User talk:JSFarman

Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.
If your message is regarding an article I reviewed, please include links to pertinent page(s).
I'll respond as quickly as I can to your message, but sometimes I'm busy in real life.
If you're gonna be a dick, you need to outdick this guy: "JSFarman you F*ing A*hole. Choke on your own vomit JSFarman!" SwishGuy

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, JSFarman. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Shearonink (talk) 21:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Harry Brand

On 6 November 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harry Brand, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that press agent Harry Brand had 20th Century Fox insure Betty Grable's legs (pictured) for $1 million? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harry Brand. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thx4thx

Thank you Julie, do tell everyone you meet how good it is to see your articles get magically better. That's the way that DYK is meant to work. Sometimes you just get someone who wants to just explain how important they are, but most of the time its just nice people working well together. Sometimes you even get someone who shows you a whole new aspect to your article (say that Brand was a Russian spy) and that great. We give out a medal when you have done 25. Do ooze at the "did you know" project as it would be good for them to remember what the project is about. Although we don't very often get a newbie as experienced at wiki stuff as you are. Do return to my talk page if you get hassle or you want to help with fixing the low number of women bios on Wiki. You will also get a buzz when you see how many people have read your article .... tomorrow. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 20:58, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Victuallers! Thanks for the encouragement (or thanks for the thanks for the thanks). I love the idea of Harry Brand, Spy. (I wouldn't be all that surprised.) I will definitely ooze at DYK! And since I am part of AfC, I see a ton of new articles, and as such can maybe come up with 25 hooks. New motivation!

AND! 2000+ views on Harry Brand. That is amazing! Julie JSFarman (talk) 13:25, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

File:New Zealand TW-17.svg

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:11, 24 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Julie, I consider you a friend even though we have only spent about 20 minutes talking face to face in San Diego last year. But we have some fun bullshitting about dogs and music on Facebook, don't we? Any time you need my help, just ask, and I will do my best. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:11, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen³²⁸ I am so delighted by the overwhelming response to your RfA! It renews my faith in Wikipedia. And I know you'll be a spectacular administrator.

It seems like we met before San Diego, but maybe that was via dogs and music on Facebook...it's good to know you both for real, online, and on WP. Thank you so much for the message and your friendship, and I will definitely be availing myself of your offer to help! Nothing has changed there. :) JSFarman (talk) 02:22, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.G. Morgan - comments

Hi JSFarman - thanks for your help on my article P.G. Morgan. I have a few follow up questions I'm hoping you can help me with to get this article up and running - would removing the early life section all together help speed the process up? Additionally - how would you recommend dealing with the extra citations? As the draft suggests, I've had many different suggestions on how many citations to use/how to cite things. Would you use one primary citation on the actual sentence/statement, and list the rest of them as references in an additional section? Any insight you can provide here would be most helpful. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmh02010 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cmh02010 (talk). Sorry for the delay. I just went through the references, and they don't support the assertions of the article. The first goes to the landing page for ISIS, nothing about P.G Morgan. The second ref isn't independent. The third, for the BAFTA awards, doesn't mention his name, and a search on the site for P.G. Morgan, Peter Morgan, and Peter Gwynne Morgan returns no results. #4 isn't independent (and doesn't support the info it follows). The BBC cite would be good if the program was a) transcribed and b)available. First Cut 2 links to a preface, and when I searched the book it appeared that the Peter Morgan referred to is the *other* Peter Morgan. I don't really have time to go through the other references.

To verify his credits, you only need one reference via an independent reliable source. His own website is not valid.

I searched Oxford, Fringe Festival, and other details under each possible name and didn't come up with anything. Your best bet would be to write and submit a stub.If you add all of his credits, you'll end up with a resume, essentially, and that's not what Wikipedia is about. Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 05:51, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Evelyn McDonnell) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Evelyn McDonnell, JSFarman!

Wikipedia editor Cullen328 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I reviewed this, Julie.

To reply, leave a comment on Cullen328's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:53, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled user right

Hi JSFarman, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:38, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen³²⁸All of the time that I used to spend cursing the backlog will now be devoted to singing your praises. Thank you! JSFarman (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your simple thanks is sufficient, since the work you have done creating well referenced and well written articles shows that you deserve this. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

LA event this Thursday

LA Meetup: September 7 edit-a-thon near DTLA

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You have been invited to a meetup and edit-a-thon at the LA84 Foundation in Jefferson Park (near DTLA) on Thursday, September 7, 2017 from 5:45 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.! This event aims to improve coverage of female Olympians and Paralympians (some of whom will be attending!). There will be a deejay and food/drinks, and kids are welcome.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Join our Facebook group, follow our Twitter account, and like our Facebook page!! To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Bughouse (Band, Australia)

Dear JS Farman, many thanks for your look at the article and also your super helpful comments! I have done as you suggested, including removing some of the language that I couldn't find references for, and have also included a number of new references where I could find them. The article is now a little shorter, and I hope more to the point. One issue that Ive had is with references from newspaper archives where you can only obtain access if you have a paid subscription. There are a couple of these references in the article, and I have downloaded the pdfs, but can't upload them to wikicommons. The upside of having made copies is Ive been able to be more precise about the dates of these articles, page numbers etc. The article URL is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bughouse_(Australian_band)#cite_note-24 Many thanks again for your help, and all or any new suggestions gratefully received. Stavros41 (talk) 16:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JSFarman. Thank you so much for helping to improve the article and for posting it! Thrilled to have first article up!!. Stavros41 (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:All Music Homepage circa 1999.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:All Music Homepage circa 1999.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I left a comment on the discussion page, Jon Kolbert, but I agree - it's not the right image for the article.JSFarman (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14:06:22, 12 September 2017 review of submission by Insulatedpolar

Insulatedpolar (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Wicanders (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi JSFarman,

Thank you for reviewing my article, I believe I have made the adjustments you requested. Please let me know if any further tone changes make sense, or if you have any other recommendations.

Insulatedpolar (talk) 14:06, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy McCoy (double bass) title change

Hi Julie, I am the subject of a page you reviewed and moved from draft form earlier today. The title is "Jeremy McCoy (double bass)". Thanks for accepting the article! I see a problem that should probably be corrected right away. After reading up a bit, I think it means making a move not an edit. The article should really be named "Jeremy McCoy (double bassist)". That's grammatically better and it will also match a disambiguation note on an article titled "Jeremy McCoy". The note there lists "Jeremy McCoy (double bassist)" so it isn't linking. The other Jeremy McCoy isn't just a musician, like me, he's also a bass player!!(bass guitar, as opposed to double bass, but pretty darn close). You can imagine the online morphing and confusion - especially with google's acquisition of youtube. Having two defined articles on wikipedia should help. I hope you can make this change without much trouble and send the article out into the wiki-sphere with this better title. Thank you very much for your time and expertise! JM 24.46.150.16 (talk) 02:11, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeremy. That's wild! I've moved the page to Jeremy McCoy (double bassist). All the best, Julie

Jeremy McCoy (double bassist)

Thanks Julie! The disambiguation link from the "Jeremy McCoy" article works but shows in red and "not created". I deleted cookies and still red. Maybe it will self correct? Jeremy 24.46.150.16 (talk) 00:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind

Yep - self corrected. It's blue now. Cheers, J 24.46.150.16 (talk) 00:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up question

Hi Julie, When an article is renamed, do internal links (like categories) auto-correct? Is there a way to trigger that? Also, that disambiguation link is back to red. Curious why it would correct and then revert. Thanks, JM24.46.150.16 (talk) 03:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm not following you. Nothing changes when an article is moved other than the title. The DAB is showing up blue for me...?

