User talk:Paulmlieberman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Note to self: check outWikipedia:REFLINKS

Wilkommen![edit]

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -- Mentifisto 00:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


Douglass article[edit]

Just the need for a citation for such a bold overarching statement. Please respond if you need to on the article talk page. Celestechang (talk) 22:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot (talk) 02:06, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Maggie Lettvin[edit]

Notability is not inherited. I don't believe Maggie Lettvin meets our notability requirements for biographies. If you disagree, please provide the required multiple third-party reliable sources. Open Library is not a reliable source. We need media coverage (newspaper articles, magazine articles, etc.) Yworo (talk) 18:46, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Maggie was a celebrity on her own right in Boston, independent of her husband.
I'm at work now, so I can't fix this until later today or tomorrow. She is mentioned in a Sports Illustrated article. Would a list of books she's authored (from Amazon.com) be reliable? Bloody Viking (talk) 19:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
No, and a list of books doesn't establish notability in any case. If she is merely mentioned in Sports Illustrated, that's not really sufficient either. Do read WP:BIO. Not all authors are automatically notable: see WP:AUTHOR for the specific details. Books themselves aren't notable unless they have multiple independent reviews.
To establish that a book exists, all that is required is the ISBN. We don't generally link to Amazon or any other book site, but rather just provide the publication data in a Bibliography section, once the notability of the subject herself is established. Most book sites like Amazon are commercial and sell the books and we can't promote one over the other. Therefore the ISBNs automatically become links that allow one to visit multiple sites all from the same page, to prevent such promotion. Yworo (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. This will be useful on more important articles as well, whether the Maggie article stands or not. Perhaps you can give me some advice on a related topic: "Things that happened BW (Before the Web)". Maggie's notability is an example (the WGBH archives only mention her once, though her show was big for them in the '70s). A more important example is the lack of information about life in the Soviet Union. There was a great series of articles in the New York Times in 1967 in honor of the 50th anniversary of the Russian Revolution. They went into depth on life in the USSR. Unfortunately, they are available only to subscribers. I wish Wikipedia could make this kind of info available to everyone. But how?

Bloody Viking (talk) 21:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey, no problem, glad to be helpful. I typically help improve the article in minor details and formatting (Wikignoming) while the question of notability is pending. As to the 1967 NYT, there is no requirement that the content be available online or to everyone: if you've got access either to paper copies or are a subscriber, you can still cite the material. While generally-accessible content is preferred if available, there is no restriction against linking to reliable sites that require registration or even payment. You can even link to the subscriber-only content, I've seen "(login required)" after the external link for such cases (not sure if there is a formal way to specify that. Check out WP:CITE and the news citation template which my give you some ideas on how to cite info not accessible online. Yworo (talk) 21:18, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for finding the SI reference. I've removed the notability tag, but I recommend that you try to find at least one or two more references as other editors may be more demanding of multiple sources than myself. Yworo (talk) 13:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

commune[edit]

