were blindingly obvious once you'd pointed them out. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing anything over-close from the cited sources; no guarantees on uncited, of course. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; that's what I wanted to know. Much appreciated. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:16, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thanks for the source review on Bonshō's FA discussion - the article has finally made it to FA status, and I'm very grateful for your help in getting it there. Yunshui 雲水 09:20, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats Yunshui! Nikkimaria (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of W.B.Bartlett[edit]

Thanks! --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Calitoxin DYK[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. I have reached an impasse with the DYK nominator at Template:Did you know nominations/Calitoxin. I am asking for your assistance regarding the suitability of the proposed hook. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 21:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you two have come to an agreement already, but let me know if you need more input. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Nikkimaria. I think it was resolved. In fact, I was on my way to let you know about it, when I saw your reply. If you feel like adding any comments or advice, you are very welcome to do so. Take care. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:29, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for review[edit]

Hello Nikkimaria, I would like to take this article to FAC in the near future and would really appreciate it if you can give me some pointers or comments that would need to be addressed before taking it to FAC? Best, .jonatalk 23:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey AJona, a few general comments:
  • You would want to make sure your citations are as complete and consistent as possible. For example, book citations should include page numbers for where in the book the information comes from.
  • I'd suggest having someone do a thorough copy-editing of the article - maybe ask over at the Guild
  • I think, if possible, the article would benefit from more information on the composition of individual tracks, details on music and lyrics, etc
You could also consider a peer review to garner more views on the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:24, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for these comments. Unfortunately, Google News Archives is down and I cannot access those sources that could be beneficial in expanding the article. I will take the article to the Guild and request a PR. Thanks again, .jonatalk 15:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Welcome to the Jungle (Neon Jungle album)[edit]

Nikkimaria, this isn't a usual request from me, because the issue on this one seems to be the proportion of quoted material to actual text: there's more of the former than the latter. After it was pointed out by the original reviewer, and blockquotes inserted by me, there was some minor paraphrasing done to split up one of the blockquotes and get the DYKcheck length back above 1500. Can you please take a look and point out the general principles involved and what needs to be done to the article? It's been sitting for nearly four weeks—the original reviewer hasn't been back—and I'd like to get this wrapped up soon as it's now over two months old. Thanks for any help you can give. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:37, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You up to a favor[edit]

... to make up for Ike Altgens?

If so: either User:Spshu misunderstands the application of notability guidelines, or I do. Please have a look at Indie Rights, its talk page and Spshu's talk page and weigh in.

Thanks in advance :) —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 23:58, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

problem with pictures[edit]

Nikkimaria I'm having some problems with pictures. File:Votivbild_Schlacht_bei_Meßkirch_mit_Rahmen.jpg, File:Jean-Victor Moreau.jpg and File:Pal Kray.jpg being improperly tagged. I've used them in several articles, but need some advice on how to tag them.....? auntieruth (talk) 19:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heyauntieruth, some general thoughts:
  • If the work was publicly displayed, that counts as publication for the purposes of {{PD-US}}/{{PD-US-1923-abroad}}
  • Photographing or otherwise reproducing a 2D work does not grant a new copyright
With those thoughts in mind...
  • File:Votivbild_Schlacht_bei_Meßkirch_mit_Rahmen.jpg is in the public domain, and probably {{PD-US-1923-abroad}} would be the best tag
  • File:Jean-Victor Moreau.jpg: source link is dead and no author is given, so I can't verify what the best tag would be. Do we know when this was created and/or who the creator was?
  • File:Pal Kray.jpg: given tag is not correct (that person is not the original author), but again without more information I couldn't tell you what the right tag is. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
both the Kray and Moreau images are commonly found in the frontispieces of 19th century bios of the men. would that satisfied the pd us 1923 abroad requirement? auntieruth (talk) 19:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you can show it was published abroad before 1923 (even if you can't find the first publication) that should be sufficient. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:17, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
there is this one....for Moreau....
Do you have a page number there? The first image I see doesn't appear to be the same one. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 October 2014[edit]

Spotchecks[edit]

Hi Nikki, there are a few source review and spotcheck requests at WT:FAC but I'd particularly like your opinion on Xx (album). It's generating a lot of discussion that might be settled one way or t'other (for me at least) by someone as experienced as yourself checking bits 'n' pieces of the article. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lovecraft in Brooklyn[edit]

Hey! Thanks for the edit to "Lovecraft in Brooklyn". I'll remember next time not to link to the Mountain Goats Wiki under the external links section.--DrWho42 (talk) 10:57, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Kızıl Kilise redux squared[edit]

Nikkimaria, it looks like the article's adopter has worked to straighten out the reference issues, which prevented you from checking close paraphrasing after I pinged you on this one back on October 9. Can you please take another look now? (I explained what was up in my post then.) Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • There's now a new post saying that the close paraphrasing you pointed out has been addressed. I don't know whether the pings are reaching you, so I thought I'd post directly. Thanks for taking this on. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apparently not. I'll take a look shortly, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Credo problem[edit]

Hello Nikkimaria, i have received a preliminary Credo-approval mid-July and sent back the "short form" in mid-August (i was on Wiki-break and didn't see the message earlier). Has the program been completely stopped or are the "old" open requests still handled? If old accounts are still available, could you check the status of my access request please? I am assuming, i would get a mail with the access info, but this is my first time with Credo - so not sure with the proceedings. Thank you for your help. GermanJoe (talk) 00:50, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey GermanJoe, we ran out of Credo accounts, so your applications is on the waitlist. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:02, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information, Nikkimaria. GermanJoe (talk) 03:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of organizations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frederick Taylor. 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) 09:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014[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) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, Redux[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou!

