Thank you again for your comments at The Emperor's New School FAC. I learned a lot from each reviewer, and it was a lot of fun to learn more about the rather obscure show. If I ever do become active on Wikipedia and pursue FACs again, I would be very happy to hear your perspective again. I hope you are having a wonderful end of the year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aoba47 (talk • contribs) 02:43, December 29, 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49, I am wondering about a missing word here:
If you wish to either RfC and/or the potential launch of Option 1 here is probably the best place to go. ...
You have had to go above and beyond; I hope this results in some help for you, and I hope you can get some rest. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:43, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia, I hope it gets some results for everyone who has participated, for the community, and ultimately for our readers. Ultimately I'm here for the encyclopedia, as I know you are and as I believe everyone who actively participates in the discussions to be. Thanks for pointing me to that sentence. I have filled in the missing words. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sandy, just read you had a death in the family. Just want to reach out with my condolences. Take care, I’m thinking of you during this difficult time. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 22:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much, Chris. While I appreciate the thought, I would rather not continue discussion of that here (just in case anyone continues same :) Thanks again, and stay strong; I am so sorry for what you have been through. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:55, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS, I am wary of engaging further, as I have not yet regained my composure :( :( SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We had a rogue-ish reviewer who slapped a GA icon on this article. I've been pruning some but I have to run and get the kids--at least it's not flooding right now, haha. If you have a minute, can you look at my edits to see if they're over the top? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 21:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies:, most of your edits look good to me. The article is about the song-- not the band, not the video director, not the band's subsequent activities. The only part where I am unsure is if some content about the music video of the song might be retained, including the critique that it was "gritty". I am unsure if there should be a separate article of the video, in addition to the song article? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:39, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A talisman that causes bad weather to leave me, and, ... well, I'm not sure what else will happen. I just found it in the basement of this weird old castle I inherited. That's also where Yomangani must have escaped from...
I just want you to know that where I am, it's −41 °C (−42 °F). (The magic point where convert templates just become redundant) I understand this predicament is heading your way later in the week? Boy I hope so not! Outriggr (talk) 10:57, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If wind chill counts, my personal record is −54 °F (−48 °C), which are numbers incomprehensible to Venezuelans. I don't put a coat on anymore until temps drop below 20 °F (−7 °C). Outriggr, I am deep into trying to repair years of neglect at Tourette syndrome; I have lots to update still, major sections to completely re-write, a lot of repeated text to eliminate, stuff to move around-- but once I am further along, might I get you and Yomangani to deal with my tortured prose? That's at least a week away, if I don't freeze in the interim. Stay warm up there! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:50, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's pretty brutal. The temperature, I mean. Well, it's -43 now, and -48 with wind chill (all C), so perhaps I'll tie you by day's end! In all fairness, I don't edit wikipedia outside.
Yes, sure, although I think you are much too modest. I'll be around, though.
In an attempt to think of a Spanish salutation, my brain said "adelante", and I doubt that would get me very far, but wiktionary says "into the future", which is pleasing in a way. Outriggr (talk) 14:07, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adelante is actually a very polite greeting used, for example, when you encounter another person trying to get into one of those revolving doors the same time as you are, and you offer to them to move forward first to escape the wind chill! Thanks, riggrS !! I am determined to stay focused on that TS mess today, so off to work I go! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It could mean "Let's go!" - speeding off in a car or starting a fight. Pick which of those you want to do with Sandy. Yomanganitalk 14:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't fight as much these days; it's too tiring, and there are too many fights that need to be had on Wikipedia, so someone else can have them. I'd rather speed off in a car ... to a relaxing place, instead! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:25, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Not that I am aware of: Tony1 may have one. If he doesn't, ping me, and I will fix them for you. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:40, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I ran the script and left a query about one item. Please ask User:Ohconfucius to give access to his composite script. Tony(talk) 23:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Tony1. Regarding the item you asked about, it's a range, so dash is correct. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone who wants to install the script directly can find it here: User talk:GregU/dashes.js. Note the instructions at the top. (It's easier than it looks) Outriggr (talk) 08:21, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather ask riggr to run it ... (like the sound of that?). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:47, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like I screwed up a couple of redirects the other day. The general theory is general discussion on one page, and specific discussion on the specific pages. I think it's all fixed now. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy, since this section is pinned, how would you feel about deleting your comment, or in some way separating it from the pinned section? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:37, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article used to be a WP:FA back in the day (2006 actually...) and was delisted in 2010. Do you think with its subsequent improvements that it now has a chance of possibly passing a WP:FAC? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 04:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Shearonink; I usually start at the bottom of the article.
Are all of those External links helpful? Some end with a period, others don't.
I went through the ELs, to me it seems that they are all unique and needful in order to have possible research for interested readers in one place. As always, online sources are in danger of petering our so I will endeavor to get wayback machine URLs for all of these links and to start to bring their URLs into stylistic agreement with one another. I also have trimmed down the Further reading section. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Citation formatting is all over the place; there is no consistency. Author name format should be standardized; there is some first name first, other first name last, some fully spelled out, others with initials. Same use page and some use p. The News-Herald (Franklin, Pennsylvania) (May 20, 1927). "Heart-rending Scenes Occur at Dynamited School". Newspapers.com. p. 12. matches nothing. Every citation should be reviewed for consistency; it appears that different editors added different citation styles.
Oh *yeah*...that will take some time...will work on it. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Am slowly plowing through all the cites. This article attracts attention from all sorts of folks whenever there is a man-made disaster involving mass-killing of school children with guns and/or bombs so refs are all over the place. I am not sure why the present style is in the article but I'll bring them all into agreement with one another. eventually....it's a long slow slog. Shearonink (talk) 00:00, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:CAPS, "DYNAMITE AGAIN PLACED IN BATH, MICH., SCHOOL"
What are we supposed to do when the original title is all in caps? I always want to reproduce what the source has at the source... Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shearonink: that is the same as sentence case vs title case, en- and em-dashes, etc.; we follow Wikipedia house style, which is to reduce all caps. They are still equally locatable on a google search. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That portal in "See also" looks utterly dreadful and should be at the bottom of the page, but I understand moving portals right now is likely to trigger some aficionados or an edit-war, so ...