Paul, I am curious as to why you changed the lead for commune. What did the previous revision lack? It more closely adheres to dictionary definitions of what a commune is. --Campoftheamericas (talk) 00:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, first of all, dictionary definitions reflect current usage, and are descriptive, not prescriptive (see this recent NYTimes article on use of dictionaries by the Supreme Court: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/us/14bar.html?scp=1&sq=supreme%20court%20dictionary&st=cse).
The term "commune" is very general, and has, in my lifetime, included lots of casual collections of people who were not intentionally creating community. At Twin Oaks, we chose the phrase "intentional community" to try to clarify the distinctions and also to distance ourselves from both Soviet Communism and cults. A commune is not necessarily intentional, and an intentional community need not be a commune (unless you want to adhere to the specific use of "intentional community" as it is used by the FIC). Bloody Viking (talk) 14:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I think the FIC and dictionaries would overrule the U.S. government. However, I'm going to go read the link you've given me. --Campoftheamericas (talk) 01:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Dictionaries provide a description of a language in general use. To say that dictionaries aren't relevant to the definition of a word I think would insult a lexicographer. I understand commune has a negative connotation, but that is all that it is: an undeserved negative connotation. You may go to other countries were the word commune has a positive connotation. Twin Oaks members share income, share land, share food. That's communal living, but you can say it's an intentional community because IC includes communes. I would be interested to see what some other encyclopedia say about the nature of a commune. --Campoftheamericas (talk) 02:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting that U.S. govt. definitions rule. The article points out that the Supreme Court is trying to use dictionaries in a way that most (including OED and Webster's Third) were never intended to be used.
I wish the term commune was better thought of in the U.S. I find myself on the defensive (even with my wife) as to the good that communes bring to the world. For the purpose of Wikipedia, I want the articles on communes and intentional communities to be well-rounded, not from a single POV, but emphasizing that they are (mostly) positive experiments of people who want better lives for themselves and a better world for all. Bloody Viking (talk) 14:30, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I read the article, believe it or not :-). I think the lead should be similar to other encyclopedias and dictionaries, but I don't think there's anything wrong with expanding the section on modern communes. I wouldn't object to expanding the lead as well. Anyway, I'm not authority here. --Campoftheamericas (talk) 15:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Templates for translation problems[edit]

Hi Paul,

In general, when you need a template, take a look at WP:TEMP. I looked under the "Cleanup" section and towards the bottom found a link for Translations. Looks like the template you need is Template:Cleanup-translation. Hope this helps. Yworo (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! That looks like it does the trick. Bloody Viking (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Buck buck[edit]

I reverted your addition of a mention of a documentary at Buck buck with this edit. I do think this documentary could be an RS used as a reference, but it should be supporting some fact about the game. Perhaps you could add a sentence with a new fact and use the documentary as the source. Novaseminary (talk) 03:03, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Civility Barnstar Hires.png The Civility Barnstar
Nice to meet one of the good guys! :) ds 18:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Eggcorn[edit]

Hello, Paulmlieberman. You recently added a section to the page Eggcorn discussing the relationship between duck tape and duct tape. That pair of phrases has been discussed at Talk:Eggcorn#Debate / defend / reject / submit examples here, but as yet I see no consensus to add it or other examples. Your comments on the talk page would be most welcome. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 00:04, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pan-European Picnic, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CEE and BRD (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) 11:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit summary formatting[edit]

Just a heads up that when writing an edit summary, the bit inside the "/* */" symbols is assumed to be the section title, and the bit after it is a comment explaining your edit. The former is greyed out in article histories and watchlists - if you look at, say, the Mondegreen history, the greyed text is all section headers and the black text are messages from the editors. It looks like you've been putting your comment inside the symbols, which makes it mistakenly appear as a section header. This doesn't matter greatly, and it's good that you're providing edit summaries at all, I just thought I'd mention it in case you hadn't realised. --McGeddon (talk) 18:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

National Statuary Hall Collection[edit]

