User talk:Jane023

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Haarlem wapen.svg
Welcome to my talk page. If you leave a message here, I will reply as soon as I can. You can also reach me on Wikimedia Commons.

The Signpost: 31 December 2014[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Cunera van Baersdorp
added a link pointing to Charles Taft
Universal Typeface Experiment
added a link pointing to Wired

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

MediaMonks[edit]

Hello. I edited the MediaMonks-article in a way that it looks better, in my opinion. Please see if you can agree with that. Regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 19:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

There is no problem with your corrections, but I would not remove citations only to slap on a citation needed template, which strikes me odd and even a bit rude. Why do you feel youtube links are illegible as a reference? If the interview was in textual form the result would be no different. Jane (talk) 00:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
The problem with youtube-links as citations is that they do not make things notable. Since Youtube has no editorial overview, everybody can put something on youtube and say it is encyclopedia-worthy. Moreover, if you see what nonsense is said in some vids, you can hardly say that Youtube-vids can be considered as a reliable source. That said, please read WP:VIDEOLINK and see if you think that your vids can be seen as acceptable, in spite of what I just wrote here.
And my apologies if my edits looked rude. That was not my intention. Sorry! Regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 08:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation, I get where you are coming from now. I didn't realize you were thinking in terms of notability criteria. To me, if someone is notable in their field, they deserve a Wikipedia article categorized in their field of notability. In this case, we don't have a category for what they claim as their "field" (creative digital production?). However, for film production they have a IMDb number and for advertising & marketing they have the associated FWA, Webby, Cannes Lions, etc awards. I always try to prove notability per category, but the art of "creative digital production" is so new I am not quite sure which authority control I should consult. What they do is considered an art form, but this is not yet recognized anywhere that I can see. In the case of the links, the party that uploaded the Youtube film is relevant. In such cases I prefer to directly link the youtube permalink rather than the owner's website, which may change at any time. Jane (talk) 11:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
All right. I understand your arguments. It wouldn't be my choice, but since I believe that your arguments are valid as well, I'll leave it as you edited it. All the best,Jeff5102 (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

This Month in Education: December 2014[edit]

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 14 January 2015[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for January 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicolaes Hasselaer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abraham de Vries (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2015[edit]

Art and Feminism Challenge[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your message. I'll participe. I've informed Wikimedia Spain Chapter and Amical as they have Women Month activities too. One thing, I've read somewhere that the challenge is March 7th and 8th. But the main page doesn't say it. So it could well be that I misunderstood something, so if you could tell me in my talk page in Spanish WIkipedia, it would be great. B25es (talk) 18:51, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Wonderful! And thanks for the tip - I will update the page for the timing element. Jane (talk) 18:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello. As B25es said, he spreaded the word in WMES mailing list. I'll try to participate and promote the contest. And we hope to organise some activity in March. --Millars (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

That would be great! Thanks, Jane (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Serenade by Leyster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Museum of Islamic Art (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015[edit]

This Month in Education: [January 2015][edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

RfC: AfC Helper Script access[edit]

An RfC has been opened at RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script. You are invited to comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2015[edit]

Invitation[edit]

Have you heard of the Kaffeeklatsch? It is a test area for women to hear and support each other. The idea came about as a result of a discussion at meta regarding my IdeaLab proposal (yet open) for WikiProject Women.

Now that the klatsch has survived an MfD and WMF legal has said that it does not violate the non discrimination policy,[1] I am looking for women editors who might like to join.

Although I have started a couple of discussions, they are not urgent. For now, the "Please introduce yourself" discussion is more important! I want to take it slow at first and build a small group before trying to address heavy topics or come up with big goals. For now, the klatsch is there as a sort of refuge. I hope you will consider joining, and invite other women editors, too, if you wish. Lightbreather (talk) 22:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2015[edit]

Gendergap v gender gap[edit]

Re this edit [2]: I personally don't have a strong feeling one way or another, though I do tend to like things standardized. FWIW: WP:GGTF is the "Gender gap task force" and at meta, it's Gender gap. I'm pinging Sarah (SV), since I believe she was the one to organize, create the GGTF. Again, I don't have a strong preference one way or another. Lightbreather (talk) 20:39, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Personally I was happy to see that most standard publications refer to the "Gender gap" because it makes it easier for searches to zero in on our "Gendergap". This is the term used in the mailinglist and I think we should stick to it, also for foreign language Wikipedias. The term should not be confused with the Gender pay gap. Jane (talk) 20:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Miss Bentham[edit]

Hi,

Please would you look over my new article, Miss Bentham? I don't often write articles about individual works, and you'll know what the bast structure is. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Interesting painting. It's always fascinating to see what the rich & famous found inspiring. I lost hours paging through the Liz Taylor auction. I bet Warhol had a bunch more interesting works by American artists. Jane (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes. And a foot. Thanks for your edits. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on WP:AN#Closure review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script[edit]

Hello! You have been selected to receive an invitation to participate in the closure review for the recent RfC regarding the AfC Helper script. You've been chosen because you participated in the original RfC. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. This message is automated. Replies will not be noticed. --QEDKTC 14:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015[edit]

Presentation proposal for Wikimania 2015[edit]

Wikimania 2015 Mexico City identity.jpg How to pick up more women...
Hello to the members of WikiProject Women writers! Victuallers and I have developed a proposal for a talk to be presented at Wikimania 2015. It's titled, How to pick up more women -- as in more women editors and more women's biographies. The proposal review process has begun and there's no guarantee that this proposal will be accepted. That's where you come in. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. Ultimately, we hope you add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal which signifies you're interested in the talk (it does not signify you'll be attending the event). Thank you! Rosiestep (talk) 21:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

This Month in Education: [February 201[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Fine Arts Star.png The Barnstar of Fine Arts
For all your contributions to articles on the visual arts. Deeply impressive and thank you! Ceoil (talk) 22:03, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Jane (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Historici.nl for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Historici.nl is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historici.nl until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 11:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

In case you disagree with the nomination for deletion, you can vote Keep at the nomination. – Editør (talk) 09:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)