User talk:Jbmurray

I prefer to keep both sides of my discussions together, so if you leave me a message here, I will reply here, probably with a copy to your page. But if I left a question on your talk page, feel free to reply there or here, depending on your preference. Thanks!

Dirty Dancing

Hiya, I was wondering if you could help with an article I'm working on? I've taken Dirty Dancing through two peer reviews, GA status, a rejected FA nom, and literally scores of hours of work, but no matter how much time I put into it or who I've asked to look at it, the FA reviewers keep saying "not good enough". I'd still really like to get it to FA, especially before Patrick Swayze dies.  :/ If you have time, could you take a look at it and see what magic you could do, to make it more "wiki"? Thanks, Elonka 14:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy to. I'm trying not to edit during the week (today's a bit of an exception as an FA I was involved with is on the main page), so will get to this at the weekend. I can see plenty of room for improvement, and would be pleased to do my bit. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 17:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I've just spent some time with the article, and started some preliminary copy-editing. The prose is indeed awkward too often. But I'd say the main problem is with the sources. There are some reliable sources mentioned in "Further reading," but they aren't used in the article itself. This fact prompted me to do some very initial research into what else might be written about the film, and I found that there's plenty. I've left some notes on the talk page. At present, the sources are not very good (The E! True Hollywood Story figures rather highly!), and overall the article reads like a fansite. Before undertaking much more in the way of copy-editing, the content itself needs to be significantly upgraded. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your time, I look forward to seeing what improvements that you come up with. --Elonka 20:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, as I say above I feel I've done what I can for now. Yes, the article could be copy-editing further, but of more concern is the sourcing. Once you have seen to that, and I've given you a whole number of suggestions on the talk page for where to start, then do get back in touch. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that's right, you're the prof who organized the class project. Okay, I understand where you're coming from now. Sorry, I thought you were going to do something different than what I was expecting. Sorry to bother you. --Elonka 21:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I'm not sure what being a prof has to do with it! Anyhow, I'm not sure what you were expecting. You asked about doing "magic" on the article, to make it "more 'wiki'," and as I've said I don't think it's a question of magic, but of a bit of legwork: going to a library, checking out books, improving the sources. That's all. Again, once you've done that, feel free to get back in touch. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) In fact, I don't think there was any miscommunication, then. I had thought you wanted copy-editing, and made a start before I saw the problems with the sources. I then spent some time starting on tracking some sources down for you, and have made a number of comments on the article talk page. For me, those problems easily trump problems with prose (as I've said). I realize you want this to go to FA, so I figure I would help copy-editing at a later, more appropriate, stage. If you don't want that help, then no problem, either! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

And now I've responded at more length on the article talk page, which is where this discussion really belongs, in case someone wants to follow up my suggestions and improve the article. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

• (undent) This seems like a good slot for me to insert yet another slavishly grateful expression of thanks for your help with Che. Good work. Cheers! Ling.Nut (talk) 03:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 04:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

A request

In case you needed another article to attend to ;) ¡Qué viva México!‎ would benefit from your knowledge of Latin America, excellent writing, and editing talent. I'll be at the library researching for it tomorrow, and sourcing an anon's contributions- so expect it to be changing over the next few days, to meet DYK standards by May 10th. I had intended to focus on the Eisenstein article but got sidetracked trying to get this article on the main page as a DYK on Cinco de Mayo which failed. Any advice from you or contributions by you would be greatly appreciated, time and interest permitting. Regards, dvdrw 04:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like to help with that, because it's an area of interest on many levels: Latin American, film, and in fact directly related to a research interest of mine. On the other hand, I'm trying to stick to my resolution to edit on weekends only (today being an exception because El Señor Presidente was on the main page). So if you can wait until Friday, and are happy with my being a bit off and on, then dandy. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 04:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, sounds good. Stick to your resolution, sorry to bother you with this but I just had to ask. Hopefully by Friday I'll have what is there with plenty of inline cites, and have uploaded some screenshots. You can then comment, copyedit, write more, or none of the above depending on your wishes. Thanks, dvdrw 05:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, sounds good. Stick to your resolution, sorry to bother you with this but I just had to ask. Hopefully by Friday I'll have what is there with plenty of inline cites, and have uploaded some screenshots. You can then comment, copyedit, write more, or none of the above depending on your wishes. Thanks, dvdrw 05:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Grand. FWIW, if you want to know some of what I think of the film (not a reliable source, natch), see here. Will check back on Friday. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for taking a look and editing a bit. Please reply on Talk:Sergei Eisenstein‎ or Talk:¡Qué viva México! when you get a chance. Thanks, dvdrw 21:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

