User talk:SandyGeorgia
Archives |
|---|
|
|
| Edit this box |
I prefer to keep conversations together and usually respond on my talk page, so watch the page for my reply.
To leave me a message, click here.
[edit] Hallmark
Thanks for helping out with Hallmark of Hall of Fame movie Front of the Classs. I couldn't get the image to work for me, but it's there now and that's what counts. Also thanks for finding more sources and filling the blanks, such as summaries and plots. That's not my kind of thing. I was surprised no other user took the time to make a movie link, when Front of the Class was first announced. Especially since there's so much information out there now for Hallmark movies.
Your help is really appriciated. GiantTiger001 (talk) 07:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ack! Thanks for the reminder that I was interrupted by Wikidrahmaz just as I was intending to expand that article from the sources. And thanks for getting the ball rolling. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:49, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
[edit] A cookie for you!
| Just a note to say that I'm sorry for the abuse you've taken at the hands of a certain pretended-to-be-new user. Your contributions are valued, and make Wikipedia a better place. Just because I may never work up the courage to brave the FAC process on anything myself doesn't mean I don't appreciate the work you have done. Likewise, while I respect the right of dissent and feedback, pretending to be new when you're not is dishonest and inappropriate, and I'm sorry that happened to you. Jclemens (talk) 23:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC) |
[edit] Resignation
Sandy, I removed your name from the editnotice at WP:FA, as you had done at the other places where delegates are listed (though I'm sure there are more where we missed it). Thanks again for your service as a delegate over the past years. Ucucha (talk) 16:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- As far as I know, there are no other places-- thanks! I'm so sorry you got left with so much work; had I realized what would ensue, I would have made it effective in six weeks, but can't go back now. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] The end of an era
Thank you for your service to Featured Articles. It is the end of an era. Your extreme competence will be missed. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ya think? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Hi there
Do you feel comfortable in explaining why you resigned as a FAC delegate? Just curious. Thanks for your services by the way. You did an amazing job. And if it means that you'll now assume a more active role as reviewer, as opposed to that of an impartial delegate, I think it's for the best—there's a shortage of quality reviewers at FAC. Orane (talk) 20:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Long time no speak; good to hear from you! Here's the official announcement. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks from me too
I know we haven't always seen eye-to-eye, but I do respect the huge amount of work you did as a FAC delegate. Many thanks for that, and I hope it will be possible to have a wider discussion of various aspects of reviewing once that RfC has run its course. Carcharoth (talk) 00:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ha! Thanks. But if you think some of the disruptive forces are going to be happy with us getting back to working on improvements to FAC, or the admin corp is going to do anything to curb their attacks on me, you aren't reading the same Wikipedia I'm reading :) :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:54, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I did notice the section below. If you will accept a bit of advice, when you go from a high profile to a lower one, it is best to slow things down a bit, take time to ease back into other things. That's what I did and I found it helped. Anyway, enough of that. Talking of review, one bit of serendipity is that I have to do some work in the coming days that will involve reading up on the history of the sinking of the Titanic (what with the anniversary coming up soon), so I hope to combine that with a review of that FAC. Unfortunately the paid work has to come first. :-( Carcharoth (talk) 00:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Carcharoth, you are always well meaning, and your heart is often in the right place, but you can be so silly :) :) Regardless of what "pace" I take, those who have long wanted to get a punch in will do it now. And those who long benefited for years from my defense of their work, promotion of their work, review of their work, will mostly be silent. It's the Internet, and more-- it's Wikipedia. Why should my "pace" be determined by external factors? I didn't slow down when it came to defending FA writers, FA reviewers, FA content-- why should I be someone different now regardless if they'll turn their backs because of my "lower profile"? Silly :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why would your profile be lower anyway? FA delegates have to be cautiously circumspect in the FAC arena, not something that reviewers have to worry about. And from experience, I'd say that reviewers get their fair share of flak there just as delegates do. And as for slowing down or being silent, well, words fail me ... actually there's an unconscious irony there, as if words have failed me then I'll presumably have to be silent ... sometimes you can think too much. Malleus Fatuorum 02:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't have a clue what you're saying or trying to say, Malleus. What I know about life in general-- and about the Interent in particular, and more specifically about Wikipedia-- is that the folks who gathered around when they perceived you had some sort of "power" weren't necessarily gathering 'round for the right reasons. Many of them were just folks benefiting from all the work I did to defend featured content, benefiting from my good name when it came to defending them or their work, and some of them will be noted for their absence when they perceive I'm no longer useful. That's life. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- No deep meaning, just "blather", as you say. What "power" did you really have as an FAC delegate anyway? You may even find that you can do more back in the trenches, that was all. And if some do abandon you because "you're no longer useful" then you're better off without them around anyway. But it won't happen. BTW, I just had to correct your spelling of "benefitting" above, it made me feel dizzy, hope you don't mind. Malleus Fatuorum 02:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- None. But people perceived I did, and came running whenever they needed help. We'll see where they are now. You shoulda been fixing my typos for years! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:32, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sure people will still be calling on you for help at FAC, perhaps even more than ever did now that you're able to take a more active role in reviewing. Your situation now seems to me somewhat similar to that of Geometry guy at GAN/GAR. But I'll leave you alone now. I've got to get back to the Franco-Mongol Alliance's FAC anyway, where battle lines are being drawn up, something you no longer need to worry about. Malleus Fatuorum 02:41, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- None. But people perceived I did, and came running whenever they needed help. We'll see where they are now. You shoulda been fixing my typos for years! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:32, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- No deep meaning, just "blather", as you say. What "power" did you really have as an FAC delegate anyway? You may even find that you can do more back in the trenches, that was all. And if some do abandon you because "you're no longer useful" then you're better off without them around anyway. But it won't happen. BTW, I just had to correct your spelling of "benefitting" above, it made me feel dizzy, hope you don't mind. Malleus Fatuorum 02:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't have a clue what you're saying or trying to say, Malleus. What I know about life in general-- and about the Interent in particular, and more specifically about Wikipedia-- is that the folks who gathered around when they perceived you had some sort of "power" weren't necessarily gathering 'round for the right reasons. Many of them were just folks benefiting from all the work I did to defend featured content, benefiting from my good name when it came to defending them or their work, and some of them will be noted for their absence when they perceive I'm no longer useful. That's life. