I took a quick peek and will have time to do it today. We are leaving at 5pm (MST) for a holiday and I will be back the evening of Monday Sept 13. --Diannaa(Talk)19:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Diannaa thank you for copy editing season 8 but can you do me a favor, when you have the time please copy edit Family Guy i am atempting to get it to FA and i really would apriciate your help. --Pedro J.the rookie23:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The military history wikiproject will soon open the September 2010 coordinator elections to determine who among us will serve on the X Tranche, the coordinator tranche beginning 28 September of this month. The current coordinators have offered up the names of a limited number of editors who we believe would make good coordinators, and your name was included in the list. Therefore, I am leaving this message on behalf of the current milhist coordinators to encourage you to run for the position of coordinator. If you have any questions or comments about the position you are welcome to ask any members of the current coordinator tranche, we would be happy to answer your questions. Note that while this message is being left to encourage you to run for the position you are under no obligation to do so, and if you decide not to run this decision will not be held against you now or at any point in the future.
Just a poke, I really hope you'll run. I suggested you as a possible candidate because of your excellent work around the wiki, and I think your input would be greatly beneficial to discussions on the coordinator's talk page. You have 22 hours to enter your name here (sorry for the short notice). Kind regards, Ed[talk][majestic titan]03:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I think you did some work with the article. The recent GA review says once again that a native English speaker should correct the language there. Perhaps you can take a further look at it or, in case you think it is fine already, say so in the GA review. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to copy edit that article....but sheesh......it's a long way from even being ready for that! Would you take a look and advise? Buddpaul (talk) 14:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive!GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
Participation report — We have 71 participants in the September drive. 95 people signed up for the July drive, and in May we had 36.
Progress report — We have been making solid progress in eliminating the 2008 articles from the backlog so far. If we continue to focus our firepower we can completely wipe out 2008 from the queue. Overall volumes are lower than expected though, with nearly a thousand articles yet to be done if we are to meet our overall target. If you have not yet participated in the drive, we recommend you do so. If each person who signed up edits one article per day from now till the end of the month we can eliminate another 1,065 articles from the backlog. All contributions are appreciated.
Announcement: credit for 10k+ articles — Participants editing a 10k word article may claim credit for two 5k+ articles on the leaderboard. Those that edit a 15k word article may claim credit for three. Regardless, the article is still counted as a single article in the tallies.
Reminder — Articles from the Requests page can be included in your tally, even if they do not have a copy edit tag. This is a great place to go if you are interested in finding a higher quality article to work on.
Hi Diannaa - I am working on a sandbox "upgrade" to the GOCEreviewed template because I would like it to express the user and date of the review similar to the GOCE template. Please refer to the discussion at the project talk page. I would very much appreciate your input as a prominent copyeditor :) -Paulmnguyen (talk) 00:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if you already know this, but from your post at the copyediting drive talk page I thought you might not.
If you click My preferences and then Recent changes, you'll see a checkbox called "Enhanced recent changes (requires JavaScript)". If you check that, your watchlist will take on a condensed format with all changes to one page on a single expandable line. That way popular pages won't dominate your watchlist. Why this is under Recent changes and not Watchlist, I have no idea...
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We will have to wait until an administrator has a look at the possible copyright infringement issue. This typically takes a few days to a week. Patience, young Jedi. --Diannaa(Talk)02:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I award you this Copy Editor's Barnstar' for insisting on clear, comprehensible, and grammatically correct articles.Dianna, I want to thank so much for your copyedits to Deshastha Brahmin, Upanishads and Third Anglo-Maratha War. I was worried that it might take a while before someone picked up these articles because some of them are "non-mainstream" but you came by and saved the day for us. I feel a lot more confident in going through my first GA because of your improvements of the article. Thanks again for all the painstaking work!—Zuggernaut (talk) 23:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Talk:merkin. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--Diannaa: Sorry, but I don't understand. I feel that this website is relevant and interesting and I'm not just trying to help them sell a merkin. I could add it to the external links instead as the guidelines you referenced suggest, but someone before me tried to do that and it was removed for "advertising".
Is it unfair to link to them just because they happen to be selling merkins? This site lets readers see merkins that are made of real hair, which is something wikipedia doesn't currently have. If you can find a better source for merkins made of real hair, I am fine with that, but this site was the best I could turn up and it seems interesting that someone is trying to sell them. Also, I thought this is a good thing to include too, but I'm not going to bother contributing in the future if everything I try to submit gets shot down.