El Señor Presidente

So, how did you and your students (well, ex-students) fancy their day on the main page? Raul654 (talk) 05:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't got to speak to my students (who have mostly dispersed for the summer), though I found it fabulous, once I realized that the day started at 5pm not 4pm my day, heh. In fact, around midnight I was with some friends, after some beverages had been consumed, and one of them got out a guitar, and started making up a song about Wikipedia to celebrate; we all joined in with various bits of percussion. Heh. Anyhow, many thanks for all your encouragement. Oh, and I was on the phone with a report for AFP earlier on today, so something may come out of that, I don't know... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment re: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Getting It: The psychology of est

I responded to your latest points at the FAC. I must admit, I am getting a bit frustrated. I do not think that it is the appropriate venue for this particular article to delve into New Age, Erhard Seminars Training, and the 1970s, beyond the brief background that is already present in the article - the appropriate venue for that is those other articles. To be asked/expected to bring in other sources which have nothing to do with discussion of this book itself, in order to provide context which is getting way too general and does not deal with this book - is really too much.

I appreciate and thank you for acknowledging that I have scoured many many archival databases in searches for more sources that deal with this book. I also appreciate and thank you for acknowledging that I have worked quite hard to address many of your points from before the FAC discussion was restarted. But I personally feel that adding historical disscussion and analysis of the time period in which this book existed is a bit much. I respectfully ask you to reconsider your position. Cirt (talk) 17:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Cirt, as you see, I did not oppose. And the article passed. Congratulations! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 16:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The language template at Mr. President

The answer may be here, although I don't see where that page specifically mentions the language template. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Following on that accessibility issue, I just did a lot of cleanup at J. R. R. Tolkien, but I don't speak literature; is this article good enough to avoid WP:FAR? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for help at GAR

Thank you for helping out at GAR. It is a really important part of the GA process, and really works if enough reviewers contribute. Geometry guy 21:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

No probs. I figured I'd lend a hand, at least editing the pages if not necessarily commenting. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

MVLL

Hey JB, did you ever hear back from MVLL's administrator? PS: take a look at The Presidents view count if you havent yet, quite something eh? Acer (talk) 21:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, didn't write back yet. Will do. Will also check out the view count. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Image problems

We need an image license, not just 'self-made'. Please take a look and choose an appropriate license. :) asenine ^{say what?} 05:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I see you have chosen a license. That license should be absolutely fine. asenine ^{say what?} 05:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

rfa

Hey there JB, if nobody else does so first, I'll be happy to take a look at your edits... but it won't be until next week.Balloonman (talk) 06:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jb, I just created a nom for you. Assuming you are interested, you might want to let Sandy know as she indicated that she wouldn't mind being your co-nom. I think you would make a great admin. A couple of things to think about before running. First, you might want to read my essay, How to pass an RfA. Second, don't transclude your nom unless you are ready to watch the page for the next 2-4 hours---Eg transclude at the start of your editing session, not shortly before going to bed. Third, I saw that you said that you are only editing on weekends right now. That might make it more challenging as you won't be able to answer questions/concerns. If that is the case, I would suggest holding off your nom until the start of the weekend. 80% of the !votes occur during the first 48 hours of a nom and you really need to be available to address questions/concerns during that time period. Ideally, you would be able to check the RfA at least once a day.Balloonman (talk) 07:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Jb, please let me know if you'd like a co-nom. I'd be happy to ! Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

D'oh, my talk page is a busy place, I missed your message :-) OK, shall I add on my blurb to the RfA Balloonman started? Say the word, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict, but what the heck:) 'Twould be marvellous! Many thanks1 I can't say I know the technical details required, but figure I'm in good hands here. Not that that guarantees success, I'm quite aware... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

OK :-) I'll work on my blurb. You're not nominated yet though; you have to finish the paperwork, then sign and date, then transclude it. It's very important to get that part right, or it can set things off on the wrong foot. You can't have anyone sign it before it's transcluded, and you have to be very careful about even the appearance of canvassing. I'd advise letting Balloonman know when it's ready to transclude, as he'll know the ins and outs. I will work up my blurb in sandbox for you to look at before I add to the RfA. Watch User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, no rush. And again, many thanks! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, how's my sandbox? If there's nothing "off" I'll add it in, and the you can ask someone how to sign and transclude. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