U.S. women in the Olympics and Paralympics edit-a-thon at LA84

	U.S. women in the Olympics and Paralympics barnstar
	I wanted to say thank you for handling the logistics for the U.S. women in the Olympics and Paralympics edit-a-thon at the LA84 Foundation. It turned out wonderful! Rosiestep (talk) 15:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Rosie! You accomplished so much with this edit-a-thon. I wish I could have been there. Thank you for doing this, and for all of the inspiration and motivation to get WP LA fired up. xx!JSFarman (talk) 23:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

22:05:59, 4 October 2017 review of submission by Rpsavory

{{Lafc|username=Rpsavory|ts=22:05:59, 4 October 2017|declined=Draft:Rhea_Scott

Maureen Wroblewitz

Thank you for improvement this article. Thank you!Ngochue456 (talk) 02:21, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for thanking me - it's great to cross paths with someone so considerate -- but I don't think it was me. (I can't find any edits to the article in my history.) JSFarman (talk) 02:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Telegraph is not a good source!

Hi, Thanks for leaving me a message. La Crosse Tribune is a broadsheet newspaper, therefore they are a highly reliable source and never make a very stupid mistake. While The Daily Telegraph sometimes making a very silly mistake. Please read this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/9450131/Singer-Adele-babysits-for-a-strangers-child-at-high-street-cafe.html) Adele's 21 albums sold 220 million?. That's look silly. Thanks Politsi (talk) 12:39, 19 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Hi Politsi and thanks for your reply. I'm with you on the inflated Adele number. However, the Telegraph (also a broadsheet) is a newspaper of record.

In terms of the La Crosse Tribune, the term "broadsheet" is used to describe its size. It doesn't confer reliability; it's not relevant. La Cross is a small town, and tabloid dailies are published in large markets with multiple dailies. It's the differentiator; tabloids are sensational by design. Consider the New York Times (broadsheet) vs. The New York Post, (tabloid) or the Sydney Morning News (broadsheet) vs. the Sydney Daily Telegraph or London's Times, Telegraph and Guardian (broadsheets) vs. The Sun, The Mirror or The Daily Mail (tabloids).

Also: Reliability is based on authority, expertise, and the presumption of fact checking. The journalist for the La Crosse paper is not a specialist -- he writes about entertainment and county government - he may not even be a professional journalist. Further, small town newspapers very rarely employ fact checkers. They can barely afford writers.

I rewrote the Neil Diamond lede without using a number for total sales. We need to find a better source for this article. And for the best selling artists chart, although it must be noted that there are no official or reliable sources for worldwide sales. Zero. None. JSFarman (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Politsi, I just moved Neil Diamond back to 130 on the best selling albums chart, and will reintroduce the number to the article on him as well. He's about to receive a Lifetime Grammy Award, and there are ample sources, including NARAS, who I suspect may be more reliable than the LaCrosse Tribune. (Here's the 130 million stat via grammy.com JSFarman (talk) 01:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Text box response

Hi JSFarman,

You responded to my query about creating a text box (or whatever the box in the top right of wikipedia articles is called) a while back and I meant to respond and say thanks but it completely slipped me by. In any case, thank you for creating one in the "Laura Briggs" page that I created. And thanks for the encouragement about creating feminist-related articles! In a world that, in my very limited experience, can feel somewhat devoid of true human interaction--that is, the complicated world of wikipedia--I truly appreciated that support!

-Faune — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faunevita (talk • contribs) 17:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Faune. It was my pleasure. Truly! Thanks for writing the article. Julie JSFarman (talk) 20:36, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Hello JSFarman, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018.
Happy editing,
Chris Troutman (talk) 00:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Merger discussion for Anna Jones (businessperson)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Anna Jones (businessperson)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 15:02, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:KalSpelletich

Hello JSFarman, your note and tips are greatly appreciated on the Draft:KalSpelletich entry ^[1]! It's great to hear you are a fan of his work too. I am back to editing the entry, after a hiatus for the holidays. When you have time can you help with the images on this page? Again thanks for your time. Marylee1234 (talk) 04:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kal_Spelletich

Hi Marylee1234. I found it so odd that there wasn't already an article. I'm a fan of his work, but I know of him because we ran in a lot of the same punk rock/art/SF circles at around the same time. (I think we probably still do.)

The article was much better after your edit. I did some more work on it but I have to knock it off for a while. If you go back to the draft, the career section needs to be completed. You can also add a section on his works, major exhibitions etc. (I removed it from the AfC queue; I will publish it through AfC when we have it ready to go.)

Do you have a conflict of interest? If so, you should declare it on the talk page of the article. If you are being paid for the entry -- or if you happen to work for the gallery -- you need to disclose your status on your user page and on the article talk page. I can give you guidance on the process as necessary.

I will ecstatically help with the images, but you need to have releases to use them on WP, unless they are photographs that you yourself took (and as such own the copyright). The details are here.

Thanks for your contribution! So glad that there will be an article on him. And, if you're interested in WP and art, you should get involved with Art and Feminism - there's a huge event in SF on the horizon. JSFarman (talk) 21:12, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JSFarman - Your edits getting the photos up are super helpful. Thank you! And thanks for adding more background too! It's rad that you are a positive force on WP! WP seems to take a lot of time to figure out and there's a tidal wave of negativity on here.

To clear up the COI question I'll post this on the article talk page: "I'm not getting paid for this edit work. I don't work for a gallery or any arts organization. I am writing this because I'm a good friend of Kal Spelletich, a fan of his work and it seems like he needs a page." Marylee1234 (talk) 00:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marylee1234, very cool. You do have a conflict of interest, though, since you and Kal are friends. Definitely note it on the talk page of the draft, and when you're happy with the draft, note your conflict in your final edit summary. Then if you ping me I'll resubmit it on your behalf, and review it (and edit as necessary). (You are a good friend! I admire your perseverance.)

I messaged Kal throught Facebook - we have mutual friends -- and he sent me the photos, which I uploaded. I sent him the release to use them -- can you make sure he returns the releases to permissions-en@wikipedia.org?