Moved portal bar to proper place within page. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That could be tricky these days, with some MOS warriers ... if someone moves it back, it may be best left alone. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That green was Not Accepted for accessibility. Adjusted the List for size. None of the possible colors would work accessibility-wise for that header so I removed the color - solved that issue. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for thinking of me, Sandy, but I'm totally blind ... I know nothing about colour! Graham87 02:06, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps (??) you could solve some of the sandwiching by taking a lot of the images to a gallery at the bottom of the article?
I'll have to take a look at them in-toto, did some adjusting. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, there are too many quotes.
Adjusted the quotes, removed some of the quoted material, integrated the people/words into the main text, etc. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some image captions do not need to start with the word "the"
TOC: Day of the disaster followed by Prior to the disaster doesn't work. First, Prior to is not day of, and second, too much repeat of the word disaster, which is in the TOC (repeat words in headings are discouraged). How about, Day of the attacks, and move the Prior to somewhere else, perhaps call it Background or something different?
Made sense to me. Done. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this in a "note" instead of just text in the article? Note: Most of the victims were Bath Consolidated School students in the second to sixth grades (7–14 years of age), according to Ellsworth's The Bath School Disaster, p. 126.
I am not sure these warrant a hatnote: See also: Bath Township, Michigan; Bath, Michigan; and Bath Consolidated School
I wikilinked the various articles instead. Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some review of wikilinking might be order. Be sure to link on first occurrence, and common terms like school board need not be re-linked in the body of the article, a second time.
That makes sense yeah...long-term project yay! Shearonink (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia I think I have all of the wikilinking fixed. If you don't mind taking a quick look to see if I missed anything I'd appreciate it. Shearonink (talk) 00:00, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think if you work on these things, you should be in very good shape to approach FAC. But I would first ask a good copyeditor to go through AFTER you have made all of these improvements. You might interest @Outriggr, Yomangani, and Gog the Mild:, since many FA regulars like seeing bronze stars reinstated. Good luck !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS, Shearonink, on the FAC, be sure to notify that it is a WP:FFA, because if it passes, the re-promoted numbers and articles at FFA will need to be updated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Much thanks Sandy - greatly appreciate your insights. This will help me out quite a bit and will give me a lot to work on. This article gets occasional major editing attention from many different editors and also spates of vandalism from ohsoclever mayhem-loving trolls so I will start the job of getting references into one single WP-classic form :). Heh, will have to remember that "start from the bottom of an article"... Shearonink (talk) 18:17, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Many reviewers seem to peter out before they make it down there! Good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Shearonink the linking looks good, but watch out for WP:OVERLINK. More WP:NBSP work needed; I left samples. And those images! They are taking over :) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia ... not a picture book :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:13, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, linking and NBSP. Re: images - What images do you object to? Do you think that a gallery would better serve the subject and the article? What to leave out, what to keep... I personally like images next to the content they are illustrating. I know, I know otherthingsexist etc is not justification but if you want to see an article where an image, in this case the infobox, takes over...hoo-boy take a look at Syrian civil war.
I'll take another look at the article later this weekend. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 01:28, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a problem with any specific image; it's the MOS:SANDWICH problem in aftermath. You can't have both images and the template there, because text is sandwiched. The images aren't particularly high quality, and aren't much to the story, so my suggestion is to remove some of them, keep only the very best, juggle the rest, and avoid the sandwiching. Anyone who wants to see more images can get them at the commons link at the bottom of the page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:35, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
edited stuff, adjusted stuff, worked on it a bit more... have to take a break for a while. Is the present version more of what you're thinking of? Shearonink (talk) 02:21, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sandy, I just realized that I never replied to your message on Rexx's talk page about your full text request. Sorry about falling behind here. I do have access to the pdf full text for PMID 23877886. Please don't hesitate to reach out if I can help! JenOttawa (talk) 16:28, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JenOttawa:, thanks so much! I found other sources that basically say parent management training is effective for families whose children have Tourette's in conjunction with behavioral disorders. Are you able to do a search on that article and see if it has, other than that, any relevant text specific to parent management training for tic disorders or Tourette syndrome? I suspect I'm OK with the general statement I now have. Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Sandy. Thanks for your patience!
Tic disorder was listed as "excluded" from the analysis in this review
Tourette was not mentioned anywhere, however they did specify that "children with any co-morbid physical and intellectual impairments" were not included in this study.
At least this rules out this source for you. I hope your editing is going well! JenOttawa (talk) 02:33, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Can I get you to cast your eyes over Reginald de Warenne with an eye to an FAC reasonably soon? Yes, that means I'll be doing reviews more also. I'm going to ask @Gog the Mild: to look it over also... anyone else watching this page or his is welcome to copyedit, with the understanding that I'll be watching like a hawk for any distortions of the sourcing.... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:06, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Stop to denial the relation of Sara braun with selknam genocide[edit]
This is a warning. Stop to undoing and denial the relation (direct or indirect ) of Sara Braun with selknam genocide , with verified academic sources and arguments given in talk:Sara Braun by various user User:SusunW , User:Gerda_Arendt and me , against your exclusive criteria. Your insistence makes you suspicious of conflicts of interest. Wikipedia is not your personal space. And this is a subject with high sensitivity. --Fitmoos (talk) 19:13, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
After I removed off-topic directly translated without paraphrasing text added by Fitmoos from Sara Braun, Fitmoos accuses me of committing a crime.You are neglecting responsability of genocide. This crime is called concealment. ¿really you wanna be concealment of a genocide ?
After I point them to information on plagiarism, SYNTH, and Good articles, and suggest they discuss at article talk, they accuse me of liberal bias (that's a first), and again of defending a genocide.
At Talk:Sara Braun, where I repeatedly point out that not a single source has been given that implicates Sara Braun directly in the genocide (while multiple sources implicate others and indicate she married very young and had her brother's "permanent help" in running the company, which has its own article at Sociedad Explotadora de Tierra del Fuego), Fitmoos:
Provides a series of sources, none of which implicate Sara Braun:[1], but
Indicates a possible COI from Fitmoos (one of the sources is from her thesis advisor, (by my doctoral advisor) its called "braun lie") The source from Fitmoos' thesis advisor does not implicate Sara Braun in the genocide either. The best I am able to tell, Fitmoos is stating that the thesis advisor called this "the Braun lie".
Again says I am committing a crime (Warning, maybe, you are commiting a crime)
Personal attacks in the same diff: You are neglecting responsability of genocide. This crime is called concealment or Cloaking. Reverse the edition, now.You are going too far, only for defend a genocide.