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why would your profile be lower anyway? FA delegates have to be cautiously circumspect in the FAC arena, not something that reviewers have to worry about. And from experience, I'd say that reviewers get their fair share of flak there just as delegates do. And as for slowing down or being silent, well, words fail me ... actually there's an unconscious irony there, as if words have failed me then I'll presumably have to be silent ... sometimes you can think too much. Malleus Fatuorum 02:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Carcharoth, you are always well meaning, and your heart is often in the right place, but you can be so silly :) :) Regardless of what "pace" I take, those who have long wanted to get a punch in will do it now. And those who long benefited for years from my defense of their work, promotion of their work, review of their work, will mostly be silent. It's the Internet, and more-- it's Wikipedia. Why should my "pace" be determined by external factors? I didn't slow down when it came to defending FA writers, FA reviewers, FA content-- why should I be someone different now regardless if they'll turn their backs because of my "lower profile"? Silly :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I did notice the section below. If you will accept a bit of advice, when you go from a high profile to a lower one, it is best to slow things down a bit, take time to ease back into other things. That's what I did and I found it helped. Anyway, enough of that. Talking of review, one bit of serendipity is that I have to do some work in the coming days that will involve reading up on the history of the sinking of the Titanic (what with the anniversary coming up soon), so I hope to combine that with a review of that FAC. Unfortunately the paid work has to come first. :-( Carcharoth (talk) 00:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
And thanks from me also. It is however disheartening to return and see that AN/I has not changed (or if it has, for the worse); it is still a place where old grudges can be revisited, adjectives substitute for evidence, and histrionics take the place of reasoned discussion. It is amazing that your last day of invaluable service in your former role is occupied by those unfair attacks. Kablammo (talk) 02:17, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Welcome back! Yes, ANI is worse; the new trend is no right of response. And yes, DYK has gotten worse, too-- before, they could honestly claim ignorance of copyvio et al (they just didn't know). Now-- years later, and with all the writing done on the topic-- they nonetheless actively endorse walking too close to the line on paraphrasing, no matter the very words describing that in the Dispatch you co-authored. I guess in an environment of the WMF lamenting our declining editorship, the very words you all wrote about copyvio are no longer true. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- You have always insisted on rigorous sourcing. My first encounter with you was just before the main page appearance of the first FA on which I worked. You went flew through it, demanding citations; I took it as a personal challenge to provide them. The article was much improved by your demands. Authors should welcome questions about their work, for that is the best way to improve it. Kablammo (talk) 02:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- I was active at DYK for a few months, and there was great resistance to change. There may still be, but at least they are now talking about copyright and plagiarism. Kablammo (talk) 02:33, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
-
-
- Silly man ! Those days are gone-- it's less about sily Wikipedia policy and more about getting along with WMF employees and WMF goals (there are starting to be more of them than us, and their goals are quantity, not quality--when you're getting paid, you need to show results that aren't necessarily in line with the unpaid volunteers).
You helped write that Dispatch (in fact, it may have been you who suggested the makeup of the entire team I put together for that); you knew the line on copyvio and plagiarism as well as everyone else involved did, and you knew the problems at DYK better than most. But now, with declining editorship, they seek more quantity-- not more quality-- in all things Wikipedian. And, what with SOPA, I don't think the WMF would like the world to know just how much copyvio really exists in here. Speaking of that team (which was a who's who of knowledgeable copyvio people in its day): Awadewit's TFA was attacked after running at TFA today (nice reward for her new PhD);[1] Elcobbola gave up and pretty much left in the face of so much opposition here to concern about intellectual property (although he'll respond to my image queries); Jbmurray's successful educational project spawned a whole ton of educational projects that don't have the kind of supervision and involvement from the professor that made his a success, so we have students adding copyvio and unsalvageable poorly sourced content faster than estabished editors can remove it (encouraged by the WMF); you left; Moonriddengirl joined WMF, has less time to work on copyvio; and Tony1 is seen less around FAC as he mostly writes these days for the dying Signpost. Nikkimaria (new since then) is the only person still working on the issues at DYK, and she's doing it all alone. In the interim, Rlevse came back to his old haunts at DYK, and fit right in, unnoticed.
Yes, relative to when you were there and when the Dispatch was written, at DYK they are finally talking about copyright and plagiarism (um, because I make them talk about it ;), but the goalposts have moved, what was clear copyvio when the Dispatch was written no longer is, DYK has chosen to walk close to the line on those borderline cases (quantity over quality), and I'm being shot at ANI for being the messenger about the problem. And all those "friends" who will sooooooo miss me at FAC are likely to stay silent; can't blame 'em (although I was never silent when it came to defending them or their content)-- going up against WMF and their quantity over quality goals ain't easy. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:51, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Silly man ! Those days are gone-- it's less about sily Wikipedia policy and more about getting along with WMF employees and WMF goals (there are starting to be more of them than us, and their goals are quantity, not quality--when you're getting paid, you need to show results that aren't necessarily in line with the unpaid volunteers).
-
[edit] Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 184.59.31.77 (talk) 18:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC) (formerly User:Khazar)
| This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | |||
[edit] Jonathan Agnew at WP:FACHi Sandy. As you know, Dweller and I have this article at FAC but it hasn't had its spot checks or image checks done. Would you be prepared to do that, or could you recommend someone (or some people) who might be able to help with that aspect of its candidacy? Thanks, The Rambling Man (talk) 10:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC) [edit] An award for you
|
[edit] Oh, gee, lookie there !
So, it seems some folks still do have my talkpage watchlisted, show up here when there's a problem, but their fingers were all broken when I was falsely accused at AN/I and some admin intervention was needed [2] to take various abusive admins to task.[3] Oh, and now that we have another Rlevse copyvio, where is Moonriddengirl? [4] There's a heck of a lot more that Wikipedia's not telling you about just how serious the copyvio problem is in here, not limited to the fact that those raising concerns are shot. So, why didn't the CCI people pick this up? It's not like the Rlevse issue wasn't known. Oh, gee, maybe it's because folks raising copyvio issues aren't taken seriously. 'Ya think?
Seems no one knows where to find facts anymore, but whatdya expect since diffs no longer count for anything at ANI.
- Here is where we find copyvio investigations (which include gazillions that haven't been addressed for years): WP:CCI
- Here is where we find Rlevse copyvio investigations:
- Here is where we find that it took the CCI a full year to clear Frederick Russell Burnham, and it was cleared by a fellow arb: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Vanished 6551232#Articles 261 through 280
So, why is this on my talk? Kindly take this problem to admin Moonriddengirl (talk · contribs) and ask what their procedures are and why copyvios that still exist are being cleared there, arb Elen of the Roads (talk · contribs) who continues to allege that I continue to allege arbcom impropriety, or admin Rklawton who thinks I need to be blocked for stating accurate diffable facts, this admin who thinks I shouldn't be addressing copyvios, this admin who overlooked Bishonen being called a Bitch, or anyone else who still enjoys participating in a Project where women can be called bitches and witches, admins can overlook or actively hide it, and even threaten those who bring up diffs about it with a block.
