User talk:Vertilly

Welcome!

Hello, Vertilly, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

I'm also the one who's offered to adopt you. You may wish to have a look through my user page and my previous contributions in order to vet me, as obviously not every adopter and adoptee are going to be matched. I take nothing on this site personally, so if you'd rather seek another mentor my feelings won't be slighted. However, I've signed up to the adoption service mostly because I've been here for a year and I've become familiar with WP's various arcane procedures and protocol. So even if we share few common interests as far as the subjects we're editing, I think I could answer most questions you'd ask. If I can't, I'd be happy to help you find the answer.

Since you're busy right now I won't worry if you don't respond/react for a while. Also, I "watch" pages to which I contribute, so you can continue this discussion here and I'll notice it, or you can leave your comments at my talk page.

Regards, --DeLarge 00:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

I'm quite happy for you to adopt me if you don't mind me asking lots of questions! All those links are really useful, I'll definitely keep them to refer to.

My first question: I was looking at The five pillars of Wikipedia and was wondering how the Geological map page faired on the "neutral point of view" front, as it seems to only talk about the maps as they relate to the USA.

TTFN --Vertilly 12:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ask all you want - I'd be a pretty lousy adopter if I rationed your curiosity.

Strictly speaking, geological map's not a neutrality problem. NPOV would be an expression of opinion or advocating a particular position. What it is, however -- and you'll unfortunately see this a lot -- is evidence of Wikipedia's systemic bias. Two thirds of English language speakers come from the USA, and there's no mechanism to prevent insular editing by those who think the whole world lies between Canada and Mexico. WP has acknowledged the problem, and is trying to make at least a token effort to counter this (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias).

The same problem is reflected in the fact that, as with most web pages, Wikipedia is edited more by young, white, computer-savvy Western males than any other demographic group. So despite the vast number of possible subjects, Wikipedia:Featured articles has 59 pages on "Computers and video games" (including six on Final Fantasy alone), and a "Media" section heavily filled with modern movies (including five of the six Star Wars films).

So if you find that a topic is inadequately covered, or that it's too parochial, then "be bold" and dive right in. I'd certainly say that the page needs work; to show what I mean I've made a "test edit" where I shuffled the text and paragraphs into what I'd say was a more sensible order, before reverting back again. But I'll leave it up to you to improve it properly. --DeLarge 15:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's another article I may try and contribute constructively to when I get a chance then! (I have the grand list of... 2.. but that's enough for me right now, heh.)

Can I change my Adoption badge now to say you are my adopter then? :)--Vertilly 13:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Course you can. I'd do it myself, but a good adopter will throw the baby in at the deep end and let it swim for itself.

PS I started with just two pages as well, and after a year I'm watching 442. You have been warned... --DeLarge 20:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About that systematic bias[edit]

Ooh found the reason *why* it's so focused on the USA - the title is "Geologic map" and is redirected from Geological map. Geologic map is the USA term for the maps. Is it worth considering creating a "Geological map" page, which would give the UK details/history etc and mention that in the USA they are known as "Geologic maps" and link to the "Geologic map" page? Or would that be confusing things?

'Fraid not. This used to happen a while back; either pages for both British English and American English would exist, or more often editors would fight to move a page from one to the other. In June 2005, the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee ruled that "when either of two styles is acceptable, it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change. For example, with respect to British spelling as opposed to American spelling, it would only be acceptable to change from American spelling to British spelling if the article concerned a British topic." So since an enterprising Brit got there first, American English words like millimeter and liter redirect to the British English equivalent, but the opposite is true for colour or carburettor.

In the case of geologic map, an American was the first to create the article, so you have to edit that page. However, here's a few suggestions of what you can do:

The text in bold in the opening line should reflect the title of the article. Therefore, since geological map redirects to the page, you can change the first sentence to read "A geologic map or geological map is a special-purpose map made to show subsurface geological features."
If there's a difference between U.S. and U.K. maps, I'd split the two into separate sections after the opening paragraph, and detail the differences for each (re-ordering the page as I'd done with this edit). If there's no difference, I'd just remove the specific references to the United States as being unnecessary, and expand on what's there.
You can also provide links to British geological maps if such a resource exists, as has already been done for USGS maps.