Requests the addition of a section,[3] when a section about the Company is already present.
See full talk page, with analysis of Spanish sources provided in English beginning here, and continuing for another section. Noting that neither SusunW[4] (who wrote the article during a Women in Red event) nor Gerda Arendt[5] (who was involved only at the DYK) have weighed in on Fitmoos edits (although I had to make significant corrections to the article to correct misrepresentation of sources[6]). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Yomangani: are you interested in having a look here? The only admin I can locate[7] who speaks fluent Spanish is A Train, but they seem to be not active. Likewise for Titoxd. Jo-Jo Eumerus and Galobtter indicate they speak Level 1 Spanish. I speak fluent Spanish, but am not having success in getting Fitmoos to understand policies. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:06, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Je je. Not unless I finish this powdered glass. Qué criminalita malisima eres. Yomanganitalk 23:42, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, my Spanish is only adequate for translating academic Spanish. I think this needs dispute resolution procedures. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:09, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Jo-Jo; I was afraid of that. I'd rather NOT have to escalate this to ANI, where there is unlikely to be anyone who speaks Spanish. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:11, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia I can't help sorry. @Alexf: may be able to help you. This is a better list; you may also want to filter for level of Spanish based on category (e.g User es-3) Galobtter (pingó mió) 21:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Galobtter; there are lot of Es-1 and Es-2 in there, which I don't think is sufficient to follow the sources. But that list reminded me of Jbmurray (who isn't around a lot, but may help if he is). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:37, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But, when i give the opportunity to write the section with your point of view, you deleted the only reference in the article
of the relation of Sara Braun with selknam genocide. A quote to a public document, is not a plagiarism, specially when this document is made for be quote. SandyGeorgia are not trying to reach an agreement. Even under Sara Braun ownership of the company was committed the genocide, no matter what Sara was or no the Adminstrator of the company (compañia explotadora de tierra del fuego).
This is a very controversial topic in Chile and Argentina, for example https://www.elmostrador.cl/cultura/2018/08/09/intervencion-deja-muda-a-puntas-arenas-con-recreacion-del-remate-de-165-esclavos-selknam/
¿Please, can you do a section of the controversy and the relationship? Only a little section, this is my only request. Fitmoos (talk) 22:06, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fitmoos, first, please stop the personal attacks and claims that I am committing a crime, or editing with bias. I am editing according to the scholarly sources provided in the article and on talk, none of which implicate Sara Braun, while they do implicate others. If you continue the personal attacks, you could be blocked from editing. Second, would it be easier on you if I typed in Spanish? If so, I need to go to another computer, with a Spanish keyboard (I don't know how to use diacritics on this keyboard). Third, there is already a section in the article about the Company. Please continue content discussion at Talk:Sara Braun. TRANSLATE: Fitmoos, antes de todo, favor de dejar los ataques personales deciendo que yo he cometido un crimen, o que yo estoy editando con un bias. Estoy editando segun los fuentes dado en el articulo y la pagina para charlar; ningunos de estos implican a Sara Braun, mientras si mencionan a otras personas especificas. Si sigues con los ataques personales, puede ser bloqueado. Segundo, sera mas facil si escribo en espanol? Si es asi, debo cambiar de computadora con otro teclado (no se como usar diacriticos en esta computadora). Tercera, ya hay una seccion en el articulo sobre la compania. Favor discutir el contenido en Talk:Sara Braun. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Further, Fitmoos, what you posted here is not true; please confine your content comments to the article talk page. The genocide is already mentioned in the article; it is even in the lead of her biography, even though there is no source in the article implicating Sara Braun. (UNDUE at this point.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:26, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia, I can certainly try (I can speak Spanish well enough to understand and be understood; I wouldn't call myself entirely fluent, but I can do the best I can). However, the conversation above is a bit muddy as to what needs to be resolved, would you be able to summarize what the dispute is over? SeraphimbladeTalk to me 23:52, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much, Seraphimblade. On the VERY PLUS side, Fitmoos has not edit warred. I removed a direct quote once, and they have not reinserted it. On the negative side are the personal attacks against me enumerated in the points above. I hope I have gotten across to Fitmoos that these need to stop. There is also a COI concern with respect to what Fitmoos says is their "thesis advisor". It appears that the "thesis advisor" holds an opinion about a "Braun lie" (but that is not in the source). The content dispute after that is fairly straightforward. There are numerous sources implicating a company inherited by Sara Braun in a genocide; all sources mention many people implicated in the genocide, none of them specifically mention Sara Braun. One needs to speak Spanish to read the sources. I am trying to impress upon Fitmoos that the article Sara Braun already has (even possibly undue) mention of Sara Braun wrt the genocide (it is in the lead), but that text should be further elaborated at the company article, Sociedad Explotadora de Tierra del Fuego. As far as I can tell, the sources implicate her relatives explicitly, without naming her. Fitmoos has also accused me of COI: I have never been to Chile, and have no pony in this race. I came across the article because I routinely scan the mainpage DYKs for articles with Spanish sources, and found that the hook was not supported by the sources, and the hook was not even in the article! The hook rolled off the mainpage as I was lodging my complaint, so I made no article changes until recently, when I found numerous misrepresentations of the sources, probably innocently due to translation errors and that the article was put together during a Women in Red edit-a-thon (which I imagine is work under pressure.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:09, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, forgot the SYNTH part. Fitmoos wants to say that because Sara Braun was a part owner, she is responsible for the genocide. The sources give a different take on that. She married young, inherited the company when her husband died, her brothers permanently helped run the company, and them (and others) are named by the sources as responsible for the genocide. Sara Braun as part owner from some sources, plus genocide from other sources does not equal Sara Braun responsible for genocide: that is a SYNTH conclusion, not in any sources I have seen. So, the genocide should be elaborated at the company article. I am also unable to decipher what Fitmoos means when referring to an article of the year 2020; perhaps there is some Women in Red article contest which is driving this? I am not sure what that is about ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:17, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This edit.. fills me with a bit of fear... heh. I do think Andy and Ian wanted me around to be the cranky-50-year-old-woman-not-afraid-to-call-a-spade-a-spade.... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:38, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A Very Good Thing. But. I think that for you to be able to do this, a lot of other whips had to be cracked, too ... having to do with a discussion about respect for the Coords :) :) If people don't have your back, you have no authority. Well done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:42, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are ghosts rising on Sandy's page! Hello, young Outriggr and Yomangani! Yomangani, the little Bishonen still has your Gabby userbox on her page. bishzillaROARR!!pocket 10:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