And I see also that no one at ANI could be bothered to notify Risker, The ed, Brad101 or anyone else as requested (at least Risker might have done something about it).
So ... why is the issue of another Rlevse copyvio on my page, after I've been threatened throughout the Wiki for trying to deal with these issues? Dweller and The Rambling Man, please go find another Pollyanna sucker to ask for help when there's a problem, since not one person could be bothered to deal with an abusive admin threatening to block me after other admins turns a blind eye when Bish is called a Bitch, turn a blind eye when it's raised on admin talk pages, turn a blind eye when I'm falsely accused of fabricating original research at ANI, and turn a blind eye when another abusive admin threatens to block me for stating the truth of what happened there.
If I were an admin, I might say "fuck off" and get away with it, but since I'm not: hasta luego, babies. Take your problems, your requests for help, and your barnstars elsewhere. My friends know where to find me, always have. Not only is this place unsafe for women: it's unsafe for anyone with integrity. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Had it not been for you-know-what hanging over my head I'd probably have pitched at ANI, but rest assured, if you ever come across an editor who needs to be told to "fuck off" then I'm your man. At least for a few more days anyway. (Does hasta luego mean "see you later"?) Malleus Fatuorum 22:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- I am not an administrator, and I read about ANI late.
- For what it's worth, I wrote to Nikkimaria, and asked to be contacted if anybody tried to topic ban her from DYK, the way Hawkeye suggested you being topic banned.
- With her refreshing naivete, Nikkimaria could not believe that anybody would make such a suggestion and asked for diffs, which I provided. (I did not provide a courtesy notice here, because I thought that you can take care of yourself, and have more powerful admirers than me.) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- And by the time I got there the thing had been closed. Anyways, the issue I raised above has been addressed, so I've taken the bold liberty of removing it entirely. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- You should remember that TParis just stated that it was ridiculous and killed the idiotic proposal. Don't let Hawkeye run you off the project, when nobody supported him. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- I did not suggest a topic ban; I only suggested leaving DYK alone for a while. I wasn't trying to run anybody off the project. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
-
- Aka, a topic ban. Which is just dandy; perhaps you and MRG can clean up all the copyvio occuring over at DKY by yourselves? Your fellow MilHist editor Rlevse's, as well. The only other person doing it is Nikkimaria. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
-
- I did not suggest a topic ban; I only suggested leaving DYK alone for a while. I wasn't trying to run anybody off the project. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- You should remember that TParis just stated that it was ridiculous and killed the idiotic proposal. Don't let Hawkeye run you off the project, when nobody supported him. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- And by the time I got there the thing had been closed. Anyways, the issue I raised above has been addressed, so I've taken the bold liberty of removing it entirely. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
@ Malleus, we both know (and everyone knows) there's nothing you could have done. Just as we both know, and everyone knows, there are plenty others-- who are fast to run here when they are falsely accused or need help with an article or a favor or TPS feedback-- could have done.
@Kiefer: I see. For the record, my "friends" are almost exclusively the most humble types, to such an extent that most folks don't even know who they are; you won't find my true friends among the "powerful" here.
@Nikki: appreciated. But User talk:Rklawton looks wide open from here,, and he's still sitting there smug as a bug for having threatened me with a block if I even continued to defend my self from a false accusation (that included no diffs) with diffable facts.
@Kiefer, you don't really think this is about Hawkeye, do you? LOLOLOL !!!! I am still under threat of a block by abusive admins for calling admin abuse at ANI, and a topic ban for raising clear copyvio concerns at DYK.
Malleus, hasta luego means "until later": it's always possible that someday I may regain interest in participating here, but it's hard to imagine that happening when I consider the level of abuse that goes on in here. Let's remember very clearly: your civility case stemmed from one thing-- admin abuse. And we've got arbs focusing on civility, and ignoring the serious abuse we all deal with, until even the kindest, the most knowledgeable, helpful, civil, the best and the brightest [5] quit. I'm with MastCell; this is not a good use of my time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Glad to see that I was the reason Bish retired... </sarcasm> thought I explained what I actually meant by doing that, but I guess not. Anyway. Maybe I need to reassess my participation here too so I can avoid getting continuously beaten over the head with this self-admitted mistake. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- There's a rather strange idea taken root here, which reminds me of the Catholic confessional; so long as administrators apologise, however belatedly and reluctantly, for their misdeeds then everything is sweet. That's not the way the world works. Malleus Fatuorum 22:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Is that now? Strange, I wasn't aware that mistakes could never be forgiven. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, for someone who sure 'nuff closed off some discussions at ANI lickety split, you sure haven't gone over to clear it up with Rklawton, who is still singing his same (false) tune. Talk is cheap, Ed; if it was a mistake and you're sorry, why are you sitting by with arms crossed while I take the heat for speaking the truth? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Call all the bullshit you want, but the mistake I made has nothing to do with whatever Rklawton is doing to you. (on ANI? I'm not sure where this is even going on... contrary to popular perception, I'm not wedded to ANI :p). I'm going to take a break. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:21, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, for someone who sure 'nuff closed off some discussions at ANI lickety split, you sure haven't gone over to clear it up with Rklawton, who is still singing his same (false) tune. Talk is cheap, Ed; if it was a mistake and you're sorry, why are you sitting by with arms crossed while I take the heat for speaking the truth? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Is that now? Strange, I wasn't aware that mistakes could never be forgiven. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- There's a rather strange idea taken root here, which reminds me of the Catholic confessional; so long as administrators apologise, however belatedly and reluctantly, for their misdeeds then everything is sweet. That's not the way the world works. Malleus Fatuorum 22:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sandy, you clarified that I was not your friend last week and I clarified my respect for you, which I've tried to express at every opportunity.
