User talk:Mark Miller

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Animation10.gif

Contents

October 2014[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Historicity of Jesus. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:43, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Mark Miller (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I don't believe I was actually edit warring as I made a bold edit and was immediately reverted without discussion and endured a good deal of personal attacks that were uncalled for. The revert was supported at the time by another editor, ArtifexMayhem and the editor that began reverting refused to actually discuss the issues before just blanket reverts. I made my case before I made any edits to the article and waited for any response. It was probably too late for the active editors to see as clearly there are many weighing in now, but at that time there were no objections and when the one editor did object, it was without any justification. The article is not about drawing conclusions and the references did not support the claims being made and therefore took away the meaning of other sources only there as "padding to prop up weak sources" as stated by ArtifexMayhem. I believed I was reverting over clear vandalism when a discussion was not going the way the other was hoping and was a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Should my request be denied, I can respect and accept that. I have not been blocked in a very long time and saddened by this turn of events...but if this is the case then I must accept it and try to somehow learn from it. Please don't get me wrong. I am not trying to stretch what "Vandalism" is but from this discussion, it appears my understanding of what vandalism is more than just blatant additions that are nonsense. I go by our precedence that is set. I cannot see how that is wrong, but can see how others may interpret my actions as edit warring when I try to only revert where the policies allow me to do so. At any rate...I very much trust the good faith of HJ Mitchel as someone I hold in high regard. Any way...I have said and done enough I suppose. Thanks you for listening and I hope at least to be understood, if not actually agreed with! Happy editing to all and to all a good day (been up way too long...sleep calls me now)Mark Miller (talk) 14:13, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

In a 24 hour period you made 4 reverts on a single article that were not removing copyright violations, libelous statements, or vandalism. In this context, I'm declining your request to be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 16:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

Well, now you know why I don't touch that cesspool very often.—Kww(talk) 14:09, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
LOL! Yes...well now I know all to well. ;-)--Mark Miller (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
The consequence of editing is always the possibility of being blocked. That is something we all must understand and take seriously for right or for wrong. However...wrong is a perception just as "right" is. Going to bed now...--Mark Miller (talk) 16:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Mark - perhaps you could get PhilKnight to unblock you if you didn't edit Historicity of Jesus or it's talk page until after the expiration of this block? I could use help finishing up the A-class review for Ford Island. I was going to work on it today.--v/r - TP 18:30, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
As the user who filed the original complaint, I would also support an unblock. Both Mark Miller and I got a bit caught up in our discussions where we both should have kept a cool head. My apologies for my part in the argument. Mark Miller is a serious and experienced user and I'm sure the community would gain from the block being lifted. Jeppiz (talk) 20:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the apology Jeppiz. Accepted. I am sorry for my part as well. I hope to work with you in the future.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
I would be willing to not edit the Historicity of Jesus article or talk page for the original block duration if PhilKnight was willing to grant an unblock for that proposal.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Mark, sorry to hear you were blocked. It would be easier for everyone if there was a clear 1RR notice on the talk page. That would level the playing field for everyone. After all, this is a controversial article that attracts a lot of problems. Why don't we have a 1RR restriction on the article already? Viriditas (talk) 02:54, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Viriditas. I think a 1RR would require and community discussion. The article has been the source for a lot of disputes but I couldn't say if the community would agree to something like that. It might but its hard to tell. That could be brought up one of the boards I suppose but I think an RFC on the talk page might be a better idea.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:06, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Why would 1rr level the field? Is someone currently subject to such a restriction on an individual level? Gaijin42 (talk) 14:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Alright, don't do it again. PhilKnight, I hope you don't mind. Drmies (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Drmies. I hope Phil is alright with this as well.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, of course. PhilKnight (talk) 06:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Seems reasonable to me, given Mark's assurances that he won't edit the article for the duration. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:06, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I'm going to say this, though, for no other reason than "I can". Mark - calm down a bit for goodness sake. All of a sudden you're all over the place, being offended, fighting the "forces of disruption", righting great wrongs... We all love you already, Mark, you don't need to be so controversial or reactive to everything you happen to see anywhere. That's all, really. I hope you don't take it the wrong way. Aloha. And your meal picture makes me so, so, hungry. Begoontalk 13:15, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