It's very generous. What more can I say?! Many thanks! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The only thing would be perhaps to tone down your most recent tweak. How about "for an editor who did not fully appreciate the help and advice he offered." --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Done, good ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Magnificent. Again, many thanks! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Great. Have fun ! Now for my beauty sleep ... I need it :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You know you have to transclude it to RfA, right?  :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Now, fingers crossed. And sleep tight! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Might be wise to take the busy sign off your talk page :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh, now that you're becoming an Admin, it will be me who will be turning to you for help, not the other way around! :D Acer (talk) 12:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

"Baby Boy"

Hello there. I addressed some of your comments during its FAC and can you please re-visit the article review it again? thank you. --Efe (talk) 04:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Jbmurray/Advice

Hi I really like the idea of your advice page, and I'd like to personally thank and congratulate you for the success you have had in helping your students contribute to Wikipedia. I've spent a number of years here at Wikipedia working with the WP:FAC process and it's great to see you are still helping. One thing I did want to note that I think I've seen you say but that your advice page doesn't currently highlight is the content that students add should match up with what Wikipedia's goals are. I know you link to the 5 pillars and so forth, but behavior and the other issues are rarely a problem. The problem with other projects comes in because most professors when you boil it down either don't get that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia or don't get what an encyclopedia is. As bad as that sounds it's true and as a result they don't understand the core content policies like No original research and Verifiability and instead encourage their students to add essays and other non encyclopedic material. At the core the biggest reason your project worked in improving Wikipedia is that you knew what type of content was appropriate and communicated that to your students and most other projects don't seem to. Of course that took planning on your part as does any good educational project, but I think it was that one facet of the planning that made the big difference. And you do include that in your advice, but as I mentioned I think it should be highlighted. (also perhaps more clearly than I have written it here!). Finally I also like to keep conversations intact, so no need to copy your response to my talk page, I'll follow this here. Thanks for your contributions and your teaching efforts. - Taxman ^Talk 13:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Taxman, thanks for this. Yup, that essay still needs significant work, and I hope to get back to it again before long. I'd certainly be pleased to receive more feedback once it's more developed. I certainly agree with your points here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess the real problem is those things do need to occur in the planning stage of an assignment, so if they haven't it's mostly too late. Though the advice can still be valuable especially if people see it as they are considering a Wikipedia assignment which I think will only be more and more common. If you want, let me know after you've worked on it and I can see if I can add any suggestions. - Taxman ^Talk 20:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can't tell I'm very intrigued by your project and how to make sure more of them go well. College and University participation is an untapped resource to make a severe understatement. Not only is it a good example of a challenging and relevant student task, but everyone benefits through the end product. So I've got another idea on the planning stage, to build off of this. Perhaps this had already occurred to you, but you noted the late stage that much of the students' work started so I thought of ideas to address that. Identifying what items were the sticking points and moving those into earlier required checkpoints should help. For example research is one of the most important factors in success in writing a good Wikipedia article. Perhaps if you make a research target to have 5-10 sources on their proposed subject very early in the process (and something showing they have dug into them) and another batch later on, that would move things along more smoothly. That way they have more to go on with their planning and some of the hardest work is front loaded. Students always hate that all the big projects are at the end of the semester. But that research very early will also make it easier to plan their article (knowing what are the most important subheadings of an article is basically impossible without having done good research for example). Then of course the things like early required rough drafts (even in the form of a diff perhaps) would help. A further idea is that this whole project and it's planning could be generalized into a Wikiversity module as a lesson planning resource. That part certainly doesn't have to be something you bite off. Anyway just some thoughts. Make sure to tell me when you don't want any more random unsolicited advice! - Taxman ^Talk 17:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry I haven't replied to this earlier. But your advice is very sound. I do hope to write up my little "Advice" essay soon, though it's sadly been thrown on the back burner right now. Still, I just got a note from a professor from my former university (one of the most distinguished people in her field) saying she'd seen my stuff and was planning to do something similar. So I feel some kind of responsibility! I'll definitely be back in touch with you on this stuff, and am very gratified by your interest. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 12:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

A question...