- You can see that I have been busy standing up for Lihaas, this time with some resolution, despite my having been blocked for stating the same truths before. I am sorry that I did not express support to you before. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Oh dear, I hadn't seen that statement from MastCell. What the Hell's going on here? Malleus Fatuorum 22:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Same ole, same ole: admin abuse. That is what fuels the frustration. There's some poor newbie on Rklawton's talk page, trying to write a medical article about fear of flying, and not only has Rklawton given him consistently bad information-- go look at the horrid, snarky responses at Lawton's talk (unless he's already deleted them). Those are the kinds of folks sporting tools in here !!!! Bish turned in her tools so she could see what it felt like on the other side-- that, interestingly, is one of the reasons I never wanted them. I wanted to know what it felt like, always, to be a regular bloke, I wanted to understand as well as I did when the FeloniousMonk cabal went after me-- just what it was to be in this place where abusive admins exercise their tools, or the threats of their tools, for no other reason than to make their little peepees get hard. Nothing has changed even with the desysopping of FeloniousMonk (over evidence it took me a month to put together), and unless our increasingly dense (or whatever words MastCell used, see diff above) arbs get that it's all about abuse of the regular editor, nothing will change. Here's what is freaky: I'm a high profile, experienced editor with a clean block log and (I thought-- now I know not to be true) a lot of friends who could shield me from abusive admins. So ... what happens to the little guys? I shudder to think what it's like in here for them. I don't want to be part of such a sick place-- and I knew that when I saw an FA writer taunting another FA writer with his number of FAs. My work here fed such divas. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think you ought to blame yourself, but I did find the comment you're presumably referring to "only someone with more FAs than I have is allowed to unblock" incomprehensible. I'd be prepared to lay a pretty substantial bet that I've helped more FAs through FAC than I've ever nominated, and even turned down offers of being added as a co-nominator by overly generous editors such as Ealdgyth. The project seems to have lost sight of the purpose of its very existence; Sue was quite right about a "death spiral", but I don't think she has yet recognised what it is that's spiralling out of control. Malleus Fatuorum 23:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Same ole, same ole: admin abuse. That is what fuels the frustration. There's some poor newbie on Rklawton's talk page, trying to write a medical article about fear of flying, and not only has Rklawton given him consistently bad information-- go look at the horrid, snarky responses at Lawton's talk (unless he's already deleted them). Those are the kinds of folks sporting tools in here !!!! Bish turned in her tools so she could see what it felt like on the other side-- that, interestingly, is one of the reasons I never wanted them. I wanted to know what it felt like, always, to be a regular bloke, I wanted to understand as well as I did when the FeloniousMonk cabal went after me-- just what it was to be in this place where abusive admins exercise their tools, or the threats of their tools, for no other reason than to make their little peepees get hard. Nothing has changed even with the desysopping of FeloniousMonk (over evidence it took me a month to put together), and unless our increasingly dense (or whatever words MastCell used, see diff above) arbs get that it's all about abuse of the regular editor, nothing will change. Here's what is freaky: I'm a high profile, experienced editor with a clean block log and (I thought-- now I know not to be true) a lot of friends who could shield me from abusive admins. So ... what happens to the little guys? I shudder to think what it's like in here for them. I don't want to be part of such a sick place-- and I knew that when I saw an FA writer taunting another FA writer with his number of FAs. My work here fed such divas. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sandy, fuck all these fools. Seriously. We're here to fix this shit because millions of people are googling how old Beethoven was when he died or what the hell the difference is between Democratic Republic of the Congo and Republic of the Congo. And they are ending up on Wikipedia, so we need to make sure they have the right information and that it's as professional in presentation as possible. I would personally stick up for you until the day I die, but in the end ANI and ArbCom and all these silly venues are no more meaningful to me than if I had a sunken pit of drunken hogs in my backyard that just rooted around and oinked and bit each other all day. They make a bunch of noise and sometimes smell bad but mostly they are just there for each others' entertainment. Let's get back to work, shall we? Sandy, Ed, Malleus... you've got shit to do. And it ain't suffering fools. --Laser brain (talk) 23:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
-
- Sorry, Laser, but it's just not like that for me anymore. Like Malleus, all I did in here was help others get their rewards, improve content, some of those people turned into divas, some of them are selfish, and for that work-- and giving an honest defense with diffs against a false, undiffed charge-- I got threatened with a block in the most unsavory terms:
I'm not interested in working to improve content for a place that is rife with copyvio, nobody cares, and where even folks with a good record can be spoken to like that by an abusive admin. Worse, I can't even defend myself now, or he could block me. The analogy is I don't want to be part of the sunken pit of drunken hogs in my backyard. Fellow admins and arbs-- no one took him to task. So what happens to the next guy? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)... if you persist, I will recommend you be stopped. As for Bishonen, there were significant health issues involved with her winter hibernation, but you would deliberately deceive people here into believing she left over a single world (sic). Shame on you! Rklawton (talk) 00:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, Laser, but it's just not like that for me anymore. Like Malleus, all I did in here was help others get their rewards, improve content, some of those people turned into divas, some of them are selfish, and for that work-- and giving an honest defense with diffs against a false, undiffed charge-- I got threatened with a block in the most unsavory terms:
- If you persist Rklawton I'll move Heaven and Earth to see you desysopped, as you ought to have been long ago. Malleus Fatuorum 00:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- I first came to Wikipedia when someone sent me an email in response to one of my articles. I thought: "but I haven't written any articles on Wikipedia!" But when I looked I found that I had. Several in fact, lifted from my web pages. And everywhere I looked, all I could see was crappy articles. And every time I said that an article sucked, all anyone would do was suggest that it be fixed. So I decided it needed a little work. That was six years ago. And after all this time, we still have vandals, we still have copyvio, and we even still have (God forbid) MOS violations. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- And we still have trigger-happy admins like you as well. Malleus Fatuorum 02:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- When I first came to Wikipedia, an admin cabal went after me. Viciously. [6] One of them ended up permanently desysopped, another temporarily, and all of them came into line by hook or by crook. Lo and behold, another set of abusive admins just cropped up in their place. If Rklawton has his way, I'm not allowed to defend myself against false charges exactly as those from FeloniousMonk were demonstrably false so many years ago. How dare I speak to the truth to an admin !!!! So what's your point, Hawkeye7 (other than the jab-- God forbid-- about MOS violations)? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- What I find very strange, well, one of the things I find very strange, is that this has all blown up at a time when cultural institutions are beginning to cry out for help with their Wikipedia presence. It may only be visible to those in the UK, but the British Museum, for instance, is advertising for a Wikipedian in Residence, salary a little over £30,000 a year.[7] Chasing off those who can actually write stuff was never a good idea, but it now looks like a suicide attempt. Malleus Fatuorum 02:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- Is it possible to live in London for "a little over £30,000 a year"? Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- What I find very strange, well, one of the things I find very strange, is that this has all blown up at a time when cultural institutions are beginning to cry out for help with their Wikipedia presence. It may only be visible to those in the UK, but the British Museum, for instance, is advertising for a Wikipedian in Residence, salary a little over £30,000 a year.[7] Chasing off those who can actually write stuff was never a good idea, but it now looks like a suicide attempt. Malleus Fatuorum 02:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I think it's a touch above the average London wage. oops, no, that's nearly £34K, apparently Johnbod (talk) 03:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
-
-
-
Without commenting on the drama side of things (my head hurts just from reading through it), I can say just from the bit I've done at CCI that it's a tough job that very few are actually willing to tackle. I get why Sandy's frustrated with it, since it shows there's a huge amount of plagiarism we have to find yet. I only did the diffs Rlevse himself posted on that TFA (the only major text addition was the current second paragraph of the lead), which means we have paraphrase issues with the editor who wrote most of that article (the original sentence in question at the talk was added here. As for my point, well, I have three. Copyright is something that needs to be tackled, but if I went berserk every time I caught something I would have been carted away from here long ago. Second, those are the types of editors we need to find and add to our ranks, those who are knowledgeable about the process and can tackle it, since few do now. Third, those running the main page should make sure nothing rlevse nominated gets put there again just to be on the safe side. As for me, I'm going to start shopping Burnham, now that I'm looking through the entire article there is quite a bit of trouble, a lot of it dating back to 2006. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- Which was my point too. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sandy,
- Don't give up hope. I would remind you that I objected to the "toxic/poison", "courting the Wikipedia fraternity", and "crying into her table cloth" aberration, for which you later received a public and voluntary apology.