That individual is a very old, sick, pathetic man in Chicago who lashes out at those who've blocked him here. Different sort of vandal than the usual bored adolescent, I'm afraid. He has no computer of his own and I and others have blocked all of his known IPs. So, he has to use proxies to spew his bile. He's been at me for the last six weeks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Me like your new toy. I gotta download that one of these days and play along. In the meantime, I've blocked both of his most recent proxy ranges and semi-protected my talk page. Poor old guy thinks that in blocking him, others can't edit this site. Uh...no proxy can edit the site. Sad. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The scary thing is that of the 11 I've written, that one is the longest. At 800 words or something. (On a more general note, am I the only one that really thinks their own writing sucks, yet wouldn't think that about a similar ability of writing from someone else?) Courcelles03:18, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It says on a college website and the German page for Schneewittchen that it was the lung and liver that the hunter was to bring to the evil queen. So quit reverting my correct edits or change the German page and all of the other languages that say lung and liver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.82.230 (talk) 04:11, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, do you need help with giving out the awards, etc.? Also, where is the final newsletter being staged? I don't think we should include all the awards in the newsletter anymore as we have had complaints in the last drive that the newsletter was way too long. Give me a holler if you need a hand. Cheers. - S Masters (talk) 14:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The newsletter is on a subpage here. If you could look it over that would be great. If we are not going to add the barnstar winners it is pretty much ready to go. The Utahraptor was going to send it out using the bot. Thanks.
I have begun to collect the info for the barnstars on a subpage here. What needs to happen next is to list under each user what all barnstars they qualified for (both for word count and from the leader board) and to calculate their new rollover words and toThese steps have now been done so we can begin to hand out the barnstars. I have noted special barnstars and 10K barnstars. I have done a few at the top to give you an idea of the layout I had in mind. Then when we hand out the barnstars we can tick them off as {{done}}. If you would like to move forward on completion of these calculations today in your spare time, that would be great. I can then get some real-life stuff caught up. Thanks. --Diannaa(Talk)16:18, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. I will probably start the barnstars tomorrow. Oh hey, I noticed the November page has been prepared; it looks great. :D --Diannaa(Talk)05:59, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
Greetings from the Guild of Copy EditorsSeptember 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks to all who participated! Several of our top editors were called away to real life concerns during the month (be careful out there, people!). This meant that once again, we did not meet all our lofty targets, but we did come close.
Stats
Out of 76 registered editors, 45 actively participated.
We nearly wiped out the 2008 articles from the backlog—there were only 13 remaining when the drive closed.
We reduced the backlog by 725 articles (11.5%), so it was another successful drive.
A total of 59 barnstars will be awarded to 40 editors—well done, and congratulations to all.
Barnstars
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you edited in the July 2010 GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive, you may have earned rollover words, which counted towards this month's barnstars (except for the leaderboard awards). Any unused word credits will be held over for the next drive, as long as you participated in the September drive. Over the course of the next week or two, we will be handing out the barnstars. Click here to see a list of barnstar winners.
We will be holding our next drive in November. You can sign up here.
A huge "thank you" to all editors who helped clear the backlog and to others who helped out behind-the-scenes. See you at the next drive, and until then, please continue to help us work through the backlog. Happy editing!
Leaderboard Award–Most Articles–1st Place It is with great pleasure, that I bestow on Diannaa the prestigious Guild of Copy Editors' Gold Star Award, for completing the largest number of articles (243) – 1st Place – during the Guild of Copy Editors'September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In addition, your dedication and leadership during the drive makes you all the more deserving. Congratulations from the GOCE, and my heartfelt thanks as well. – S Masters (talk) 04:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have done all of the leaderboard, but I have to stop now. I will continue later but if you have time, please feel free to go down the list, and I will go up the list so that we don't have an edit conflict. Cheers. - S Masters (talk) 06:47, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I usually do all similar barnstars at one, to avoid work (the bane of existence). I will do all the "Modest" barnstars before I go out. Thanks for your help so far. --Diannaa(Talk)17:38, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Diannaa! I went to do something on an IP editor’s talk page and noticed that you had added the {{Welcome}} template to an IP editor’s talk page. I think that that is a great thing since it encourages good IP editors to keep up the good work. I did, however, want to mention two things to you:
Always substitute your templates (don’t worry about this particular one, I already did it for you, and there are various bots that would have eventually done it);
For anonymous (i.e., IP) editors, you should consider using the {{Welcome-anon}} template: it lets you optionally indicate a particular article for which you want to commend them, and, most importantly, it encourages the anon to register; and
For registered users that you want to welcome, you might like {{Welcomeg}}. It has a nice layout. By the way, this template does not require you to sign it since it will do so automatically.