First, the Washington Post article you cited only references the placement of Frederick Douglass' statue in Emancipation Hall; it does NOT specifically say that statue is part of the Collection (though it suggests it may have been intended as such). More importantly, however, the list on the AOC website does NOT include him. If you click "LOAD MORE" at the lower right corner of the page, it expands to show all 100 current and four replaced NSHC statues; Douglass does NOT appear in that gallery. Douglass' statue, along with Rosa Parks', is found only in the menu item "African Americans in Art" on the left side of the page. (I also added the language in the opening paragraph on Parks' statue clarifying that, though Congress specifically placed her statue in Statuary Hall, it is not part of the Collection as both Alabama and Michigan are otherwise represented; deleting Parks altogether was inappropriate because her statue is in Statuary Hall itself.) As stated elsewhere in the article, the Collection is limited by Federal law to two statues from each of the 50 states; legislation to permit DC and other territories to add to the NSHC has been introduced, but AFAIK is not yet law. I believe the letter from the AOC will confirm my position; if it doesn't (i.e., Congress designated the Douglass statue as DC's contribution to the Collection), then the AOC's own website needs to be updated. --RBBrittain (talk) 15:46, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, the situation is currently ambiguous. I've cited the laws involved, and will cc you if and when I get a response from the AOC. Paulmlieberman (talk) 16:17, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
In the meantime, I have reverted all of your edits. The 2010 bill you cited concerning NSHC statues for DC & insular areas was NOT passed by Congress; it died in committee. Congress did pass legislation authorizing the Parks statue, but (a) the statue was commissioned by Congress itself -- all NSHC statues were commissioned by the states they represent -- and (b) Section 2 of the act prohibits the placement of any statue in Statuary Hall less than 10 years after its subject's death except the Parks statue or an NSHC statue (separate exceptions). It might help to double-check the legislation behind the Washington Post article. --RBBrittain (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I found the Douglass legislation here. It directs the Joint Committee on the Library (*not* AOC, though that committee does have a role in NSHC replacements per 2 U.S.C. § 2132) to accept the Douglass statue from DC and place it in Emancipation Hall. Though 24 of the NSHC statues are also in Emancipation Hall, and it could be speculated (as did the Post article) that the act was in lieu of permitting DC to put statues in the NSHC itself, it does NOT in any way cite 2 U.S.C. § 2131 & 2132, the statutes governing the NSHC proper. Unless AOC suggests otherwise, that statue should NOT be listed as part of the Collection. --RBBrittain (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I was wrong, you were right. My apologies. Here's the email from AOC:


Dear Mr. Lieberman:

The statue of Frederick Douglass is not part of the National Statuary Hall Collection. That specific collection, created by law in 1864, includes two statues from each state in the nation, and there are indeed 100 statues in the Capitol (including the Capitol Visitor Center) that are part of the collection.

However, a number of statues in the Capitol are not part of the National Statuary Hall Collection, and the statue of Frederick Douglass is among them. Others include the statues of Ulysses S. Grant, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln in the Rotunda; Edward Dickinson Baker in the Hall of Columns; and Rosa Parks--which is displayed in the room named National Statuary Hall but is not part of the National Statuary Hall Collection. These statue were either commissioned or purchased by the Congress or received as gifts from individuals or organizations.

I hope that this will be useful to you.

Eric Paff Office of the Curator Architect of the Capitol

Paulmlieberman (talk) 20:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Revolutions of 1989 online Wikipedia challenge[edit]

Baltijos kelyje ties Šeškine.jpg

Hello, Paulmlieberman! We are looking for editors to join the Europeana 1989 challenge, a multilingual Wikipedia Challenge where all of the participants are invited to improve Wikipedia articles related to the European Revolutions of 1989 in their own language. We have selected a short list of topics that may be improved or translated. As you have already edited some of the listed articles, we thought you might be interested, and accept the challenge. Hope that you will join us. Thanks!!!

--Kippelboy (talk) 15:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


Meetups coming up in DC![edit]

Hey!

You are invited to two upcoming events in DC:

  • Meetup at Capitol City Brewery on Saturday, January 25 at 6 PM. Please join us for dinner, drinks, socializing, and discussing Wikimedia DC activities and events. All are welcome! RSVP on the linked page or through Meetup.
  • Art and Feminism Edit-a-Thon on Saturday, February 1 from Noon – 5 PM. Join us as we improve articles on notable women in history! All are welcome, regardless of age or level of editing experience. RSVP on the linked page or through Meetup.

I hope to see you there!

(Note: If you do not wish to receive talk page messages for DC meetups, you are welcome to remove your username from this page.)

Harej (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Coming up in February![edit]

Hello there!

Our February WikiSalon is coming up on Sunday, February 23. Join us at our gathering of Wikipedia enthusiasts at the Kogod Courtyard of the National Portrait Gallery with an optional dinner after. As usual, all are welcome. Care to join us?