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) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria. You have new messages at Dewritech's talk page.
Message added 18:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Dewritech (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temperatures Rising[edit]

Hi. I addressed your comments regarding Temperatures Rising. Care to take another look? Jimknut (talk) 00:31, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Further corrections were made. Yet another look? Jimknut (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Jimknut, let's hold off on that until the Guild has had a chance to respond to your request. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, again. I had a response from one of the guild members. You can read our conversations here and here. Jimknut (talk) 20:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • He (?) makes a good point about the article's structure - I don't work much with television so that didn't stand out to me. Poking around a bit, there are a few sources that might help you with expanding that aspect of the article, if you can get them: Playing Doctor in particular looks promising, though I don't have the full text in front of me to know for sure. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the advice. I took a look at Playing Doctor on Amazon.com and was able to see a preview of the text. The preview only showed earlier parts of the book dealing with films of the 1930s. However, the acknowledgement page was visible and William Asher and Harry Ackerman (respectively, the producer and executive producer of Temperatures Rising) where listed. I think it's a safe bet that the series is discussed at some point in the book, although how in depth is something I won't know until a receive the copy that I just ordered. (I bought a used copy at a cheap price.) Thanks again for the advice. Jimknut (talk) 17:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Forced seduction[edit]

Hey Nikkimaria, any time you want to turn this future DYK into readable English... :) Drmies (talk) 05:08, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, using "motif" and "theme" interchangeably? I am aghast. I mean, "captive woman held captive" is one thing, but this has high-school English teachers rolling over in their graves. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:42, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I believe you are on payroll: you are not allowed to criticize management in public. I agree, that is a terrible one thing; all I can say is that those paragraphs were so long that I may have slipped more than once. Who wrote that shit? Thanks Nikkimaria. Oh, Mrs. Drmies fessed up to having read The Flame and the Flower, and Drmies is glad they're not into roleplaying. Drmies (talk) 13:58, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, motif, theme... I really want to call it a trope, but unfortunately the literary dictionaries and rhetoric manuals don't agree with that. I wonder if "theme" isn't the better word. What do you think? Drmies (talk) 14:03, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Probably of the two I'd go with theme. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Florence Mildred White[edit]

Hello Nikkimaria. I have updated my Talk page on Florence Mildred White today. During my researching for secondary sources I have noted quite a few concerning female policewomen generally in the UK 1918-1925 which I would be pleased to pass on if you are interested. TimothyWF (talk) 20:18, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:31, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Whilst looking at the copies of the Police Chronicle between 1917 and 1937 I have noted the following articles about women police: How this came about and my comments for finding future secondary sources are noted in the Talk page: Florence Mildred White. The following are of interest but do not specifically mention White. The following are my notes:

The Police Chronicle. A weekly magazine from the late 1800's to about 1947 on police happenings.

1918 Book. P.C. 4 Jan 1918. PC Edith Smith obliged to retire due to ill health. First woman to 'receive' a Warrant Card.(Taking up nursing again.) [List of record of her work]

8 March 1918. The OTHER Edith Smith on tour for National Union of Women workers. Women on patrol in Scotland.


11 Jan 1918. P.C. 10 towns have Women Police Constables. WPS.

8 Feb 1918. P.C. Women's Police Service. For many reasons it is advisable that a Policewoman should not be rated by any precedent which the male Police force has initiated. Article, speech by Damer Dawson Commandant. WPS.

Editorial P.C. 1 March 1918. Policewomen should consider themselves sociologists.

5 April 1918. P.C. Annual Report, Sir Leonard Dunning,( who wrote a letter to Sir George Rafter, Birmingham City Police, in support of Mildred White's application for a post in Birmingham.) Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary. With regard to the women police, it would seem that the introduction of women into the professional police may well work well and help police authorities to combat evils which have presented incoming difficulties to them for years past.

15 April 1918. P.C. P.C. Editorial- On the Beat. In the meantime there is little possibility of the question arising as women police are not authorised to make arrest. Women police do not desire the power of arrest until it is legally and properly invested in them.

17 May. P.C. Page 11. Hull Watch Committee discussion. Counselor Cooper: "do women police do the same work as men?" Chief Constable: "Not physically."

28 June 1918. P.C. Sir Leonard Dunning (Inspector of Constabulary known to Mildred White personally)is laid up with an illness which has a severe grip on him. (Report; still ill on 5th Aug.)

2 Aug 1918. P.C. Lady Nott-Bowers. Article, "Women police patrols were, of course, a different body, not forming any part of the police service."


25 Sept. 1918.

Dorothy Peto and Edith Smith (2nd.)write an article in the P.C.


25 March 1937. P.C. Policewomen hold their first conference, in London. Paper by Prof. John Glaister. Lecture by Miss White. (Inspector CID Birmingham City Police.)

28 Feb 1936. P.C. Sir L. Dunning, with Lady Dunning. Dinner, Home Office, Whitehall. Photo included.

Fri 4 June 1936. P.C. Annual Report, Sir Leonard Dunning 16th Annual meeting, Sir L. Dunning, Bart. (President)

24 April 1936 P.C. No policewomen for Newport, S. Wales. Watch Committee states.


Editorial, Police Chronicle, 4 Sept 1925. Article, Chief and women police. Chief Constable of Oxford Police states 

"In my opinion the employment of women in police uniform are entirely useless."

P.C. Police news. New Women's Section to have certificates by 1925.

P.C. Reports a lot on police happenings in Birkenhead and Metropolitan Police.


1925. Long list of promotions in P.C. but no women listed.

P.C. 1925. Two line editorials saying there should be more women police. Some more Chief Constables say women police would make good chauffeurs-for them.

