User talk:Alansohn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nohat-logo-XI-big-text.png This user is one of the 40 most active Wikipedians of all time.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 07:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

Editing Barnstar[edit]

Bästa nyskrivna.svg 100,000 Edits
I, Bugboy52.4, award you for reaching 100,000 edits according to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits generated 11:45 pm, 24 February 2009. Keep up the good work!________________________________________________________________


Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn! Saturday September 7[edit]

Brookln Public Library
Please join Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn scavenger hunt on September 7, 2013!
Everyone gather at the Brooklyn Public Library to further Wikipedia's coverage of—
photos and articles related to Brooklyn, its neighborhoods and the local landmarks.
--EdwardsBot (talk)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6[edit]

Queens Library
Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

AFC Backlog Drive[edit]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

TWA guide left bottom.png
Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

--

Get Help
About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge


Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue[edit]

Books & Bytes

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

Volume 1 Issue 3, December/January 2013

(Sign up for monthly delivery)

Happy New Year, and welcome to a special double issue of Books & Bytes. We've included a retrospective on the changes and progress TWL has seen over the last year, the results of the survey TWL participants completed in December, some of our plans for the future, a second interview with a Wiki Love Libraries coordinator, and more. Here's to 2014 being a year of expansion and innovation for TWL!

The Wikipedia Library completed the first 6 months of its Individual Engagement grant last week. Here's where we are and what we've done:
Increased access to sources: 1500 editors signed up for 3700 free accounts, individually worth over $500,000, with usage increases of 400-600%
Deep networking: Built relationships with Credo, HighBeam, Questia, JSTOR, Cochrane, LexisNexis, EBSCO, New York Times, and OCLC
New pilot projects: Started the Wikipedia Visiting Scholar project to empower university-affiliated Wikipedia researchers
Developed community: Created portal connecting 250 newsletter recipients, 30 library members, 3 volunteer coordinators, and 2 part-time contractors
Tech scoped: Spec'd out a reference tool for linking to full-text sources and established a basis for OAuth integration
Broad outreach: Wrote a feature article for Library Journal's The Digital Shift; presenting at the American Library Association annual meeting
...Read Books & Bytes!

Saturday: NYC Art And Feminism Wikipedia Editathon[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join Wikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014,
an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists!

There are also regional events that day in Brooklyn, Westchester County, and the Hudson Valley.
--Pharos (talk)

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon[edit]

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon
ArtAndFeminismNYC-Generations.jpg

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:

I hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

GOCE February blitz wrapup[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2014 wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of seven people who signed up for this blitz, all copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 16 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by

Saturday June 21: Wiki Loves Pride[edit]

Upcoming Saturday event - June 21: Wiki Loves Pride NYC
Wikimedia LGBT outreach logo.svg

You are invited to join us at Jefferson Market Library for "Wiki Loves Pride", hosted by New York Public Library, Metropolitan New York Library Council, Wikimedia LGBT and Wikimedia New York City, where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on this theme:

11am–4pm at Jefferson Market Library.

We hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Hi[edit]

Hi, im GenericBobJoe, you sent my IP address a warning for vandalism, the page that I apparently vandalized said the vandalism was in 2007. I got the computer with this IP last year, and I don't think teaneck is gay. I seriously do not know why this is happening. You should TempBan me from editing for now, maybe one day, and i'll see what's wrong with this computer. If this keeps happening,or if you might know anything about this, please reply. -GenericBobJoe

Eli Sagan[edit]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

NJ stuff for your perusal[edit]

If you could take a moment or two and look through a current article, Newton, New Jersey, and a soon-to-be-mainspaced draft of an article on the New Jersey Forest Fire Service at User:JackTheVicar/sandbox/Box6 I'd be much obliged for your suggestions on how I could improve them.--JackTheVicar (talk) 17:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

  • JackTheVicar, thanks for the work on the Newton, New Jersey article, especially for the added content and images. My only suggested changes are in the education section, where I think that there is a bit too much about the history of SCCC. The forthcoming article for New Jersey Forest Fire Service is excellent, and the DYK hook is fascinating to me as a resident of the state for the past few decades; I never knew that I could be dragooned against my will into fighting fires. Nicely done. Alansohn (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 May newsletter[edit]

C/2014 Q2 (Lovejoy) is a long-period comet discovered on 17 August 2014 by Terry Lovejoy; and is one of several Featured Pictures worked up by India The Herald (submissions) during the second round.