Ok, I get it. I am glad there are bots and experienced users to help with stuff! This business recently about getting bite-y towards vandals made me more cognisant that when I am saying, yeah, Mr. IP, that's a great edit, that I should be adding a "Welcome" template to their talk page. We need to attract more competetent editors as well as protect the content we already have. --Diannaa(Talk)03:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well put! I think a lot of recent changes patrollers (RCPers) rush when they’re Huggling, as if they were in a race for whose the quickest or who can churn the highest volume. I try to be very deliberate and almost always end up opening the page in a browser to take a closer look at the history. For instance, if HG is showing me two edits from the same editor, then I really need to look at the history, because what looks like the removal of content may in fact be just a cut and paste that is part of a larger batch of legitimate and good editing that s/he is performing. Once I look at the totality of his/her edits, it may become clear that there is no “violation,” so to speak.
Another example occurs when an editor adds something unsourced to an article. HG and the “Failing to cite a verifiable reliable source” warning may not apply since it is only for extraordinary statements whose unsourced presence could harm Wikipedia. If the unsourced statement does not rise to that level (e.g., adding to a culinary article about a certain dish that some cooks use margarine instead of butter), then it is more appropriate to manually add a {{Citation needed}} tag to the sentence, and then add a {{Uw-unsourced1}} template to the editor’s page. That template indicates that a source is necessary, but does not indicate that the edit was reverted. You can use HG to apply the template without letting HG revert.
After I revert, I often open up the editor’s contribs page and see if there is anything else they have done that needs cleaning up. You can do the cleanup with HG. It will not issue further warning templates if the editor has not edited since the last warning, but it will make the revert.
Also, Popups (and some related extensions) can be very useful especially when, while reviewing edits, you realize that well intended RCPers are reverting to bad versions. Popups lets one find the clean version and revert to it.
I would say that, overall, anywhere from one-third to one-half of the work I do when on vandalism patrol is done manually, where HG just takes me to the article to be dealt with. Sorry to be so long-winded. — SpikeToronto05:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's great advice, and I will re-read it tomorrow to be sure that I understood it all. I have been on Wikipedia for nearly a year but only recently took up vandal-fighting to add variety to my activities, so I don't mind the help. You are right; every time I start up Huggle there are typically at least two or three other people vandal hunting at the same time, so there is no rush to get things done. Someone else can be reverting while I am off investigating something. --Diannaa(Talk)05:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It’s good that you waited a year. That’s why you’re good at assessing what is or is not a good edit. I do not agree with the consensus among many Wikipedians that vandal fighting is a newbie task. I think that one needs editing experience to be good at analyzing and deliberating over each edit. Editing experience makes a good vandal fighter. You fit the bill! — SpikeToronto05:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the modest barnstar. It is nice about what happened in the September drive, especially since there were only 13 articles remaining from 2008. I wasn't as active in this drive as I was in July (school might have something to do with it, because July was a summer vacation month for me, and I had more time to kill), but I did learn some worthy information. I'll be signing up for the November drive; I do like these drives and their motives. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds.20:38, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, that's good news. Thank you for your kind words and your participation in our efforts. I am gonna chip away at the remianing 2008 articles so they will be cleaned up, I hope, when the next drive starts. --Diannaa(Talk)03:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can I just semi-protect my User page while leaving my talk page unprotected? Vandalism on the user page is unacceptable to me. And, my user page in particular has a notice telling editors thay any editing of that page is vandalism. So, yeah, a semi for that page might be a good idea.