I should have asked this a while ago. How did your students react to getting their articles featured? I jumped up and whooped at my first, and at TKaM. Did they take it all in stride, or were they all excited? Inquiring minds want to know. --Moni3 (talk) 12:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

They were definitely excited. What I don't know if how team El Señor Presidente reacted to their 24 hours on the main page, as by then they'd dispersed for the summer. But I know that I was thrilled! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 13:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

Best of luck on your RFA -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you!  :) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA comment

I'd just like to congratulate (I don't think you need luck at this stage!) you on what appears is going to be a whitewash nomination in your ongoing RfA. It's not often that this happens and when it does, you know you've discovered someone who will make an excellent administrator. This is further proven by your excellent capabilities as an editor. Congratulations once again! Good luck and happy editing. Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 11:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I still have my fingers crossed, rather than tempting fate. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 13:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Talking to the media?

Hi, you (sort of) know me and I've heard of you.

Anyway, I see you've been talking to press now? Interesting (especially that sly reference to that horribly failed Global Econoics project from Marshall). Despite a few inaccuracies in the article (the FAs across all Wikis are much higher than the 2000 they list in the article;you created the WP:MMM this year, not last year), I'm glad you're educating the public.

However, besides that, I wanted to ask: As you have indicated that you will be doing this project again next year, do you know yet what articles or topics you will choose to work on? Noble Story (talk) 15:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Sheesh, that reporter did a fine job of mangling the facts :-)) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there is a consistent trend of inaccuracies in articles about Wikipedia. It is extremely ironic that Wikipedia is lambasted (mostly rightly so) for being inaccurate, while the reporters can't even get their facts right. Noble Story (talk) 15:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. A fine irony. Heh. Meanwhile, the (same) story's spreading; I'm going to try and keep track here --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 15:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Ha! I hadn't seen that. Thanks for pointing me to it. Yup, the reporter phoned me the other day. I should say I found it odd having to spell out the name of (for instance) Mario Vargas Llosa, when if she'd looked at the site she could have figured it out pretty fast... It made me wonder how much research she was doing... Oh well.

Anyhow, the next project will be on Chicano and Latino writers in the US and Canada. Look for instance for María Amparo Ruiz de Burton to stop being a redlink. It may also involve some editing in Spanish, on the Spanish Wikipedia: this article, for instance. Perhaps that's a step too far? (And I notice that their FA standards are nowhere near those of the English WP, at least if this is any indication.) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 15:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, apparently they haven't got past the "at least one reference per paragraph" yet. That's rather interesting, as their FA criteria seems to be the same as as ours. But for sure, their "featured articles" wouldn't make it past the hard-line reviewers here at FAC. Maybe you should take your next class as an opportunity to clean it up. :) Noble Story (talk) 15:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk to Raystorm (talk · contribs), Spanish wiki editor, has an English wiki featured article (Same-sex marriage in Spain). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Innerestin'. Will do, nearer the time. Thanks, SandyG. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 15:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

A little gift

		The Special Barnstar
		I, Qst (talk) award you, Jbmurray, this barnstar for keeping calm over the dispute at Talk:The Accidental and not being rude to me, although I was rude to you. Great skills. :-) Qst (talk) 18:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for this. It is really much appreciated. I look forward to further collaboration with you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

¡Hola!

¿Qué país/cultura estudiás en la educacion? ¿Es profencía en la historia o cultura de hispana/conquistadores de España? Me falta por darle muchos preguntas. No tengas contestarlos. :-) miranda 02:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hola, he estudiado un poco de casi todo lo que tenga que ver con América Latina, pero sobre todo Argentina, Perú, Chile, y Centroamérica. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, he leído sobre de la historia de Mexico, especificamente la revolución de Mexico - con Porifero Díaz y Pancho Villa. Pensaré leer sobre la historia moderna de Argentina (Juan Perón, etc.), en la futura. ¿Estudiaste la economícas de Argentina? Son intresantes durante WII, porque los E.E.U.U. y Gran Bretaña quierían petroleum en América Latina. Creo que estes ocupado porque tu estudiantes tienen finals y los darás. Adios, hablaré a ti un otro día. miranda 14:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