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Belarus Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 11[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - MIT Press Journals, Sage Stats, Hein Online and more
  • New TWL coordinators, conference news, and new reference projects
  • Spotlight: Two metadata librarians talk about how library professionals can work with Wikipedia

Read the full newsletter



MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Discussion re[edit]

I draw your attention to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 April 27#Counties of the United States.Djflem (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

June 10: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting[edit]

Wednesday June 10, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our next evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month will also feature on our agenda: recent and upcoming editathons, the organization's Annual Meeting, and Chapter board elections.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

0.1 not equal to 0.100[edit]

In your recent edit to Collingswood, New Jersey, you state in the caption that 0.1 and 0.100 are not the same thing. I don't see that it's a big deal one way or another, but what do you mean? I looked in the manual of style and didn't find answers there. In school, they teach that trailing zeros after a decimal point do not affect the value of a number and "roll off." I'm sure you know what you're doing; please teach me the significance so I can be sure to do it correctly in the future.

Thanks! Jacona (talk) 17:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

  • JaconaFrere, see Significant figures, which discusses the significance of trailing zeros after the decimal point. In our example, 0.1 could be the result of rounding a number between 0.05 and 0.15, while 0.100 would mean that the number would be between 0.0005 and 0.0015, a much higher degree of precision. WP:MOSNUM further addresses the issue and recommends a consistent degree of precision for all the numbers listed in this context, all of which (total, land and water area) have three decimal places, as provided by the source from the Census Bureau. A small measure of good faith in trying to understand the issue and refraining from making any such edits until you understand the issue would have been helpful, rather than needlessly running off to look for every occurrence of 0.100 so that you could drop the trailing zeros. Again, 0.1 is NOT the same as 0.100, which is an issue of precision, not equality. Alansohn (talk) 17:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I thought understood you until the last sentence. True, 0.1 is not the same as 0.001, but it is an issue of equality. Maybe it's the new math? Jacona (talk) 18:21, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
    • A perusal of other place articles around the U.S. seems to contradict the 3 significant digit "rule". I checked around twenty such articles randomly; none outside of New Jersey contained a trailing zero after the decimal. Is New Jersey the only place it's done right? Maybe so. Jacona (talk) 18:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
      • JaconaFrere, you're trying to do two things here: 1) change the wording of the standard geography template, mainly to remove "of it", and 2) change the number of decimal places in numbers with trailing zeros, as seen in this edit.
      • 1) The basic wording dates back to the first edit of the article in 2002 by Ram-Man, which included the dreaded "of it", which has stayed there for more than 12 years. There are thousands of articles using this wording. There's nothing grammatically incorrect with "of it", but the working you're using is flat-out wrong. What you have is "(0.1 km2) of (3.99%) water", which has the parenthetical percentage floating meaninglessly in between "of" and "water".
      • 2) You need to review the content of significant figures, which describes that "Stating the result as 12.2300 makes clear that it is precise to four decimal places (in this case, six significant figures)." So 0.1 is accurate to one decimal place, while 0.100 is accurate to three places; It's more precise. There is a difference. Next is MOS:UNCERTAINTY, which specifies that "The number of decimal places should be consistent within a list or context (The response rates were 41.0 and 47.4 percent, respectively, not 41 and 47.4 percent), unless different precisions are actually intended." So using "0.1" is wrong, because of the loss of precision and the inconsistency; All the are data in the sentence have three decimal places and all of them should have three decimal places.
      • The best case, even if you were right on all fronts, is that you've done nothing more than rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. The encyclopedia is no better for these changes. As the wording is inconsistent with the standard used across Wikipedia since these articles were created and as your changes conflict with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers guideline, the articles are worse than they started. There is room for improvement, but do so based on a clear understanding of the underlying principles and policies. Alansohn (talk) 01:59, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
        • So you're saying if there is a grammatical error that's been around a long time, we should not change it? And you still didn't explain what you meant about 0.1 and .001 above. They are different, not only in precision, but also in value. Jacona (talk) 02:06, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
          • In this edit, you've removed "of it", which has been there for a dozen years and is not a grammatical error. In its place, you made it "including 3.164 square miles (8.196 km2) of land and 0.131 square miles (0.339 km2) of (3.98%) water." What does "of (3.98%) water" mean? If you're going to fix something that isn't incorrect, why deliberately introduce an error that makes it worse than it was before. Please tell me that you read and understand significant figures and tell me that 0.1 and 0.100 are not different (note that the typo was corrected). Please review WP:MOSNUM and confirm that you understand keeping the precision consistent across the three area numbers for total, land and water. Alansohn (talk) 02:14, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
              • I was very confused because I could not find something you posted previously. Rather than answering my question, I researched and found you edited your previous comments (which had already been replied to), without explaining that you did or why. Is that proper behaviour? It seems to conflict with the guidance on the talk page guidelines. Why would you do that rather than answering the question? Jacona (talk) 02:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
                • Read above "tell me that 0.1 and 0.100 are not different (note that the typo was corrected)". Do you understand the issue here? Alansohn (talk) 02:59, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
                  • Yes. I understand that you changed an earlier part of the discussion, which made my question, which was already a part of ther discussion, look strange and crazy. It undermines good faith and leaves me wondering what else you may have done. Your behavior undermines good faith. Do you understand that? Ignoring this, as you attempt to do is not possible; it overshadows all else in this discussion because it destroys the basis for an honest conversation. Jacona (talk) 10:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
                    • Read the heading of this section. It says "0.1 not equal to 0.100". The issue here, from the beginning, was your improper removal of trailing zeros from a number that read "0.100" and your changing it to "0.1". At one point, I made a typographical error that read "0.001", when I had obviously intended "0.100", which is the subject of this entire discussion. I clearly stated that a change had been made, writing "tell me that 0.1 and 0.100 are not different (note that the typo was corrected)". Are you still making the argument that you believe that dropping the trailing zeros is correct or are you obsessing about the correction of a typo? Alansohn (talk) 12:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
                      • Thanks for all your help. I'm sorry I didn't understand what your "obviously" intention (you might have cleared it up when I asked you about it directly). The articles in question have been changed. Thanks again for the information. Jacona (talk) 13:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
                        • Again, my apologies for my mistake and any confusion it may have caused. If I had realized that I had made the mistake, I would have corrected it before pressing enter. Once I realized it, I made the correction -- and clearly indicated that I had made the correction -- to match the title "0.1 not equal to 0.100". Just as you realized that the leading zero before the decimal place is needed per editing guidelines, so too the trailing zeros are meaningful and necessary, both to provide the information on the significant figures / precision of the number and to conform with WP:MOSNUM editing guidelines on maintaining consistent precision (i.e., the same number of decimal places) in all numbers in the same context. Alansohn (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Bergen/New Jersey counties - demographics section upgrade[edit]