TimothyWF (talk) 19:42, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Thanks for posting this. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:10, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Highbeam[edit]

Just wanted to say thanks for setting up my new Highbeam account - thanks! Miyagawa (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Longwood Gardens[edit]

Stop icon This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Longwood Gardens, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lgaddjjg (talk) 02:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lgaddjjg, welcome to Wikipedia. I would encourage you to review the policy links that the bot has left on your talk page, as well as our explanation of what is and is not vandalism. Unfortunately a wiki with a single user does not qualify for inclusion; please don't re-add it. If you have any questions about how Wikipedia works, you can ask here, or you can visit the Teahouse for new editors. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly did not explore that wiki! Lgaddjjg (talk) 03:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I did, which is how I knew it had only one (non-bot) editor. Again, I would encourage you to read through our guideline about external links. In particular, please note that if people disagree about whether a link should be included, it stays out until there is consensus to include it. If you'd like to seek a second opinion about the link, you can try the external links noticeboard. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I heard that user is controlled by different people. Did you even watch the video tours that are in the pages? They are very helpful! Lgaddjjg (talk) 03:31, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean the ten-second videos of ceiling fans? No, those aren't particularly helpful. There are better videos available through the garden's official website, which is already linked. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, these videos are taken in Longwood Gardens. I know because I've been there before, and they look exactly the same. Second of all, not all of these videos are 10 second videos. Lgaddjjg (talk) 10:35, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wherever they are taken, all of the video links go to a "channel of random ceiling fans". This plus eight pages of fewer than three sentences each does not equate to a valuable resource for our readers. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:21, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been to Longwood Gardens a lot, so I know exactly what they looked like. Whoever took this video must have visited there! And this wiki will improve soon, I promise. Lgaddjjg (talk) 20:04, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lgaddjjg: at this point you really need to stop adding that link. At least five different editors have removed it, and just today you have already violated the three-revert rule, which means you are very likely to be blocked from editing. Again, if you want more input on this you should start a discussion at the external links noticeboard, but for now this link does not meet our standards for external links. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:47, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lgaddjjg was indef'd. Dreadstar ☥ 23:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw, but thanks for letting me know. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:56, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 October 2014[edit]

DYK for Beaver attack[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Shuttlecock (film)[edit]

Nikkimaria, I was wondering whether you could take a look at this one. The reviewer was concerned about close paraphrasing, but the creator (a very experienced DYKer) doesn't seem to think there is anything significant. Can you please take a look? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:03, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, are you satisfied that the edits to the article have taken care of the issues you raised with Template:Did you know nominations/Eurasian eagle-owl? It would help to have an update; if a new reviewer is needed I can call for that. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:08, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have made an attempt to track down any further problems with this article with not much success, mostly because I haven't got access to many of the sources such as #6 Schuchmann and #7 Konig. I tracked down the source of at least some of the problems to an edit on 27 February 2011 by Sandhillcrane who I see is still actively adding content to articles in Wikipedia. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:11, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Paraphrasing problems, verifiability, or both? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:25, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Paraphrasing. I'm going to suggest abandoning this as a DYK nomination. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK stats[edit]

I have added your article Beaver attack to the DYK stats as it had over 5,000 views.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomina im Indogermanischen Lexikon[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria! Could you tell me what was wrong with the media_type parameter in the book infobox? Just curious. Thanks, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 08:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey ἀνυπόδητος, it's not wrong, it's just not particularly useful to include. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Paraceratherium/archive1[edit]

Just a quick heads up, since I accidentally started an image review, and found a few problems that were missed by your image review.

Now, let me start out saying this: It's not that you did a bad job, it's just that there's a few common pitfalls people fall into that I've picked up from working primarily with images so long, and, if you don't know about those, it's easy to miss them.

First of all: People will mess up copyright tags. A lot. Watch out for US-based copyright tags on works that aren't clearly indicated as being US works, and PD-Old-70 on works that might be American. That happens all the time.

Secondly, {{PD-US-no notice}} and anything {{PD-anon}} is usually worth carefully checking, because people so often don't actually look enough to see if it's true. (Take the examples in this case, where, while it was out of copyright for a different reason, the copyright notice about two pages before the image was missed.) Similarly, if something is (say) {{PD-Old-70}}, check there's actually a death date for the author, because people have a strange tendency to use this, and not actually give the one piece of information that will prove 70 years have passed from death of the author.

Thirdly: The most popular checks for renewal of US copyrights only include books in their databases. Be careful of {{PD-US-not renewed}} if it's not a book. http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/firstperiod.html is a good check for journals, magazines and comics - that site alone let me save about a third of the images in this case, by proving that a different copyright argument applied. Oh, and if you don't know a good book database, http://collections.stanford.edu/copyrightrenewals/bin/page?forward=home is a good one.

Fourthly: Insist on enough documentation to prove the copyright. If something is claimed as anonymous, make sure that the checks for it would show it's anonymous. A museum lists the author as unknown is fine. A website doesn't give the author might not be. Look at the recent James Chadwick incident, where someone proved the author probably could be identified, and probably wasn't Swedish as required for the Sweden-based copyright logic while it was on the main page. Oops.

Anyway, I hope this isn't rude. I honestly just want to help out a bit, and share my workflow. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Adam, that's helpful. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 02:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:56, 28 October 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Pratyya (Hello!) 02:56, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer![edit]

Happy Halloween!

Hello Nikkimaria:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:54, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Locus iste (Bruckner)[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bilhildis[edit]

Hey Nikkimaria, thanks as usual for looking over my shoulder--but please tell me, why "upright"? What does it do? Don't I want to have control over size? Drmies (talk) 18:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not usually. Standard display size is 220x for normal images, but users can set a different preference size, and most who do choose a larger size. upright lets the system know that certain images are meant to be taller than they are wide, so can be used to scale images within the context of the user's preferences. On the other hand, if you set a particular pixel size instead of using a scale, you override the user preference. That's why the image policy says we generally shouldn't do that. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:04, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One of my students today said it always helps to know what you're talking about. I guess that's true here as well: I was almost completely ignorant of all this, so thanks for the links and the lesson. Drmies (talk) 21:48, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The War Symphonies: Shostakovich Against Stalin[edit]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 October 2014[edit]

November 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Charles Cryer Theatre may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • |country = [England

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Acantha[edit]

