Jump to content

User talk:HickoryOughtShirt?4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is Canadian
Trout this user
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Prof Mo Lill (talk | contribs) at 19:53, 27 March 2022 (→double checking: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Your GA nomination of Kyle Palmieri

The article Kyle Palmieri you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Kyle Palmieri for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 17:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Kyle Palmieri

The article Kyle Palmieri you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kyle Palmieri for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 04:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

rejection of article

Hi - You just rejected my article on Richard Gordon Lillard. This was my first submission, so I must have things to learn. I had actually been working on some changes; I never expected the review to happen so fast. Are you able to give me guidance? If I resubmit, will it go back to you, or will it go to someone else? I noticed that you have posted mainly about hockey players. Richard Lillard is more in the academia area. I realized that I should have noted his many honors, national and regional, and the fact that a scholarship is named after him. I think that people using his Outdoor Classroom, or people receiving his scholarship, would be interested in reading about him. Am I on the right track? Thanks for your help. Prof Mo Lill (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Prof Mo Lill and welcome to Wikipedia. While my talk page may be full of hockey players, I have actually written over 100 articles on academics. My main concern with this is that you only cite three sources. This is not enough to show he is notable enough for Wikipedia. You may be unaware but you are allowed to use offline sources on Wikipedia. If you can provide citations for everything in the article, I will re-review it and consider accepting it . HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will work on it. I will take a look at the academic articles you have written, as they may have similar sources. It will take me a month or so - that should be ok, as it is within the six month window, correct? So in a few weeks I will get back to you. (I am going on vacation, not abandoning the project!) Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Prof Mo Lill (talk) 20:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Prof Mo Lill, there is absolutely no rush. Just message me whenever you feel it should be reviewed. Enjoy your vacation . HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again - Just before I engage in a lot of work chasing down exact source citations, I wanted to ask you if I was on the right track. I will be able to establish that Richard Lillard had the Outdoor Classroom named after him (which was an honor, not something he "paid for," though I'm not sure how to "prove" that). Also he was a Fellow of the Historical Society of Southern California (which is an honor). He was given several grants and fellowships - Guggenheim, a listing the The WHite House Library: A Short-Title List, a Fulbright, A non-Fiction award from a Library Assn, a resident scholarship at the Bellagio Study and Conference Center and at the Camargo Foundation, and a Fellowship from the Henry Huntington Library. I did read an article you did on a professor, and I took another look at other author/educator pages, and I realized that wikipedia wants some corroboration that the work done by the person was exceptional, groundbreaking, etc. Are you able to tell me -- of course without any "guarantees," I really do understand that -- if this is the direction I should be going? (If I do not answer for a couple of weeks, it is because I am away. I do appreciate any direction you can provide.) Prof Mo Lill (talk) 21:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prof Mo Lill, Sorry for the delayed response. I did a quick google search and what I found beyond the outdoor classroom includes a large collection with the Online Archives of California. To me, both of these show he passes WP:NPROF #7 but I will need to see the full article before I can confirm. I will also say that I was unaware of your connection to this person before we started communicating and am glad you're already following our COI guidelines (maybe unintentionally). HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, odd, I answered this once but it didn't show up, so again - thank you so much for the information on the Online Archives. I will pick this up again in a few weeks. And, yes, I was intentionally trying to follow the COI guidelines - I hope I did it right. Prof Mo Lill (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2022 (UTC) Hi. Just trying to fix the "Jacqueline Rhodes" page. It got declined because of unreliable sources? I think it's fixed, but not sure because I'm not sure what's unreliable ABOUT the sources used. I'll keep working. Profjrhodes (talk) 16:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)profjrhodes[reply]

Hello HickoryOughtShirt - I am back from vacation and will be in touch in a few weeks. Prof Mo Lill (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just tried to resubmit the article on Richard Gordon Lillard. Not sure I pushed the correct button. Are you finding it?
Prof Mo Lill (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Prof Mo Lill, You did not submit it properly. I have re-added the banner and you should be able to now. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I tried again. I have phone calls and emails out to supply the missing citations.
Prof Mo Lill (talk) 02:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Gerd Ulrich Nienhaus

Could you please be so kind and check the current draft once again? I have added more references in the honors section as per your suggestion. Please advise! CSNV (talk) 15:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CSNV, I've accepted it. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help! CSNV (talk) 08:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pavel Buchnevich

The article Pavel Buchnevich you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pavel Buchnevich for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nova Crystallis -- Nova Crystallis (talk) 23:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

  • AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
  • The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March editathons

Women in Red Mar 2022, Vol 8, Issue 3, Nos 214, 217, 222, 223, 224, 225


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2022 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

  • New York (state) Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
  • Christmas Island AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
  • Kingdom of Scotland Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
  • Philadelphia GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
  • United Nations Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
  • SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
  • United Nations Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April Editathons from Women in Red

Women in Red Apr 2022, Vol 8, Issue 4, Nos 214, 217, 226, 227, 228


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

double checking

Hi Hickory Ought Shirt,

I am just double checking to things: did I re-submit the article correctly on March 10? and, did I ping you correctly just a few moments ago, using my talk page, clicking on the "new section" tab? I kept the parenthesis. I will now try again without the parenthesis. @HickoryOughtShirt?4: Now now I am on your talk page.

Eventually I will understand this, I hope.

Prof Mo Lill (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Prof Mo Lill, I am so sorry. You did but I completely forgot to reply. You will need to fix all those citation needs tags before it can be accepted though. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 02:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is really good news, thank you! I understand about the citation needed tags - I wasn't sure how to handle that. A couple of the main ones were held up for technical reasons at the source; I have been assured that those glitches are being fixed today or tomorrow. Three questions for you: First question -- Lillard's fellowship at the Huntington Library was confirmed by a librarian there, and she said "yes, he was a fellow," and gave the dates. Then I said, "do you have a citation I can use for Wikipedia, and she said, "this email should suffice." That seems odd to me. Is she correct? How would I cite her email? Just show it to you? It all seems irregular. Second question - if it gets too hard to find the citations, may I just remove the sentence from the entry? Third question -- some of Lillard's most important work is proving elusive to give a citation for - e.g. his work drafting a municipal code to preserve hillsides from erosion. So I have just left it out. I wondered if I should put it in and write "citation needed," in the hopes that someone else had one - but that seemed unlikely! Did I make the correct choice? Thanks again for your help.
Prof Mo Lill (talk) 19:53, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HickoryOughtShirt%3F4&oldid=1079625529"