WOOOoooooooooooOOOoooooooooooOOO, etc. Hello, Zilla. I really must make some more templates, I am hilarious. Yomanganitalk 10:52, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wow so many FREN, hew new I wood wan to loggin many years after I did retire to GOLDEN FARMS sum ware in the COUNTRY! Quite nice there, no complain. DOGRIGGR did lose the barker, sum years bac. Have noticed the PUPS speak diffren (E Gee, "fren"!). Somewhat concern, no time to SIT on INNER NET larning new pup slang. "Rare pup!" No, in my day we did not rate pups. 13/10 -- please!. No in my day we luvved the SMOL PUPS eekwally, the pups sot attenshun from mamma and mamma sot no attenshun!, as any attenshun mite endanger pups. I hope you understan that sum things do not change. BISHZILLA have long time span, EYAWN perhap, shirley understan that we mus carrie on what good MUTHER NAYCHER has tot us, not to looz our selfs in TEMPTASHUN, fad, in deed to put a way PUPHOOD THINGS. In fac, for the VARY SAKE of the pups. I have spocan, an I bid ewe a dew. --User:Dogriggr-Bark
Sandy sees sea slugs down by the seashore. What a panoply, and before my coffee. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:46, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Such visions appear when Sandy swills shandy. Kablammo (talk) 13:48, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[Darwinbish stares.] "Dogriggr, last edited 10 years ago"? (Darwinbish has a script that tells her this.) So what are those howlers then, mylings? [Bites the revenant dog experimentally]. Hmmm. Tastes a bit wispy. darwinbish 14:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Hello, SandyGeorgia. You have new messages at Talk:Coropuna. Message added 11:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello. We haven't, as far as I recall, encountered each other on WP hitherto, but I should like to put your mind at rest about my quoting emails from my friend (on WP and IRL) Brian Boulton. Will you please explain to me why he is uniquely exempt from having his private correspondence quoted when countless WP FAs - including BB's - quote the private correspondence of their subjects and others. I realise standards were lower in your day at FAC, but surely even then "releasing a dead person's private [...]mail is the lowest low" would be to disqualify many of the biographical articles that quote dead people's letters. Would you care to explain your protestations of outrage? Best wishes, Tim riley talk 16:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to discuss private email on Wikipedia, and certainly not from a dead person, released without his permission. I should not have used the phrase "speaking ill of the dead", when I meant showing Brian in a bad light, and that is all I have to say on this latest instance of bullying. Please do not continue to pursue this matter. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Tim riley I am going to archive this so as not to call further attention to an unauthorized release of personal email. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. We haven't, as far as I recall, encountered each other on WP hitherto, but I should like to put your mind at rest about my quoting emails from my friend (on WP and IRL) Brian Boulton. Will you please explain to me why he is uniquely exempt from having his private correspondence quoted when countless WP FAs - including BB's - quote the private correspondence of their subjects and others. I realise standards were lower in your day at FAC, but surely even then "releasing a dead person's private [...]mail is the lowest low" would be to disqualify many of the biographical articles that quote dead people's letters. Would you care to explain your protestations of outrage? Best wishes, Tim riley talk 16:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to discuss private email on Wikipedia, and certainly not from a dead person, released without his permission. I should not have used the phrase "speaking ill of the dead", when I meant showing Brian in a bad light, and that is all I have to say on this latest instance of bullying. Please do not continue to pursue this matter. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, and please be asssured I bear you no ill will for your hurtful remarks. Tim riley talk 16:56, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I may get in big trouble for outing you but I don't care as I feel an obligation to let our fellow editors know your true identity. Your amazing powers have been nothing short of mind boggling and your good work around this sometimes wretched place does not go unnoticed. Gandydancer (talk) 01:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Awwww ... that is so very nice of you! And here I thought you were referring to me finally confessing to dear Giano that I was not swooning in Georgia, thereby dashing all of his fantasies! Thanks, Gandydancer; it is very much appreciated in such trying times. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And, taken away as a non-free file! [8] Well, it was fun while it lasted :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:28, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It might be the G-Men that did it. Just keep this hush-hush. Check your page frequently for secret writing perhaps done with lemon juice, one of their many tricks. (Actually I was afraid that might happen. I once used Zoro's white horse to award someone and it disappeared as well. It seems that some pics get a limited-use OK.) Gandydancer (talk) 02:42, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think I will survive ;) Thanks again, it was fun! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I could be wrong but I think this letter - over there. to the left. - could be used... Shearonink (talk) 01:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
...And I could be wrong, but I think that it's easy enough to imagine the part about the very much more than ample bosom stretching the S to it's max under the top? (BTW, I'm a gurl, and a feminist gurl to boot, so it's OK for me to say this... ) Gandydancer (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please don’t mention and ping me in this outing conversation. I am still inconsolable that the Scarlett O’Hara southern belle, who for years has sparkled flirtatiously at my fevered imagination has suddenly become an Eastern European from a country not known for its gracefully, swooning womenfolk. It’s ruined my life completely. Giano(talk) 17:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't been there either. You need to activate your fantasy mechanism! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:49, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See the article talk page. In particular, please avoid altering citation style, because fixing that almost always requires a revert and then starting over to rescue good edits. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Please ping me when replying I don't watch) I simply added {{rp}} to specify pages for citations, I didn't alter citation styles. Please explain your other reasons for r/v as well... my WP:LINK in particular? comrade waddie96 ★ (talk) 18:17, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of repeating myself, see the article talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:22, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is so risky to repeat oneself... comrade waddie96 ★ (talk) 21:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LUNATICS is an essay and basically renders Jimbo's statements about "lunatic charlatans". How I am supposed to link to this essay without others inferring that I am calling editors "lunatics"? If the essay is offensive, it should get deleted, but don't blame me for its existence. Tgeorgescu (talk) 03:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think you do get my point. I don't care what admin tells you that incivility is OK, I'm calling incivility. We have a very strong tool in WP:MEDRS, our sourcing standards are on our side, and we don't need to attack people for their misguided beliefs. If you can't engage POV pushers without civility, then how about just don't engage them at all? They aren't getting their content into articles unless it's reliably sourced, so why fill talk pages with attacks on them? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:16, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But merely citing this essay wasn't a personal attack. At least in my view. Tgeorgescu (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think that is how the person on the receiving end felt ? Will citing LUNATICS help wrap up the discussion quickly, explain our standards, and discourage more of similar posters from arguing futile points on talk ? We have sound sourcing guidelines; it is sufficient to cite MEDRS. KC can think whatever they want, but when you are an IP who does not understand Wikipedia, and you see the word LUNATIC on the page, that feels like an attack, betcha bottom dollar. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why cite offensive essays when we have wp:v policy, wp:not policy and wp:medrs guideline? We don’t need to personalize. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:46, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Because most people don't easily get the point of WP:MEDRS and at WP:QUACKS Jimbo himself explains the WP:RULES without beating around the bush. Tgeorgescu (talk) 03:50, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Now you're reading IP's minds? So, I fall back on my other point: if you can't engage IPs, POV pushers, trolls, quacks, whatever you want to call them, with civility, then let someone else engage them, so you don't fill the talk page unnecessarily. If you have to resort to calling someone a LUNATIC, your arguments aren't very strong or convincing. Separately, on that page, anyone who is arguing in favor of the condition is, by definition of the condition, likely to have a mental illness to begin with. Would you call someone with a mental illness a lunatic in real life to their face? Not likely; so why do it on Wikipedia? Also, get better role models, so you aren't quoting admins who are likely to find themselves in trouble if they had to face ArbCom with civility issues. That WP:MED has lowered in general to an unacceptable level of civility in the name of whacking trolls, vandals, quacks and POV pushers doesn't make it OK to follow suit. MEDRS is all we need. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sandy. This edit just popped up on my watchlist, and I'm wondering what it's about. If it's this content ("similar to more commonly recognized conditions such as delusional infestation"), then fair use applies, so no problem. Otherwise, there is still nothing to forbid paraphrasing, but quoting is not forbidden either. Maybe I'm missing your whole point. -- BullRangifer (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See this from Diannaa. Actually, we have other verbatim passages from that source in the article, so attribution helps. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:09, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay to copy from public domain sources or from compatibly licensed sources, as long as the source is properly attributed. Attribution is done so that our readers will be aware that the prose was copied rather than written by Wikipedians, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Attribution can be added by using templates such as {{PD-notice}} or {{CC-notice}} or manually like Sandy did. There's more on this topic at Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources and Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Copying material from free sources.— Diannaa (talk) 16:27, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for tracking down that watchlist-whitespace-gap "bug" (the one that's fixed by unchecking the "group pages" option). I had the same thing happen to me, like six months ago. I thought I was crazy. One day the whitespace just magically appeared and I couldn't figure out how to make it go away. I started uninstalling scripts, I read a bunch of docs, I couldn't figure it out (and was frankly too embarrassed to ask for help). Finally I concluded that I must have been imagining that it was ever any different. Literally, I thought I was crazy, until I read your thread at VPT. :-) Now the whitespace is gone! Yay! So thank you for asking the questions I was too embarrassed to ask. Levivich 18:22, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.
You have been very helpful, so I wanted to get your brief input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen. I see a few possible options for making this happen, so I would like to get your input and feedback on this. which of the options below would you prefer? also, please reply to the brief questions below.
Would you be interested in an idea of this nature?
If so, which option below seems most feasible to you?
Create a new page/talk page at the existing WikiProject Council, where members of various WikiProject can gather to offer updates, information and ideas on the latest efforts at each of their own WikiProject, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Town Hall.
Create an entirely new WikiProject with an inclusive name such as
Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know. --Sm8900 (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
"Active editors" (English Wikipedia editors with >100 edits per month)
(talk page watcher) I think you're hugely overestimating how important the WikiProjects are. They're an idea from the early days of Wikipedia which has largely failed; aside from the Military History project which is still active, and the Medicine project which occasionally twitches into life, most of the projects are completely moribund and the only reason they still exist is that nobody can be bothered to go around flagging them all to be marked as historical. If you envisage reviving the notion of WikiProjects, you'll need to be prepared to explain what benefit they serve; on relatively narrowly-defined topics like military history, medicine etc there's a role for a place where people can raise concerns, discuss sources etc, but for broader and more nebulous topics ("Canada", "Visual arts", "London", "Philosophy"…) they don't seem to serve much useful purpose. Bear in mind that although the collapse in Wikipedia participation has ended, we've been left with significantly fewer active editors than we had in 2006–07, so any given subproject is much less likely to have a viable number of participants than it did in the old days. ‑ Iridescent 08:18, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MilHist is the only WikiProject still functioning, and that's with a decades-long organizational history. I admire your intent, but I'm afraid trying to re-invigorate WikiProjects is unlikely to go anywhere. I'm not sure modeling a new idea after Women in Red is a good idea; few editors will give an honest critique of the work it has produced, compared for example to a project like MilHist. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
your input is really helpful. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On looking into the examples you gave in connection with Inter-Allied Women's Conference, I see that the foreign name in italics is frequently a result of using Template:Lang which automatically introduces italics unless conditions such as italic=no are used. I'm pretty sure nearly all organizations covered by the template come out incorrectly in italics. Quite a job to correct them all (or simply avoid the template altogether). See, for example, French Confederation of Christian Workers which I am now about to change. I really wonder whether the template default should be no italics, leaving the editor to italicize if necessary.--Ipigott (talk) 11:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ipigott:, well that's a fine mess :) I guess it's good that an article like this one, using many different foreign terms, brings something like this to light. By the way, when you are looking for translations, remember that you can check the other-language Wikipedia, and make use of the {{ill}} to provide a link, which has the added benefit of encouraging an article via WP:RED. Have fun with this! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:05, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ipigott ... And thank you for taking this on. I can't say that the other responses on that talk page weren't very discouraging, since we have so much time to address these issues before mainpage day, and yet ... there was considerable resistance for reasons beyond my ken. Thanks again, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:07, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, just still fighting the crud I had last week. Not helped by some absolutely frigid temps we had here in Wisconsin, which I had to go out in and thus aggravated my bad throat again. Ealdgyth (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I knew about the loss of your horse you mentioned elsewhere, but I'm not sure I also knew you were sick. Everyone's sick, so I forget who's who. I've been chugging the snake oil that I don't believe in on the off chance the placebo effect will work. Feel better, Ealdgyth! Sorry for the misplaced ping today, adding to your load, where I pinged FAC coords to a FAR! Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:10, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I don't do tps's. But then I didn't know you were out there in Wisconsin, one of my favorite places, where I spent some of my happiest years. So much so that I remain a Green Bay fan. When my wife, a New England Pats fan, gloats during yet another January (though she didn't this last) I remind her of 1997. True there are days in Wisconsin when the tear ducts begin to freeze and cars lie strewn everywhere, ... but then what is the point of these New England winters, where our Company Store down, bedclothes or body-, sits in closets all winter. Speaking of Lacrosse, Piggy's on the Bank remains my fantasy of a baby-back ribs dinner, though for all I know they've changed their name and gone vegan. And I would kill for some Eau Claire All Malt, (not a whiskey) if it could magically reappear. Anyway, I hope you feel better. Sorry to hear about your horse. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:40, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cassianto, not wanting to spread a discussion best forgotten to more places than necessary, I was intending to apologize for not being more clear in my original wording re "new" before that discussion was removed. So, I'll do that here on my own talk page :) Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:13, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per the JW discussion of ITN. Should it go to VP? AtsmeTalk📧 18:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I'm pretty well known as the worst formulator of RFCs on the entire Wikipedia ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Morgellon's Disease, 2015 Association with Spirochete Infection[edit]