De México sé relativamente poco, pero estaré allí el año que viene, enseñando un curso sobre el cine mexicano, así que espero contribuir aquí sobre el tema mientras tanto. Bueno, mucha suerte a tí, también. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the note! I got landed with delivering an electronics course for an external client, during which my laptop died, so I've been pretty much out of things for a bit. The enforced wikibreak was probably good for me though, as things were getting a little hectic with the MMM wind-up, that simultaneous RfA and GA stuff too :P Not much seems to be happening at WP:FAT at the moment, so back to GA for a while I guess... All the best! EyeSerene^talk 10:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

A laptop dying is a bad thing, I can report from my own bitter experience. But again, good to see you back; let's hope WP:FAT gets up and running again before long. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Watership Down

Funny bumping into you at WD after just running into you in that Films Themes discussion. Small (WP)world. Your collaboration on developing WD further will be welcome.
Jim Dunning | talk 10:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'd love to help out, but feel a little overstretched right now. Perhaps later, if there's anything I can do, give me a shout. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

FYI

See WP:100. Congratulations :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Marvellous! Thank you! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

A man on a mission :-)

Byzantine-Arab Wars (780–1180). You may save it yet. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh, yes, I saw your note about this article, which is why I took a look. Anyhow, there's a rather serious confusion about the sources, which I can't answer; I've left a note on the talk page. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll just say that I didn't much appreciate the "NB". ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I see you disagree. I do think it's better, though. It helps teach the reviewer more if they see how more experienced reviewers react. The only problem is that there's a horrible backlog at WP:GAR. We should encourage the good GA reviewers to hang out there. I do think that's the best way of teaching new reviewers when they go wrong. Heck, I use it that way, when I'm not sure! See Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Skin & Bone/1. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess you meant WP:GAR? The best thing is to do what you're doing, dig in and help the article keep its GA status, and believe it or not I've done that many times. This particular one though is so far short that I believe it's better if it's take away, worked on, and then brought back to WP:GAN. Your mileage may vary of course. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, GAR. Thanks for the correction--I'm endlessly getting these acronyms mixed up! Of course, digging in is good, too. There are many ways to make an omelette.  ;) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

... but they all involve breaking eggs. Anyway, fair play to you for digging on this article, and I wish you luck with it. I won't delist it as you've taken a hand in it, so I'll leave it to you to decide what you think is the best course to take now. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent:) I've both delisted and taken the article to GAR. Do feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Byzantine-Arab Wars (780–1180)/1. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Advice needed on introducing Wikipedia to a class in university

Hello professor:

I have talked to my computer course professor and she agrees to let me do a 5-min quick walkthrough of Wikipedia in my CSCA01 class [1] course. So far, I know I will talk about how to identify the best work of Wikipedia (FA) and when to raise red flags (when they see "citation needed" or unreferenced articles) What else would you suggest me to talk about? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 01:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hiya. It might be good to have a bit more context. As it's a computer studies course, I don't know if they'll want to know about the technicalities!

But in general, and if you have only five minutes, I think it's worth remembering how little even fairly tech-savvy people know about how Wikipedia works. In five minutes I'd probably run through:

• Every article (just about every page) has a "talk page" where there is discussion and, often, more information.
• Every article has an article history, by means of which you can look at edit summaries, edit differences, and previous versions of the article
• What distinguishes good articles are sources (WP:V) and idetally, good sources
• If you find a bad article, you are welcome to improve it, either directly or via a comment on the talk page, and encouraged (if not obliged) to register
• Wiki mark-up is different from html, but obeys some of the same basic principles

I'd have thought you can't do much more in five minutes. And I think this presentation does a pretty good job, and in less than five minutes, though I don't agree with it completely.

Feel free to email if you want more ideas. But I suspect you have a pretty good notion already! Just remember not to over-estimate people's existing knowledge, however much they have interacted with the site as readers. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Great ideas. These points are more than enough to cover 5 mins of peep talk. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 23:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Since my audience is peers and a professor, I'll be focusing on academic aspect of Wikipedia. I'll send this rough draft to my professor soon so that she'll know ahead of time on what I'm going to talk about. This is the draft:

• Intro about Wikipedia (its history, who can edit, where is the edit button, project statistics)
• How to identify if the article is trustworthy or not (so WP:V, "citation needed", "this article does not have reference or citations", etc.)
• How to tell if that article is one of the best work (FA)
• How to go to page history. (Some students said they went to a page and read something useful but didn't write or copy it down. Few days later, they came back to that page and it's gone! They feel like they're doomed. So I'll teach them how to retrieve the "lost" information so no one need to panic.