And I hope you'll stick around and contribute. The community isn't really hostile. I think you just got off on the wrong foot. Thanks!JSFarman (talk) 01:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day LA 2018

I see you seem to be in charge of the Wikipedia Day LA 2018 event. I have not declared anything on the page because I don't know if I can make it. If I do make it, or if I can make it on something like Skype, I would like to give a short talk.

Trackinfo (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trackinfo, so very excellent to meet you. (I just read your user page, I'm completely psyched.)

It would be fantastic to have you at Wikipedia Day. I hope you can be there in person, but if not we can Skype.

Do you want to do a flash talk or do you want it to be more formal? The schedule is just coming together but it would probably work best early afternoon.

Thank you so much for the message. Made my day. Month. Year...Julie JSFarman (talk) 08:46, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ Trackinfo, We have had to postpone Wikipedia Day LA due to a scheduling conflict with the hotel. We're trying to resked for March. If you're up for it (and comfortable with providing an email address) I can include you on a Doodle poll we're using to determine everyone's availability. You can message me through the email here (or via Facebook) if you're so inclined. Apologies for any inconvenience and hoping you can still participate. Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 19:27, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have much of a social media presence. Email is just info @ my name .org but you can notify me when you get a date and place. I'm not in L.A., so I have to drive in. It will just depend on what I have scheduled when you do it. You are in media so you know you can get a phone call at any time that will ruin your plans. Downtown is not a wonderful place to go, or park or . . . I know. I shot a show for a couple of months just up the street from the proposed hotel. Trackinfo (talk) 19:51, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Totally get it (although I've developed a fondness for downtown despite the miserable experiences I've had shooting there). I will email you when we have a date (and hope that you don't get a call day of). JSFarman (talk) 20:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Trackinfo - Just saw your note on the meetup page - SO STOKED. If you're leaving at 11:00 we can schedule you for 10:50???? Does that work? (There's an introduction at 10, and then a speaker at 10:15-10:45 - we would have you right after him?!?) Let me know! JSFarman (talk) 22:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then I may have to skip it. I have to be @ UCLA @ 11, not leave. Maybe I can swing by maybe before 4 p.m. but I'll guess that will be useless because most everyone will have gone home or lost their energy by then. Or could I do a flash at the beginning? Trackinfo (talk) 04:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your choice - I would truly love you to talk @Trackinfo - we can either put you right at the top (after the intro and before the keynote, although we'll have to figure out how to transition) - but it would be better if you can make it at 3:30 or 3:45, people won't be burnt yet, it will be just before cake! JSFarman (talk) 20:43, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you put me at the front. That way, it can be an underlying topic in the other discussions through the day (as it is a background issue in all things wikipedia). I'll make an effort to return for the later time. Maybe there will be questions to ask by then. Trackinfo (talk) 22:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trackinfo (talk), Excellent. About 10:10. I'll email you my # (or email me if you don't have the editor email enabled) - will you text me if you're running late? Otherwise find when you arrive. I will be the person crying in the corner. JSFarman (talk) 01:42, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

info @ my user name .org Trackinfo (talk) 04:11, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Julie, I've got a set of space banners for the west coast and would be happy to FedEx them down to you for Wikipedia Day vs. having them sit at my house where they are getting bored. If that interests you, let me know and we can sort out shipping address (your home? the venue?) via email. Sorry I can't make it to the event this year because of busy calendar. But I will be back in LA in May; will let you know when dates are finalized so that maybe we can grab coffee or something. --Rosiestep (talk) 08:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ROSIE! I wish you could be here. It will not be the same without you. And yes - it would be great to get the banners! Thanks for offering (and for thinking about it). It would probably be best to send them to the hotel -- info to come. And, yes, May, but I think you should come back much sooner! JSFarman (talk) 00:30, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help with NBC News?

Hi,

I have started a discussion about what I consider to be an incomplete and misleading paragraph in the NBC News article about the Harvey Weinstein investigation: Talk:NBC_News#Correct_misleading_paragraph

I'm an experienced Wikipedia editor but as a paid consultant to NBC News, I am seeking an independent review of my proposed changes, as per WP: COI.

If you happen to have the time/interest to help out, I'd very much appreciate it.

Hi, BC1278, I just left a message on the talk page but I agree with you - I have to run out but I will work on it this afternoon. JSFarman (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! BC1278 (talk) 21:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

More with NBC News

Hi,

Thanks for agreeing to take a look the Weinstein issue at NBC News. If you happen to have time, there is also current discussion of how to handle Matt Lauer firing on the NBC News page: Talk:NBC_News#Expanded_info_on_Matt_Lauer and importantly, on the article about the president of NBC News, Noah Oppenheim, where I think it's been mishandled as unbalanced criticism instead of a neutral statement. Talk:Noah_Oppenheim#Lauer_content

Your independent opinion would be greatly valued.

Thanks so much for any help you can offer. BC1278 (talk) 21:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

Women in Red

Hi there, Julie. I'm glad to see you are now an "official" member of WiR. I see you have a good track record, including several women's biographies. I enjoyed reading this. Don't hesitate to let us know if you run into any problems or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ipigott, and thank you. I'm honored to be official! I have so many articles in my sandbox that I haven't finished -- I'm sorry to say that in a lot of cases it's because I've found out after I've started that the subject of the article won't meet notability. (I want to write articles about the very few women on the Billboard Power 100 list, a handful of casting agents, publicists, writers and journalists.)

I hadn't read that Judith Newman article in a long time - I forgot how funny it is. (Did you read the article about being rejected?!?)

Thank you for the welcome -- I'm looking to being more (officially) active in the project! JSFarman (talk) 01:39, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Women's History Month 2018 at Women in Red

		Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons. Historically, our March event has been one of the biggest offerings of the year. This year, we are collaborating with two other wiki communities. Our article campaign is the official on-line/virtual node for Art+Feminism. Our image campaign supports the Whose Knowledge? initiative. [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/70\|Women's History Month 2018]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00\|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Wikipedia Day LA, March 31

Wikipedia Day LA 2018

Please join us from 10:00 am - 5:00 pm on Saturday, March 31st for Wikipedia Day LA 2018 at the Ace Hotel in downtown Los Angeles. There will be speakers, panel discussions, a presentation on Wikidata, flash sessions, and a discussion about the formation of an LA User Group. There could be dramatic readings of LA-related talk pages, and there will be truly excellent cake. Please RSVP on the event page if you're thinking of joining us.

We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

14:29:13, 12 March 2018 review of submission by Kjburch1988

Kjburch1988 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Linda Proud (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Kjburch1988 (talk) 14:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC) Hi, regarding your comments, I am unsure how reviews in magazines such as The Florentine and Resurgence & Ecologist are unreliable or trivial. I will certainly remove the interviews and links to Godstow Press, but you also asked for reviews of her books from national and regional publications, which I have provided via both those publications. Her books have also been reviewed by the Historical Novel Society, which I can include as well.[reply]

Hi, Kjburch1988, according to the draft you submitted, she has written for the Resurgence & Ecologist. That means it's not an independent source. As for The Florentine, it's a monthly with a circulation of 10,000 that sells editorial services, and to me, it doesn't impact notability. Other reviewers might feel differently.