I see that a few weeks ago you stumbled across the Acantha article. Firstly I wanted to thank you for your edit and, secondly, wondered if I might make a request? Having taken the time to read through the article, and improve upon it, I assume you must have at least some interest in the page. As such I wonder whether you might consider reviewing it? The nomination can be found at WP:GAN#MYTH. It's a fairly short article so it shouldn't be too much of a time commitment and I would really appreciate the help. If you'd rather not though I completely understand. All the best, Nyctimene (talk) 16:03, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nyctimene, I can take a look but it won't be for a couple days yet. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Nikkimaria, I look forward to hearing your feedback soon! Nyctimene (talk) 14:18, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like someone else got there before I did. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:56, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article issue[edit]

You made edits to the article Gumbo that is a featured article. There is an issue (discussed here) with article content and the picture conflicting. It is actually a serious issue in that the picture involves original research that became evident during discussion. If you could take the time to look at this I would appreciate it. Otr500 (talk) 08:41, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (November 2014)[edit]

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

  • DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
  • Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
  • British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
  • Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
  • Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
  • JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Template:Did you know nominations/Market Basket protests[edit]

Nikkimaria, can I ask you to please take a look at this one? It had apparently had issues with close paraphrasing earlier, and I'd feel more comfortable if someone with an experienced eye made sure that said paraphrasing was a thing of the past since it has now been promoted to prep. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking, and for removing it from prep. Can I ask you to take a look at this one: Template:Did you know nominations/Nuestra Señora de Candelaria Parish Church (Mabitac)? It's the same reviewer who passed the Market Basket one, so I decided to stop it before it got to prep for a look. If there isn't any close paraphrasing, please restore the tick. Again, thank you! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:10, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not able to check that one, unfortunately - most of the sources are either non-English or offline. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your looking at it. Thanks again. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 November 2014[edit]

Cite locations on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ford Island/archive1[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. I'm not sure I understand what to do about your comments regarding locations in the citations. Are you talking about the book references or the web citations? Would it be better to just remove all locations?--v/r - TP 19:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My personal preference would be to remove them, but you can have them there so long as they're consistent within each type of source - so have them for all books, and/or all websites, and/or all journals, etc. It would be okay to have them for books and not websites, but not for just some books and not all. Right now you've got some books, one periodical, and one website with locations. Also, if you end up keeping them you'll want to be consistent in how specific they are - for example, right now Prange has city/state but then Pratt has state/country. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:47, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I've taken care of it. Thanks.--v/r - TP 00:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
TParis, not quite: if you're going to be including them for books, the books cited in full inline should include them also. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:38, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Should I merge all books into the bibliography or keep the ones I had in print separate from the ones accessed online?--v/r - TP 01:23, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Either's fine, really. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:31, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I've gone through the body and updated those book cites with locations. Whew - that was a lot of work.--v/r - TP 18:58, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It would have been a lot easier to remove all the locations, which is what I always do. Eric Corbett
Fair enough, I'll do that instead in the future.--v/r - TP 02:47, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: October 2014[edit]



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 23:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:BMD-3/GA1[edit]

Nikkimaria, I know you don't usually look at GA nominations, but I stumbled across this one which had been stuck for over a month, in part because it was a new reviewer who didn't know how to call for a second opinion. The review looked odd because no prose issues at all had been found, so I looked to see if this might have been one of those rare ones that was just about perfect.

When I found an oddly constructed sentence, I checked the source to see whether it could clear up what was meant. While there, it seemed to me that some of the phrases were quite familiar. Doing a Duplication detector on the article and source found a high number of identical phrases. As far as I can tell, the source isn't one that allows copying (and the article doesn't say anything about that kind of source); I haven't checked any of the other online sources. I was wondering whether you could check the article to see how problematic things are, and do whatever seems necessary in terms of adding templates to the article and the like.

Thanks for anything you can do here. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:52, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh, good luck finding anything on that website. Anyways, it looks like the GA nominator did a significant rewrite of the article back in July. Part of the material DupDet is picking up was carried over from 2007, when it was added without a citation. The website existed at that point, but I can't confirm whether this particular text was in it or was added later. However, other parts were added in the rewrite, at which point the site definitely did have that material [1]. A fair amount of other material from the rewrite also appears to have existed online previously, from various sources. On that basis, I've reverted to the version prior to the nominator's involvement with the article. It's possible that some of the earlier material is also infringing, but I can't confirm that. In any event, that revert would obviously render the GA review void. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:59, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see no infringement here. Not a single complete sentence was copied and every single one was in my own words. I recommend that you actually read the article and note its major improvements in comparison to the previous version. Khazar (talk) 21:34, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Khazar. I did actually read the article, in great depth. It certainly was far more comprehensive in coverage than the previous version. However, it did also contain infringing material: your addition was made in July 2014, but parts of the text had already appeared elsewhere online by that time, which means that we are not the original source for that text. To give you a couple of specific examples
  • "crew to engage targets from the vehicle or with the system deployed at some distance away from it" was in this source by 2013. There are also other phrases that appear to be copied or closely paraphrased from this source: for example, "Two of the passengers are seated at the front, one either side of the driver, with the other two seated in the fighting compartment near the turret. On each side of the vehicle, one firing port is provided. Another three infantry can be seated for short distances to the immediate rear of the turret with the roof hatch open" is unacceptably close to "Two of the five infantry are seated at the front, one either side of the driver, with the other three seated in the fighting compartment near the turret, one firing port provided in each side of the hull. Another three infantry can be seated for short distances to the immediate rear of the turret with the roof hatch open".
  • "Unlike its predecessors, the BMD-3 can be airdropped with its complement of seven men inside the vehicle, allowing combat engagement to be immediate after landing. For the BMD-1 and BMD-2, the crew would be dropped separately which required additional time to marry up with their fighting vehicle" is unacceptably close to "unlike its predecessors, the BMD-3 can be airdropped with its complement of of seven men inside the vehicle, enhancing the element of surprise associated with airborne operations. Previously the crew of other vehicles would be dropped separately, requring additional time to marry up with their fighting vehicle" from this source, also predating your edit
So no, I'm afraid your addition was not all in your own words. I suggest you review our pages on copyright and close paraphrasing, and check that all of your edits (to other articles as well) are in alignment with that guidance. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:44, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I'll rewrite infringed parts of the article since it clearly violates Wikipedia's policies. I apologize for the mislead, it's been so long since I last edited it. I will fix this some time next week. Khazar (talk) 02:04, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Genetics 2014 question about Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Nikki,

I'm a student in Tom Haffie's Advanced Genetics course, and I'm wondering if you could tell me how to repeat a citation without it showing up as a new one? There are a couple sources I used more than once in my article for our assignment, but Wikipedia lists every citation I use in order, separately listing the same source used more than once.