Professor allowed me to spill over a few more minutes, but cannot exceed 10 mins in total (and this presentation isn't for marks, so no pressure there =D ) If I do have some spare time, I'll show the students how easy to vandalize (and just wait... there's more to it) and how easy to undo the changes so there's no point to be disruptive. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks good to me! The Golden Rule of any presentation is not to go over time. Practice before hand, aiming for eight minutes, rather than ten. Good luck! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 11:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

re Elonka's oppose reasons

Might I suggest that it would be more seemly to respond to the reasons after the RfA? You seem destined to succeed in your candidature, but pressing the issues regarding one of only two opposes (against 120 supports and no neutrals at time of writing) may look a little... anxious? If you address the issues raised, but after the RfA concludes it then looks like someone who cares sufficiently to review any instances where improvement may be made even with such a vote of confidence.

Of course, this is what you may have intended anyway. In which case, I apologise. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for this. I know it's good advice. I simply thought it might be useful to reflect on the more general concerns that Elonka raises, that I think other people share: I don't think she's the only person who believes that FAC is an intimidating process. Yes, there are probably better times and places to go over these issues, but I didn't want to ignore them completely, because they concern me also. This is not to win her (or anyone else's) support at RfA. I hope that this is not "pressing the issues" or a sign of any anxiety; rather, an acknowledgement of what I see as real and understandable frustration on her part. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You're doing fine. My mentor when I was a newbie was Encephalon (talk · contribs); he set the course for me, was the only person to help me early on write an FA that no one on Wiki knew anything about (I was literally on my own), and I have tried to pattern my approach to Wiki after the model he set. You've passed him at WP:100.

Sorry, I'm just catching up this morning, or I would have done this for you (to the extent possible, best to let others deal with moves). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

SandyG, thanks for this. Yes, I waited a while to see if anyone else would move that text; but then I decided to do it myself. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

GGM

Your FA on The general and his labyrinth prompted me to start my first ever Marquez novel – Love in the time of cholera. It happened to have sat on the bookshelf for a couple of decades, and now I don't even remember how it got there. I must say that, 40 pages in, it's already a rewarding experience: gems such as "wisdom comes to us when it can no longer do any good" are just too important not to write down; and I feel like a pervert, which is a good sign that the characterisation is rich. It's giddyingly different from my staple, Patrick White, whose prose tastes like the darkest olives, and who – as the master bitch – sets up many of his characters only to dump shit all over them from a great height (love that).

The translation is by one Edith Grossman, who seems to be doing a superlative job, although it's hard to pass ultimate judgement without knowing the original. TONY (talk) 11:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you're enjoying the GGM. I should admit that it's a long time since I read Love in the Time of Cholera. Meanwhile, I've long intended to read Patrick White (and had noted your praise of him on your user page); ever since I first saw his books on the shelves of one of the strangest but perhaps brilliant men I've ever met. Where should I start: Voss?

Pretty much the only Antipodeans I've read have been New Zealanders, one of my favourites being Ronald Hugh Morrieson: a Southern Hemisphere Flannery O'Connor.

Meanwhile, I've been thinking of dropping you an email about something else I'm working on. Maybe I will... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 11:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do. As far as White goes, my recommendations as points of entry are A fringe of leaves and The Twyborn affair. Both were written post-Nobel-prize, when he was feeling good about himself, which shows in what I see as their cinematic qualities. (The BBC commissioned a screenplay of TTA—a copy of which found its way into my house for a few days—from a notable poet and novelist back in the 80s; but they didn't proceed with it.) I'll follow up the link to Prynne in a few days' time. TONY (talk) 14:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

Since you will become an admin within a matter of days i thought i would ask you a question. Just tell me your thoughts, do you think this newly created article Northstar financial coaching should have been speedily deleted or it deserves a spot in wikipedia? I tagged it but another user said leave it even though they agree its not notable. There are millions of companies like this in the world and certainly not everyone of them deserves a spot in wikipedia. Thanks and good luck with the mop and bucket. Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 12:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh. I'm not an admin yet! And anything may still happen. Anyhow, the relevant policy is WP:COMPANY. It's a question as to whether or not "it has been the subject of coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." And right now the article certainly doesn't show that notability. NB also that the user who created the article, User:Brpope95, has a name suspiciously similar to the company's founder, Brian Pope, so there are most likely WP:AUTO issues, too. But if another editor disagrees with your assessment, probably better to leave a prod. And if that's taken away, you can still always take it to AfD. At first sight, I'd certainly vote for its deletion at AfD, but at least then you're giving the article a chance. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 12:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