And yes, please include the Historical Novel Society reviews. The interviews are a helpful resource for readers - I would leave them in - it's just that they don't go towards notability. Just so you know, my goal is to accept articles, not reject them, particularly when the subject is about a woman. JSFarman (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Blackman

Hello, Regarding this article that you just reviewed. Here is another article for further recent coverage. Here Blackman's creation of THE ASSOCIATES is cited in the book "Law and Justice on the Small Screen." This interview cites him as one of the writers on FARGO. This interview cites him for as a writer on BONES. Are these sufficient? This is my first attempt at creating article, so any guidance is very appreciated.

791six (talk) 06:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)791six[reply]

Hi 791six (talk), He is obviously very accomplished (and based on his credits I'm a huge fan), but to establish notability you need extensive coverage that's specifically about Steve Blackman from multiple sources. The Globe and Mail ref is great because it provides in-depth editorial on his background. The other references serve to verify that he has all these credits, but he's mentioned tangentially. To meet the inclusion criteria you need articles that are similar in length and focus to the Globe and Mail. Maybe when the Netflix show debuts there will be more written about him? (You did a great job writing the article - the tone is neutral, it's factual, and the formatting is perfect. Huge points for that. Stick around!) Julie JSFarman (talk) 06:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, JS! This is all very helpful info as I figure out how to navigate page creation, and I really appreciate the detailed response in regards to how to move forward with this article. For the time being, I would like to make one more appeal if that's alright. I think there would be considerable value in publishing this page at present rather than waiting for further coverage, due to confusion with a prominent wrestler of the same name. The name of the Steve Blackman whose page I hope to publish already appears on multiple pages across Wikipedia, including The Umbrella Academy, Legion, Private Practice, and The Associates, due to his significant contributions to those series. The inevitable result is that anyone perusing those pages who wishes to research more about him as a creator will see that his name isn't linked, search for it manually, and then find themselves routed to the page for the wrestler, leading to confusion and misinformation. I'll also link two additional articles ([[1]], [[2]]) in the hopes that at a certain point, sheer breadth of sources might suffice. Regardless of your determination, thank you again for your help! 791six (talk) 07:44, 27 March 2018 (UTC)791six[reply]

Hello again, 791six, and apologies on the delay. First! This isn't my determination - I'm just following Wikipedia's guidelines.

I agree that it would be helpful to have a page about this Steve Blackman. But in order to meet the inclusion criteria, the subject of every article must, um, meet the inclusion criteria. That means extensive coverage specifically about him via reliable independent sources. If there are two more articles in addition to the Globe and Mail, or if any of this applies, you'll be good to go. Thanks for the kind note (and for your effort). JSFarman (talk) 00:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me, JSFarman! Totally understood with regards to guidelines. I thought perhaps there might be an inclusion criterion for situations where subjects could be confused, but I fully respect that you are following objective standards. Per your directive, I've found two more articles that I think should meet those standards. The first is from the National Post, and it is very comparable to the Globe and Mail write-up. The second is from Variety, and unlike other articles I previously cited, this one is solely about Blackman's work on a project, rather than only mentioning him tangentially. Finally, I do think that Blackman satisfies the third criterion for Creative Professionals on the page you linked: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series)..." Because that's the very definition of a TV showrunner, and Blackman has been the showrunner on several major shows (which can be verified in some of the sources I originally linked). I hope this all satisfies the requirements. Thanks so much for your patience, Julie! Much appreciated. 791six (talk) 06:09, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

791six (talk), Emmy nomination = notability (as far as I interpret the criteria, anyway). I did an edit on the article, submitted it on your behalf, and accepted it. I added a reference (or maybe two), but Deadline isn't a great source (not exactly known for reliability) and imdb is definitely not independent. You should replace those cites (and maybe expand the article - it looks like there's more bio info available - right now it's kind of resume-ish.) Thanks for your contribution! Julie JSFarman (talk) 01:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful! Thank you again JSFarman, I appreciate the extra time you took with those revisions. I'll continue updating the page per your instructions. I'm looking forward to making further contributions on wikipedia thanks to your guidance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 791six (talk • contribs) 04:31, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. And thank you! JSFarman (talk) 17:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hyperplay_rpg

Hi Julie I've updated the draft 'Hyperplay RPG' page to show improved "Notability" since you declined it a year ago, and I've included loads more references too, as requested.

Hopefully this gets us over the line!

All the best

Kincl PS Thanks for saying it's "very cool"! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kincl4 (talk • contribs) 09:39, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Kincl! Glad to see that you're working on the article. It is very cool!

It looks like the referencing is more solid, but I don't know enough about the specifics to know what is niche and what isn't. I think another reviewer with expertise in this area would be better suited to review the article. Sorry! I wish I could be of more help. All the best to you too, and thank you. Julie JSFarman (talk) 00:58, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018 at Women in Red

		Welcome to Women in Red's April 2018 worldwide online editathons. Focus on: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/71\|April+Further with Art+Feminism]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/72\|Archaeology]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/73\|Military history (contest)]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/74\|Geofocus: Indian subcontinent]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00\|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: `@wikiwomeninred` --Rosiestep (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! Sorry for writing in English. The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

--WMF Surveys (talk) 01:32, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RCA

Hi Julie. How do you propose we deal with this? There are just far too many of (almost) the same photos. Perhaps a discussion on the article talk page? Rob van vee 10:43, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rob van vee! Sorry about the delay. I was avoiding WP because of this issue - it makes me disproportionately crazy when people revert changes without giving any thought to other editor's perspectives. In this case, it's particularly frustrating since it's an anonymous (ahem) editor. I suspect that he/she/they won't pay attention to consensus, but yes, maybe we should try the talk page? JSFarman (talk) 18:52, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this will most likely be a very frustrating exercise but I hate letting people like this go against community consensus with what appears to be a case of own. My first thought was to just wait and revert after the IP had lost interest but it would appear as if the they have some vested interest. I am not completely familiar with the protocal, is it a RFC? Rob van vee 07:06, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Julie, I've realised I just don't have the energy for this right now as I actually have too much going on. I'll wait a while and revert when I feel the IP has lost interest and if that doesn't work I'll rethink my plan of action. Rob van vee 15:01, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, good morning, Rob van, Sorry for not responding to your last message. I feel the same way. When I attempt to address this kind of idiocy, I end up frustrated and edgy. I think we will both have to keep an eye on the article and revert the edits, which are obviously made my a user who logged out to continue adding the redundant images. We can ask that the page be semi-protected, seek consensus, or at the most extreme, request a topic band for the user under their registered account name. (I don't think it qualifies as sock puppeting, but I could be wrong.)

