User talk:Nikkimaria/Archive 32

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

A kitten for you![edit]

I noticed a problem on this page... not enough kittens! Ten years on Wikipedia and 79k edits..... impressive!

The Quixotic Potato (talk) 21:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 23:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2015[edit]

July to September 2015 Reviewing Award[edit]

 The WikiChevrons 
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons for an awesome 35 FA, A-Class, Peer and GA reviews during the period July to September 2015. Well done! Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 12:09, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP and forms[edit]

Hi! I was recently accepted for OUP access, and I filled out two forms, one that involved both Journals and Scholarship. I previously requested for just the former, but the latter along with the former makes more sense on further recollection. If you come across two forms, please accept the form with Journals and Scholarship! Sorry for the mix-up and thanks for reading! LeftAire (talk) 22:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LeftAire, could you update your app at WP:OUP as well? This shouldn't be a problem but we want it to be clear what's going on. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean on the main page or on the list of Approved Users? Sorry if I'm being difficult. LeftAire (talk) 23:12, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. I get the gist of what you requested. LeftAire (talk) 23:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that's good - just need to be able to track application numbers centrally. Thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Cccan't You See[edit]

Nikkimaria, can you please take a look at this one for close paraphrasing/copyvio? A recent review pointed out such issues, and the edit that supposedly fixed them talked about shuffling phrases in its summary, which is worrying—the diff made it look like shuffling to me. The copyvio check doesn't find anything, but then it probably wouldn't find that kind of phrase inversion. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BlueMoonset, the paraphrasing is not great, but I don't think it's sufficiently bad to hold the nom back. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking at it and letting me know. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP query[edit]

Nikkimaria, I submitted my form for the Journals subscription, but I have not received anything since my submission. Is there usually a wait time between the submission of the OUP journals form and the receipt of login information? I just wanted to ensure I was on course to receive my account. Thank you for all your help and assistance! -- West Virginian (talk) 10:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WV, yes, there's a wait of 1-2 weeks - form submissions get passed on in batches to OUP for login creation. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, thank you for the information! I look forward to receiving my response from OUP. Thank you again for all your efforts in getting editors like me squared away! -- West Virginian (talk) 12:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 7 October[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) 00:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Prior Park Landscape Garden[edit]

Nikkimaria, this one was just promoted to prep, and the message given with the nomination approval about the copyvio detector leaves me worried that it might have missed something. Can you please check to see whether it is indeed free of close paraphrasing? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BlueMoonset, I did a few spotchecks there and found one phrase that needed quoting (which I've fixed) but not much else, so I'm minded to let it run. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nikkimaria, for checking and for doing the one fix. I'm happy to let it run if you're satisfied with it. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Wild 'n Out[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you removed some content from Wild 'n Out without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! JustBerry (talk) 02:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JustBerry, there was extensive discussion about that edit on the talk page, and I referred to that discussion in my edit summary. This templating is incorrect, and I'd encourage you to revert your restoration. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --JustBerry (talk) 13:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Frank Sinatra[edit]

Left a comment there just in case the ping didn't work, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: September 2015[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 01:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 07 October 2015[edit]

Airport 77 Film[edit]

Hi,I thought your edit of the alternative version was brutal.Atlantic306 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Email[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, for security reason I associate a different "secret" email to my account, if possible I'd prefer a direct email via the one which is listed here but if needed I have no problem in changing my settings as soon as you'll confirm me it's needed. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015[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) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 October 2015[edit]

Coast Guard Squadron One[edit]

Hi, Nikkimaria... I guess it was you who put the image review on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Coast Guard Squadron One. The edit was not signed so if it was not you then disregard this. Anyway, some of the images that are on the Coast Guard Historian's Office website do not have captioning and therefore no date is known. The Historian's Office admits this in the narratives that accompany the photos on the website. From personal experience as a former Coast Guardsman, I know that in the past the historian's office was either non-existent or under-funded. It has only been in the last 20 years or so that history has become important to those prepare Coast Guard budgets. Much of the documents relating to cutters, personnel and operations from the period 1946 through about 1990 has either been lost or is in storage in some government warehouse ( Think... the last scene of Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark) The current Historian has been doing wonders in discovering lost treasures of Coast Guard history that have been stored away for years, but it is almost 45 years of work to sift through, plus keep current on all of the stuff happening today. Anyway, how do I resolve your questions about the image review? Any suggestions? Cuprum17 (talk) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cuprum17, I would definitely suggest linking to the Historian Office website from the image description, and provide any information that is known - for example, the commissioning date for the squadron can provide an estimate of date for the patch. The more significant problem is my last point, regarding the awards - they are not original creations of the uploaders but were pre-existing designs, so we need to consider the copyright status of those designs. What do you know about their origins? Nikkimaria (talk) 19:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Republic of Vietnam ribbons were a creation of the Republic of Vietnam and that country no longer exists. The Vietnam Service Medal ribbon was a creation of the U.S. Army Institute of Heraldry and is in the public domain. I will get back to you after doing some research on the other two ribbons of Vietnamese origin. I am still not sure what to do about the patch because I do not understand how a link to the Historian's office will establish a date for the patch or how that is documented. I will try something, but I would like for you to check my work, please. Thank you for your patience... Cuprum17 (talk) 20:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nikki, please check this link to the and Medals&ps=24&p=0 Vietnam Campaign medal to see if referencing it would help. Ditto, the and Medals&ps=24&p=0 Gallantry Cross (Vietnam) Cuprum17 (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Cuprum17, but those links don't seem to work for me... Nikkimaria (talk) 23:47, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strange...they load instantly for me. Now I don't know what to do; I'm at a standstill. Cuprum17 (talk) 00:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what do they say about the designs? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and ribbon it says:


Description


A Gold six pointed star with rays, 32cm in diameter, superimposed by a White enameled star, 42cm in diameter, overall in center a Green disc, 18cm in diameter, with the outline of the Vietnamese Country with a Red flame of three rays between North and South Vietnam. On the reverse of the medal is a circle with a designation band containing the word CHIEN-DICH (Campaign) at the top and BOI-TINH (Medal) at the bottom. Across the center of the circle is the word VIET-NAM.


Ribbon


The ribbon is 1 3/8 inches wide and consists of the following stripes: 1/16 inch Gherkin Green 67183; 3/16 inch White 67101; 5/16 inch Gherkin Green; 1/4 inch White; 5/16 inch Gherkin Green; 3/16 inch White; and 1/16 inch Gherkin Green.


