User talk:Nnev66

Women in Red

Hi there, Nnev66, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to see you have again become active on Wikipedia and have been improving a number of women's biographies. When you feel ready to create biographies yourself, you'll find some useful tips in our Ten Simple Rules. I've taken the liberty of adding the Women in Red user box to your user page. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out. Trying to figure out things on my own but also want to find communities of Wikipedia's to chat with where appropriate. I hope soon to be creating a wiki page for a notable woman scientist. Nnev66 (talk) 16:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I think you'll find we are a very cooperative community. Feel free to comment on our WIR talk page where you are welcome to take part in discussions. And I'll always be ready to respond to anything you come up with on my own talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 14:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

I did my first page via the Wikipedia Review mechanism. Not a scientist but someone I thought should have a page: Draft:Rachel Cowan. Not sure I'd go through this mechanism again as there appears to be a backlog but wanted to see what it would be like to go through the reviewer process. Hope to identify a woman scientist soon. Nnev66 (talk) 23:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Nnev66. So glad to see you contributing to the Women in Red project. I just wanted to explain why I reverted several of your recent changes to the bio about Diane Koken. I did so because your recent, good-faith edits removed several useful citations from the article with the rationale, "remove references with no information: "'M. Diane Koken,' Milton Hershey School." and "'M. Diane Koken,' Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company." Unforuntately, when you did that you removed citations that actually serve important functions. (Those shortened citations may have seemed as if they did not contain important information, but each was designed let future Wikipedia editors know that those cited paragraphs had reference sources to back up the content presented there. This is particularly important when writing and editing biographies of women for the Women in Red project because women's biographies on Wikipedia have had a history of being challenged and deleted because they "did not contain enough citations," regardless of how prominent the biographical subjects were/are. Being a relatively new editor to Wikipedia and the Women in Red project, you may not have realized this; so that's why I just wanted to reach out to you.) Also, just fyi. The types of abridged citations that you deleted actually did have valid formatting (based on longtime academic standards, as well as Wikipedia's current Manual of Style). So, I've replaced three of the citations you removed for these reasons. There's always a bit of a learning curve with Wikipedia, but I know I can safely say that your contributions are genuinely welcome. Again, thanks so much for helping with the Women in Red project! -- 47thPennVols (talk) 22:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Ah, OK. It was confusing to me but I see now. Thanks for explaining.

I find it more straightforward if a reference is used more than once on Wikipedia to use <ref name=something> and then that can be used thereafter so that multiple instances are collapsed in the References section. I just did this now. I don't feel super strongly about it if you want to revert. But it makes it easier to read the References and see how many unique ones there are.

I do understand the challenges of writing women's biographies in Wikipedia and to make sure everything is properly referenced. Apologies for not understanding you were using Ibid - I'm used to seeing this with books when referencing different page numbers. Nnev66 (talk) 22:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

No worries. There are so many ways of doing things on Wikipedia that it can get confusing for all of us, no matter how long we've been editing. (There are also some Wikipedians who are laser-focused on formatting citations a specific way and spend a great deal of time reformatting citations to their preferred way of doing things, but that's not my focus. Quite honestly, I'm more concerned about just making sure that the articles I work on are just so well-cited that it's nearly impossible for anyone to contest the notability of the subject or subject matter, particularly when it comes to the women I write about because of Wikipedia's problems with keeping bios posted and intact.) So, if you'd like to reformat the citations, that's fine with me. I'll just ask that, moving forward, you not remove citations in a way that leaves paragraphs uncited. I wish you many, many years of happy researching, writing and editing! - 47thPennVols (talk) 23:05, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I will not remove references again - appreciate you taking the time to explain to me. Yeah, I do like a certain kind of reference formatting. I’ve also created or significantly added to pages and want to do a good job with writing and referencing with reliable secondary sources. I plan to write more Wiki pages for women. You’ll also likely be seeing me around some on Philly & PA political pages… Thanks for all the work you’ve been doing! Nnev66 (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

That's great news! WikiProject Pennsylvania can always use help from skilled editors like you (and Women in Red really can benefit from more of us creating bios of women who have been overlooked for far too long). Every time I find myself thinking, "I'm sure SHE already has a bio," I end up being shocked to find out that some historian, scientist or prominent political figure whose name was well-covered in the news still hasn't found a place on Wikipedia. On the plus side, there are plenty of opportunities for us to write about unsung heroes. - 47thPennVols (talk) 00:58, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

If you notice a notable woman scientist without one and don't have time let me know and I could potentially take it on. Nnev66 (talk) 01:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm currently whittling away at the historians on the Women in Red academic list (Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Academics). There are a number of scientists on that list that might be of interest to you and the list of researchers (Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Researchers) looks like there might be some fascinating subjects for you as well. - 47thPennVols (talk) 01:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2024

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304 Online events: New: Alphabet run S & T | Gender studies | Health Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman. Tip of the month: If you run into technical problems, you might find help on our Tools and technical support page Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Ipigott (talk) 09:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Ellen Bernstein

On 7 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ellen Bernstein, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ellen Bernstein was called the "birthmother of Jewish environmentalism"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ellen Bernstein. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ellen Bernstein), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 12:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rachel Cowan (April 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Devonian Wombat was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Rachel Cowan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Nnev66! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rachel Cowan (April 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Rachel Cowan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 02:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rachel Cowan has been accepted

Rachel Cowan, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

BD2412 T 18:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jeff Yass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WHYY. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 17:58, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Interesting. WHYY has news articles also but hard to say if they're associated with the radio or TV link - may be used for both. I suppose I could just unlink but I'm OK with keeping it as either one would give more info about WHYY. Nnev66 (talk) 18:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Conservative synagogues, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)