Thanks!

Melissahwong (talk) 15:55, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Melissahwong, you can do that using named references. The first time you use the source, you would write a full citation as <ref name=x>Full citation</ref> (replacing x with a name that is unique to that source - often the author name works well). The next time you want to use that source, you can just use <ref name=x />. Here's how that will display the first time,[1] and the second.[1]
  1. ^ a b Full citation for Ref X

Great! Thank-you! Melissahwong (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a legit class?[edit]

See this edit and User:Grumblis.6 You're the only person I can think of off the top of my head that has a clue on the education/class thing. (and thanks for the articles... getting ready to write soon) Ealdgyth - Talk 23:23, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, Education_Program:Ohio_State_University/EEOB3310_Evolution_(Autumn_2014). A couple of their ambassadors are fairly experienced and active Wikipedians, if you wanted to get in touch with them. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 16 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 November 2014[edit]

DYK Wyangala submission[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria,

I replied to your helpful comments regarding my DYK, and I think I have addressed all your concerns.

Cheers DirtDigger (talk) 06:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help request, via Gerda Arendt[edit]

I've been referred to your by the above user via this talk page entry. I need a source review for the FAC mentioned there, and have been referred to you as Gerda Arendt is busy and she said you were good at source reviews. Can you help? --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In case you missed it, I and another editor have (I hope) dealt with the issues you cited. And thanks for the input so far. It's been a help. Hope you can come back with either more stuff, clarification if I missed or misunderstood anything, and your verdict on the article. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:47, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
An update, as a fellow editor contacted me and told me that I might have failed to alert you my most recent work. Quote from the page: "I've done a spotcheck, and it seems to be alright, with the only detections being deliberate quotes or repeats of the names of games. There is a url (3djuegos.com/foros/tema/33612126/21/especial-la-batalla-de-las-estrellas) that's at 82.4% violation, but it isn't part of the article. I don't understand. Other than that, I've gone through the references again and.... I think the rest of the issues have been sorted. I really, really hope this can be finished successfully." And a minor addition, all the other links have a reading of low forties and below, if that's a help. I'm really grateful for your help concerning all this. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:11, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey ProtoDrake, are you using one of the automated copyvio detection tools to come up with those numbers? If the coordinators request spotchecks (they don't always), those won't be sufficient to satisfy them. Spotchecks at FAC check not only for word-for-word copying (which is pretty much all those tools can catch), but also overly close paraphrasing and verifiability - that the cited sources support the text they purport to cite. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I used this tool (found on your useful page about spotchecking), which is an automated thing. But I have generally been keeping an eye on the prose to make sure it didn't copy anything verbatim outside quotes, but rather paraphrased it, and made very (very, very) sure that the information was cited correctly (occasionally getting cross-eyed translating Japanese or searching for accurate translations in the process). Quite honestly, I'm feeling exhausted with all the work I've done on this article, even though I still want it to succeed. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whether the article succeeds or fails, thank you for the source review. :) --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:03, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review request[edit]

Wyangala DYK[edit]

Hi Nikki, mind having another look at my submssion? Cheers DirtDigger (talk) 06:37, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FGM[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, I want to thank you again for catching the inconsistencies during your source review of FGM. The article was promoted today, and I'm very grateful to you for the time you spent checking it. All the best, SlimVirgin (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 19 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014[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) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AdGen Wikipedia Improvement Project - Heteroplasmy[edit]

Hi Nikki!

I am from Tom Haffie's Advanced Genetics course at Western. I'm just in the process of finishing the page I chose to update, which is "Heteroplasmy". I've still got a little more to add, but I was wondering if you could take a look and let me know if the writing style is concise, neutral, and correct for the "Wiki style" of writing. I don't have a lot of experience with writing for Wikipedia, so any tips would be really helpful!

Thanks!

Meredith Barr (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Meredith, this looks good so far. There are just a few changes needed:
  • For section headings, only the first word should be capitalized - so for example "Types of heteroplasmy" instead of "Types of Heteroplasmy"
  • Footnotes should come after punctuation, not before
  • The "screening" section is a bit hard to follow as written. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Israel National Council for the Child[edit]

Nikkimaria, there's a disagreement in the review here whether close paraphrasing is involved, or whether WP:LIMITED applies. Since the original reviewer has just bowed out, do you think you could comment on whether close paraphrasing is indeed an issue with this article? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:55, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Phoenix Sinclair[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Reddy[edit]

Hi friend, thanks for your edit on Anita Reddy. Just to clarify that the removed part is in fact supported by one of the references (please see here) but I failed to support it inline. Still, not much is lost but I took it up only to clear the air. Thanks once again and cheers!!--jojo@nthony (talk) 06:30, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi jojo@nthony, there is a source, but those parameters are not supported by the template you're using - that's why I removed them. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Market Basket protests redux[edit]

Nikkimaria, while I have no reason to doubt Freikorp's work at addressing the close paraphrasing issues you had confirmed were introduced by the original author, I thought I should let you know that the nomination has been approved and, as the oldest extant nom, is likely to be promoted in the near future. The reviewer did a spot check for close paraphrasing and didn't find anything, and AGFed the rest. Thanks as always. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know - it's not ideal but I think it's okay to run at this point. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:45, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look. Glad to know what the result was. The nomination has already been promoted to Prep 1, so it'll be hitting the main page in about 20 hours, assuming the prep is promoted in good time. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:10, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 November 2014[edit]

Thanking[edit]