Criteria


See Army Regulation 600-8-22, Military Awards.


Components


The following are authorized components:


a. Medal (regular size): Available commercially.

b. Medal (miniature size): Available commercially.

c. Ribbon: MIL-R-11589/158. Available commercially.

d. Ribbon Attachment: MIL-R-41819/23. Available commercially.


Background


The Secretary of Defense approved a request for approval of foreign awards to US Military personnel on 7 February 1966. As a result of this approval, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with device bar (1960- ) was awarded to US Armed Forces personnel by the Government of the Republic of Vietnam per Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces Order No. 48, dated 24 March 1966. The acceptance, criteria and description was announced in the Federal Register, Volume 31, No. 147, 30 July 1966 (Title 32, Code of Federal Regulation 47).

The Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces Memorandum 2655 prescribed there were two devices to be worn on the ribbon. The first device was for the period 8 March 1949 - 20 July 1954 and is not authorized for wear by American Military Personnel. The second period was from 1 January 1960 with the last period to be decided after the war was over. The ending period remains blank, since the Republic of Vietnam Government ceased to exist before the ending period was established. The devices for the medal are in two sizes - - the large size is 1 13/64 inches in width and is worn on the suspension ribbon of the full size decoration. The regular size is 19/32 inch wide and is worn on the miniature decoration and service ribbon bar.

Since the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal is a foreign award, it is not issued by the United States Government. The medal may be purchased from commercial sources.

There is similar verbiage for the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Medal and ribbon. Cuprum17 (talk) 13:11, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. So the Republic of Vietnam would have been entitled to the copyright... I'm not sure what if anything their laws regarding copyright were, nor what the succession would have been, so this will take a bit of digging. I will try to find out more. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

India House FAC[edit]

Hi Nikki, I have left a response to the points you raised in the India House FAC. Your comments would be welcome.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 19:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fulfilling Stale Requests on the Resource Exchange[edit]

Hello.

I had an idea about Stale Requests that I thought you should see. Ocaasi (WMF) might have already pinged you already about this idea. If you haven't read it already, you can read it here.

Thank you. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MrLinkinPark333, thanks for that. I see you've also volunteered as a research coordinator - this would be a great project for you to take on in that role. I've sent you an email to follow up. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Emile[edit]

Hey I was hoping since you're interested in Canadian topics, you could take a look at Jonathan Emile's page and make suggestions on how to improve it. He is an artist I believe meets musician notability criteria, however it has been nominated for deletion. I'd like to have your vote to keep the page alive while it's being improved. It has already been made better. Wikiwahwah5 (talk) 14:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikiwahwah5, I'd be happy to take a look at the article, but so you know asking people to vote a certain way is strongly discouraged - I suggest you not take that approach. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:36, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

newspaperarchive.com accounts...[edit]

Has the email for the newspaperarchive.com accounts though wikipedia been sent? I'd like to know if digging through my spam folders on that email is needed...Naraht (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Naraht, it has, email me if you can't find it. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:30, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanx, I'll look when I get home.Naraht (talk) 20:31, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Nikki. I already have access to Newspapers.com -- would it be too greedy of me to request access to Newspaperarchive.com, too? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I applied for Newspapers.com, Newspaperarchive.com, and the British Newspaper Archive... :) Sam Walton (talk) 20:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Dirtlawyer1, lots of people in that boat with Sam - if you think it'd be useful, go for it! Nikkimaria (talk) 22:54, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mail[edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Deletion of "Trivia" section from 2 albums[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria.

Back in 2011 I added a piece of (self researched) trivia to the albums of Always.../The Gathering and Nachthymnen/Abigor.

In 2013 you deleted it, stating non reliable source. Here are your edits:

I'm not an expert in Wikipedia editing, but surely there must be a way to convince other editors that the point I made is true. I can try to do it over your talk page, but feel free to move it elsewhere.

So here are the lyrics to "I Face The Eternal Winter" compared to their source snippets from Always... :

I Face The Eternal Winter Always...

Flying silent on winter wings

Slowly... Flying silent
[...]
Dancers on winter winds

Flowing emotions from my bleeding soul
Tears that flow burn my skin

Drain emotions from my bleeding soul
Tears that follow burn my skin

I'm drifting away on the cold wave of desolation

Sailing on the winds of desolation

I'm touching the wind as it sadly sings

Touching the wind as it sadly sings... for me.

Carried to the distant unknown

Carry the light to a distant unknown

Eternity awaits me...

My heart is so cold

My heart is so cold, Subzero

Emotions reached their freezing point

can emotions reach freezing point?

..Only pure hate

Lost all that I was living for

Lost all that I was living for, live no longer

Crying without sound

All crying without a sound

Thy sky has frozen to ice
As the last drops of blood leave my body
I hear the winter breath
I'm the face of the night

I'm all alone

Will I always be alone?

The fullmoon is glowing
Snow falls from the sky
I feel the eternal winter
Holocaust winds are rising
Like a dark northern breeze
My cryptic journey has just begun


OmerMor (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi OmerMor. The issue with this content is that it is original research based on your own analysis of primary sources (the lyrics for the two songs). That one is a mashup of the other is a possible explanation for the similarities you note, but there are others (eg. both could derive from some other song we don't know about). The solution is to find a reliable secondary source that details how one is derived from the other, and cite that. Are there any such sources available? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find any other sources for this. As I said - it is an original research. If there's no way of mentioning this, I'll let it go. OmerMor (talk) 20:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Without sources to tell us why they are similar, I think that's what we'll have to do. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images on Bristol[edit]

Thanks for your image review on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bristol/archive2, however since your review some images have been added or changed (by another editor) does this mean these should also be reviewed?— Rod talk 21:27, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I'll take a look. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cite error[edit]

Hi. This edit caused a cite error. I've fixed it, but I thought I should mention for future reference that {{sfn}} appears to be rather persnickety. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's annoying. Thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 October 2015[edit]

How Do I Log-In to JSTOR?[edit]

My request to be given access to the illustrious JSTOR Academic Journal was approved on 25 October, but what do I use to log-in to their online Journal? Do I use my Wikipedia username and password, or something else?Davidbena (talk) 16:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC) P.S. - I have just now seen the e-mail that was sent to me, and I have duly filled-out the required entries.Davidbena (talk) 17:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davidbena, once JSTOR has processed the form response they will send you your login information. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 17:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Frigid bumblebee[edit]