In the spirit if aloha, have some Jambalya Homemade Jambalaya.JPG.--Mark Miller (talk) 14:36, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Needs salt. Begoontalk 14:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I've known Mark for quite some time, and will just say that while he isn't perfect, he is much closer than he was two years ago. Personally, I find no fault with the personal growth he has experienced, nor with the personal challenges he has accepted. He just isn't done yet. None of us are. Dennis 17:14, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2014 Iranian-led intervention in Iraq[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Iranian-led intervention in Iraq. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Timestamp[edit]

Collaboration on "Homelessness among LGBT Youth on the United States"[edit]

Hello,

I was excited to read that you may be interested in collaborating in some small part on the page I am creating, "Homelessness among LGBT Youth on the United States." I was wondering if you were still interested in being involved, and if so, what capacity you would like to be involved in--writing a specific section? Reviewing my work? Pointing to sources? Etc. Just so you're aware, I will probably be posting my first draft of the article around Wednesday, October 15h (as that is a class deadline), and I will be working on the article in my sandbox until then.

Thanks so much; I hope this message finds you well! Also, if this is not the appropriate place to be discussing things, please let me know that as well. :)

Magenstat (talk) 18:19, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I did some work in the summer of 1981 in the Youth Department of the Gay and Lesbian Community Center in Hollywood. Youth issues such as homelessness are not as well covered on Wikipedia as I would have thought. There are good sources but you will have to face difficult issues. I wait to see the direction you take.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:22, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Conundrum[edit]

I've discovered a strange problem, and I'm wondering if I can draw on your knowledge of art for insight. Chain Reaction was supposed to have been built from bronze to the sole purpose of longevity. For some reason that I cannot figure out, it never was, and this is what led to the deaccessioning attempt due to the degradation of the stainless steel and fiberglass structure. What do you think happened? They had $250,000 to work with, and the fabricator, Peter M. Carlson, had worked with bronze many times.[1][2] So who made the decision not to use bronze? Viriditas (talk) 22:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2014[edit]

This week's article for improvement (week 42, 2014)[edit]

CIA map of Central America.png

Central America is the geographic region that connects North America and South America.

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Central America


Previous selections: Steak • International airport


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:04, 13 October 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Deepwater Horizon fire 2[edit]

Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling unit on fire 2010.jpg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling unit on fire 2010.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 19:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Cool. Thank you. I only photo-shopped the new version of a public domain, US Coastguard image, but thanks!

Please comment on Talk:Marital rape[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Marital rape. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

GOCE October 2014 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors October 2014 newsletter is now ready for review. Highlights:

– Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2014[edit]

This week's article for improvement (week 43, 2014)[edit]

Icehotel-se-29.JPG

Inside an ice hotel in Jukkasjärvi, Sweden

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Ice hotel


Previous selections: Central America • Steak


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Please comment on Talk:United States pro-life movement[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States pro-life movement. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014[edit]

Question[edit]

Hi Mark, I like your suggestion here that there be an RfC to settle the ongoing issue there. But I'm confused about your interactions with AbramTerger on the talk page. I see from his talk page that he has had some past issues with edit warring but his recent posts seem to be reasonable requests for talk page participation and consensus. Also I think citing his citing of a WP guideline to support his position is quite normal and even encouraged on WP. I'm not familiar with entire back story regarding this dispute, so would you fill me in? What am I missing here that is causing you and others to have this bitter reaction to AbramTerger? Thanks for your time. -- KeithbobTalk 15:07, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Keith. The demands that editor is making on the talk page are more than citing guidelines...he is demanding a strict adherence to them and that is simply not right. Guidelines are there to guide editors...not instruct them. The editor is also flat out wrong when he states that a consensus is needed to go against guidelines. No...a consensus is required for all content. What he is attempting is to place himself above the other editor, believing he has some moral right to stick to the guidelines. We tend to call that Wikilawyering: arguing guidelines in an absolute and strict interpretation is akin to filibustering to get their way and refusing to compromise themselves.--Mark Miller (talk) 18:57, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I don't agree with your line of reasoning but thanks for the explanation. Best, -- KeithbobTalk 20:36, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Picture used in article[edit]

I only briefly looked but you are listed as the editor that contributed a picture to the Gumbo article. You (concerning the picture) have been indirectly referenced on the Gumbo talk page so I thought it right to advise you of this. Otr500 (talk) 11:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Herb Kawainui Kāne[edit]