Thanks for accepting my HighBeam access. - Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 04:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! I hope you can put it to good use. Nikkimaria (talk) 06:14, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Wollstonecraft Award[edit]

Mary Wollstonecraft Award
The Mary Wollstonecraft Award is awarded to contributors who have helped improve the coverage of women writers and their work on Wikipedia through content contributions, outreach, community changes and related actions. In particular, thank you for your efforts with the WikiProject Women writers start-up; your ideas and contributions are much appreciated. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:25, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huge request![edit]

Hi Nikki, I have a huge request! W. B. Yeats (an FA) is undergoing an overhaul, apparently as a class assignment. I reverted the edits and then undid my revert, I suppose to give them the chance to do the work, which I suspect is probably due in the next few days. I won't be around much myself for the next week or so - final projects coming in for my own classes beginning tomorrow - and so am hoping maybe you can pitch in to help there if you have time. I don't have time to pull up relevant MoS policies to explain why I reverted in the first place. Also I've left a note at WP:ENI, but not sure anyone is home there. Huge thanks in advance. Victoria (tk) 00:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Victoria, it doesn't look like these students are part of the Education Program, which makes figuring out their timeline a bit more difficult. I will take a look at the article and the discussion in a day or two. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:58, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about the schedule for Canadian universities but for most American universities on the semester system, the final week of classes is either tomorrow or next Monday, with final exam week coming right after. So, probably the work has to be done soon. I noticed a lot was sandboxed first and only pasted over tonight, and I've not had time to figure out specific details because it was all pasted in at once. Anyway, thanks. Another set of eyes will be helpful. Victoria (tk) 01:09, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nikki, I'm canceling this request because I can take care of it myself. I have my own class project to finish today so I have to be around, and I have sources for Yeats at hand. Sorry for pulling you in; I'd hoped it would be simple. Victoria (tk) 19:57, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, let me know if I can be of any help. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:24, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a photo from the Imperial War Museum[edit]

In the review of my GAN at Talk:HMS Otranto/GA1, the reviewer has problem with File:HMS Otranto IWM SP 001064.jpg since the data for the picture says nothing about the photographer. He wants me to add a statement that the photographer is assumed to be RN so that it meets the first bullet of the IWM's copyright statement. I've often used IWM photos that have lacked any information on the photographers and don't really see a need to add anything as I think that it's redundant since the IWM's already claimed that it's copyright expired. You know more about this than I do so I'd appreciate it if you could weigh in on the issue.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:10, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/List of Muslim philosophers[edit]

Nikkimaria, you pulled this from prep due to close paraphrasing. The nominator has posted that the issue has been addressed. Can you please check to see whether it's fine now, or whether problems still remain? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:21, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding: you've just been pinged there by the original reviewer, who is requesting a final check from you before being willing to reapprove the nomination.
On a different topic altogether, I was hoping you could take a look at Template:Did you know nominations/Mamadou N'Diaye (basketball, born 1993). I found what I thought was an inappropriate lifting of text from a source, which the reviewer subsequently disagreed with (though it has been dealt with by someone else); I also found a quote that included an additional four words not found in the original, which has also been addressed. While I like the article and hope it makes it to the main page, I'd feel more comfortable if you'd checked it over first. (It's now our oldest nomination.) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk)
The list still has serious issues, but I'm not seeing any obvious problems with the basketball player. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking both. I wasn't sure whether there would be anything with the basketball player, but wasn't willing to trust that it would be without someone else taking a look. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikipedia Library.
Message added 13:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

—Sadat (Masssly)❤Talk☮C☺Email☯ 13:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

recent reversal of edit concerning "maple syrup"[edit]

-EDIT; This is not an attack on you or your opinion. Everything i can find concerning this subjest stems from a guy named "Seeren" or something like it and most articles pertaining to his work are in disagreement of details. such as he is a she. or 50 new compounds, or 20 new compounds. his study can only be found on a bogus journal site, and cant be looked at. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.188.88 (talk) 13:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I just wanted to get things out on the table here concerning this paragraph you seem to like, "Scientists have found that maple syrup's natural phenols – potentially beneficial antioxidant compounds – inhibit two carbohydrate-hydrolyzing enzymes that are relevant to type 2 diabetes. In the study, 34 new compounds were discovered in pure maple syrup, five of which have never before been seen in nature. Among the five new compounds is quebecol, a phenolic compound created when the maple sap is boiled to create syrup."

I have scoured the internet and I can not find a SINGLE peer reviewed study on maple syrup's phenol content. Also nowhere can i find anything about them being relevant to diabetes. the next part about 34 new compounds, i can only find references to a study done by a "scientist" working for a "maple college" and published by the school he works for, and the only link to the actual study is on a bogus scientific journal site that has no credibility.

Telling diabetics that maple syrup is good for them is bordering on criminal and is at least dangerous.

none of your links are relevant, verifiable, or reliable. I did find a dubious article on the synthesis of "quebecol" which i suspect is just more fake stuff made up to back the claims made in "maple college" article.

Please provide quality references or delete this paragraph, you could be hurting people.

216.152.188.88 (talk) 12:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP, there are a number of studies that support this paragraph, but let's continue this conversation on the article talk page. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. I am definitely open to a change of mind, talk to you there. also, i'm quite new to this, there is a steep learning curve. 216.152.188.88 (talk) 13:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

XX FAC[edit]

Hi, Nikkimaria. Would you please stop by Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Xx (album)/archive2 and clarify what you meant by the article having source-integrity issues? Thanks! Rationalobserver (talk) 18:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let's figure out the ANI issue first and then, depending on outcome, we can return to the FAC. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:51, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Rationalobserver (talk) 16:18, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question about an article you reviewed for FA - Ed, Edd n Eddy[edit]

Hey there. Thanks for helping me out with HighBeam the other day. In a funny bit of timing, there's an issue that I've been sitting on for a while and have finally decided to act on - and it turns out that you're involved. A few years ago, you reviewed the article Ed, Edd n Eddy for FA. Here's the review - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ed, Edd n Eddy/archive1. During the process, you questioned the quality of a source called Animation by Mistake. The nominator for Ed, Edd n Eddy (Khanassassin) removed the source without further discussion, and the article was promoted to FA. Fast forward a few years - I've discovered that some of the info in the article has been improperly referenced. A claim that the series was sent to Nickelodeon before being picked up by Cartoon Network is sourced with a DVD interview. I've watched the interview, but it didn't contain any information about Nickelodeon. The only source that I've been able to find that does mention Nickelodeon is - you guessed it - Animation by Mistake.