- I had no idea what to say when TCO wrote the "pussy juice" remark, but I did end the discussion.
- More generally, I did remove RodH's sexist remarks against an editor (who had asked me to ignore her).
- I don't think it fair, either for yourself or for me, to imagine yourself so isolated and bereft of friends, who want to help you when you are attacked, particularly when you face sexist attacks.
- Hawkeye apologized here to Malleus. We all have potential to reform ourselves. Don't despair!
- Kiefer.Wolfowitz 06:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Ping, email. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 08:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Apology
I'm sorry I've not been there for you recently when you've been under fire. --Dweller (talk) 10:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- Me too. Real life has been biting me on the butt... usually without warning. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] A bit late, but
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.
Sven Manguard Wha? 14:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Chin up
Been a while since I sent a Saturday tune, but [8]. Youve done incalculable good for the project, my own experience is how helpful you were in the Sex Pistols and Punk Rock FARs when I was starting up here, and how you scholed, guided and encouraged me, and Im not alone in thinkingn that. Dont let all this drama let you forget your worth, FAC would not half what it is if you had not been there fighting and bringing in standards, against often bitter resistance. Ms An Hero. Ceoil (talk) 13:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] May you have a day full of WikiLove
| Happy Valentine's Day | |
| All the best for one of Wikipedia's best!
(Feel free to send this to your other Valentines) |
[edit] Thanks for your help with Adiantum viridimontanum
Sandy, thanks for your promotion of Adiantum viridimontanum to FA and your useful suggestion about redirects. (I'm normally rather punctilious about those for my railroad articles, but I'd forgotten to pay attention here.) I look forward to long-term maintenance and graphics improvement of the article. Yours, Choess (talk) 03:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] A note of appreciation and respect...
...for your contributions till date. I wished to add an adjective to qualify your contributions, but didn't as I was afraid it might have read sarcastic - which is not my intention. My sincere regards and respect... Wifione Message 16:15, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
| The Monarch of the Glen Appreciation | ||
| Thanks for your working helping so many articles to become Featured.
It's much appreciated by His Majesty and myself, Ben MacDui 10:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC) |
[edit] Recent WP:MEDRS change
Hello, I made a comment on a month old discussion [9] which you may not have noticed. It concerns the guidelines which now strongly imply that tertiary sources cannot be used to determine balance/due weight. I'd appreciate you taking a look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindjuicer (talk • contribs) 18:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] SG on FA
Is this what you were talking about earlier? ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 21:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- That's only a very small part of it. She never really retracted that (mis)interpretation, it appears she's unfamiliar with how Wiki works, and some folks got mileage out of that (against FAC). The bigger problems are elsewhere, though. The effect on medical articles of recruiting students to edit-- the overall drive for quantity over quality, the disregard for established knowledgeable editors as well-meaning WMF employees seek to increase editorship ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Administrators
I've followed a little of what you've been through with the forces at work here at Wiki, and I would like to comment. I too have seen the shift here at Wiki, and I am troubled by the attitude of the administrators. Power hungry and immature seems to describe their behavior best from what I've seen personally. We can only hope that this may change sometime in the near future. Good luck in all things you do. JuSlayer (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ju Slayer? What does that mean? Jew Slayer? I don't think I need that kind of help, thanks anyway. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know what "JuSlayer" meant, hopefully it wasn't "Jew Slayer", but I just wanted to say that I find these these "thanks for for all you've done here" postings to be more than offensive. That may sound strange, but what they're really saying, to my ear, is "OK, you've done a bit, but piss off if you want to, Wikipedia can easily do without you". I'd also like to take NYB to account for his open encouragement of pre-teen administrators, which I think has led to Wikipedia's imminent collapse. Malleus Fatuorum 23:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Sandy. I've paid the price of semi-retirement it seems; content to tend my own uncontroversial articles in the walled garden I'd built, I didn't see until too late the shit you, and FAC, have gone through these last few weeks and months, and which I've just spent the last couple of evenings wading through with an increasing disheartenment I'm tempted to let vindicate my decision to leave. I can't say my input would have made any difference, even if I'd chosen to give it, but I shouldn't have let my disillusionment with the project blind me to what was happening to those still attempting to make a difference. Anyway, words are the easiest shit I'll ever take, and I'm sure you've had more than enough of that; you know what an influence you've been without my having to join in with the general eulogising. All the best, Steve T • C 23:59, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Steve, it is always a joy to hear from you; I often think of you and hope you're well. The dung flung at FAC was disgusting, but that wasn't really the worst of it for me. It is most thoughtful of you to take the time to write: kindness heals :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
BTW JuSlayer stands for Justin Slayer (pornstar) JuSlayer (talk) 04:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia article feedback tool
Have any of you copyediting experts sampled this tool? The results make no sense to me. I see someone has commented here. Quisquiliae (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Sialoblastoma; Neuroendocrine Adenoma Middle ear; Ceruminous adenoma
Good morning: Thanks for your comments on my pages and for "clearning up." I would greatly appreciate someone adding the ICD-10 codes to the bottom of these tumors. Once I have seen one filled in, I hope to be able to add to subsequent additions. Also, I hope the photographs can have similar additions -- but I haven't seen an easy way of me adding the ICD10 or ICD9 codes to them. Pathophysiology is not the same as Pathology. Pathophysiology is the disease mechanism -- not the findings on microscopy. Microscopic findings would be fine -- but Pathology sort of covers both Gross (macroscopic) and histologic (microscopic) findings. Could you please clarify why these were changed? I changed them back until I can understand about this distinction unique to Wikipedia. Thanks for clarifying the signing! I thought it was odd -- since I didn't see it on other pages -- but I completely understand. As you noticed, I am a physician, a pathologist specifically, and I am fairly well recognized in my field. It is for this reason that I was disappointed as well as "agitated" to see that when patients search for specific tumors, the information is random, non-coherent, and anecdotal. So, since the Wiki is more well respected, reliable and peer reviewed and organized, I figured I would contribute about 50 or 60 pages over the next year or so (1 per week) on the topics that are not in the Wiki. If you have some good advice for me -- or better yet -- I am happy to contribute the content and make it as good as possible, if someone like yourself who is more familiar could perhaps monitor my contributions closely, and give guidance as you have here for corrections and layout guidelines so they are more conforming. By the 5th or 6th one, I hope to be more proficient. I remain, Lester D.R. Thompson, M.D. 18:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soca1zim (talk • contribs)
- Hi, Soca; do you prefer to be addressed as Lester, Dr or Soca1zim ?? Nice to meet you-- it is encouraging to come across someone who is making good additions to our medical content.