Hey - do you think it'd take much for us to get this to GA class?--v/r - TP 06:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Just a quick look and I'd say it is nearly there and would take very little work to get it listed if I were reviewing it. I would love a chance to do so if you end up listing it. Good way to get a quick and detailed overview of the artist.
A few things need to be fixed:
  • There are at least two tags in the prose needing to be looked into. A "by whom" and "Citation needed".(must be fixed before nomination as tags are a quick decline criteria)
  • Most images seem to be with proper license but I think one needed proper dating for verification reasons and it should be easy enough to find.
  • Non Free Images have invalid rationales. It would probably be best to use one of the newer NFC boiler plates that have all the specifics needed and have no "NA" or unfilled out points.(This needs to be addressed before nomination as copyright is a quick decline criteria)
  • The lede should be expanded to cover more of the body of the article.
  • All of the sources should be checked to make sure they are all reliable and free of blogs, fan sites or other non RS.
  • The prose and sources should also be checked for unattributed opinion such as an art expert discussing style etc..
  • Check for "List incorporation" guideline issues with the Publication section.
  • Double check spelling of all the Hawaiian names, places, words and phrases and make sure there is consistent spelling.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
If you, TParis don't have time, maybe I can just make that my project, make the changes and then the nomination. I haven't nominated anything in a while.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I might have time later. The ACR on Ford Island should pass later today and I am going to put it up for FAC immediately. Trying to get it to FA by Dec 7th so it can be on the mainpage.--v/r - TP 20:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I looked for the A class review but didn't see one a while back for Ford Island. Sorry I didn't get to that but would like to help with the FAC if possible.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
No biggie. The Hawaii edit a thon planning isn't going well. I got ahold off the Hawaii public library and they agreed to host it on Jan 24, 2015. But User:Solarra went MIA in August and I haven't been able to get ahold of her. I have made contact with the Bishop museum but they havent responded since. I havent been able to get ahold of either University. Struggling.--v/r - TP 22:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Here is the A-class review. It will be closed later tonight as successful if all things remain the same. I'll put it up for FAC tomorrow. Hopefully the peer review and a-class review will get it through FAC quickly.--v/r - TP 22:29, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 44, 2014)[edit]

Grand canyon of yellowstone.JPG

Grand Canyon of Yellowstone, the world's first national park

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

National park


Previous selections: Ice hotel • Central America


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Please comment on Talk:Gaza flotilla raid[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gaza flotilla raid. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer![edit]

Ford Island[edit]

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg Heads up! Ford Island has passed its A-class review. Moving on to FAC. v/r - TP 15:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2014[edit]

This week's article for improvement (week 45, 2014)[edit]

Pepperoni pizza with basil.jpg

A pizza is an oven-baked flat bread typically topped with tomato sauce, cheese and various toppings

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Pizza


Previous selections: National park • Ice hotel


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

WikiCup 2014: The results[edit]

Flag of the Smithsonian Institution.svg
Flag of Wales.svg
Flag of Scotland.svg

The 2014 WikiCup champion is Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. Scotland Casliber (submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.

A full list of our prize-winners follows:

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 November 2014[edit]

You're killin me smalls[edit]

Mark, citation style has been brought up in the FAC. I just went through and fixed all of the citations to use the same style and then you added a half dozen more. I don't mind fixing it again, but in the future could you please make sure to include publisher, year of publication, and use page= instead of pages=?--v/r - TP 17:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I did see that a comment was made about the consistent use inline citations but I figured the tool I was using was providing publisher info. I was not aware there was an issue with the page numbering. You don't have to fix my contributions. I will take a look myself.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
The citation tool I use for all book sources is the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books. It appears to include a publisher and publishing date but does use "pages" instead of page. I will check all new references for complete consistency right now. Now...on the Mary Māmaka Kaiao Kuleana kope. "Hawaiian Dictionaries". University of Hawaii reference, there is no page number as this is an online dictionary using the publications as their data base, but I could just find the exact book source from this author and add the information treating it as a true book source as that is the actual source and the online dictionary is really just a convenience link. I'll fix that as well.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:35, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 46, 2014)[edit]

Man sleeping striped-sheets.JPG

Sleeping is part of everyday life

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Everyday life


Previous selections: Pizza • National park


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

This week's article for improvement (week 47, 2014)[edit]

USAF F-15C fires AIM-7 Sparrow 2.jpg

Military aviation and missile guidance are examples of modern military technology.