An explanation of the style ruling can be found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Disputes over style issues and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English, or if you're really bored you can read the original case at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jguk, which concerned and edit war over the use of BC or BCE for Biblical dates. Hope all this helps! --DeLarge 13:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well I now have something to do after this assignment is done then! Not that I don't have more studying to do though. Heh.--Vertilly 14:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scary![edit]

I just created my first wholly new page (I've done redirects before, but never a whole new page) just thought I would comment it here so you could see how your adoptee is progressing.

Ok, it's only a stub so far, but it was needed to help fill in a gap on a category page... and I'll do some work on the pages it is related to as well :o) --Vertilly 13:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing wrong with stubs! I've created loads myself: Akinori Nakanishi, Epaulette mate, Mau Escarpment, Vanessa Collingridge. And look at how the current Mitsubishi Motors North America compares with the stub I created. From little acorns and all that...

Two wee things for you, as I drip feed you advice. First, I notice that when you create new headings on your talk page, you use the triple apostrophe. If you put two equals signs on either side (i.e. ==Scary== instead of '''Scary!'''), this will do the same. It's not a big issue here, but on occasion it can be important; it splits pages into "sections" which can be individually edited without conflict (important when the page gets edited a lot), and helps keep pages organized, as the Wiki software will arrange the sections into a Table of Contents (see my own talk page for an example of this).

The other tip is a little more pressing, as it relates to St Joseph's Catholic Infant School. In the six weeks following April 22, 2005, some seventy school articles were nominated for deletion, and each AFD contained mostly the same people making the same arguments back and forth repeatedly. In the aftermath there was an attempt to draft a policy which would avoid a repeat of that situation, and although this ultimately failed they're kept for historical interest at Wikipedia:Schools. Earlier drafts are at daughter pages, Wikipedia:Schools/Defunct and Wikipedia:Schools/Old proposal.

St Joseph's Catholic Infant School might be a bit borderline as far as notability goes, so I'll keep it on my watchlist. Also, you may wish to have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools. Their stated aim is to "improve and standardize the quality and consistency of school-related articles", so they perhaps have some specialized sources for information which would help you expand the article and ensure its survival.

Hope all this helps. Regards, and a Happy Easter if I don't reply again before Sunday, --DeLarge 19:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've basically followed the general format for other schools in the area. I know quite a bit about this school - and it's "sister" school which is possibly more notable - if I remember my facts correctly! I think I've probably used the same source as those who have created the stubs for the other schools in the area as well. I've had a brief look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools and got some ideas on how to expand etc. To me, it was basically a gap in information I spotted. Thanks for the heads up though! :o)

Happy Easter to you --Vertilly 20:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject homeschooling[edit]

Hi Vertilly!

I noticed you were a member of WikiProject Alternative Education, and thought you might be interested in WikiProject Homeschooling. In this "WikiProject," we have been together working on the collaboration of Homeschooling-related articles. As a member, I really hope you can join, and let me know if you need any help signing up or with anything else. If you have any questions about the project you can ask at the project's talk page. Cheers! RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 23:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative education[edit]

There has been a proposal brought forward [1] regarding a merger of WikiProject Alternative Education, and as you are member of that project, I am notifying you. Thanks. Twenty Years 13:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Hi Vertilly!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative[edit]

WikiWomen Unite!

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

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

Liking the WikiWomen's Collaborative on Facebook and share your tips, projects, and connect with other WikiWomen
Join the conversation on our Twitter feed
Reading and writing for our blog channel

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

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 05:06, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)![edit]

WikiWomen - We need you!

Hi Vertilly! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Wikipedia, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more!

Get involved by:

Visiting our website for resources, events, and more
Meet other women and share your story in our profile space
Participate at and "like" our Facebook group
Join the conversation on our Twitter feed
Reading and writing for our blog channel
Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for volunteering
Already participating? Take our survey and share your experience!

Thanks for editing Wikipedia, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland[edit]

I'm just dropping you a quick note about a new Wikipedian in Residence job that's opened up at the National Library of Scotland. There're more details at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland#Wikimedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland. Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

I am a reporter for IBT Media covering technology. We publish the International Business Times (IBTimes) and Newsweek. I am looking for female Wikipedians to interview for an article. Would you be able to speak to me for the interview over Skype? Please email me as soon as you can, story deadline is tomorrow.

Thanks, Thomas Halleck t.halleck@ibtimes.com Technology Reporter International Business Times http://www.ibtimes.com/ Thalleck (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinators and help needed[edit]

Hi, if you are active on Wikipedia and are still interested in helping out with urgent tasks on our large Schools Project, please let us know here. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sent to project members 13:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC). You can opt of messages here.