I am not sure what you mean about adding the ICD codes to images; I don't work with images (better stated, I'm scared to death of working with images because of our copyright issues-- I've never uploaded an image). Have you seen the standard medical infobox, that includes ICD codes? If you can point me to an article about a similar tumor, which has an infobox and provide the ICD codes, I can show you how to add the infobox. Alternately, someone over at WT:MED may get to that more quickly than I can, since they know the other conditions and codes: I mostly edit in the neuropsych realm (Tourette syndrome, etc.)
Ah, on Pathophysiology then, perhaps those sections should have been "Causes" instead of Pathophysiology? I am not a physician (layperson), so I'm sorry for that mistake-- there is a section in WP:MEDMOS which explains our standard headings, and that may help you decide how to name those sections. Perhaps these would be "Causes" rather than Pathology Findings (and if we used Pathology findings, the F would not be uppercase per WP:MSH). Also here.
Yes, there is a good deal of bad, even dangerous, medical misinformation on Wikipedia, so it was a relief to encounter your work. It is something the med editors battle constantly. It would be wonderful if you would wander over to WT:MED and introduce yourself; you will find others there who will be of more help to you than I am, since the doctors hang out there. On the issue of citing yourself, you might want to carefully review the information at WP:COI to make sure you are in compliance (you may want to make some sort of identification on your user page, which is at User:Soca1zim. If you add something to that page, the link will turn blue and we'll know you intend to stay a while : Also, you can sign your talk page entries by adding four tildes ( ~~~~ ) after your edits, and when you get really ambitious, you can click on your Preferences tab and set up a custom signature.
I'm curious about one thing, just for my general knowledge: you've created a number of fine articles, without apparently coming across WP:MEDMOS or WP:MEDRS in your editing time. This is a source of frustration for many of us. If you don't mind the intrusion, I'd be interested in knowing more of your editing experience, how you came to Wikipedia, what path your editing took, and what we might do differently so that other new editors would encounter our medical guideline pages sooner in their editing career? For example, it appears that you started out at WikiProject Articles for creation, and no one there guided you to our medical pages: perhaps we can work on better educating the folks who hang out on that WikiProject ?? Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Reactive attachment disorder
Thanks for helping watch this. I keep on eye on it for obvious things (like the sock that keeps showing up) and Fainites doesn't seem all that active. I will watchlist other medical FAs and help keep an eye on them re: MEDRS. --Laser brain (talk) 21:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- That is a big area of concern-- it can go downhill really fast. I see that Fainites hasn't edited for several weeks, so I emailed her. Other than that, it will be hard to help because I don't have sources, but a whole lotta text that has been chunked in there doesn't seem very necessary, and speculation about where DSM5 will end up is still premature. Glad you're watching it, but if Fainites doesn't surface, it may be hard to keep that article in shape. And I'm always surprised at how few editors are aware of how very closely the APA guards their copyright on DSM info; we have to be very careful about how we even paraphrase the diagnostic criteria. They've come after us before, and we had to launch a whole massive check and cleanup of every article (I know because TS was also on their list even though I was aware of this issue and had very carefully written it in my own words, so I was cleared, but being investigated was unpleasant). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Speaking of guts...
Your question here started me looking. It seems the answer (nothing, at least in the UK) is in the Forfeiture Act 1870, if hanged, drawn and quartered is to be believed. The former article needs a lot of work, if you're looking for some distraction. Perhaps a quote can be worked in:
Treason doth never prosper? What's the reason?
For if it doth, none dare call it treason.
LeadSongDog come howl! 22:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] PumpkinSky CCI completed
See, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- As often as I get informed about this, one would think I discovered, opened or otherwise had something to do with the CCI. As I've said, my concerns are more related to his knowledge of sourcing (something a CCI doesn't look at), and his bringing his grudge about Raul to bear on FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, if I informed you too much. It is hard for me to tell when it is too much or too little. Geometry guy gave me some related thoughts that you may be interested in, ending on "notifications about notifications", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- For sourcing see Great Dismal Swamp maroons, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, if I informed you too much. It is hard for me to tell when it is too much or too little. Geometry guy gave me some related thoughts that you may be interested in, ending on "notifications about notifications", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] PISA in Miranda
Sandy,
You wrote "Miranda was chosen because it is wealthy and accessible". That's wrong. I am actually involved in the PISA project and I was the one who put the OECD in contact with the government of Miranda after some Venezuelans (including me) had asked the national government to let the whole country take part in the PISA programme. You have no source to say "Miranda was chosen because it is wealthy and accessible", so I will put the PISA back. PISA is a voluntary programme and all countries are called to participate. The national government led by Chávez does not want it because it hates transparency (which I cannot prove but then I don't state that in Wikipedia). The Miranda government DECIDED to take part. I hope this does not become an editing war, please inform yourself firstly. --Periergeia (talk) 08:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for letting me know of my mistake-- there is no need for aggression. The source supplied was a primary source, slow to load, and not very helpful. PISA wasn't linked, so it took me a bit to figure out what it was. I have now found an English-language secondary source via Google; if you could better source the addition, it would be helpful. If you could additionally find a source that says that Miranda decided to take part, as a direct result of Capriles, it would be even better. Btw, I don't edit war; do you? There will be plenty of editors along later (closer to elections) who will try to diminish Capriles' bio, so making it as good as it can be early on will help. The fact remains (as stated in this source) that demographics and socioeconomics affect scholastic results universally, so directly linking something successful to Capriles would help make that entry more relevant to his article. [10] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I've now looked at the text you added; it is original research, synthesis. No source given mentions Capriles, nor compares it to the Chavez administration policies on education. Please have a look and revise to address. Regardless if I remove it, someone will, and it does not help the article to have poorly sourced info to prop up a candidate-- there are plenty of secondary sources in English that discuss Capriles' education policies. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Oh my!