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Military technology


Previous selections: Everyday life • Pizza


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:18, 17 November 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

The Signpost: 12 November 2014[edit]

Gender[edit]

Re: this. I'm not sure who is and who is not, since we can be anybody here, but "Afrodesiak" was raised at the RfA and to be best of my knowledge has never identified their gender. - Sitush (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Alright.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
All three are women and have self-identified as such on talk pages many, many times. Viriditas (talk) 01:53, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
That is correct. Two of them are not available to help, however. Dennis - 02:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
All three are great editors. Anna is especially good at thinking outside the box and is extremely patient....extremely. I hope she will be able to help when possible.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello Mark Miller. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pauahi. 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) 11:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 48, 2014)[edit]

San Andrés Island Colombia.JPG

A beach on the island of San Andrés, a tourist destination in the Caribbean

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Tourism in the Caribbean


Previous selections: Military technology • Everyday life


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

RfC United States same-sex marriage map[edit]

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 (talk) 09:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25[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.

Alii
added a link pointing to Chief
Aliʻi
added a link pointing to Chief

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:23, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Good bot. Thank you. I think I corrected both of those but will double check.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:25, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

New editor needs a barnstar[edit]

Awesome edit by a new editor I welcomed today.[3] One wonders how long that vandalism was in the article. Viriditas (talk) 08:20, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

That is a good catch but I am not clear if the decade change from the "1970's" to the "1960's" is accurate. I will look into it as I seem to remember hearing that Castro only became well known for it's Gay community after the opening of a certain bar and that it grew up as a center of Gay culture in the 70's after the Stonewall Riots of New York. Even on the West Coast, gay bars were routinely raided and closed by police. San Francisco's gay culture was an underground sub culture not really out in the open until the late 1960's and it's heyday in the early to mid 1970s, I believe.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:22, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Good point. Thanks for looking into this. It's possible that part should be reverted back. Viriditas (talk) 23:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I did a great deal of work on it and the section around it, copy edited and added references. I also moved the page per MOS for using "The" in the title as that is just a nickname and the most common name used is the Castro District.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, however you did a cut and paste move, which needs to be fixed. When you can't move an article, you're supposed to request a move on the talk page. Viriditas (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Actually, we can move the content from one article to another in this manner when the page already exists as a simple redirect with a one line history.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:46, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
No, that's only for merges and splits. The redirect title already existed, which is why you couldn't do a move. When that happens, the procedure is to make a move request on the talk page using the move request template. Otherwise, you can try to have the redirect deleted to make way for the move. Those are your only two choices. Moving content from an article to a former redirect is a copy and paste move, and this is not recommended procedure for many reasons. Viriditas (talk) 03:38, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Not true actually. While discouraged, full content copy paste moves are not against policy if done correctly. The only needed step was to ask for a history merge but the copy template, on top of the edit summary attribution was enough for the moment until the merge of the history was done if needed, but attribution was done properly for the full content merge.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:40, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Happy Thanksgiving, Mark! I've never heard anyone argue for a copy and paste move, but I'll give you some reasons why it's a really bad idea: 1) that's what the "move" function is for, and if it isn't done properly, it can cause a host of problems with links, redirects, etc. 2) when you can't do a proper move due to existing redirects (like this situation) the procedure is to place a move request on the talk page. This is because a) notifying the talk page watchers of a move (especially in high-trafficked pages like this) is good practice as it may be disputed, and b) the move request, if non-controversial, places it in the queue for admins to review and take action (perform a histmerge). By doing a copy and paste move, you're creating more work out of process for other editors/admins to track down. Anyway, enjoy your feast. Viriditas (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Note, I've placed histmerge requests on both the talk and article pages, which places it in the queue. I also removed the copy from template from the talk page, since that's only for merges and splits, not copy and paste moves. Viriditas (talk) 02:21, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Actually per WP:FMERGE it can be used for copy paste moves as it is merely attribution for "copying" content in whole or in part. But it will not be needed if the histories are merged.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
I was just going to ask an admin on their talk page to do a history merge when they had time but I like to make sure proper attribution is made until histories are merged.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:48, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Before I venture an opinion, what needs to be history-merged to what? See WP:Parallel histories. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:25, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
    • Anthony, you already did the merge (The Castro > Castro) the other day. The reason I asked you over here was to comment on the two opinions in this discussion. Obviously, copy and paste moves aren't against policy because it's a mistake, and we don't forbid mistakes. But Mark argues that copy and paste moves are sometimes needed per the above; however, I don't agree with him. Viriditas (talk) 22:41, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Not really arguing that it is "needed". Very few things are "needed" on Wikipedia. I am arguing that it is possible and is technically not a mistake (especially when it is done on purpose) and that we have other policies and procedures in place to be sure we have proper attribution. The minimum attribution requirement when merging or copying content on Wikipedia is to use the edit summary with something like: "Content from [[This article]] is being copied into [[this other article]]". This allows editors who see this on a watch list to check the articles through direct links. We also have the copy template which has several versions depending on use. The edit history can then be merged by request as I have done before by asking a friendly admin who is not busy. The main issue here is copying all of the content from article to another. As long as the article it is being copied to is nothing more than a simple redirect with a one line history (or a simple bot edit) we may copy into that article but...and this is the part Viriditas may be most concerned with, is that the article not stand with just the attribution in summary or with the template but that the actual history be merged and I agree that is important.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:38, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
  • As I said above, mistakes are not against policy, and yes, when an editor copy and pastes without knowing about the move function, it's a mistake. When you can't perform a move, you request a move, you don't copy and paste the article into the redirect. I know you've talked quite a bit about how stubborn you are, Mark, but I know you aren't this stubborn! There's no good reason to copy and paste articles unless you 1) don't know about the move function, and 2) dont' know about requested moves. Can you think of a good reason to copy and paste move an article? I can't. Viriditas (talk) 04:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
As one of the members of Project Merge, I have a pretty good grasp of the merging and copying process Viriditas. Yes, I can be stubborn but this isn't what is going on. I researched and help write the steps for the project on how to merge articles properly and within guidelines and policies. If we were in a dispute over the article or title in any way than no, I would have to request a move, but if it is uncontroversial an editor may still do copy paste merges. There is a proper procedure for it. The only reason a "move" could not be done was because a redirect already existed....but one that had only a single line history. The issue is proper attribution and it was done in redundant manner to be sure it would be seen. A request to merge history can de done or asking an admin who isn't busy can also be done after. Seriously. It isn't something I wouldn't do all the time or often but it is still possible and not a violation of rules.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
If I understand correctly, a copy and paste move followed by a history merge will lead to the same result, except that there will be an extra entry in the history log that is artificial (the copy-and-paste edit will be in effect a null edit), which can be confusing to future editors. Given that this approach involves more work and produces a redundant history log entry, I suggest that in this scenario, deleting the target article and moving the original would be preferable. isaacl (talk) 13:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I think deleting the target article first is indeed preferable for many reasons. The quickest way to do that is by asking an admin if it is uncontroversial and is the intent to then recreate the article by moving the other article. Requesting a move is not a bad idea either. I have used that process before but only when the move is controversial and requires a discussion and a consensus. Many articles on Wikipedia at this point, have several redirects. With Hawaiian related articles there are a good number that do not have the proper diacritics (special characters) in the article title and are not actively edited or have discussion underway on the talk page. Many are obscure stubs. At the moment there may still be a ban on special characters from being created even though there appears to be a consensus that the ban on special characters is only for those characters that effect the Wiki mark-up. Some article can be moved (as only one characters seems to be ban listed..can't remember which one at the moment) normally but many will require the target article that was created as a redirect be deleted first so that the article can be renamed by an admin or through requested moves (as there are bound to be some controversial moves or use of diacritics or not to use etc.).--Mark Miller (talk) 21:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The best way is to discuss it on the talk page first, and then submit a request for move for highly trafficked pages. Viriditas (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Alii and Aliʻi[edit]