Nikkimaria, could you please take a look at this nomination and see whether there are any close paraphrasing issues? There seems to be some disagreement, and a person with your extensive experience would be welcome. In the interests of full disclosure, you may be subject to some unpleasantness if you decide there is any close paraphrasing, given what's been going on lately at WT:DYK. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Newspaper archive[edit]

Whoops. It got accidentally thrown into my archives in my email. I finished it for you. Mitch32(Scenery is fine — but human nature is finer.) 20:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Newspaper archive[edit]

Email address now confirmed (re-31 Racingmanager). Sorry about that and many thanks.User:Racingmanager

Question[edit]

I had a question: I was asking the education people if they'd be interested in setting up a booth at the VLA Conference in 2016. This is a library conference in Virginia and would be held during October. Would you be interested in coming and helping out with a booth, if I can afford to set one up? I'd be covering information about GLAM and the education project. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:52, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tokyogirl79, that's a cool idea, I might be able to help out. You could also ask Sadads, who is much closer geographically and would have an easier time getting there. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:01, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Tokyogirl79: I am not sure what will be going on that time next year nor where I will be--and from the larger official WP:TWL perspective, the strategic priority is higher level national/international events. Increasingly, I am trying to wrangle activities like that in New England in my volunteer time (since I moved up here). For example, it looks like I might be doing a series of activities for the Vermont Library Association next May. I would love to participate remotely, but it might be easier to get some people from Wikimedia D.C. to participate in Virginia (like @Fuzheado, Harej, and Econterms:). If a group of volunteers wanted to attend the event, you could easily get funding via the WMF Grants program, and I would be happy to advise on booth/presentations/editathon/workshops/conversations to have. I think for the Vt, Lib Assoc. meeting I will be doing a 4 hr editathon, 2 hr Wiki + Education workshop, and a small presentation later in the weekend -- all of these I have in pre-packaged presentations/materials that would take about 40 minutes to convert to another context. If you ping the GLAM US mailing list (documented at outreach:GLAM/Mailing_lists, you might find someone else who is also interested.
Also, were you at WikiConUSA? I think I missed talking to you (wanted to say hi, and congrats on all the great work you have been doing). I am very much interested in documenting more of your relationship with the State Library of Virginia? Would you be interested in doing a blog post for the Wikimedia Blog? If so, email me at astinson@wikimedia.org, and I can send you some questions to get started in drafting. Sadads (talk) 13:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadads, that sounds like that'd be fun! WikiConUSA was the recent one in DC, right? I actually was at that one and I held a presentation about my work with the LVA and editing with a COI. I'd definitely appreciate any help I can get with people attending. I actually will be seeing @Econterms: next week at the edit-a-thon at UVA, so I can ask him if he'd be interested then. Also, anyone that would be willing to go up, even for a day, would be wonderful. I will say that the first real day of the conference (Thursday) is the one I'll definitely need someone to be there. As a perk, I'll say that this year they held a reception for the exhibitionists that involved really delicious food and drink, so they'll likely hold it again next year as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:08, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I filled out the JSTOR form[edit]

Hello... I filled out the JSTOR form I rec'd via email; was I supposed to get a link & password? Tks! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 15:49, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lingzhi, JSTOR will process the form responses and generate logins - you'll get an email from them with your password, although it might take a week or two as you just missed the last batch. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:26, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1998 Strikes[edit]

Thanks for your feedback. I will get started on it this weekend -- The lede and background will be given plenty of expansion, as you advised. GABHello! 16:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes... thanks for catching my mistake. Sleep deprivation is a wonderful thing. GABHello! 22:40, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A toast for your help with Schmerber v. California![edit]

Many thanks for your help reviewing the images in Schmerber v. California. The article was promoted to FA status today, and I hope you will raise a glass with me in celebration! -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:10, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

5 Million: We celebrate your contribution[edit]

We couldn't have done it without you
Well, maybe. Eventually. But the encyclopedia would not be as good.

Celebrate 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:41, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 October 2015[edit]

Www.Newspaperarchive.com[edit]

Thank you for activating me there. Despite filling in the Google Doc, I have not received a login there, if I am not mistaken. Nor does the "remind password" procedure work there, either. I filled in the Google Doc again, just in case. The other press DBs work for me. Zezen (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zezen, see the update at Wikipedia talk:Newspaperarchive.com - will be following up on this tomorrow. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question concerning JSTOR[edit]

Hi, again. My question is whether or not it is normal to wait so long to receive the codes from JSTOR which will enable me to have access to their journal? I still haven't received my codes in my e-mail.Davidbena (talk) 01:25, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davidbena, it can take 1–3 weeks depending on when you fill out the form - responses are processed in batches, and it looks like you just missed the most recent one. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Allegra Versace[edit]

If you want to, you can take a look at the article about Allegra Versace. That article is this weeks TAFI.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:15, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will take a look. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:08, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Blocking_policy#RfC_about_WP:NOTHERE[edit]

Colleague, I remember we had disagreements about contents of policy pages. Therefore I would like no invite you to take a look at the RfC about inclusion of WP:NOTHERE as an advice into the blocking policy. I need your sharp judgement to double-check the validity of my position: if an essay becomes a base for a common practice, then it must be promoted to a guideline and only then incorporated into the policy. Rationale: essays (their number is legion) are not subject to rigorous scrutiny by the community. If you will say I am wrong, I will back off from there. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:43, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Staszek. If I'm reading your comments correctly, you're objecting more to the process rather than the actual premise of the essay? Broadly, I agree with your line of reasoning that treating an essay like policy is not a good practice. In this particular case though, since this essay is already commonly used that way, I wonder if you might not be trying to shut the barn door after the horse has bolted. It might make more sense to have an RfC on promoting the essay to guideline status, and in the process addressing the advice there that you feel is questionable - this would (ideally) have the effect of imposing community scrutiny. Does that make sense? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/2015 IFMAR 1:10 Electric Off-Road World Championship[edit]

Nikkimaria, since you don't always get notified when you're pinged from templates, I thought I'd ask whether you could take a look at this nomination to see whether the close paraphrasing you noted earlier has been dealt with. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BlueMoonset - the paraphrasing is passable, or at least at the point where it could be passed. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:47, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, thank you. I've been posting to that nomination, and it's good to know that the paraphrasing is adequate there, but—this is terribly embarrassing—it was actually Template:Did you know nominations/That We Can Play where you were pinged from, and what I'd meant to ask you about. Can you also take a look at it to make sure the paraphrasing isn't too close? Many thanks, and my apologies for copying the wrong link into the section header here. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR accont processing[edit]