This really does drive me nuts, but there are so many other issues that make me equally crazy. Look at the talk page for List of best-selling music artists for a truly bizarre experience, and next time you see the random information that the subject of an article "was raised in a Jewish family," look at the editor and the source used. These are just two examples! Then there are the messages I get from people who are pissed off by my reviews. See the message below (on Caracats) for a particularly passive/aggressive message..

OMG. I have to stop...even thinking about this puts me in a hideous mood. I'm glad to meet you though! We will sort out this RCA problem! Julie JSFarman (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah this place can make me crazy too but it's also very rewarding! Glad to have met you too Julie, it's nice to have people you can bounce things off every now and again. Let's keep an eye on that as you say. Later. Rob van vee 16:00, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rob van, OMG I cannot take it. Every time RCA comes up on my watchlist, mostly with good edits, I look at the page, and my head explodes. It's terrible. THERE ARE 11 IMAGES and nine of them are the same! How about over the weekend you and I tag team it? The "anonymous" editor can revert and revert but you and I can abide by 3R. You in? JSFarman (talk) 06:40, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Julie, you bet! I should just mention that I am attending a conference this weekend and my wiki work will be sporadic but I will check in every now and again to see where i can assist. Just ping me when you need me. What is the plan of action? Revert the changes made by the IP and we take turns potentially reverting their reverts? Rob van vee 06:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, Rob! (Is this collusion? Are we allowed to do it? Do we care?) I'll hit it on Saturday sometime and ping you. Have a good conference! Julie JSFarman (talk) 06:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC) (PS, don't know why your username keeps showing up shorter and shorter - not intentional!)[reply]

Cool! See you there. My name is Rob so that's perfect. Also, its not collusion if 2 editors enforce wp:mos imo. Rob van vee 06:59, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey J. On second thoughts perhaps collusion is not the wisest option. I'm not familiar enough with what the rules say regarding that. Maybe a photo album at the bottom of the article or a reduction of pics generally should be proposed on the talk page first? What do you think? Rob van vee 18:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Rob, yeah, you're probably right. I was so pissed off about this last night. I'm not familiar enough with the guidelines to know if it's ok or not to go with Plan A, but let's go with Plan B and create a gallery at the bottom of the page. First though let's revert the images. If they put the images back in, we can leave a message on their talk page (or the article talk page) offering the gallery solution....? JSFarman (talk) 19:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cool let's start there. Rob van vee 19:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Julie. The deed is done! Now we wait. Let me know what you think. Rob van vee 17:14, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rob! It looks great. I almost think that it won't be reverted. Almost. Thanks for doing the heavy lifting. JSFarman (talk) 17:19, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! I wasn't happy to tag it but it seems there is a fair amount of unsourced info or there are additional footnotes needed. At a later stage... I'll bet you $10 (donated to Wikipedia) they revert :) Rob van vee 17:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Peters Page

Hi JSFarman! Thank you so much for the guidance. I might still have screwed it up massively. Most of the works are massive articles in bigger books or journals. I tried to do them using the cite tool but then it duplicated them into the reference section. Not sure if that is right. I also removed a few things that I could only really find on bios that were from Peters herself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big thoughts (talk • contribs) 22:23, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! It looks good. I will go back to it later today or tomorrow and move it to the mainspace (if someone doesn't do it before I do). Thanks! JSFarman (talk) 18:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer Flag

Hi, JSFarman.
I've noticed that you are an AfC reviewer but don't yet have the New Page Reviewer flag. Would you please consider heading over to PERM and requesting it? (check the flag requirements HERE)
As part of a larger plan to increase cooperation between New Page Patrol and Articles for creation, we are trying to get as many of the active AfC reviewers as possible under the NPR user flag (per this discussion). Unlike the AfC request list, the NPR flag carries no obligation to review new articles, so I'm not asking you to help out at New Page Patrol if you don't want to, just to request the flag.
Of course, if it is something you would be interested in, you can have a look at the NPP tutorial. Please mention that you are an active AfC reviewer in your application.
Cheers and thanks for helping out at AfC, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:32, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

THE CARACAT article

Dear JSFarman, Your comment upon my article as follows: "Given that "the caracat can mostly be found on the Russian media (main[17] and local[18] TV-channels, magazines) because the contribution to the breed development is being carried out to date only in Russia by felinologist Irina Nazarova" it will be challenging for the Caracat to meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Reliable sources that cover the breed, specifically, are required. Also (while I love the way this is written, personally) the tone of the article should be more formal. If you're able to provide the references required, you'll need to give this an edit for tone." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Caracat

PLease, when declining be more clear. First of all You mention the challenge according to the sources provided in the article. Please would You be so kind as to explan me are You trying to tell me the Russian media is not a reliable source? Next I just must say that if You could be more attentive to Your Reviewer's work - You would look through the history of the article and could see my explanations for the previous Reviewer: the only person who has been making the contribution to this breed for many years - is Irina Nazarova whom I mentioned in the article. she is the professional caracat breeder for more than 5 years. So there are no any other sources to take info from. She herself, her website and her interviews in Russian media - are really reliable sources. Other sources I used for article are also meeting the Wiki rules - no dispute is possible upon that I think You will agree. I would also be thankful if You could be more clear upon Your "tone" remark. So please show me the way the tone could be more formal - take any two pieces for example and rewrite them accroding to the "formal tone" so that I could understand what You are talking about. And additionaly please provide the Wiki rules link about the "tones" should be used in article. I would like to look through the rules about the formal tone. thank You in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alena Ross (talk • contribs) 12:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alena Ross: I'm sorry if it was unclear. I was not questioning the Russian media -- I was reacting to your statement that "information on the Caracat can mostly be found on the Russian media (main and local TV-channels, magazines) because the contribution to the breed development is being carried out to date only in Russia by felinologist Irina Nazarov." I perhaps misinterpreted it as: "Because the Caracat is bred by only one person, the breed has not been covered extensively." I've now searched Caracat, and seen coverage, however, I'm not certain that the sources would be considered reliable. (Also, based on what I read, a "Controversy" section should be added to the draft. (See "The Dark Business of Hybrid Pets" from Gizmodo, here.)

Wikipedia articles are written in the formal language of an encyclopedia. Please see this guidance. Per your request:

"They say it's the mass media fixed fact that the story of Caracat creation allegedly began in 1998 (“Ein Bastard von Karakal Hauskatze im Moskauer Zoo” in Der Zoologische Garten Vol. 68, No. 4 (1998)...." would be more appropriate for Wikipedia if it read: "In 1998 Der Zoolisgische Garten reported that a female cat of an unidentified breed entered the cage of a male Caracal at the Moscow Zoo..."
"Today felinologist I. Nazarova made the greatest and undeniable contribution to the development of the Caracat breed, since the total number of adult nowadays has at least 50 (fifty) individuals of both sexes (male and female) and generations" is not a written in the neutral style that Wikipedia requires. Further, it is sourced to Irena Nazrova's commercial website. Also, "Nowadays" is not a formal term (and Wikipedia articles are written in the past tense). If your statement is based on the percentage of Caracats that Nazarova has bread, relative to the number of documented Caracats that have been born, you could something like: "There were a total of XX adult Caracats in 2018. X% had been bred by Nazarova." (You must have a citation via an independent, reliable source.)