I don't understand why we now have two articles on Alii and Aliʻi, both of which are short articles on the same, exact subject. Viriditas (talk) 20:14, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Alii is about the broad use in different Polynesian languages that also included Ariki. Aliʻi is specifically about the Hawaiian nobility that made up the majority of Hawaiian ancient history and became the nobles of the Hawaiian Kingdom. However...I noticed something after I created that from the redirect with a particle content merge (does not need a history merge). There are two articles with nearly the same title that include the ʻokina. Both were redirects, however the one I used seems to have a hidden special character and I don't think it is an actual spelling of the word. This will need to be copied over to the correct article and have an admin delete the other redirect as not a word. The article I believe is the correct spelling with no hiden characters is Ali‘i.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:49, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate your explanation, but I'm not seeing two different articles. Alii is the original article about Hawaiian nobility. It was created in June 2004 and remained focused on this primary topic until you copied the material on November 24 and created a duplicate article with the same name, except for the addition of an okina.[4] Again, we've lost the page history since 2004 due to this fork, duplication, and copy and paste job. If there were two distinct topics (there aren't at this time) we would have good sources and content supporting it. The reason the topic has remained at Alii since 2004 (prior to your fork) is because until recently, we couldn't handle diacritics and okinas. My hope is that you will temporarily agree to stop cutting and pasting articles and duplicating articles. The original page history on Hawaiian nobility currently resides at Alii. If you want to request a move from that title to another, then you make the request on the talk page, we discuss it, and then the page gets moved with the page history intact. Viriditas (talk) 03:57, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Alii was not about the Hawaiian word, but, as I already said, the broad use of a similar word and words in other Polynesian languages. I split off the section on the Hawaiian Ali‘i to it's own article and properly attributed the split (even went back and made dummy edits to be sure and use the word "split"). We do not merge histories in this case and we do not request moves to do splits. Now..if you truly object to the split, that is different and we would need to discuss it, but I created the article because there are far more links to Ali‘i in the context of Hawaiian nobility and I have begun to drastically expand the encyclopedic content of the Hawaiian use and would like to expand the non Hawaiian uses on Alii eventually.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:23, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't appear that you read my comment. As I said up above, Alii was most certainly about the Hawaiian word, regardless of its shared use. As you can see in the lead, the proper term used was "Aliʻi", but we had it at Alii because we once had problems with diacritics and okinas. The last good version from May 14, 2013, proves this is true.[5] Unfortunately, we have now lost the entire page history because you copied and pasted it to a duplicate fork, which only shows your edits, not the edits of other editors. I've explained this to you several times already with no sign of understanding on your end. Please stop copy and pasting articles. When you do so, we lose the page history. As it stands, we now have two duplicate articles on the same exact subject, and that's just not acceptable. Viriditas (talk) 04:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Viriditas, I actually appreciate your concerns and that you feel it important enough to stress your understanding of the situation. This is what I am going to do; First, I am going to review this thread to make sure I am understanding you and that I believe you are following me. Next, I will review the project merge standards t see if and where I may have varied from what we have decided was the proper procedures for copying, and merging within Wikipedia and review the current guidelines and procedures again. Just remember that, we have no set rules and I am not attempting to do an end run around a consensus or cheat on a dispute. The edits were non controversial and were improvements to the articles from my stand point. Consensus determines all content on Wikipedia so...if you object to something, lets talk but...I don't understand one thing; You don't seem to accept that the Aliʻi article is a split from Alii. Is this correct? If so, why?--Mark Miller (talk) 07:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:CONSPLIT:

Content split

Sometimes two or more distinct topics may share the same or similar title, such as "light", which may refer to electromagnetic radiation, a component that produces light or spiritual illumination. Sometimes the distinct topics may be closely related, such as Coffea (the plant) and coffee (the product), or thermal energy and heat.
When two or more distinct topics which share the same or similar title are being written about on the same page, even if they are closely related, a content split may be considered, and a disambiguation page created to point readers to the separate pages. Consideration must be given both to notability and to potential neutrality issues before proposing a split. If one or more of the topics is not notable it may be more appropriate to simply remove the material from Wikipedia than to create a new article.
If unsure, then use a template, and start a discussion on the article talkpage.

--Mark Miller (talk) 07:45, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

The Aliʻi article is only about the Hawaiian language word. Not about the various Polynesian words that the original article, Alii is about. The original article does cover the subject but I feel it deserves and can support a full stand alone article with a link on the old page. Their meanings vary and the people and places are completely different. 1500 years separate Hawaiian history from Polynesia and Tahiti and there are many links to the Hawaiian word that I have encountered in a number of articles referring strictly to the Hawaiian language use. Per Wikipedia:Content forking:

A content fork is the creation of multiple separate articles all treating the same subject. Content forks that are created unintentionally result in redundant or conflicting articles and are to be avoided. On the other hand, as an article grows, editors often create summary-style spin-offs or new, linked article for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage.

--Mark Miller (talk) 07:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

The most important part of all of this is proper attribution. Per WP:PATT

Proper attribution

Attribution can be provided in any of the fashions detailed in the Terms of Use (listed above), although methods (a) and (c) — i.e., through a hyperlink (where possible) or URL to the article or articles you contributed to; or through a list of all authors — are the most practical for transferring text from one Wikipedia page to another. Both methods have strengths and weaknesses, but either satisfies the licensing requirements if properly done.