Greetings Nikkimaria,

I was approved for access to JSTOR on 25 October, just want to know how long the account processing usually takes. I'm improving an article currently and having this access would help a lot. Thanks cӨde1+6 LogicBomb! 16:19, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Code16, you would've just missed the early batch - I would say another week before the next batch is processed by JSTOR and the logins sent out. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, thanks, looking forward to it. cӨde1+6 LogicBomb! 14:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Highbeam account[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria,

My free subscription to Highbeam was approved on 22 August, but I don't have a record anywhere of getting the email to activate it (maybe it went to my Junk folder). Is it possible to resend it? Sionk (talk) 01:55, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sionk, if you email me I can send you your activation code. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 November 2015[edit]

BMJ[edit]

You should have received an email a couple of weeks ago regarding your request for access to BMJ. Can you please either fill out the form linked from that email, or let me know if you did not receive it? Thanks, Nikkimaria (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message, I filled out the form. Did it work? Best regards, Hippo99 (talk) 06:54, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When do you think it will be activated? All the best, Hippo99 (talk) 14:06, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Hippo99, it worked. As to when it will be activated, Atsme is now coordinating that partnership and will work with BMJ to get you a login, but it might take a week or two. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:08, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nikkimaria, thank you so much for your efforts! Best regards, Hippo99 (talk) 23:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Hello, Nikkimaria. If, and only if, you can conveniently fit it in, may I bother you for a source review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ralph Vaughan Williams/archive1. I feel guilty at troubling you after you have already contributed an image review, and I can easily ask someone else to step in, but I'm afraid your justified reputation as a source reviewer makes you the natural first choice! Quite understand if you're too busy, naturally. Tim riley talk 13:19, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are a star! Thank you so much. Tim riley talk 14:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A gong[edit]

The Special Barnstar
For your patience and your unblinking eye for omissions, errors and contradictions in countless FAC reviews, I send this decoration, with gratitude. Tim riley talk 16:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Frigid bumblebee redux[edit]

Nikkimaria, this has just been approved, with a ping to you, but since pings frequently don't get through to you from templates, I thought I'd post here to see whether you wanted to check it again, hopefully before it gets promoted. Many thanks, and sorry to bother you again. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:54, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's now in Prep 2. You'll probably want to check anyway, since the approval simply mentioned a copyvio detector check, which is no guarantee of anything. (A couple of weeks ago I found clear copyvio/close paraphrasing in a case where the copyvio detector gave a 16% chance of an issue.) BlueMoonset (talk) 06:24, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - it's not great but I think it's passable. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:37, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your checking. Wish it was better, of course, but passable is a relief. Thanks again! BlueMoonset (talk) 14:44, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

eMail[edit]

Honestly I don't remember when and how I proposed myself for The Wikipedia Library but I believe I did it. I am a reliable contributor of Wiki it, I don't have problems in the use of English language (it is not my native language but I do not live in Italy and usually I use English as main language), and I think that working on a single project is not enough. I would like to be more involved on global projects (e.g. Wikidata where I recently passed 1000 edits... not too many but a lot more compared to other Wiki it contributors older than me) and I believe that the resources are the foundations of all Wikimedia projects.

If you want, feel free to contact me, I will be glad to have a chat with you. I live in the Netherlands (UTC +1) and a good time to talk for me is between 7pm to 10pm (12am to 3pm for you) from Monday to Thursday. I have a Skype account always connected through a Skype phone (no video) and another account for the PC.

If you want to write me back, I would prefer if you will do that here.

Hope to hear from you soon. --НУРшЯGIO(beware of the moose) 20:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hypergio, sorry that was unclear! You had responded to the JSTOR user survey, which included a question about volunteering, and I was following up on that.
Since you are most active on it-wiki, would you be interested in helping to start a branch of the library here? There are already some other users interested who've been discussin it by email - I could loop you into that conversation if you like. Nikkimaria (msg) 23:53, 10 nov 2015 (CET)
Sorry if I'm short and I didn't answer you immediately (I was online when I received your message) but at the same time I was busy clearing my PC from a virus (and I'm still busy with it). Yes, please, keep me in the loop. --НУРшЯGIO(beware of the moose) 20:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, will follow up by email. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:39, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: October 2015[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 05:57, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Newspaperarchive.com[edit]

Hi. I have completed and resent the Google-form to get access to Newspaperarchive.com. However, I still haven't received any answer. Did you receive the form? Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 07:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeff5102, yes - it's been sent on to Newspaperarchive so they can create a login for you. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:31, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR access[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, My application for access to JSTOR was approved and you sent me an email to that effect on 27 October. I responded by filling in the Google form at the link given, but have received no further communication. Am I being too impatient?.....cheers Paul venter (talk) 09:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, your response has been received and passed on, so you should receive an email directly from JSTOR when they've created a login for you. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again and thank you.....Paul venter (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again....it seems that the JSTOR access is only partial and more importantly (for me) is that access to botanical material is severely limited, Paul venter (talk) 07:42, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Paul venter, you should have access to all journals on the main jstor.org domain (just not the plants.jstor.org) domain. If that doesn't seem to be the case, I suggest getting in touch with support(at)jstor.org. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:59, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria.

I was approved for OUP over one month ago on October 5. I still haven't received any email for account activation. Is this just me, or everyone else as well? --Biblioworm 18:53, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was also approved over a month ago, and I'm still waiting.Davidbena (talk) 19:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Biblioworm and Davidbena: See WT:OUP: there were processing delays that affected all applications. These have now been resolved and the distribution is moving forward - expect logins within the next few days for Scholarship/Legal, possibly a week or two more for Journals. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:43, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 November 2015[edit]

Mass messages[edit]

Hi! I've seen you request mass mailings numerous times with no concerns. If you'd like, I can grant you the right so that you can carry out this task yourself moving forward. Let me know — MusikAnimal talk 22:36, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I'm okay without it for now. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:23, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR[edit]

Hi Nikki. I have a JSTOR account, but I do not use it as I have never found a source on it I could not access elsewhere. I asked to cancel it, but this does not seem to have happened. Can you advise how I cancel it to free it for another editor? Dudley Miles (talk) 22:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dudley, I will let JSTOR know, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:17, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP account[edit]