I have never looked at discussions between the author of a submitted article and a reviewer that has taken place on the reviewer's talk page. I look at the comments on the draft itself, the draft's talk page, and the edit summary. If you would like a reviewer to be aware of a previous discussion, please consider moving it to the draft's talk page.

I hope I've provided some clarification. Thanks for your message and for your contribution! Julie JSFarman (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Wikimedia survey (corrected link)

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 26% of Wikimramedia contributors who Wikimedia programs like the Education program, editathons, or image contests. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed.Take the survey now.

If you are not fluent in English, I apologize for posting in English. If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks! —WMF Surveys (talk) 17:24, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

Hello JSFarman. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia; if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:19:02, 17 April 2018 review of submission by JennyK2610

JennyK2610 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Randi Pontoppidan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Thank you for your comment on my draft of the article about Randi Pontoppidan. I have a couple of questions that I hope you have time to answer, so that I can create better articles in the future (this is my first one actually). You wrote in your comment that "The independent references used provide only trivial coverage of Randi Pontoppidan. They're great to verify the assertions of the article, but they don't establish notability. (Her CV, label sites, and the websites of groups she is affiliated with are not independent.)", which I understand since a lot of the sources simply mentioned Pontoppidan and don't go into a lot of detail about her music/life/etc. So I'm assuming that I should have included more sources like source 10, which was a half-page article on Pontoppidan? Should I also have included specific quotes from articles that talk about her place on the Danish music scene (in regards to the notability aspect)?

In regards to sources I also want to ask about the type of sources, because I stumbled across some articles written about her that I didn't include because the author then at the end says "Pontoppidan is playing at XXX on XXX date". I assumed that this wouldn't be a good reference and therefore didn't include them. Should I have?

In general I'm a bit confused as to what renders an article "good", even though I've read the guidelines. Some articles I look at, such as this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalia_Faitelson doesn't seem to have any independent sources but it has still been approved. Do you know why? I'm sorry what I've written here is so long, but if you have the time it would be really helpful for me if you could answer my questions/point me in the right direction before I attempt to write another article/update this one!

Thank you so much!

P.S. Just to be clear, I'm not requesting a re-review of the article at this point in time, I just wanted to ask a couple of questions.

JennyK2610 (talk) 12:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JennyK2610, If you've found independent sources that provide significant coverage, definitely include them. It's fine if the articles end with a notice about a performance as long as it's not from a publication related to Randi (or the venue where she's performing) and there's in-depth editorial content. Including quotes in the first paragraph could be helpful, particularly if they illustrate her notability. You just need to be careful not to overdo it - the article needs to have a neutral point of view. (I wrote the Sofia Rei and Ryan Keberle articles -- I used a lot of quotes. Jazz artists are difficult since there aren't a lot of publications that cover the genre.)

There are many articles on Wikipedia that shouldn't have been published. Some were written a long time ago, and some have just never been noticed. The article that you referenced wasn't accepted -- it was published directly by the editor who wrote it. (I will tag it for notability after I've had a chance to search on my own.) You don't have to put articles through the review process; if you're a confirmed user - you can just move it from the draft space to the main space. Working with AfC is helpful for newer editors, but it's not mandatory. (The article will still be reviewed, but it's through a different mechanism.)

I hope that I've answered your questions, and no worries about my time. I'm happy to help. I hope you update the article and stick around to contribute others. Thanks, JSFarman (talk) 04:20, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:13:52, 18 April 2018 review of submission by Hayleycaldervibe2017

Hayleycaldervibe2017 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Mike Scribz Riley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm requesting a re review as I feel my clients page should be allowed to be published as only facts are stated on this page - my client is a writer/producer signed to one of the biggest publishing companies in the world (Sony ATV) he currently has a song that he co produced on one of the biggest albums in the world right now (Cardi b) - the album is RIAA gold certified and he is listed as a producer. Pls can you give us a bit more advise on what you consider to be a reliable source? Thanks Hayleycaldervibe2017 (talk) 17:13, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hayleycaldervibe2017,

First: if he is your client, you have a conflict of interest. Please see WP:COI.

To answer your questions, a valid source needs to be independent of the subject of the article, provide extensive overage, and meet editorial standards, such as content written by professional journalists, and a practice of fact-checking. Social media like Twitter and Facebook are not acceptable, since the content is generally user-contributed and/or not independent. Output is a blog published by a software company, and Hamada Mania would not be considered reliable -- it's a wordpress site published by a music fan. Discogs and allmusic are great to verify the assertions of the article, but discographies on their own don't establish notability. (I haven't seen Spotify used previously, but it would fall into the same category as iTunes, which isn't valid.) Sony/ATV is prestigious, but being signed to the company does not on its own mean the subject meets the inclusion criteria. For more information on sources, see WP:SOURCE. For more specifics on notability, see WP:NMUSIC - he may meet inclusion criteria that I'm not aware of. If he was nominated for a Grammy, notability is automatic. He needs to be specifically nominated, though, and I can't find a valid citation. Co-writing the Cardi B song may also satisfy the notability requirement in the opinion of another reviewer.

I hope this is of some help. Thanks, JSFarman (talk) 20:51, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Control Music

Hey! I'm the creator of the Quality Control wikipedia page. I'm just wondering, what does it mean to have my page reviewed? Thanks! Bandittx (talk) 21:45, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bandittx! A user group of reviewers checks new pages to make sure they comply with Wikipedia's guidelines. When I reviewed your page I checked to make sure that the subject was notable and that the content neutral, balanced, and referenced. If it wasn't, I would have edited it, tagged it, speedied it, or nominated it for deletion. Once an article passes through review, t's indexed by search engines. You can find all the info at New Page Patrol.