The specific article in question - here [2] - is an interview between the owner of Animation by Mistake (Kit Topp) and the creator of Ed, Edd n Eddy (Danny Antonucci). So there's a certain amount of reliability to the source, in the sense that Danny Antonucci's own words about his own series could be taken as a reliable primary source. The question is - "Can Animation by Mistake be treated as a reliable publisher?" Personally, I would say yes. What Khanassassin forgot to mention during the FA process is that Animation by Mistake had been maintained in collaboration with a.k.a. CARTOON Inc. - Antonucci's own production studio. For some reason, this detail isn't mentioned on the interview page, but you can see it at the bottom of this page - [3]. I've done a little more digging around and came across archived pages of another website that Ms. Topp used to run, called The Eddzone. One of these pages - here [4] - clarifies that Animation by Mistake received full approval from Antonucci. He was even so involved, that he chose the name for the website. Another page - here [5] - adds that the website was "built with collaboration" with Antonucci and others at a.k.a. So we know that the website was both built and maintained with collaboration from the creators of the series. If there's any doubt at all as to whether Ms. Topp was being honest, it should be expelled by the personal photos of Antonucci and various crew members of a.k.a that are contained on the website (see the link that I provided for the "maintained in collaboration" statement).

So I feel that it would be proper to view Animation by Mistake as an official extension of a.k.a. CARTOON Inc. This should make it a reliable primary source. We plan to use the source for a single factual statement (not a viewpoint) about the history of the series. I wanted to run this by you though, so as to cover all of the bases. Do you feel that it would be appropriate to re-introduce Animation by Mistake as reference for one (maybe two) non-contentious statements, while maintaining Ed, Edd n Eddy's FA status? --Jpcase (talk) 23:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jpcase, I think your explanation is compelling enough to support the use of that source for non-contentious information. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 December 2014[edit]

Reference Errors on 6 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Elaine Surick Oran[edit]

Nikkimaria, I was hoping you could take a look at this one, which had some copying from one source, since addressed. The other sources were not checked in the initial review, so if you could check them (and recheck the original just to be sure all was fixed) that would be great. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking; sorry to read that there were more instances to be found. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, it looks like the nominator has done more work on the close paraphrasing. Can I ask you to please check again? Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

ex-Flickr image on HMS Illustrious article[edit]

Nikki, I just got an email from the University of Newcastle saying that they were OK with the image being used on Commons and that they had no idea who the photographer was. So what do I do now so that this issue doesn't come up again at the FAC? Have them formally give permission via OTRS? In the meantime I'll amend the sourcing info on Commons to state unknown photographer although I don't think that I'll go so far as to state assumed official RN photographer since nobody's claiming Crown Copyright applies.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:17, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sturm, OTRS wouldn't be a bad thing, but if the author is unknown what do they think the image's copyright status is? Does Newcastle own the copyright? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:55, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, but I'll ask. I'm very much willing to bet that it's an orphaned image as most donors don't seem to bother to explicitly specify the copyright status of their photos when they donate them to institutions.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia genealogy project[edit]

Just wondering if you have any thoughts re: the idea of WMF hosting a genealogy project. If so, feel free to contribute to this discussion. And apologies if I have made this request before. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Surgeon's_assistant[edit]

A while ago I spotted a ton of IP activity building the Surgeon's_assistant article. I jumped in to fix the IP's broken refs. In the process I noticed large chunks of the article were copied from a public domain US-government report. It wasn't copyvio, so I figured it was probably OK. I just checked in on the article and saw your edit summary removing a lot for "apparent copying". I just thought I'd pass on my info in case you wanted to restore it. I've barely skimmed the content itself so I have no opinion on what should or shouldn't be included. Alsee (talk) 22:06, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Alsee, the GAO report isn't copyrighted, but the IP also copied material from a number of other sources that are. If you'd prefer to readd some of the GAO stuff that's fine - I was just concerned that the result was a bit unbalanced. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Writing for the web[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. Do you have any idea whether Education Program:University of Western Ontario/Writing for the Web (Fall 2014) is done yet for the semester, or whether they still plan to edit more, move stuff out of sandboxes? Thanks. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 23:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian, the course doesn't end until the 13th, and there may well be stragglers after that. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the edits of Wiki page Raj Chowdhury[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria,

Appreciate your taking the time to avoid any potential copyright violation.

I have communicated with the owners of both sites-

www.rajchowdhury.com

www.unificationenergy.com

some of the contents of which had been used for the wiki page Raj Chowdhury.

The owners have agreed to grant permission for the use of the content of the sites by including the copyleft notice at the footer of the sites as per Wiki requirements.

The text -

"The text of this website is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License"

has been added to the footer of the sites by their owners.

I hope this will suffice. I am reverting back to the original content. Please do not hesitate to point out any issues in the future.