Thanks for making me laugh - I'm touched that you noticed! My impressions of RLevse are somewhat influenced by reading the early history of GAR. Neither reverence nor disdain for his contributions/former-status seem to me to be helpful responses: tolerance, acceptance and mentoring make more sense, at least given genuine community engagement on his part in response. Geometry guy 21:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I can predict the next step. Someone criticizes you or me for pointing out his bad spelling, and then I have to mention that with the possible exception of Tbhotch, there is no one on the entire 'pedia who makes as many typos
asand spelling errors as I do :) I do appreciate that post of yours, though; now I see it's hard to know which he meant! I've never said he shouldn't be unblocked, but some others there persist in presenting the whole Rlevse thing as some sort of witch hunt, based only on copyvio. I think he can be productive, and should probably be unblocked, but not with his fan club as mentors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC) - Oh god that's funny. Reminds me of a love letter I wrote in first grade that was oddly scorned. It began, "Dear angle face..." --Laser brain (talk) 22:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- If only it had been to Geometry Guy, all would have been well... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I find "angle face" only marginally better than "angel face", but largely because I dislike trite cliches, rather than because I like the geometry of angles. If the subject of your affection was truly worth your time, Laser brain, the originality of your typo would have been met with appreciation, not scorn, so consider it a lucky escape :)
- Meanwhile, Sandy, I hope Tbhotch has been notified that his/her name has been taken in vian?? :) Geometry guy 22:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- He acknowledges it in his sig-- maybe I should do same! If I added something to my sig asking folks to fix my frequent typos, do you think they would? :/ SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I knew a guy who, without I think ever having ridden a motorbike, had a leather jacket studded with "Hell's Angles". It is of course a pun with a very long history. Johnbod (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- (ec) Yes, but given the nature of Wikipedia and the disputed credibility of the admin corps, such editors might also, occasionally, be blocked for doing so! There is no easy answer... Geometry guy 23:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I knew a guy who said "Lucy in disguise with diamonds". I got rid of the dummy. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Years ago (in the early days of electric typewriters), I learned that the patterns of my typos were a result of the thinking while I was typing (in the days before word-processors, thinking while typing was a big no-no). So I have an excellent excuse for my typos. --Orlady (talk) 16:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- I knew a guy who said "Lucy in disguise with diamonds". I got rid of the dummy. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- He acknowledges it in his sig-- maybe I should do same! If I added something to my sig asking folks to fix my frequent typos, do you think they would? :/ SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- If only it had been to Geometry Guy, all would have been well... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Hologenome theory of evolution
Thanks for your hard work on this. I don't agree with everything that you've done, but where we disagree, I'm sure that we can come to a mutually satisfactory resolution. Among other points, I'm quite impressed with the work that you did digging up the PMCs that I missed, etc. etc. You're very serious about what you're doing. You've set me on a hard trail with some of your comments. I know several of the participants in the Hologenome debate on both sides, and some of the points raised stemmed from private communications with them several years ago. I've assumed that in the intervening years since they expressed to me their contrary opinions, they must have published them, but of course, that isn't necessarily so. There's some politics involved, and I'm trying very hard to be neutral. Anyhow, thanks again! Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Question about the quotations. You removed my statement that they were condensed from Rosenberg et al. by which I meant that most of the quotes were exact up to the first comma, at which point I truncated the subordinate clauses following. I found it less distracting to do that than terminating each quote with ellipses. So without a clear statement that the quotations were condensed, should I add dot dot dot to each sentence? Or is that four dots? Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, Stigmatella ... I'm just in for the evening, and will be out all day tomorrow ... I'm unclear what you mean about removing quotes, will catch up after tomorrow ... do whatever you think best, don't worry about reverting anything I've done. I know nothing of the topic, was just trying to give you some pointers for learning your way around Wikipedia. On the things that aren't published, though, we can't include such on Wikipedia ... we need to source text to things that can be verified, WP:V. I'll check in with you later. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, I found the article that I knew had to exist, given my conversation with the author a few years back. Main trouble finding it was my not remembering the author's last name correctly. But now I should have all the missing references that you wanted. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 15:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'm glad you got more of that cited! The next issues with the article would be to wikify it (see WP:MOSLINK and WP:OVERLINK), add PMIDs and PMCs that are missing (I did a few samples), and there are still some WP:MSH issues (we don't repeat the article title in the section headings) and improper capitalizations within the article. I'll try to get over there some time to help you, no promises-- most of that you can probably do as well as I can! Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:14, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, I found the article that I knew had to exist, given my conversation with the author a few years back. Main trouble finding it was my not remembering the author's last name correctly. But now I should have all the missing references that you wanted. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 15:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hi SandyGeorgia, it's both flattering and a bit worrying that you've asked me to chip in: I'm not very confident about the details of MOS and about good writing. Am also falling behind with other editing on my todo list, but had a look over, picked up on a couple of points, and commented on the talk page. Hope that helps and isn't too much too fast, . . dave souza, talk 10:17, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Human rights in Argentina
Do you think there are any copyvio issues with this article? --Greenmaven (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Wow. 90% of the article is a verbatim copy of one government source, and there's more from another, which isn't copyvio but is still kinda insane. There's also smaller-scale copying from a non-PD source, which is copyvio. There are also a few Spanish-language sources I can't check and at least one broken link. That article needs some serious cleanup, and the GOCE tag isn't going to cut it. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ugh, sorry, was busy elsewhere and neglected to catch up on this. Nikki, I'll go check the Spanish language sources now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:11, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have just CSD'd the article. See the talk page for details. --Greenmaven (talk) 03:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Um. Much as I think this is a problem, I don't think it's CSD-able as copyvio, as US federal government sources are generally PD. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'm afraid the early edits will need to be revdel'd, which I can't do (admin) ... not sure how I can help? Or not, since they're PD? Don't know how to fix this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I removed the copyvio identified above, let me know if there's anything from the Spanish sources. The large-scale PD copying isn't a legal issue, so wouldn't warrant revdel. This is the last version without the PD dump, but it does have the copyvio. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I'm afraid the early edits will need to be revdel'd, which I can't do (admin) ... not sure how I can help? Or not, since they're PD? Don't know how to fix this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Um. Much as I think this is a problem, I don't think it's CSD-able as copyvio, as US federal government sources are generally PD. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have just CSD'd the article. See the talk page for details. --Greenmaven (talk) 03:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ugh, sorry, was busy elsewhere and neglected to catch up on this. Nikki, I'll go check the Spanish language sources now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:11, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Nikki for checking, and thanks Jack for asking before proceeding with ce this time ... wise move, saves time! I updated one dead Spanish link, couldn't find another, but there's not enough sourced from those sources to worry much ... the bigger problem is identified by Nikkimaria. Will leave it to you now, Jack ... glad you checked. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Willuconquer Only one edit in 2012 ... should be notified (but he's got a lot more articles, may need further investigation ... geeeez, copyvio is all I've done for three days now ... ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:29, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- In recent contributions I'm seeing interwiki translations and foreign-languages sources (neither of which I can check), but there's also at least one blatant copyvio from last year. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Even as early as the second edit in 2009 this article was base on COPYVIO. See Talk page. I therefore believe the entire article is worthy of deletion. This is unfortunate given the topic. --Greenmaven (talk) 03:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- See Nikkimaria's message above -- it's a PD source. I'm not sure how it's fixed now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Roe v. Wade FAR
Hi there Sandy, I hope you're doing well! I saw you were involved a bit at a prior FAR for this, Wikipedia:Featured article review/Roe v. Wade/archive1, so your comments in particular at the current FAR would probably be quite helpful. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Mauricio Wiesenthal
Hello Sandy. I don't read Spanish well enough to be sure, but the article Mauricio Wiesenthal appears to be mostly a translation of part of the biography page on a web site that appears to be his own. The relevant part begins with "Ha sido Profesor ...", five paragraphs from the top. The article was built almost entirely by one single-purpose editor. I can't tell whether there is copyvio here, or COI, or neither. Can you help, please? --Stfg (talk) 21:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- I should be able to look in an hour or so ... will do. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:43, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Earth Microbiome Project
Hi again! I split this article out from Microbiome because it unbalanced Microbiome in its level of detail. It's really interesting how Microbiome languished as a stub for two years until I started adding substantive content. Now all of a sudden multiple authors have started contributed big sections and I find myself spending most of my time reorganizing and copy-editing. Next big project is to add the PMC and PMID references that User:Projectphobos neglected to add. Whew! I'm only just starting to appreciate the sort of work that you did for me on Hologenome theory of evolution!