Thanks for caring enough to ask, and thanks for writing the article! JSFarman (talk) 22:55, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you are not a native speaker of English, I apologize for writing in English. If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thank you!! --WMF Surveys (talk) 05:54, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I took it!!! JSFarman (talk) 06:36, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mina Sundwall

Hello! You seem to be active on the Sundwall page. I want to ask about moving forward. The subject is undoubtedly notable enough for posting, her co-stars have less impressive credentials than her and have pages, and she is garnering more and more media coverage as the days pass. I am contacting you because I don't want to simply resubmit this without ensuring that this page can sufficiently meet Wikipedia standards. I know this draft deserves to be published, and I want a seasoned Wikipedian like yourself's help in making it possible. Thanks a lot! (Page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mina_Sundwall) WikiSniki (talk) 23:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WikiSniki (talk). I left my comments on the draft when I declined it on April 8. She hasn't come closer to meeting the inclusion criteria since then. I'll be happy to publish the draft when and if she does. Thanks, JSFarman (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response, JSFarman (talk). I totally get that, which is why I'm asking for your help in seeing what I cn do to make it work. I have a lot of belief in it, but I definitely agree with you that it isn't ready. I just want to know the steps I can make to make it suitable. (Edit*: Added links to two sources praising her acting. At least one of them looks relatively reputable. Geek.com and Romper.com) Thanks, WikiSniki (talk) 22:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, WikiSniki, I just did another search and didn't come up with additional sources, and for me, the only way that she'll meet the inclusion criteria, is, um, to meet it. As I said on my original review, it's early. She's 16. When the series airs I'm sure she'll get more press.

You do know that you can publish an article directly, correct? It doesn't need to go through AfC. You can just move it from the draft space to the article space using the "move" option in the "more" menu. (I don't think it will survive if it's nominated for deletion, but you never know.) Thanks, JSFarman (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

Hi, Julie!

I just wanted to stop by and say thank you for helping review and contribute to ResistBot! Since I'm still a student, all your feedback is greatly appreciated.

Best, Sweet inaara (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sweet inaara! It's a great article - you've done a fantastic job with it. (I'm stoked that Wikipedia has an article on ResistBot, too.)) Thanks for your message! JSFarman (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arts Datathon!

LA County Civic Arts Datathon!

Please join us for the LA County Arts Commission Civic Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Beginners are welcome! We'll provide training for new editors.
(See the meetup page for more details.) Friday, April 27, 2018, 9:00-5:00
Bob Hope Patriotic Hall, 1816 S. Figueroa St., Los Angeles, CA 90015. We hope to see you there! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply] Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Jerry Lorenzo

No problem... would should there be an article regarding his brand, fear of god, or is it too young?

Hi StraightOuttaBoston. I was really just talking about the Jerry Lorenzo article. You could write about his early life, what inspired him to start the line, how quickly it developed, his faith - it's such a good story, seems like the kind of article that would be rewarding to write. (They're the kind of articles I love to write. I may be projecting!) JSFarman (talk) 05:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson Broms

Hi, Julie. Thanks for your guidance on the article about] Nelson Broms (and for taking your finger off the "delete" button!). I'm working on additional citations. Rathfulman (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HiJulie, I added new citations to] Nelson Broms and deleted one statement I couldn't verify. Please take a look and, if you think the article now meets the guidelines, consider unflagging. Thanks. Rathfulman (talk) 22:55, 3 May 2

Hi Rathfulman (talk): In my opinion, based on the references used, he doesn't meet the inclusion criteria. He isn't mentioned in the The New York Times ,CNN, or Washington Post references, and while the second NY Times ref does mention him, it's one sentence in a column on executive changes. Bloomberg is a run-of-the-mill listing; Funding Univese is hardly a reliable source; ASU is not independent, SEC is a press release; US News and World Report is about ASU; Distinctive Schools, LEEP, and EdisonLearning are not indpendent. That leaves the Science Network and CSPAN, and CSPAN is coverage of a "forum to discuss the idea of an alliance between Jewish Americans and political conservatives." JSFarman (talk) 04:40, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the second look and the evaluation, Julie. I'll keep looking for independent citations to add. I continue to believe Broms is notable enough, and I don't understand why independent mentions of him proved so difficult to find. Rathfulman (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Julie, I found and included more independent citations, and deleted some of my assertions I found I couldn't verify. I would appreciate it if you would take a look when you have time, and let me know what you think. Best, Rathfulman (talk) 05:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Follow-up to the above) Julie, I need some guidance, please. Some of the citations I found for the Nelson Broms article are from microfiche archives and not available online. I posted PDFs of them, with attribution, to Wikisource, and linked to those. I thought that was one of the purposes of WS but an editor there said no; that they should be on WM Commons, and they might not comply with copyright guidelines. My question for you and your experience is, how can I use a citation that doesn't exist online, for which I have a PDF that can be found in the source's archives? Thank you again for the hand-holding. Rathfulman (talk) 15:51, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rathfulman (talk), and thanks for adding the citations.

References don't need to be accessible online. Just use the usual format for referencing, and insert the name of the publication, the date of publication, the title of the article, and the article's author, as well as any other info (such as the page number) that might help a reader to locate the reference. I haven't had a chance to look at the article yet - hoping to get to it this evening. Thanks! Julie JSFarman (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Julie. Very helpful. Don't bother looking tonight. I won't have the citations plugged in appropriately till tomorrow, and then you can see the (hopefully) finished product. Rathfulman (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018 at Women in Red

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2018 worldwide online editathons. File:Soraya Aghaee4.jpg New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/75\|"Women of the Sea"]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/76\|"Villains"]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/77\|"Women in Sports"]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/78\|"Central Eastern European women"]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00\|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Wiki Loves Food

Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 08:05, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:47:26, 8 May 2018 review of submission by Msabaker

Msabaker (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Jeanne Ruddy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I included many more citations, including print and digital newspapers. I need to change the photograph but am not sure how to proceed at erasing this photograph and uploading one that has all the merits for creative common use. Msabaker (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Event coordinator

Hi, the English Wikipedia recently created a new user permission for editors involved in off-wiki outreach work, event coordinator. This new permission allows users to mark accounts for confirmed for up to 10 days, and also allows them to create accounts for events without rate limits without some of the features of the account creator right that aren't used at edit-a-thons and other events. I have added the event coordinator permission to your account and removed the account creator permission, as you appear to have been using it mainly for outreach work.

This should have no noticeable impact on your ability to create accounts, and will give you the extra ability to temporarily confirm accounts if you need to. For more in formation, you can see the information page on the right, or you can ask me if you have any questions. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. There's an edit-a-thon here in LA on Friday, and this will be incredibly helpful. Thank you, TonyBallioni! JSFarman (talk) 21:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello JSFarman, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red June Editathons

		Welcome to Women in Red's June 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/79\|WiR Loves Pride]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/80\|Singers and Songwriters]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/81\|Women in GLAM]] New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/82\|Geofocus: Russia/USSR]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00\|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Help?

Hi! You helped me a while back when my article for Manijeh Razeghi was flagged for deletion. Thank you. I appreciated that! :) Recently I had a different article that I received the notice for deletion after midnight and then the article was gone before I sat down to fix it at 6 am. I am cheesed that I wasn't given the opportunity to fix it before they deleted, but they did give me the article back in draft form. I have edited that and submitted it for review, but the notice says it will take two to three weeks to be reviewed. Is there any way you could review it for me? Best, SJT SJTatsu (talk) 06:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SJTatsu. I was stoked when I came across the Manijeh Razeghi article. I didn't know about her, and I'm so glad that she is in WP.