Thanks,

Sayan999 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayan999 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sayan999, thanks for doing that. Could you please also add the following at the bottom of the article? {{CC-notice|cc=bysa3|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page}}. You will need one for each appropriately licensed source being copied - replace the url with the one for the site you're using. That should resolve the copyright issue.
I'm also a bit concerned about the article's adherence to our other content policies. In particular, we have requirements regarding the neutrality of articles and the use of citations to reliable sources in biographies of living people. I would encourage you to review this page and some of the pages linked from there. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:23, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You left a message on my talk page[edit]

And I can't tell why.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:37, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vchimpanzee, I was actually hoping you could answer my question about your application at WP:HighBeam. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Germany vandalism[edit]

Please stop vandalism at Germany page. And add music media to the national anthem.--ThecentreCZ (talk) 21:19, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ThecentreCZ, you might want to review what is and is not vandalism. As I explained on the article's talk page, I am working to remove unsourced and overdetailed information from the broad general article. More details about the anthem are already available in the more specific Deutschlandlied article. Nikkimaria (talk)

Due to the normalization of main informations, almost every country page have in infobox playable music file, except this and of course some crazy copyright nations like Canada.--ThecentreCZ (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have added several such files to country pages, but I'm not seeing any evidence of "normalization of main informations" - no central consensus, no addition to the template, etc. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:57, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Accessdates[edit]

Out of curiosity, why do you make a habit of removing the |accessdate= parameter from references when cleaning up articles? G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 15:39, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi G S Palmer, I generally only do that in two cases: for articles where most refs (or most refs of a certain type) don't have them, or for GBooks links for print books. The former is simply a matter of consistency. For the latter, they're not useful: GBooks is a convenience link, a reproduction of a print source - these links should be static, and in the very few cases they aren't, the old versions aren't archivable so aren't recoverable even with a known retrieval date. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:39, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 19:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Lucia![edit]

Happy Saint Lucia's day!

"Good Morning" Nikkimaria:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia!
13 December is the day when Swedes perplex the rest of the world by showing up way too early in the morning dressed in white tunics, candles in their hair, singing and bringing saffron buns and breakfast in bed to nice people. Hope you have a bright day!
    – w.carter-Talk 00:49, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thank you! Nikkimaria (talk) 01:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 December 2014[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for December 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby. 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) 10:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: November 2014[edit]



Headlines
  • Australia and New Zealand report: ALIA partnership goes countrywide
  • Belgium report: Workshops for collection holders across Europe; Founding event of Wikimedia Belgium; Wiki Loves Monuments in Belgium & Luxembourg; Plantin-Moretus Museum; Edit-a-thon at faculty library in Ghent University; Image donation UGentMemorie; Upcoming activities
  • France report: Wiki Loves Monuments; mass upload; Musée de Bretagne
  • Germany report: Facts, fun and free content
  • Ireland report: Ada Lovelace day in Dublin
  • Italy report: National Library Conference; Wiki Loves Monuments; Archaeological Open Data; BEIC
  • Netherlands report: Video challenge; Wikidata workshop and hackathon; Wikipedia courses in libraries; WWII editathon
  • Norway report: Edit-a-thon far north at the Museum of Nordland (Nordlandsmuseet)
  • Spain report: Picasso, first Galipedia edit-a-thon, course in Biblioteca Reina Sofía and free portraits
  • South Africa report: Wiki Loves GLAMs, Cape Town
  • Sweden report: Use, reuse and contributions back and forth
  • UK report: Medals, maps and multilingual marvels
  • Special story: ORCID identifiers
  • Open Access report: Open proposal: Wikidata for Research; Open Access signalling
  • Tool testing report: Tools for references, images, video, file usage; Popular Pages
  • Calendar: December's GLAM events
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 22:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open![edit]

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your review of Liao Chong Zhen[edit]

Thank you for your edits,

you are right, I should create a page about his father, so I am creating one, please give me some days to do so and then I'll delete the family story from Liao Chong Zhen page

thanks

Vargha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vargha aqa (talk • contribs) 00:36, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vargha, thanks for that. As you're working on those two articles, I suggest you take a look at our page on identifying reliable sources - sites like Wikipedia are not considered reliable for referencing. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nominations/List of Muslim philosophers[edit]

Hey, could you please take a look at our discussion? Mhhossein (talk) 04:41, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mhhossein, as I said there, at this point the article needs a thorough reworking and rechecking as opposed to a more piecemeal approach. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw Hadi.anani pushing him self too hard and trying to rewrite the article. That's why I thought things might have been corrected! Mhhossein (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Russo-Georgian War[edit]

Nikkimaria, this is a bit of an odd one that I'm hoping you can take a look at. The Russo-Georgian War article lists the Peace plan in a section of the article, citing two sources immediately before the plan is displayed as bullet points: a New York Times article that includes a graphic containing their translation of the plan from the French, and a Kremlin page with their own translation. The plan bullets sometimes use the one translation, sometimes the other, and sometimes change a few words, but for the identical sections there's no quoting involved. Shouldn't there be? Or shouldn't this perhaps be a blockquote with a particular translation citted at the end of a bullet point? Or is what's been done an acceptable way of handling things? Please stop by and give your opinion in the matter. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your analysis. Were you planning on taking the article to GAR? BlueMoonset (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Already started - Talk:Russo-Georgian_War/GA3. Feel free to weigh in there if you like. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Elaine Surick Oran redux[edit]

I noticed that Mary Mark Ockerbloom has posted that she fixed the sentence you were questioning. However, since you pointed out that it had been taken from a source other than the one given, I find it odd that said source has not been at least added to the one that had been cited... BlueMoonset (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's why I haven't gone back to that one, plus it would be far more efficient to recheck with the correct sources associated with the correct text. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:35, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Begging another flavour[edit]

Hi NM, As always, many thanks for your endless work in and around featured content: it is always appreciated, especially in less glamorous areas like FAR. Could I ask for you to direct one of your next source reviews at the article on John Barrymore, which is now at FAC. Any comment or suggestions would be much appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 07:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image clarification for AI Mk. IV radar - FAC[edit]

Hello Nikkimaria, a reviewer has added some comments about 3 images at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/AI Mk. IV radar/archive2. As you did the initial image review, could you comment on those questions please? (I'll rather not stick my nose into another reviewer's work, at least not intentionally :) ) The review is in its final stage, so any clarification about those images' status would be great. GermanJoe (talk) 10:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (December 2014)[edit]

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Reference Errors on 18 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!


May 2014 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!

All the best

Gavin / SchroCat (talk) 09:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 13:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 December 2014[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nikkimaria/Archive_28&oldid=1146675303"