Thanks for the reminder (and your patience) about the OUP form. I filled it out, checking the "Scholarship" box, as I wasn't sure if I had also been approved for Journals. GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was both - I've fixed that, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR cleanup drive[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria. I think I have fixed a couple of links but in most cases I cannot find a bad link and in the others I can find no link at all so I can't fix it. Are there some links that seem to work but are in an unacceptable format? Is there some way I can learn to better understand what is involved? Yr advice please. Eddaido (talk) 07:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddaido, that is a list of pages that JSTOR reported was redirecting to their error page. However, you're not the first to find articles on the list with no link at all. The Interior might know more, as he was the one actually discussing the issue with JSTOR... Nikkimaria (talk) 13:57, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eddaido, the list was generated in the summer, so it is possible that some links have been fixed since then, or that the content has changed and the JSTOR refs are no longer there. Could you give me an example of a page where you weren't able to find a link? Thanks, The Interior (Talk) 17:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
First, sorry other commitments are in my way just now so this late response but I have gone to the end of Group 18 here and made notes as I worked through the last 15 or so. Can you comment on my experiences as recorded there? Many thanks, Eddaido (talk) 11:01, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My guess from looking at it a little is that this list was generated by looking at their web server logs, and for every entry with an error status of some kind, they recorded the contents of the Referrer header (the page on which the users clicked a link that led to a page on jstor.org which in turn generated an error in their logs). This means that errors on their side will show up in this list as errors on our side (if their server is temporarily overloaded and returns an error, it will here look as if we have an invalid link); and it also means that the list only reflects purely technical error conditions, and excludes any logical errors (such as linking to an incorrect, but existing, article). Iff that's the case (I may obviously be wrong, I'm just speculating here), that means we can pretty much ignore any article we check that has no obvious erroneous link. If we follow the link and get the relevant article on jstor.org, then the cause isn't that we've failed to identify the error in the article (a false negative) but rather that JSTOR have incorrectly flagged an article as having an error (a false positive).

I would suggest taking that approach in this round, and if there are a lot of the same articles that show up in any future list from JSTOR we can reevaluate whether we need to change that. --Xover (talk) 11:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I feel better now. Eddaido (talk) 11:28, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 17 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) 00:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015[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) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR errors - duplicate entries in list[edit]

Hi Nikki, just dropping by to let you know we have duplicates on this list - the one I noticed was Jan Vansina, which is listed for both the default English site and mobile site. I guess all the m.wikipedia links can be removed? I checked 3 and found all appeared twice. Cheers! Nikthestunned 12:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed all the .m links to links to the desktop site; removed (some but not all) duplicates; and converted the links to enwiki articles to internal wikilinks so that redlinks are more obvious (there were a handful that I've fixed). There will still be some duplicates left because some the links were of the form http://en…org/wiki/Article#Section_title (or similarly for cite_ref links) that would be a little too much effort to remove reliably, but the number should at least be significantly reduced. --Xover (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Legend! Thanks Nikthestunned 13:54, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your responses and related work both here and above. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 14:56, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 November 2015[edit]

Reference errors on 21 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) 00:16, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR[edit]

Hello, I have been approved and filled the form over a month ago but still have not received account login. I would like to know whether it is still in process. Thank you.--黑暗魔君 (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 黑暗魔君, you should have received a login directly from JSTOR - check your spam folder, and if you can't find it you should get in touch with them at support(at)jstor.org. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Issue resolved. Thank you.--黑暗魔君 (talk) 02:14, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CopyVios NOV 5 - Civility[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria,

Was hoping you could help point me in the right direction regarding the CopyVios tag on NOV 5 for Civility. Was wondering since it was tagged in the initial definition that it might be that, and if not how I am supposed to identify what needs to be corrected. Still new, buy a quick learner.. Any advice/guidance is appreciated!

Best regards, Blipp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blippincott (talk • contribs) 02:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blippincott, you can see some examples here. Basically, when I was reviewing the article I found a lot of instances where segments of text were identical or very close to segments found in the sources. You can use tools like the Duplication Detector to help you find problems, but keep in mind that tools aren't as smart as you - manually comparing your sources and your text is always best. You might find this resource helpful. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply Nikkimaria, i'll be sure to scan through the article again using the references you mentioned. Once changes have been made to the text should I message you again for review? If not, what's my next step.

Blipp --Blippincott (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you can let me know, but it would also be a good idea to check other articles you've written or substantially edited to make sure this kind of problem hasn't occurred elsewhere. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nikkimaria, I've gone ahead an updated the Overview section. Before I make the remainder of the changes to this page, would it be possible (when you have time of course) to take a look at the Overview section to see if these changes are appropriate. If this is what I'm supposed to do, I will proceed to make more changes and report back. I really appreciate your help :-) --Blippincott (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blippincott, good start, but it'll need to go a bit farther. If you compare for example "Freemasonry has continuously been a long-established supporter of permitting and perpetuating alternative perspectives and ideas, while zealously inculcating democratic habits of honest listening and civil discourse" and "Freemasonry has been a long standing supporter of allowing and perpetuation alternative voices and ideas, promoting democratic habits of generous listening and civil discourse", you can see that the structure and phrasing is almost the same. You should either rephrase to a greater extent, or where necessarily quote directly. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria, much appreciated! Was worried I might be changing things too much, but this makes a lot of sense. I will give this a greater pass this next round and report back to you once the next round of edits are made. Thanks so much for the quick feedback. Hope you're having a great new year so far!

--Blippincott (talk) 01:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nikkimaria,

Hope all is well! Made some further changes to most of the sections with paragraph text. I have not touched the section on Canada, but there is not much in that section and I think the content is original. However, it's something that can be easily updated if it needed. Was hoping if you could take another look (whenever works best for you of course), since now I've made greater edits and I think the page should be closer to getting the CopyVios lifted. Really appreciate your help!