Anyhow, Earth Microbiome Project is basically User:Axtian's work, and I've noticed that he/she doesn't seem to monitor his/her talk page. The picture on that page is going to be deleted unless proper copyright justification is added. Is there any other way to get in touch with Axtian than on the talk page? Thanks again for everything! Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 14:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I noticed it wasn't your work (ce needs throughout). I only catch these articles because I patrol User:AlexNewArtBot/MedicineSearchResult, to check for notability, copyvio, sourcing issues, tag Medicine articles, etc. I did a bit of basics, but don't have the time to do more there. You might see if Axtian has email activated? Go to his talk page, look on the left side of the page in the "Toolbox" window, and see if there's an "E-mail this user" link. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Interesting
I thought you might find this bit of reportage interesting. Warning: it mentions PANDAS. MastCell Talk 00:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yep, I've gotten inquiries (interesting that the media seems to want to find someone to say, "Yes, it's tics").
- The "arm flailing", "swung her arms across her body", "writhing" doesn't make one think right off of TS-related tics, but I haven't seen a video.
- See tourettism; there are all kinds of secondary (non-TS) causes of tics (things like carbon monoxide poisoning). If the NYT didn't talk to Jankovic (who is the guru on secondary causes of tics), they didn't do their job.
- It's most curious that this is happening near Rochester, but we see no mention of Kurlan, Mink, Perlmutter ... some of the world-class TS researchers and physicians happen to be in Rochester. Why aren't they quoted? "Neurologist in Buffalo"?
- PMID 20807070 is one of the most fascinating articles I've read in a very long time. It's tough going for the layfolk, but even though the PANDAS hypothesis isn't panning out, some really fascinating research has come out of it, about all of the mechanisms involved in the etiopathogenesis of tics. Particularly psychosocial stress and how it affects immunological mechanisms.
- "The story took off quickly, not just on the local and national news but on Facebook and autism blogs and sites devoted to mental health and environmental issues." Um, yea ... that's what happens. From the PMID above:
The potential link between common childhood infections and lifelong neuropsychiatric disorders is among the most tantalizing and clinically relevant concepts in modern neuroscience ... The link may be most relevant in this group of disorders collectively described as PANDAS. Of concern, public awareness has outpaced our scientific knowledge base, with multiple magazine and newspaper articles and Internet chat rooms calling this issue to the public's attention. Compared with ~ 200 reports listed on Medline—many involving a single patient, and others reporting the same patients in different papers, with most of these reporting on subjects who do not meet the current PANDAS criteria—there are over 100,000 sites on the Internet where the possible Streptococcus–OCD–TD relationship is discussed. This gap between public interest in PANDAS and conclusive evidence supporting this link calls for increased scientific attention to the relationship between GAS and OCD/tics, particularly examining basic underlying cellular and immune mechanisms.
- Enter, PANDAS. Curiously, they come up with Rosario Trifiletti, a pediatric neurologist from Ramsey, N.J., when they've got world-renowned PANDAS experts right in Rochester. Something tells me they didn't hear what they wanted to hear from the Rochester docs, so they got a "true believer" on board. Swedo wasn't buying it. Local docs say "all nine of the girls he tested showed evidence of either strep exposure or exposure to the organism associated with pneumonia." What kid doesn't ??
- "... enough evidence to get them started on antibiotics and anti-inflammatories." Bingo ! Enter antibiotics, based on ... nothing ... contributing to antibiotic resistance that affects not only the kids that are incorrectly treated, but the rest of society. See PMID 19242249 and Medscape report of the Gabbay, Coffey study.
- " ... the girls he was treating were showing dramatic signs of improvement". Um, yea, well that happens with tic disorders. And with conversion disorder. Without antibiotics.
- Good doctor on board !! "McVige’s approach has been to offer them cognitive behavioral therapy, psychological counseling, antidepressants and exhaustive testing."
- Well, the good news is that even Swedo didn't buy it, so there's no reason for it to show up on the PANDAS article. Now, back to the kitchen! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Happy International Women's Day
| Award for a great woman | |
| On the internet no one knows if you're a dog, but I think you're of the female persuasion. Against kitchen slavery, and for women's writing: this award presented to a deserving woman. Drmies (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC) |
[edit] Because I mentioned your name
Because I mentioned your name, it is only polite that I inform you, although it is mostly in passing, so no urgent need to read this, just FYI.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Giraffe spotcheck
I look over nearly every source have have available and did re-paraphasing when need. Can you do some looking over? LittleJerry (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Other aspects of close paraphrasing concerns regarding United States Education Program
Not sure if this has already been drawn to your attention, but you were mentioned at User talk:JMathewson (WMF)#User talk:Moonriddengirl aka User:Mdennis (WMF) suggested I contact you and rather more obliquely at User talk:Epistemophiliac#Is there a place where OAs are discussed?. Largely the same old same old, but there are some interesting implications as to the details of how the education program is (not) actually managed. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)