Hyperlink
If material has been contributed by more than one author, providing a link in the edit summary is the simplest method of providing attribution. A statement in the edit summary such as copied content from [[article name]]; see that article's history for attribution will direct interested parties to the edit history of the source page, where they can trace exactly who added what content when. A disadvantage with this method is that the page history of the original article must subsequently be retained in order to maintain attribution. To avoid the source page being inadvertently moved or deleted, it is helpful to make a note of the copying on the talk page of the source article. The template {{copied}} can be used for this purpose. This template can also be added to the destination talk page.
List of authors
When dealing with a page edited by many, a hyperlink is the simplest solution, but if the content being copied has only one contributor, it may be preferable simply to list him or her individually. Using this method, the edit history of the source page is unnecessary, and it will not matter if the source page is later deleted or moved. A statement in the edit summary such as text originally contributed by [[User:Example]] on 2014 26 December serves as full attribution. If the material being copied has more than one author, attribution requirements can technically be satisfied with a note in edit summary directing attention to a list of contributors on the talk page, but as the Terms of Service indicate, a hyperlink is preferred where possible.

--Mark Miller (talk) 08:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 November 2014[edit]

This week's article for improvement (week 49, 2014)[edit]

Us-mexico-border.jpg

The Mexico–United States border spans six Mexican states and four U.S. states, with a total length of 3,145 km (1,954 mi).

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Mexico–United States border


Previous selections: Tourism in the Caribbean • Military technology


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Hutcherson FAC[edit]

Hey Mark, do you plan to return to the FAC and leave some more comments? Wondering because as I commented there, I've taken care of the comprehensiveness concern, I believe, and if I haven't I was looking for more input on what could be included and improved. Best, Gloss 02:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

? Gloss 05:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry. A tad busy with research and I hit some gold and have been flying pouring over documents and websites. No, probably not. Sorry. It really needs much expansion. I know it seems like there is nothing left to write but biographies are not so much what you write, but how you summarize the most notable aspects and tie in the less notable for mention. You don't want puffery but you do want something broader in coverage to be more comprehensive.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
That's what I'm confused about. For someone who is only 21 and been in about 5/6 major films, how much do you think can be expanded? This isn't someone who has lived a long life and had a full career. He is 21 and just getting started with his adult career. There really isn't much to be expanded. It would've been helpful if you could've provided more insight, but you seem busy. So long. Gloss 05:55, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Safe to assume your concerns have been taken care of since you've not returned to the FAC? Gloss 17:21, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings[edit]

Pine cone on pine tree.jpg Happy holidays.
Best wishes for joy and happiness to you and all your loved ones from ```Buster Seven Talk 09:21, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Buster!--Mark Miller (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Revert Only When Necessary[edit]

Please see #2 on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Revert_only_when_necessary#Unacceptable_reversions Don't revert an edit because it is unnecessary — because it does not improve the article. For a reversion to be appropriate, the reverted edit must actually make the article worse. 50.48.205.73 (talk) 03:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

That is an essay. Essays are not guidelines or policy. Please use the BRD talk page to gain a consensus for the change and base it on actual guidelines and policy. I feel reverting you now should acceptable for restoring the BRD lede that was altered using another essay as the basis for the change. --Mark Miller (talk) 04:22, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Someone beat me to it. Please make your proposal on the talk page an editors will discuss it, but the two essays do not have to agree and changes to BRD should have a basis in guidelines or policy.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014[edit]

WP:Co-op[edit]

Hey Mark,

I'm Soni, and currently, I'm working on a mentorship space for newcomers on Wikipedia, called the Co-op. Our basic idea is to have a friendly space where experienced editors can provide one-to-one guidance to newcomers based on what their interests are, and where they want to contribute onWiki. Given that you already have experience with the Teahouse, your experience should come in really helpful for us. We expect there to be not too much of a commitment as every mentor only takes up upto 2 newcomers under them. If you're interested in participating in the pilot project in January and February, please sign up here. I'll be around to answer any doubts or questions that you may have, so please feel free to ping me if needed.

Cheers, Soni (talk) (Previously TheOriginalSoni) 23:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...[edit]

Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.

  • We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
  • In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
  • The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Beamer family tree[edit]

First of all, I am IMPRESSED by your work on this. I've done a couple of family trees, but used a different type of tree. I never could figure out how to work with the type you use.

Secondly, because I notice you are putting the tree on multiple Beamer articles, I thought I might suggest you create a template for the tree, and then transclude it on the individual articles. Then you only have do each update on the template. An added benefit to that is that drive-by editors who think they know the subject better than you, would also have to know they're just looking at a transclusion. So far, that's kept mine safe from the hanky-panky non autoconfirmed attempts. Do whatever works for you. But I found the Transclusion method is a real time saver when I did the Template:Houston family tree. — Maile (talk) 21:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I had a lot of fun researching this out the other night when I fell on some names with a Google search. That template you created is fantastic. Yes, I will be making that as a template but I want to try and do a little more research on this.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Your template looks good. — Maile (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I figured I can still update it as I need to.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:05, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 50, 2014)[edit]

Math games - Big Brother Mouse activity day.jpg

Game design is the art of creating rules and mechanics to facilitate interactions between players in a game.