--Blippincott (talk) 10:03, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blippincott: again, definitely better; again, definitely more needed. Compare for example "provides students with tools they need for active participation and democratic action, and teachers with the materials and support to achieve this" with "provides students with the tools they need for active participation and democratic action, and teachers with the materials and support to achieve this" - these two are pretty much identical. You might find it helpful to read through Wikipedia:Close_paraphrasing#How_to_write_acceptable_content. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikkimaria,

Happy February! Thanks for all your advice and feedback. I've made several updates, and am hopefully this is more aligned with those guidelines you sent. Could you please review when convenient? Would be great to know how close I am to getting the CopyVios removed. Really appreciate everything! --Blippincott (talk) 17:07, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blippincott, it might be helpful for you to do a side-by-side comparison between each of the cited sources and the material being cited - this will help you to catch identical or too-close phrasing, which unfortunately still persists. For example, take a look at this source next to this section - see how there's a sentence that is almost exactly the same? Nikkimaria (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hey Nikkimaria, I've searched every reference using the duplication detector and the information and worked on paraphrasing as much of the text by looking at DD and comparing it against the sites. Feels like I might be making a double pass over ones I worked on before. Are there any other tools that I can use to take a look at these faster or more effectively? Just want to make sure I'm not missing anything. Thanks so much for your time a feedback. --Blippincott (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Blippincott, for tools I always recommend either DD or Earwig's Copyvio Detector, but I also always emphasize that, while it can (very!) tedious, the gold standard is manual comparison of article and source. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR[edit]

HI there Nikkimaria. Sorry but can you drop me from the list for JSTOR please. I've been absent for a few months and am likely to remain so for quite a while. Peripitus (Talk) 08:35, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP Scholarship resources[edit]

Hi Nikkimaria, I'd have a question on the OUP Scholarship stream: I've seen the list of OUP Scholarship resources and I've noticed that Oxford Scholarship Online and Oxford Reference are not listed, while they are in Wikipedia:OUP; are they really not included in this stream? I think so, because yesterday I received my OUP credentials and Scholarship Online and Reference were not among them, but I'm asking to be sure, because these are two of the OUP resources I was most eager for :-) In any case, the other resources of the stream are excellent. Thank you, ContinuaEvoluzione 09:17, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. You're right - my understanding was that the list at WP:OUP was definitive, but I will check on this. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Continua Evoluzione: yes, confirmed - those resources will be added to the accounts by end of day. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, both are active now. Actually, for Oxford Reference only the "Quick reference" resources are available, while the "Reference library" ones (such as The Oxford Classical Dictionary) are not. I don't know if we just have to wait for the "Reference library" to be included in the subscription or if this was intended; in this case, I think an explanatory note on the OUP Scholarship list would be useful, so as to clarify that only part of Oxford Reference material is actually available. Thank you again, ContinuaEvoluzione 11:47, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can ask again, but the person I was talking to is in the US (where it's now Thanksgiving), so there likely won't be a response until next week. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:26, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanksgiving
Shout for joy
Have a happy one, with a trumpet! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:30, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My Thanksgiving was last month, but thanks anyways. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Continua Evoluzione: Reference library should be included - the person who can fix this is out of the office right now, but they will work on the problem and will have it available by next week. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:54, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thank you again for your patience, Nikkimaria. Best regards, ContinuaEvoluzione 08:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Reference library has just been added! :-) ContinuaEvoluzione 09:02, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Access to JSTOR[edit]

I wanted to know if it's normal to wait two months after being approved before one is able to access JSTOR? I still haven't heard from them, and I am waiting still for my codes.Davidbena (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You should have already received them, Davidbena. I suggest contacting support[at]jstor.org. Unfortunately I don't have direct access to their system so can't find out your login myself. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:38, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I just checked my Spam folder, and the JSTOR was accidentally sent to my Spam inbox. So, thanks. I got it.Davidbena (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 November 2015[edit]

Image licensing at Guatemalan Revolution[edit]

Greetings, Nikkimaria. I just put Guatemalan Revolution through a peer review, with the intention of eventually nominating it at FAC. During the PR process your name came up as a person who could give the image licensing a final look. If you have the time/inclination to do so, I would be very grateful; I intend to nominate this at FAC after that. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 06:28, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vanamonde93, I do have a few concerns about the images in that article:
  • File:Guatearbenz0870.JPG. While Guatemala does have freedom of panorama, generally that does not extend to two-dimensional artworks such as murals. Thus, you will need to also have a licensing tag to indicate the status of the mural itself, as well as the photo
  • File:Manuel_Estrada_Cabrera_01.jpg. You have indicated a licensing of life+75 and pre-1923 publication. In order to verify this, you'll need to provide the date of death of the creator and the location and date of first publication of the image. Note that publication is not the same as creation - though the photo may have been taken before 1920, that doesn't mean it was published then
  • File:Ubico_Castaneda,_Jorge.jpg. Your rationale here is that this image is a scan of a 2D work now in the public domain and is therefore in the public domain. However, that doesn't tell us why the 2D work is in the public domain. In order for PD-scan to apply, there needs to be another tag for the original work.
  • File:Juntagobierno1944.jpg. This image has a life+70 tag. As that tag indicates, "You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States".
Let me know if any of the above needs further explanation. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:55, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I am not actually the person who uploaded any of those, but I will contact the people who did, and generally see what I can do. I might come back to you for clarification at some point; thanks for the time! Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Technical problems with the translation[edit]

We spoke a couple of weeks ago about the Wikipedia Library. I started with the translation of this page but am not able to publish one paragraph. It is ready but it is showing a little yellow clock and not appearing on the page. What am I missing? --НУРшЯGIO(beware of the moose) 07:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hypergio, if you mean the paragraph starting "Credo che il programma Wikipedia Library...", I think I've fixed that. Looks like there are still some questions that aren't translated yet. Thanks for your work on this. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Songs[edit]

Aha! thanks for this. I sort-of-knew but had forgotten! Cheers DBaK (talk) 06:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Email OUP[edit]

I already tried to email you after your first message. Didn't get an email and couldn't send you one. Spam-filter is also empty. --Gripweed (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Gripweed: Re-sent, let me know if you still don't receive it. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, entered my data. Next steps? --Gripweed (talk) 21:03, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Gripweed: The form response will be passed on to OUP later this week and they will generate a login for you. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oct 2015 Milhist backlog drive[edit]

 Military history service award 
I hereby award you this as a token of the project’s appreciation for your contributions during the October 2015 Military history project backlog drive. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mayabazar[edit]

I've nominated this article for FAC which also happens to be my first attempt. It is also the first Indian Telugu film article to be nominated for such status. Can you please conduct a source review on this article here? If you are not interested in doing that, can you please leave your comments there as a reviewer? All constructive comments are welcomed. Yours sincerely, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Hi, Nikkimaria MochaMilk (talk) 07:55, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Nikkimaria (talk) 14:38, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Balinese traditional house[edit]

Nikkimaria, just checking to see whether the close paraphrasing issues you raised here have been addressed to your satisfaction. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:11, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 December 2015[edit]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open![edit]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP[edit]