And you know what, I've just gone and added a prod. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 13:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

TBGS Copyright Issue

Hi there Jbmurray. I am just going to say that with the issue regarding the copyright. I understand about the issue and I am sending it over to OTRS for permissions. I hope to have this resolved soon. If you have anything else you would like to say regarding this issue please talk to me. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 20:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Addshore. There's really not too much reason to take it over to OTRS now, because in any case the content you added wasn't really relevant to the article, which is why I deleted it in the first place; it was only subsequently that I realized that there was a problem with plagiarism / copyvio.

I should say that I feel somewhat bad if something I pointed out were to mean that your RfA failed. But it is a serious issue, and I thought it important that I mention it. And then your initial response rather compounded the problem. You obviously have lots of supporters, and do good work in other ways on the encyclopedia (though here's a bit of vandalism that you missed!). I feel sure that, if you attempt fails this time, you will have more success in the future.

In the meantime, if you want help working on an article--and I think it's useful that you gain some experience there, simply so you know how Wikipedia articles are written, and the issues involved--I'd be happy to help out. We would work on improving TBGS, for instance.

All the best. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Woodrow Wilson

I really think there should be a section oon the Armenian Genocide and what the U.S. did to help at the behest of Wilson. Also, some sort of info on Assyrian and Pontic Greek genocides should be included.--Briaboru (talk) 15:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm fine with the topics being included; but there should be some kind of link made to the article's main topic: i.e. Wilson's reaction (or non-reaction, I guess) to the genocide. Previously, there wasn't. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 15:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Robert F. Kennedy assassination

Hi - thanks for trying to lend a hand, but the guidelines all seem to tend towards inline citations, and as the article is currently wandering through the GA evaluation process, I think it is more appropriate to convert these references to use the {{cite book}} template for the references. Just a heads up, as it will probably mean me undoing the work you did. Fritzpoll (talk) 16:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you did - it make the references section a bit more readable. The diffs didn't make your actions clear - my apologies. I have changed the headings - I hope you don't object? Fritzpoll (talk) 16:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm still a bit confused as to why you removed {{cite book}} templates from the text and changed the structure in this way? Fritzpoll (talk) 16:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not a criticism - but I meant, I don't see why you have extracted the citation templates (like that for Noguchi) from the text and placed them in an additional list. I am curious as to why this is preferable. As I say, not a criticism, just interested Fritzpoll (talk) 16:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it certainly looks better, with the reflist being much less cluttered. Thanks very much for both doing the job and taking the time to answer my nagging questions! It's just that layout issues are one element of the guidelines that I'm not very familiar with, so I always try to take the time to learn! Best wishes, Fritzpoll (talk) 16:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Your copy-edit

Many thanks for doing this - it was exactly what the article needed, and I was far too close to the text to see the flaws. I notice the inline queries, and I'll address those shortly. I'll also chuck an extra summary sentence in the lead. Your helpfulness and willingness to communicate further strengthens the reasons I supported your RfA :) Fritzpoll (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA

Your ability to stay polite, and dare I say it even kind, during discussions about article content, and keep those discussions focused on article content, is quite admirable and something that every single Administrator on this project and on every Wikimedia Foundation project should strive for. It is quite rate, unfortunately. Cirt (talk) 18:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You're very kind. And I should say, in turn, that you show admirable patience and responsiveness to criticism. I'm half-aware that that's been something you've been working on, so all the more reason for congratulations! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Another award

I daresay you've gotten plenty of accolades, but this seems appropriate:

		The Real Life Barnstar
		For finding a new use for Wikipedia in your university curriculum, I award you the Real Life Barnstar. Fishal (talk) 19:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You're really too kind! Thanks so much. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Cinco de Mayo

I did greatly enjoy our day on the main page! It was really exciting. I worked all day so I told everyone I worked with about it and showed it to as many people as I could before it changed at 4pm. Thanks for all that help getting us there. I am looking forward to more Wikipedia-ing in the fall! :)--Mfreud (talk) 03:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)