Also, if you are available, there is an American Art Edit-a-thon being held at the Smithsonian American Art Museum with Professor Andrew Lih's COMM-535 class at American University on Tuesday, February 11 from 2 to 5 PM. Please RSVP on the linked page if you are interested.

If you have any ideas or preferences for meetups, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC.

Thank you, and hope to see you at our upcoming events! Harej (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

DC Meetups in March[edit]

Happy March!

Though we have a massive snowstorm coming up, spring is just around the corner! Personally, I am looking forward to warmer weather.

Wikimedia DC is looking forward to a spring full of cool and exciting activities. In March, we have coming up:

  • Evening WikiSalon on Wednesday, March 12 from 7 PM – 9 PM. Meet up with Wikipedians for coffee at the Cove co-working space in Dupont Circle! If you cannot make it in the evening, join us at our...
  • March Meetup on Sunday, March 23 from 3 PM – 6 PM. Our monthly weekend meetup, same place as last month. Meet really cool and interesting people!
  • Women in the Arts 2014 meetup and edit-a-thon on Sunday, March 30 from 10 AM – 5 PM. Our second annual Women in the Arts edit-a-thon, held at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. Free lunch will be served!

We hope to see you at our upcoming events! If you have any questions, feel free to ask on my talk page.

Harej (talk) 05:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

History of Ukraine template[edit]

Hi Paul. Thanks for reporting the damage to the {{History of Ukraine}} template; it was caused by an IP editor trying (I think) to make the template more widely usable (needless to say, it went wrong). I reverted their edit and the template is now fine. The Edit-warring noticeboard is not the best place to raise issues like this - it exists specifically for reporting edit wars - so if you come across something like this in future, the helpdesk or administrator's noticeboard is usually a better place to go (although in this case, the fix was something any editor could have done). Thanks nevertheless for letting us know. Yunshui  15:47, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Paulmlieberman. You have new messages at Iryna Harpy's talk page.
Message added 05:22, 19 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:22, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

An exciting month of wiki events![edit]

Hello there,

I am pleased to say that April will be a very exciting month for Wikipedia in Washington, DC. We have a lot of different events coming up, so you will have a lot to choose from.

First, a reminder that our second annual Women in the Arts Edit-a-Thon will take place on Sunday, March 30 at the National Museum of Women in the Arts.

Coming up in April, we have our first-ever Open Government WikiHack with the Sunlight Foundation on April 5–6! We are working together to use open government data to improve the Wikimedia projects, and we would love your help. All are welcome, regardless of coding or editing experience. We will also be having a happy hour the day before, with refreshments courtesy of the Sunlight Foundation.

On Friday, April 11 we are having our first edit-a-thon ever with the Library of Congress. The Africa Collection Edit-a-Thon will focus on the Library's African and Middle East Reading Room. It'll be early in the morning, but it's especially worth it if you're interested in improving Wikipedia's coverage of African topics.

The following day, we are having our second annual Wiki Loves Capitol Hill training. We will discuss policy issues relevant to Wikimedia and plan for our day of outreach to Congressional staffers that will take place during the following week.

There are other meetups in the works, so be sure to check our meetup page with the latest. I hope to see you at some of these events!

All the best,
James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 01:29, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Two edit-a-thons coming up![edit]

Hello there!

I'm pleased to tell you about two upcoming edit-a-thons:

  • This Tuesday, April 29, from 2:30 to 5:30 PM, we have the Freer and Sackler edit-a-thon. (Sorry for the short notice!)
  • On Saturday, May 10 we have the Wikipedia APA edit-a-thon, in partnership with the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center, from 10 AM to 5 PM.

We have more stuff coming up in May and June, so make sure to keep a watch on the DC meetup page. As always, if you have any recommendations or requests, please leave a note on the talk page.


Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 20:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Meet up with us[edit]

Happy May!