Hi, I responded to the email on 11/16 for scholarship and journals. Should I have gotten a login yet? Thanks. --JFH (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JFH, looks like you were on the more recent list sent to OUP for login generation, rather than the first one - you should receive your Scholarship login this week, and Journals in a week or two. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:00, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUP Law[edit]

Dear Nikkimaria, sorry to bother you again about OUP. This morning I've received my credentials for OUP Law, but I remember I didn't request the Law stream (only Scholarship and Journals, which I already got). Of course I have no problem in keeping this stream in my subscription, but I'd just like to let you know that this stream can be removed from my OUP subscription in case there is shortage of Law accounts for other users, since I'm not interested in it. Best regards, ContinuaEvoluzione 10:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. We only have a few applicants for Law so definitely won't have a shortage, but you were not on the list of recipients I sent in yesterday at all - not sure why you got any credentials today. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Continua Evoluzione: Turns out that all Scholarship recipients were accidentally granted Law as well - you will keep the access, but those won't be subtracted from the total available. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:00, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no problem, we'll keep it :-) Thank you for your prompt reply as always, ContinuaEvoluzione 21:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ACR for Coast Guard Squadron One[edit]

Greetings. You said to contact you if I had questions about the image review of Coast Guard Squadron One. I tried pinging you a couple of times about concerns but did not receive a reply. Anyway, I think I have resolved all of the image issues but I have added a couple of relevant images and I would ask you to please look at the article again and make sure that everything is in order. If there are remaining issues, kindly point me in the right direction and I will attempt to resolve them. Cheers... Cuprum17 (talk) 14:02, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cuprum17, sorry about that, will check right away. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:12, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I know that editors sometime have a Real Life outside of WP, plus I'm very sure being a MILHIST Coordinator keeps you real busy also. When you get time, see my comment on ACR/Coast Guard Squadron One page. Cuprum17 (talk) 19:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, what happens now? The article has three support reviews and your comment that the images seem to be OK. Being new to the process, I don't know what to do next. If I can see the process through once then perhaps it will be clearer to me if I decide to do ACR reviews in the future. It is my understanding that the ACR process is somewhat short-handed and if possible I would like to help out on articles with subject matter that I am familiar with. Thanks for your help in the image review, that is perhaps my weakest area of expertise. Cuprum17 (talk) 16:19, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cuprum17, the review has been listed for closure here. One of the coordinators who did not participate in the review process will take a look and decide whether there is consensus to promote or not (which, with three supports plus pass on images, I expect there is). They will note a pass (or fail) on the article's talk page, and then the review will be closed and the results processed by bot.
You can't do the closures, but we'd certainly welcome your help with reviewing. Most people do general reviews of the whole article, like Rupert or Peacemaker in this instance; others, like Dank or I, focus on specialist areas like prose or image review. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to thank you for your participation in the ACR. Enjoy... Cuprum17 (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yum, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:24, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Scarfe and Barbara March entries[edit]

Please stop deleting our family information. Farjalan (talk) 23:08, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Farjalan, I'm afraid I can't do that. Under our rules regarding biographies of living people, details like this need to be backed up by reliable published sources. I understand that obviously if you're family you would know that what you write is true, but we require that other people are able to verify the content also. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What you say is preposterous and extremely irritating. The simple family information included in our entries is corroborated in countless places on the web. Please restore it as we wished to have it immediately! Farjalan (talk) 04:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, then you should be able to find a reliable source that you can cite fairly easily. Here is an easy-to-follow explanation of how to cite sources on Wikipedia. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is extremely dispiriting for people like ourselves who have suffered greatly from misinformation to find that a source like Wikipedia, which we had hoped was the one place where errors and outright nonsense could be monitored and corrected, had roving functionaries and busybodies who can simply override the truth at will. If you do not allow people who actually know the facts to enter them then the entire grand edifice of Wikipedia will slowly erode and degenerate. Believe me, we did not initiate our entries and when we first came upon them they were quite inaccurate. We have tried our best to make them compact and informative. I still have no idea how to rid my entry of a picture that I Ioathe. However, I gave up trying because it's certainly not the worst one that's out there. In any case, I have no more time to devote to this foolishness. I wash my hands of it. Rest assured I shall make no further financial contributions to Wikipedia. How would you like it if i went to your Nikkimaria entry and deleted the 'unverified information'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farjalan (talk • contribs) 16:16, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Farjalan, I'm not the subject of a Wikipedia article, but if I were then yes, I would appreciate people removing unverified information. After all, one of the purposes of the biographies of living people policy is to protect the privacy and reputations of living people (and their families - see here). This means not only that "errors and outright nonsense" should be excluded (and please do say if you see any of that), but also that material that has not been published elsewhere should not appear here. I do understand why you would be very interested in monitoring and amending these articles, but I suggest you take a look at this guidance for article subjects. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your 'contribution' to our entries was the arbitrary removal of factually accurate information that we think is of interest to Wikipedia readers. Your opinion that the passages in question require verification is unjustifiable but since you insist on carrying on with this you leave us no option but to make a formal complaint against you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farjalan (talk • contribs) 20:54, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That the material in question requires verification is in accordance with our policies, including but not limited to our policy on biographies of living people and our policy on the verifiability of article content. I would again encourage you to read these policies to get a better understanding of how Wikipedia works. If you want to have this material included, you will need to provide reliable published sources that support it. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:10, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly we differ but let's not argue the point any further. We will amend the passages that you excised so that they contain nothing that has not been published in my biography in Canadian Who's Who for the last twenty-five years. We trust you will find this satisfactory.Farjalan (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great. This page explains how best to cite that biography in the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing it for me. I am far from computer savvy.Farjalan (talk) 14:47, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome - let me know if there's anything else I can do to help. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:43, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to add a bit about a collaboration between my kids that won the Grand Jury prize for short films at Dances with Films in LA in 2001 but I'll try and figure out how to insert the citation myself. Let's label this 'conversation' as 'getting to know you'. Now you know what an irascible old so-and-so I am.Farjalan (talk) 23:21, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Nikkimaria. I have now added all the citations necessary for verification (I hope). My question is how do I get the (!) need for additional citations box removed from the top of the page? Thanks for your help.Farjalan (talk) 04:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Farjalan, nice work on this. The only concern is that Wikia and IMDB aren't considered reliable, because anyone can add information to them, with little editorial control. Once you've replaced those two with other sources, you can just remove {{BLP sources|date=March 2013}} from the top of the page. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FA question[edit]