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Game design


Previous selections: Mexico–United States border • Tourism in the Caribbean


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:25, 8 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

GOCE coordinator elections[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG
GOCE Coordinator.png

Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you.

Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.
Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 December 2014[edit]

Athena as weather goddess[edit]

Re this edit, while Zeus was certainly the most important sky and weather god for the Greeks, Athena was perhaps also one, see [6]. Paul August 12:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Don't you think we should have a stronger main stream academic opinion to show a category?--Mark Miller (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Probably so. Paul August 03:11, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014 GOCE newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors December 2014 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in November's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 43 people who signed up for this drive, 26 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: The November Drive removed 26 requests from the Requests page and 509 articles from the {{copy edit}} backlog. We copy edited 83 articles tagged in the target months; July, August, and September 2013. Together with tag removals from articles unsuitable for copy editing, we eliminated July 2013 from the backlog and reduced August and September's tags to 61 and 70 respectively. As of 01:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC), the backlog stood at 1,974 articles, dipping below 2,000 for the first time in the Guild's history (see graph at right). Well done everyone!

Blitz: The December Blitz will run from December 14–20 and will focus on articles related to Religion, in recognition of this month's religious holidays in much of the English-speaking world. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. Sign up here!

Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from 1 January to 30 June 2015 is now underway. Candidates can nominate themselves or others from December 01, 00:01 (UTC), until December 15, 23:59. The voting period will run from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. You can read about coordinators' duties here. Please consider getting involved and remember to cast you vote—it's your Guild and it doesn't organize itself!

Thank you all once again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve anything without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 51, 2014)[edit]

Spaghetti with Meatballs (cropped).jpg

A plate of spaghetti and meatballs.

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Spaghetti


Previous selections: Game design • Mexico–United States border


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open![edit]

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Need help with a template[edit]

A user just copied a small bit of material I wrote for The Magpie (Monet) into a new article, Winter in Western Art. While this is OK, they didn't use any attribution during the copy/past/merge. Recently, per WP:PATT, they added a message on the talk page. However, you have knowledge of a particular template used for this purpose that I don't know about. Could you either point me to this template or add it to Talk:Winter in Western Art, replacing the current attribution message that is there? Thanks, and you don't need to include my user name, just the article names. Viriditas (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure. No problem.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


It was a note that it was the draft that made its way into the article somehow. From here User:Sca/sandbox#Selected quotations re Monet. It does say too: (Except for the material in parentheses, these are all direct quoets.). It just got into the article somehow. Removed now. Hafspajen (talk) 01:37, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Editor retention
Thank you for quality contributions on difficult topics such as Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, for your work in editor retention, even in difficult cases, for presenting facts "in a neutral fashion, with compassion, understanding and a calm demeanor", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Two years ago, you were the 337th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much again Gerda!--Mark Miller (talk) 07:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2014[edit]

A page you started (Ruling chiefs of Hawaii) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Ruling chiefs of Hawaii, Mark Miller!

Wikipedia editor Lstanley1979 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I'm sure you know what you're doing, but just reviewing your article. Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment on Lstanley1979's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thank you very much! I appreciate the review.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ruling chiefs of Hawaii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tahitian. 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) 09:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 52, 2014)[edit]

Hello, Mark Miller.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Natural phenomenon


Previous selections: Spaghetti • Game design


Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

GOCE holiday 2014 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors Late December 2014 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the December Blitz. Of the 14 editors who signed up for the blitz, 11 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

January drive: The January backlog-reduction drive is just around the corner; sign up here!

Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015 is now underway. The voting period runs from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. Please cast your vote—it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!

Happy holidays from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2014[edit]

Bright Hawaiian Christmas[edit]

Indeed. You and I are about as far away as we can be and be agreed by the contentious editors at United States to be in the United States. (There is quarreling about the territories, but not the 50 states and the District of Columbia.) What is considered a warm Christmas in Washington, somewhat above 50 F / 10 C, would probably be a record low in the fiftieth state, and we get nine hours of daylight. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:38, 26 December 2014 (UTC)