User talk:APerson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Signpost
30 July 2014

EB1911 verification X-Z[edit]

I see that you marked the X-Z section of Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/1911 verification as Done. First, thanks! I thought I was the only one toiling in this particular vineyard.

What's probably not clear is that I have a tool for calculating the table. It scans the individual lists counting the number of lines that end in "-" (actually, it reads the HTML looking for "</a>)</span> -</li>"; some time I must modify it to use the Wikimedia API). The ask on the toplevel page is "remove the {{search}} template and add a note after the trailing hyphen", while the X-Z list does not, itself, contain an indication that you have worked on it. Compare the B2 index, which I just finished.

Rather than make-work, if you can just add an assertion to the X-Z list that it is verified, I'll special-case the code. Sounds good?

I think I'll move on to D now, to avoid clashing with anyone else (I'd also made a start on X-Z, but hadn't done much). David Brooks (talk) 03:30, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

DavidBrooks, while originally going through the X-Z list, the only check I performed on each article was making sure that the article was as comprehensive as that on Britannica; I didn't do anything relating to {{EB1911}}. Therefore, it would probably be best if I were to just go through and mark articles as "ok", following the format on the B2 index.
Regarding the tool: where can I find the code for it? I would be interested in working on it, since I have some prior experience working with the API. APerson (talk!) 01:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
@APerson:, I've expanded the per-letter pages to include the important advice from the project page. Because of the emphasis on citations since the EB1911 stuff was created, and the need to be explicit about what would otherwise be an accusation of plagiarism (and CorenSearchBot slaps you if you do include a copy of a previously missed EB1911 article), we're being asked to include the actual title or wstitle of the EB article. Since they were originally just tagged with {{1911}}, sometimes it can require some creativity to find it again. See the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Encyclopaedia Britannica and also see Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica with no article parameter.
Re the tool, it's a very untidy, incrementally created piece of C# code on my PC, which used to be a very untidy piece of PERL. It doesn't even make optimal use of the API (one get call per subpage). As a professional developer, I'd be really sad if anyone else saw it. Don't worry; I'll run it every month or so. David Brooks (talk) 03:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
OK, still not my best work and poorly documented, but try http://1drv.ms/1sVPTMJ. David Brooks (talk) 05:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Robert Bloom and User:SLBloom/sandbox[edit]

Draft:Robert Bloom (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

User:SLBloom/sandbox (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

SUBJECT: Robert Bloom submission ... Hello, My name is Peter Cole ... My account name is justmeotw. I created a draft article of Robert Bloom that you say is the prior version of the article you will consider for publication.

I created the original draft for a client (wikipedia acct username: SLBloom) on my account. I did not at the time have SLBloom's login credentials. When I did, I copied the entire article over to her account and did the final edits under her account. I am just a 3rd party contractor hired to create the Wikipedia article. It's not mine and I don't want to have it associated with my account. I have removed the article from my account(justmeotw) and would like it to be reviewed for SLBloom. Please consider the SLBLoom submission as legit and not a duplicate submission. I never submitted the justmeotw version of the article for review.

There is some urgency involved in getting this published ASAP as there is a big gathering of people for whom Robert Bloom was an important person. I hope this clears up any confusion.

If you have any questions, you can reach me by email at webtech@b2webservices.com

Regards, Peter Cole 603-763-5276 SLBloom (talk) 01:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@SLBloom, Justmeotw: I understand what you're saying about how SLBloom is the client, but you wrote most of the text and therefore are considered the article's author. At the moment, you, and not SLBloom, are going to get the notifications (i.e. when the article is submitted and when it is accepted/declined.) I'll review the article as soon as I can. APerson (talk!) 16:02, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
OK ... no problem. I've copied the article back into the justmeotw account sandbox and submitted for review. Appreciate the help.
Peter
SLBloom (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
SLBloom, it doesn't look like either article has been submitted. Did you want to submit the submission which is in the Draft namespace (i.e. Draft:Robert Bloom)?
Side note: If you're a 3rd-party contractor who's going to be operating on Wikipedia, you should probably check out the guidelines for holding discussions on Wikipedia (which, when followed, have a massive impact on the legibility of discussions), located at WP:TP. You should pay special attention to WP:THREAD, a section of that, which describes how to indent posts (with :'s). Thanks! APerson (talk!) 21:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Resolved: Moved to user page. APerson (talk!) 01:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
For your efforts to bring essential functionality enhancements to a key AfC template. Thank you! Bellerophon talk to me 19:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

inre Draft:Found Footage 3D[edit]

On June 18, you made reference to a comment by an earlier reviewer and advised that we await the film's release before moving the article to mainspace. However, I call your attention to WP:NFF (paragraph 3) and its advising that an article on an unreleased film may be considered if filming has been confirmed to have begun (and in this case it has completed) and the production has received enough attention to meet WP:GNG. That said, I seek your approval in my moving this to mainspace. Thanks, Schmidt, Michael Q. 23:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Since the last discussion on my talk page, Tokyogirl79 has added another source, noting that filming has wrapped up. In that discussion, Tokyogirl79 said that once another review is found, it should be moved to mainspace; I guess that the additional source counts as another independent mention. Therefore, I have moved it to mainspace. APerson (talk!) 02:06, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Excellent. Face-smile.svg Schmidt, Michael Q. 02:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)