Hello, I looking at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates#Supporting and opposing. In the event that I get an opposition to my nomination, if I agree with some but disagree with other improvements/suggestions or oppositions of a reviewer and I feel that in principle the suggestions or concerns being made are not fully legitimate problems (which ), I am only required to state that in my opinion the appropriate concerns are addresses, correct? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:23, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, can I disrespect the opinion of a reviewing editor if I believe I have legitimate reasons to?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi KAVEBEAR, the answer to your second question is yes, you can disagree with what the reviewer says. You shouldn't do so disrespectfully, and you should give a rationale if possible - after all, the coordinator reviewing your nomination will need to know how much weight to assign the oppose, and an explanation of why it isn't valid goes a long way towards dispelling their concerns. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:09, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks. I think respectfully disagree is more along with what I mean not disrespecting the opinion. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you offer another assessment after the article's current images. Basically all the image in dispute had the potential of violating the freedom of panorama rule, so I just excised them from the article. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 14[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
  • Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
  • Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Read the full newsletter

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Balinese traditional house redux[edit]

Nikkimaria, there has been a major rewrite of the paragraph you cited in your last comment, but I don't see much work outside that paragraph. That said, this review is now waiting for your next comment in order for it to proceed. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]

Thanks very much for the heads-up about Infotrac and the New York Times. I have added my request to the list of people applying for an account. I appreciate your help. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: November 2015[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.

The Signpost: 09 December 2015[edit]

Help on Wolffsohn's viscacha?[edit]

Hi, can you expand the article, Wolffsohn's viscacha? I can't find any good information on the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MochaMilk (talk • contribs)

Try biology textbooks, then, or ask for help at WT:WikiProject Biology. Random editors summoned by the {{help me}} template are unlikely to possess advanced knowledge about South American rodents. Huon (talk) 01:31, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MochaMilk, Huon is right - WikiProject Biology or another project would be a good place to start. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:26, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
NikkiMaria, call me Nana. I don't liked to be called by my username.

Anyways, thanks MochaMilk ( ^^) _U~~ 04:39, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Hi Nikki,

Greetings! Hope you are fine today? Thanks for your edit on Folake Solanke. Could you please help with formatting and copy-editing on $2 billions arms deal? Thanks. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 08:06, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikicology, I've done some work on the article, but I wonder if its title shouldn't be Nigerian arms scandal instead? Are there any sources that use the current title, or perhaps something else entirely? Compare Anglo-Leasing scandal, Bofors scandal, etc. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the good work Nikki. I earlier thought of that too and I'm also aware of South African Arms Deal but per WP:UCRN, Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used in reliable sources as such names will usually best fit criteria such as recognizability and naturalness. Let me know what you think is the best practice. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 18:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikicology: Yes, you're right, that's why I asked about sources. I think we should at least move to $2 billion arms deal (which does appear in some of the sources used), if there is no more common option. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:16, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Thanks! Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 20:39, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Real ear measurement[edit]

Nikkimaria, I noticed that the review of this nom failed to mention close paraphrasing, and when I checked I found some. (Copyvio detector rated this particular source as having a 10.8% chance of issues, which is why I think it's a very risky tool for novices to use.)

This was not a self-nomination, and the actual editor of the article seems to edit on Wikipedia for brief periods every few months or so, so it's unlikely we'll get a response from the author. Can you please check the article for close paraphrasing, and report back on the nomination template? (I mentioned there that I'd be asking you to check.) Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Gale[edit]

I just wanted to give you a heads-up (since you created the page) that there are 18 pending applications for Gale Directories access. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:32, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Neutralhomer, yes, I know. Ocaasi is working out some distribution/usage questions with them, so that will have to be done before accounts can be handed out. Just so you know, though, at the moment there are only 10 total accounts available. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:02, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I figured it might have been a technical issue, but wanted to make sure. It's OK if I don't get an available account. I have/will have Newspapers.com, NewspaperArchive.com, and HighBeam access, so I have plenty of sources to play with. :)
A quick, unrelated-to-Gale question for you, about how long does it take for Newspapers and NewspaperArchive to allow full access once the accounts are signed up for and what not? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It somewhat depends on when you apply relative to when processing is done. For Highbeam, as you probably know, the coord just has a list of access codes so can send you one directly once you're approved - no need for any kind of intermediary process. Both Newspapers.com and Newspaperarchive.com need the respective publishers to generate logins on an as-needed basis - that's the function of the Google form that you're linked to by email. Once the coord has a batch of form responses, they forward those to the publisher, the publisher generates logins, and they either send those back to the coord or send them to the users directly. But batches aren't formed and sent out every day, so it can take from a week up to a month from approval to get your login. A better system is under development, but won't be in place for at least a few months yet. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:13, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I noticed the immediate access with HighBeam, I thought it was the same with the others until I got the "Sign In for a 7 Day Free Trial" screen on NewspaperArchive. :) But I don't mind waiting. So once the batch with my info is generated, I will probably get an email letting me know? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:23, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, assuming you've entered a valid email on the form. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:39, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I used the one I have for Wikipedia-only emails. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:57, 15 December 2015 (UTC) 16:57, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Claudette Sorel[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tag to be used for images vested in the Alien Property Custodian[edit]

Hi Nikki, according to the 1952 U.S. Army publication in which it appears, File:Damaged bridge over the Drava, April 1941.jpg is a still from a captured German film. It is a fair assumption that these propaganda films, created by the Wehrmacht, which were captured by the U.S. Army, were confiscated and vested in the Alien Property Custodian per 17 U.S.C. 104A(a)(2). Is there a specific copyright tag for such items, or should I just be using {{PD-US}} with an explanation in the description? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:03, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peacemaker, have you seen this? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:27, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, because the German case law says the copyright is with the actual film photographer, that provision (only applying to restoration of government copyright) doesn't apply, so the copyright is restored at 70 pma? And because we don't know the author and itwas probably still in the 70 pma period in 1996, it is still in copyright in Germany and not PD in the US? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:36, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
According to the most conservative approach, yes. There are a number of factors though that could affect that determination, including whether the original film was ever shown publicly, whether the author was ever credited, etc. It's also important to note that the case law isn't entirely straightforward on the issue of images from films. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:45, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings[edit]

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Bzuk, happy holidays! Nikkimaria (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!


May 2016 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!

All the best

Gavin / – SchroCat (talk) 16:12, 19 December 2015 (UTC) [reply]

And best wishes to you as well, Gavin! Nikkimaria (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nikkimaria/Archive_32&oldid=1080052489"