Fabulous work on upgrading the Bergen County article, Alansohn, thank you! I think this should be kicked up another notch for New Jersey counties in general. Have you seen the Orange County, California article before, with its wealth of municipal demographic information? Let me know what you think of doing the same for New Jersey counties. Best, Castncoot (talk) 17:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

In fact, now that I look at it, other California counties (e.g., Los Angeles County) are formatted the same way. Castncoot (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
1. Agreed that you've (Alansohn) done a very good job on Bergen County, and a tremendous job of updating so much data for the state!
2. Also agree with Castncoot that the collapsible sections in Orange County make it much easier to read!
It's great to work with such dedicated people! Jacona (talk) 17:55, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the thanks from both of you. I'm working my way through the counties by alphabetical order, updating geography, county government, politics and municipalities as a focus, with other edits as they arise. I think that the New Jersey county articles are a strong start, but where the California articles come off better is in history an other sections where there is greater work in prose and descriptions of geography, economy, sports and culture. I'd love to see one of the New Jersey county articles expanded using Orange, Los Angeles or Nape counties as a model, perhaps with one of the weaker county articles. Castncoot, kudos to you on the ethnodemographic side, which should be ported over to other counties, and I agree that Hudson County would be a good place to start, probably followed by Essex and Passaic in the area. JaconaFrere, I think that we are reaching some sort of consensus on some of the wording for area and other data, and I hope that we can mutually agree on some wording that would allow us to use AWB (or other tools) to apply the changes on a more consistent, thorough and faster basis. It's amazing what one person can do, but all the more work can be accomplished working together. Alansohn (talk) 18:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan. Castncoot (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
As far as the wording on the land/water area goes, I think I like the "including" or "composed of" wording best. Anything to get rid of that extra comma and the two "of it"s. Jacona (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Will transpose this thread to the Talk page of Hudson County. Castncoot (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Use of the Definite Article in the Title[edit]

Isn't it bad style to use the definite article in the title such as The Lewis School of Princeton? I've had other pages I created using the definite article changed by other editors to remove it. Is that wrong? Clarification would be helpful. Djkeddie (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Djkeddie, as to the use of the definite article, see WP:THE. An argument could be made either way, and you might well have support for removal of the definite article. The issue is the way you handled the removal. The proper way to do it is to move the article. What you did was a Cut-and-paste move, which would leave the new article having none of the edit history of the original version. See WP:Requested moves for the process of requesting a move to effectively rename the article. Alansohn (talk) 13:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
That makes sense, duly noted. Djkeddie (talk) 03:45, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Buena, New Jersey may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • partially or completely within the borough include [[Landisville, New Jersey|Landisville]] and [[Minotola, New Jersey|Minotola], each of which had postal facilities established with those names

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Haworth, New Jersey may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • sup>), including 1.945 square miles (5.037&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) of land and 0.411 square miles (1.065&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup> of water (17.45%).<ref name=CensusArea/><ref name="GR1" />

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

A note[edit]

I just wanted to say thank you for defending me the other month for me defending those articles on Nevada, though both of us were unsuccessful. Do you still fight that other user? Dandtiks69 (talk) 23:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)