Since I found you as the last editor of the Wikipedia Morgellon's Disease page, I am writing to ask if you might be able to consider review of a 2015 medical journal article that describes a study of 25 patients with the Morgellon's syndrome. It is a study dated than many current citations in the current Wikipedia page, published by BMC Dermatology. Rather important, the article outlines identification of spirochetes found in lesions, and keratin strands beneath skin surface. They identified Lyme's related spirochetes and more importantly syphillis spirochetes in the lesions of the test subjects. Some of the test subjects had prior negative test results for Lyme's disease (which should have identified spirochetes.) Since syphillis sexually transmitted disease and many still retain employment that might include health care or contact with public, believing the disease a neurotic manisfestation, and Wikipedia is rather important for its use in understanding clinical diagnosis, I hope that you can consider reviewing the study and adapting the Morgellon's Wikipedia page. Thank you for your time. Here is the link: https://bmcdermatol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12895-015-0023-0 and here is the citation: Middelveen, M.J., Bandoski, C., Burke, J. et al. Exploring the association between Morgellons disease and Lyme disease: identification of Borrelia burgdorferi in Morgellons disease patients. BMC Dermatol 15, 1 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12895-015-0023-072.224.159.97 (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2020 (UTC)L[reply]
Normally, I would advise you to move this post to the article talk page, or I would do it for you, since article content is discussed on the article talk page, not user talk pages, and this is not my decision to make. Looking at a) the main author, b) the small sample size, and c) not a secondary review of the findings, I won't move this to article talk because it's a non-starter. I am not even remotely one of the top editors on that article, but I can assure you this is what others there would also say. It is not hard to get a study on a very small sample published; Wikipedia rarely uses primary sources in medical articles, waits for studies to be reviewed by others, and even when Wikipedia does use primary sources, this is not an example of when that would be done. Further, it is my understanding that much larger and better studies have contradicted those findings. I wish you the best; what an unpleasant condition to live with (we don't use the word "disease" to describe the condition on Wikipedia). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, just wanted to thank you for your detailed comments on this article at FAC. Admittedly I read your initial comment, "there are prose issues", with some trepidation, given that vague concerns over prose have sometime been the downfall of candidacies. But the comments that (subsequently) followed have clearly helped improve the article, and have been fun to work through. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Usernameunique: I'm sorry my work has been so piecemeal; I have a number of distractions going on. And I'm sorry I weighed in so hurriedly the first time, and left you with "some trepidation" ! I don't think the article is at risk for a "downfall"; there are still other things I hope to get to, but I have a Very Big Birthday tomorrow, so I am unsure how much free time I will have. At least I've given you some things to work on in the meantime, and I'm glad you've enjoyed it. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:42, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again—I realize I neglected to ping you once I finished responding to your comments, so am just dropping you a line here to let you know that I have. But of course, no rush! --Usernameunique (talk) 23:18, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Usernameunique; got it. I have a few things to wrap up and will get over there later today. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:26, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
RFC on policies V, OR, DUE, and NOT and drug pricing[edit]
Thanks so much for the excellent and comprehensive wrap-up, Sandy. Just a heads-up that I think you mis-typed in this section, paragraph beginning "LEAD should be respected..." Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 23:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for letting me know ... there's going to be tons of that, and then someone will come along and claim I "Owned" the RFC when my edit count skyrockets for typo fixing :( Going to look now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Adrian J. Hunter I knew I hit a wrong button and lost a lot of content there. Not sure what all I lost, but I did fix whatever you saw? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, you did. FWIW I don't think you're bludgeoning, because you're not repeating the same thing over and over, you're finding common ground with other editors, and what you're writing is nuanced. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 23:55, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that :) After those edits, I slept for two hours. The last three months of that business have darn near killed me, and I suspect I added mostly gibberish there. But I'm not gonna re-read it! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:10, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I just read about a tree and your fingers, and simply offer some flowers, loving your little blue ones on top since I first met them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Gerda ... the wee blue ones are Virginia bluebells, which are an early spring delight. I don’t think I know your yellow ones ??? While I love my peonies and hydrangeas, lately I am more into wildflowers and such for the bees and butterflies. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:28, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you follow the link to more flowers (one for each month), I offer captions, and this one is Eranthis hyemalis, in German Winterling which probably doesn't need a translation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again, Gerda; but remember, my fingers hurt :) The yellow one looks like my beloved primrose, but seems to be European only. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:02, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reverting your extensive changes to the vanc author citation style, and then separately recovering the one correct date format change with a script,[9] is much less typing than manually restoring each author change to retain one date. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so you replied to the easy one. What about WP:CITESTYLE? HandsomeFella (talk) 10:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please take greater care when changing the citation style.[10][11] (Please also read the message at the top of my talk page; when you change the citation style, it is unreasonable to expect another editor to manually fix each change to save one good correction.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So, you didn't, actually. Or you didn't check the format of other references. Your revert re-introduced inconsistent format. I've fixed it now for you. Please take greater care next time. HandsomeFella (talk) 10:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that! [12] Although that doesn't change how the citation renders to the reader (which is partly what WP:CITEVAR is about, along with not making editing more difficult for other editors), it is a helpful edit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors![edit]
please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2019 Cure Award
In 2019 you were one of the top ~300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a thematic organization whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.