Yes, you sure can just get your main page protected and leave your talk page as-is. It is important that IPs have a way to contact you. --Diannaa(Talk)18:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Thanks for your hard work cleaning up the verbal carnage at USS Mississippi. Just kidding, but I do need someone to follow in my wake to tidy up. My wife does this in real life, but would shoot me if she knew how much time I've spent on this article (or at WP in general). I have one qustions though, "Greek Navy" or "Greek navy" -- we have it both ways. I think that we are consistent with "U.S. Navy", so should we follow this with the Greeks. Talk to you soon. Kevin --Kevin Murray (talk) 11:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
whats going on.. on the hunger for more 2 section for trackstar u have produced by kanye when i (Cardiak) produced the record and everytime i put my name u change it back to kanye... i have produced 3 beats on the album and trackstar is one of them —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cardiak100 (talk • contribs) 04:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the copyedit. Can you please put this template: {{GOCE|user=Diannaa|date=October 7, 2010}} on Talk:Mandodari, acknowledging officially your copyedit contribution to the article? Also, I have another favour to ask: can you please take a look at Sarama (which is the article waiting in GAN currently), and may suffer from similar prose issues as it is authored by me. Thanks again. --RedtigerxyzTalk15:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the template as requested. If your GA reveiewer feels it needs further copy editing please let me know and I will go over it again. Not too many copy editors are drawing from the requests page right now so it is hard to find time to get them all done. So sorry you had such a long wait. I have to take the time to follow my own interests as well or Wikipedia is no longer fun. I have an article in progress and will look at Sarama when it is done. Regards, --Diannaa(Talk)22:32, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Please go over the article and look for factual errors that may have been introduced. Sometimes I took an educated guess at the meaning of passages, especially in the plot section. --Diannaa(Talk)22:42, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2010 ALCS
It is a fact that the New York Yankees are winning the 2010 American League Championship Series. I just traveled from the future and saw the Yankees win this game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.230.143.154 (talk) 03:53, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that! And I foresee a Yankees win as well. But we will still have to wait for it to appear in the papers before we add it to the encyclopedia. --Diannaa(Talk)03:55, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I declined your CSD tagging of this article as geographic articles are not subject to speedy deletion under A7. You will need to place an AfD if you wish to pursue deletion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks on a thorough and very good copyedit! I usually have to go back and correct various distortions that copyeditors have inadvertently introduced, but your job was excellent! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 08:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you so much for offering to copy-edit this article. I think that if this article gets a copy-edit it will be able to pass the GA review. As you can see from the last review, prose was the main reason it failed. Once again, thanks. Mr.Kennedy1talk09:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you for your kind words. You will be very close to ready for your next nomination when I am done, so please be sure to check out the review and address the other concerns as well, such as locating any missing citations. If I spot anything unsourced I will tag it. Remove anything from the lead that does not appear elsewhere in the article (or add things to the article that only appear in the lead). If there are no further facts available for his early years, you could trim the more recent years slightly to compensate. I am glad you seem to have a thick skin, as this is a lot of news to hear at once. I will put a note on the talk page when my bit is done. Regards, --Diannaa(Talk)15:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, I want to clarify that I have only removed items from the list where an editor from GOCE has fulfilled the request. I have complete confidence in the GOCE and am indebted to their work, especially you, SMasters and NielsenGW who have copyedited my GANs. Delay is really not an issue, as it is not much compared to the improvement the articles have.--RedtigerxyzTalk15:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's good to hear. I just wanted to reassure you that everything posted on the list will be dealt with, and several of us have the skills to get you to GA or even FA. I am working through the list in the order things were posted, even though you also requested edits on my page, because some people have already been waiting a while. Thanks for your understanding. --Diannaa(Talk)15:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Now we're up to question number three (although at least question number two has been answered): Is quoting material (inside quotations marks) in a footnote a "copyright violation"? (It would be an "edit war" if I insisted on adding back in the quoted material; if the other editor thinks the article is better off with just a link, fine by me.) 184.36.90.17 (talk) 05:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The way we write Wikipedia articles is we write an article and quote our sources. We do not make extensive quotations from copyright material to produce the articles. We actually write new material using reliable sources for which we then incorporate footnotes. to do otherwise is plagiarism and a violation of copyright law. I will post some useful links on your talk page. --Diannaa(Talk)05:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"The way we write Wikipedia articles is we write an article and quote our sources"--well, yes, that's exactly what I did--I made some changes to an article, included external cites to back up those changes, and in the footnotes generated by the citations I quoted the sources. 184.36.90.17 (talk) 05:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The phrase "On 3 April 1944, however, she provided fighter support for an air strike on the German battleship Tirpitz in Altafjord, Norway, which disabled the German ship for three months." is identical to what appears in http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/s17/st_george.htm and is thus in violation of copyright law.
The phrase " In September 1943, she supported the invasion of Italy at Salerno. The ship was redesignated CVE-6 by the American Navy on 15 July 1943" is word for word from http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a7/altamaha-i.htm and thus is a copyright violation. If you cut and pasted this material from other wikipedia articles they too are in violation of copyright law. --Diannaa(Talk)05:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The initial point you were trying to incorporate into the article (five were converted and three were scrapped) has now been included in the article along with a source. --Diannaa(Talk)05:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And in the course of trying to make a perfectly unobjectionable correction to an article that appeared on the front page and that I happened to see had an error in it, I've been accused of being a vandal and a plagiarist. 184.36.90.17 (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't take it personally. I am criticising the edit, not you personally. You are not being attacked. It is not necessary or desirable to insert a lengthy quote from the source in the article. That is not the usual way to do it. Have a look at any wp:featured article, the best Wikipedia has to offer, and you will see we don't do it that way. Indiana class battleship is my favorite example. I am sorry you have found your wikipedia experience unpleasant. Thanks. --Diannaa(Talk)13:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