There are a few meetups in DC this month, including an edit-a-thon later this month. Check it out:

  • On Thursday, May 15 come to our evening WikiSalon at the Cove co-working space in Dupont Circle. If you're available Thursday evening, feel free to join us!
  • Or if you prefer a Saturday night dinner gathering, we also have our May Meetup at Capitol City Brewing Company. (Beer! Non-beer things too!)
  • You are also invited to the Federal Register edit-a-thon at the National Archives later this month.

Come one, come all!

Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 20:20, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Washington, DC meetups in June[edit]

Greetings!

Wikimedia DC.svg

Wikimedia DC has yet another busy month in June. Whether you're a newcomer to Wikipedia or have years of experience, we're happy to see you come. Here's what's coming up:

  • On Wednesday, June 11 from 7 to 9 PM come to the WikiSalon at the Cove co-working space. Hang out with Wikipedia enthusiasts!
  • Saturday, June 14 is the Frederick County History Edit-a-Thon from 11 AM to 4 PM. Help improve local history on Wikipedia.
  • The following Saturday, June 21, is the June Meetup. Dinner and drinks with Wikipedians!
  • Come on Tuesday, June 24 for the Wikipedia in Your Library edit-a-thon at GWU on local and LGBT history.
  • Last but not least, on Sunday, June 29 we have the Phillips Collection Edit-a-Thon in honor of the Made in America exhibit.

Wikipedia is better with friends, so why not come out to an event?

Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 01:41, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 13 June[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

The Great American Wiknic and other events in July[edit]

Wikinic 2013 washington d.c. 02.JPG

I am pleased to announce our fourth annual picnic, the Great American Wiknic, will take place at Meridian Hill Park in Washington, D.C. on Sunday, July 13 from 1 to 5 PM (rain date: July 20). We will be hanging out by the statue of Dante Alighieri, a statue that was donated to the park in 1921 as a tribute to Italian Americans. Read more about the statue on Wikipedia. If you would like to sign up for the picnic, you can do so here. When signing up, say what you’re going to bring!

July will also feature the second annual Great American Wiknic in Frederick, Maryland. This year’s Frederick picnic will take place on Sunday, July 6 at Baker Park. Sign up here for the Frederick picnic.

What else is going on in July? We have the American Chemical Society Edit-a-Thon on Saturday, July 12, dedicated to notable chemists, and our monthly WikiSalon on Wednesday, July 16.

We hope to see you at our upcoming events!

Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 21:22, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Frederick Douglass[edit]

Thank you very much! I am glad to hear that the 4-5 hours I've spent on it, were worth the effort. I admire Douglass, but I had not been able to find a clear and specific explanation of his religious views. Until yesterday that I researched on books and was surprised to see that his biographies explain he was a really committed Christian who really really hated American religious hypocrisy. By the superficial statements I had seen, I had thought he had been some sort of deist and I could stand idle by seeing that someone had misrepresented his religious position in the article.

Now I read exceprts of his writings, and I can't help thinking that he was truly the Martin Luther King Jr. of the 19th Century. I can't add all the things he said on religion in the article, but I added some of his beautiful quotes at his Wikiquote article.

Regarding your question about the improvement of the article, I don't know exactly how to do it but I think this might help you. Hope it does. On the other hand, I wonder if you know how to highlight a quote in the article? I was thinking in resalting his motto ""Right is of no Sex – Truth is of no Color – God is the Father of us all, and we are all brethren." I've seen articles with representative quotes highlighted in blue questions marks, but I don't know how to do it.

Again, thanks for your comment, I really appreciate ot :) --Goose friend (talk) 16:08, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Fort Stevens Edit-a-Thon![edit]

Ftstevens.jpg

Greetings!

Sorry for the last minute update, but our friends at the DC Historical Society have scheduled a Battle of Fort Stevens Edit-a-Thon to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Civil War battle fought in the District. The event will last from noon to 2 PM on Wednesday, July 30. Hope you can make it!

Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 21:16, 23 July 2014 (UTC)