This analysis is a thing of beauty and wonder. Thank you. Now I'm sad that it closed before I could !vote "oppose".--Jorm (talk) 23:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! (You got an asbestos suit handy you could loan me for the next five years :) ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I missed that analysis of yours until now. It's insightful to point it out, thanks x2! Here is an invisible picture of a puppy. And a kitty. Outriggr (talk) 09:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. I decided to make an extra paragraph at Aftermath (Rolling Stones album) for the release delay and edition difference. Please let me know if the prose reads well enough. isento (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
another Shelomi paper of likely interest to you[edit]
There is a more recent and - arguably - more impactful recent publication that made it past peer review and was also based on delusional observations, like the Traver paper, and SHelomi also published on this case: Shelomi, Matan (2013). "Evidence of photo manipulation in a delusional parasitosis paper" (PDF). Journal of Parasitology. 99 (3): 583–585. doi:10.1645/12-12.1 There are additional references linked in the Springtail article. Dyanega (talk) 00:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much ... I will probably have a look at that tomorrow. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Our ships crossed in the night; just responded there. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So I see. Let’s do it, it will be a huge laugh. You can be in charge of “technical” and 17th century swooning. Giano(talk) 21:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will do all I can ... but my fingers really do hurt almost all the time :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would contact DrKay, who wrote the Charles I FA, and would be invaluable in this. Ceoil (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome (DrKay, see Giano talk linked above). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See my comments to DrKay re structure and scope. In this I think instruction/guidance from Yoman and Victoria would also be of high value. Then, if a TOC and weight to each section was agreed, then we are spoiled for choice in allocating sections for specialists to build up (e.g. DrKay on historical context and contemporary politics, Wehwalt, Risker & Ergosum on the colonies, User:Giano and KJP1 on architecture, Johnbod, myself and others on visual arts, Hoary and Outriggr on logic, flow and copy-editing; and then there are many other wish list editor. My interest is because this restoration recently came about[13]. Ceoil (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw that; way behind here. Do you want me to link in the actual peer review I did, which is in my talk page archives here? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:22, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, your peerless peer review! I'll link to it on the nom page - thanks for the reminder. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 02:11, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done btw. Thanks for all your help. Shearonink (talk) 18:15, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any input for Puddleglum's The Signpost article?[edit]
Hi SandyGeorgia, Tenryuu from Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19. A fellow collaborator, Puddleglum2.0, is looking for editors to answer some interview questions regarding editing and COVID-19. If you're interested, please leave your thoughts over at User:Puddleglum2.0/WPR. Cheers! --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Can the lead section of Tourette syndrome be ordered based on all other major medical articles (Autism, Cancer, Huntington's disease) and the contents of the body, as specified in WP:MEDORDER (Definition + symptoms, cause + diagnosis, management + prognosis, epidemiology + history + society & culture)? I always found it strange that it wasn't. · • SUM1 • ·(talk) 18:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that you asked, SUM1, but I certainly hope not. The short, choppy, 8th-grade, headache-inducing enforced order is against WP:LEAD, disputed at WP:MEDLEAD, accepted nowhere else on Wikipedia and at odds with WP:WIAFA, and when it was "imposed" as a personal preference at some point in the history of the TS article, that was among the things that stopped me (and others) from continuing to try to write or maintain featured articles. WP:MEDORDER is a suggested order of sections, only a guideline (which has been interpreted by WPMED as policy), and as such is and should be unrelated to the LEAD. Enforcing a set order on leads results in poorly written and not very compelling leads, such as those now found in the rest of the medical FAs. Sometimes a compelling story needs to be told in a different way. Sometimes the editors who are actually immersed in the literature on a topic know what matters to the reader and how the story should be told. Sometimes forcing an order results in a mess with what needs to be explained first for the rest to make sense. The reasons for not imposing upon medical articles something that is not in any other guideline for any other content area are many. Here is my sandbox version (a bit dated now) of the damage that was done to TS when an order was forced. The idea that we should be writing medical leads to look like this is what has completely halted FA production in the medical realm. If that is what readers want, they can find it at the CDC or the NIH-- at Wikipedia, we should be able to go beyond that. I would very much like to bring dementia with Lewy bodies to featured status, but with the kind of lead that has been forced upon it, I would be embarrassed to show my face at WP:FAC. When an FA writer is not allowed to write a compelling summary from scratch, in accordance with WP:LEAD and WP:WIAFA, it is hard to go back and repair the lead. Hence, a complete stall in medical FA production-- indeed, even a decline-- since 2015, when this trend took hold. So, the short answer to your question is ... the leads at the other medical articles are horrid, the FAs are not being maintained because the writers who uphold FA standards know the leads are horrible, and if a forced order is imposed at TS, I unwatch because after 14 years, I am uninterested in seeing the damage. The more significant question to me is, will I ever be allowed to write a real LEAD at dementia with Lewy bodies, so that I can bring it to Featured status? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
+1. MEDMOS does not require any order or indeed any sections. They are merely suggestions. I say this as the editor who wrote that bit of MEDMOS! -- Colin°Talk 18:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thus assuming Doc James is the main person responsible for this convention of practice. · • SUM1 • ·(talk) 20:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SUM1:, I stopped following closely during the years I had given up on Wikipedia because of WPMED issues, but my understanding (perhaps incomplete) is that only James and one other editor are enforcing these personal preference. Since I disengaged from WPMED because of its lack of interest in producing and maintaining top content, it is possible that others are enforcing this guideline as if it were policy, but I am unaware. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article and Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article#Separate issue and was wondering about TFA's and the timeliness of them etc As you may or may not know May 18th is the anniversary of the Bath School disaster. If the article doesn't get passed to a FA status, this next will be a moot point, but if it does get passed to FA status - maybe by the end of March or thereabouts, do you think it is possible that it could be the FA for May 18th? I know, I know...probably too much to ask for but I didn't realize FA-of the Day was done so far in advance. Just wondering. If this year isn't possible there's always 2021. And 2022... Shearonink (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm scheduling May... and am unlikely to schedule before about the 20-25th of April. And I'm usually pretty simple to change out articles - if there isn't a strong date connection for an article on a specific date and someone wants a timely article to run then (or a recently passed FA that has strong date ties), I'm open to changing up until a couple of days out. If I haven't scheduled May by the time it passes - you can use the usual procedures for requesting a TFA appearance. If May's been scheduled, drop a note on my talk page when it passes. --Ealdgyth (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ealdgyth, thanks so much for jumping in here. Shearonink has tried to resurrect a FFA, and came to FAC well prepared, but has had a miserable time at FAC with unactionable commentary and suggestions/edits that have moved in the wrong direction, so I hope he gets through soon enough. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:12, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ealdgyth & SandyGeorgia - Thank you both so much, appreciate the info. I'll keep it all in mind as our days progress in these strange times. Am so grateful I have Wikipedia to edit & keep me busy. Shearonink (talk) 19:29, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do not accept that an editor can lodge a personal attack on my talk page, and then delete it without retracting the personal attack, while telling me I can't post to their talk page and removing my post there. So, AManWithNoPlan, deal with it here, or deal with it there, but you don't get to lodge a personal attack and remove it here without retraction or discussion. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:25, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have been reading and lurking on wikipedia for a while and have noticed a huge trend in how some articles on Venezuela or relating to Venezuelans who have ties to the government get a free pass. I just read an article in the New York Times about a Venezuelan money launderer and yet when I come on wikipedia what I see is that they have, more than likely, a company working on their page. I just joined because I want to help bring some light to this and eliminate puffery and manipualtion. I am not an expert editor so I write to you to find out if you think this is a good idea. I want to start with the article for a guy who keeps popping up in criminal investigations but I don't want to get into a massive edit war. Do you have any advice? thanks Quarantineer (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Quarantineer, welcome to Wikipedia. I would urge you, with certain articles and people, to exercise extreme caution when editing. You must scrupulously follow WP:BLP, use only the highest quality sources, make sure you represent the sources correctly, and be aware that Wikipedia editors have seen lawsuits filed against them as individuals. When the subject of an article is "lawyered up", you must be very scrupulous in your edits. I know the New York Times and others have run more articles since I last looked at Venezuelan BLPs, and it may be possible to add more content now, but you should still edit VERY cautiously. Be sure to tell all sides of the story, lest you end up sued, and be sure to attribute-- that is, say things like, "According to the New York Times ... " ... I also tend to overquote in those situations. You don't want to end up sued, because the Wikimedia Foundation can be forced to reveal your IP address. I haven't looked lately, because I have unwatched the lot of Venezuelan articles, but yes, there has been a good deal of paid editing affecting those article in the past. Good luck, there's lots of money out there for hiring lawyers, so edit with great care. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Quarantineer, the best advice someone gave me when I was a new editor, is Never Ever WP:EDITWAR. If you make a change and someone reverts you, don't go to WP:3RR-- good editors respect 1RR. You will find out quickly if someone challenges your edits, and then you should always take the dispute to the talk page. Good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for the advice. I will start with the page for Alejandro Betancourt of "Derwick" fame and then move on from there. Quarantineer (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:24, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Medical pricing and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
DocJames has suggested I was hasty with this request. So maybe it didn't unravel as fast as it seems from my perspective. We'll see what the community and ArbCom says. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. The timing is most unfortunate because of COVID, but the necessity to get on with this is abundantly clear. I think we tried everything possible at the WT:MED post-RFC discussion to forestall this, to no avail; the responses were jaw-dropping. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:54, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I mean we were back to edit warring. I too would have preferred not to file now (I would have preferred to file never but especially not now) but since the dispute doesn't seem like it's going to sit during COVID... Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:03, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Barkeep49, you may recall mention of this back on the ANI, but it seems that in medical content, edit warring is a feature, not a bug :/ Another feature is the idea of quickly putting up RFCs. Real discussion went out the window about 2010 or 12, WAID's valiant efforts notwithstanding, around the time we lost many of the "founders" of the Medicine Project. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your watchful guidance on Wikipedia coverage of COVID-19 deserves recognition! Here is a barnstar. RexSueciae (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, RexSueciae-- although I have not done nearly enough. Thanks to you, too! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Original Barnstar
Your watchful guidance on Wikipedia coverage of COVID-19 deserves recognition! Here is a barnstar. RexSueciae (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I second this. Thanks for your careful guiding virus into TFA, after my initial idea. I was a bit reluctant to engage in the 2nd discussion, don't want to be too pushy. It ended fine, the blurb reads fine, see what happens to this :-) -DePiep (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sandy, I have noticed all your hard work on the COVID19-related articles and talk pages lately. Thank you so much for all your efforts to ensure what is shared is accurate. Take good care! JenOttawa (talk) 00:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, SandyGeorgia, for the "COVID-19 Barnstar" you left on my Talk page. It is appreciated more than you know. God bless. Al Leluia81 (talk) 21:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sandy, I know you are not part of the Venezuelan project anymore, but I just wanted to invite to just keep an eye on 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Venezuela and its related talk, as it is a health related issue and you know better of both worlds. Any advice in wiki guidelines and health could come handful. The page is updated quickly but is being filled in an unprofessional way. Again do not feel forced, but be welcome to act in any way that is confortable to you. --MaoGo (talk) 12:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, MaoGo; it is so good to hear from you, and I hope you and yours are well. I will think about whether I feel able to look at that article, but I expect it will infuriate and sadden me too much, as Venezuela will be a complete calamity of death, doubly attributed to the regime in China, and it may be hard for me to read about that much death and suffering and react calmly. All of Wikipedia's Coronovirus articles are in trouble because of the increased editing activity, all of them cause me to have to unwatch daily so I don't pop a cork, and I imagine the Venezuela article will be the most disturbing yet. I will go over there eventually if I feel I can look in there without exploding in frustration. Que estes bien, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I understand completely. In these times of crisis, health comes first. Stay safe, cuídate.--MaoGo (talk) 18:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some users in French Wikipedia were concerned that my username was associated with Chinese politics. I hope my new name does not bring problems with Proust haters. As we interact often enough, I wanted to let you know. Best regards.--ReyHahn (talk) 17:09, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "An update on and a request for involvement at the Medicine MOS". Thank you. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:36, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
.jpg)
(BTW, I'm a gurl, and a feminist gurl to boot, so it's OK for me to say this... 
_-_8.jpg)
_CIPH0027_(cropped).jpg)