I just checked out the draft for Motomatic, and it looks like you've done a significant edit for tone. I would still edit it a bit, though, and I think more references may be needed to establish notability. I'll review it as soon as I get some time! Thanks for the message and for contributing. Julie JSFarman (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'll continue to work on it.

Hi SJTatsu, I just reviewed the article. I intended to just leave comments, but it's not acceptable, and it doesn't make sense to leave it in the review queue. I left a comment on the decline notice, but you haven't established notability, and it reads like promotion. You need to write just the facts, specifically about the company; it can't be a cheer for the company's mission, notable though it may be. If you need help, let me know, but I did a search, and I don't think it's possible to meet notability at this time. JSFarman (talk) 19:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for looking at it. I am going to continue to work on it inbetween other pages that I want to do. I did find another article about it that might address the notability issue, but I do now understand that the article needs reconstruction, which I will be working on for the next few days. I do appreciate that you took the time to read it closely and google search. Sorry, it took me a while get back to you. Thanks again :) SJTatsu (talk) 22:09, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Building Helene Lerner's Wikipedia Page

Hello! I am an intern for Helene Lerner, working on building her Wikipedia page. I'm trying to upload a professional headshot of her that's she's given me permission to use, but the site won't allow it. Is there a way to get this approved? Or to have her reach out to you directly to give Wikipedia permission to include the photograph of her? Please let me know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbamber (talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cbamber. I just moved the article back to the draft space so that you can work on it there. (I will also leave this message on your talk page). There are many issues that you need to address:

The first is regarding notability - see WP:NPEOPLE. She would automatically be notable if she had won Emmy Awards, but regional Emmys don't go toward notability. (I edited the article last night, and noted that the Emmys were regional; I also added citations. You need to find independent references that provide extensive coverage specifically about Helene Lerner in reliable sources. The sources you've used aren't independent.
Verifiablility: See: WP:VERIFY. You need to be able to verify the assertions of the article, such as the Gracie Awards. I can't find any confirmation via and independent, reliable source.
Neutral point of view: The article is very promotional. See WP:NPOV. Get rid of the adjectives and the superlatives! A Wikipedia article should be just-the-facts. Ask yourself if a statement is significant, or if it serves only to promote the subject.
Conflict of Interest: You have a conflict of interest, and you should note that you're an intern for Helene Lerner on your user page, and on the draft. Because of your conflict, submit it through AfC rather than publishing it yourself. See WP:COI.

It looks like you participated in a Wikipedia course at Emory. Notability, verifiability, and neutrality are mandatory; do you have materials you can review? I'm happy to help if you're in need of guidance. Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello JSFarman, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018 at Women in Red

Hello again from Women in Red!

July 2018 worldwide online editathons:
New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/83|Sub-Saharan Africa]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/84|Film + stage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/85|20th-century]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/86|Women Rock]]
Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|Notable women, broadly-construed!]]

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello JSFarman, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018 at Women in Red

September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons!

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/91|Women currently in academics]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/92|Women + Law]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/93|Geofocus: Hispanic countries]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Check it out: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Monthly achievement initiative: September 2018|Monthly achievement initiative]]

All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards.
It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September.
Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

7th Annual Los Angeles Wiknic

It's the 7th Annual Los Angeles Wiknic!

Sunday, September 30, 11:00-4:00 PM
Pan Pacific Park, 7600 Beverly Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90036
Hang out. Consume crowd-sourced BBQ! Bask in the glory of late September in Los Angeles (and the glory
of our new user group, Wikimedians of Los Angeles).
RSVP (and volunteer) here.
We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) 02:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Join our Facebook group, or follow us on Twitter!

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello JSFarman, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js^(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget.
In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions.
MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues.
User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js^(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page)
User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js^(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50).
User:Primefac/revdel.js^(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you.
User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js^(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link.
User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion.
User:Evad37/rater.js^(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC) [reply]

October 2018 at Women in Red

		Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October! New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/94\|Clubs]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/95\|Science fiction + fantasy]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96\|STEM]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/97\|The Mediterranean]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018\|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Nile Rodgers

Hi there, would you please take a look at Nile Rodgers? I fixed some of the issues, but your recent edit added a ton of ref errors and duplicate text in the 1980s section. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jessicapierce and thank you! I didn't clear the cache when I previewed the article and didn't see all the ref errors - I was horrified when I looked at it on my cell. I think I got most of them but there's still work to be done. I'm trying to rewrite and ref another 30 years. Thank you, thank you....I hate when that happens. Julie JSFarman (talk) 03:39, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I've done worse! Let me know if you'd like a fresh set of eyes on it at any point. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 03:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Get ready for November with Women in Red!

Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/98|Religion]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/99|Deceased politicians]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|Asia]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

WikiProject AfroCine launches

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello JSFarman, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:52:59, 31 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Artworkintl

Artworkintl (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Mark Yale Harris (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I understand your policy that every factual assertion needs to be verifiable, but I am a little unclear on what Wikipedia editors consider a "factual assertion." I see on entries for other people that their place of birth, education and the like are not substantiated. I could use a little guidance on what parts of this entry or what types of assertions require corroboration. Thank you for your time.

Artworkintl (talk) 17:52, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Artworkintl.

You will find a lot of articles on WP that don't conform to the guidelines or policies. Sometimes it's because they were created ages ago, and sometimes it's just because no one has noticed. Either way, the existence of one poorly-sourced article doesn't justify the existence of another. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. That said, yes, the assertions of the article need to be verifiable. For example: "Beginning his professional life in the business sector, in 1972 Harris co-founded and was Executive Vice President of Red Roof Inns" should be supported, and can be:

<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://fineartconnoisseur.com/2018/09/contemporary-sculptures-risky-change-spotlight-mark-yale-harris/|title=A Risky Change: Spotlight on Mark Yale Harris - Fine Art Connoisseur|date=2018-09-21|work=Fine Art Connoisseur|access-date=2018-10-31|language=en-US}}</ref>

And so on. There's a lot of content in the article that needs to be verified, from the lead paragraph through the section about his recognition. See WP:VERIFY, and note that Wikipedia content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. (The refs should be placed next to the assertions they support; you have them in the "further reading" section.)

I declined the article based on notability, though -- you need more references via independent, reliable sources in order to meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. I suspect they exist, but you may have to dig back a while. See WP:NPEOPLE. There are five references used for the current draft, and at least four of them aren't valid. Wikipedia (not reliable!), his own website and two refs related to exhibits (not independent). I'm not familiar with ArtSi.

Finally, it appears that you may have a conflict of interest. If so, please read WP:COI.

I hope that helps. He has a great story! Let me know if you need additional guidance.JSFarman (talk) 23:11, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello JSFarman,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, JSFarman. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018 at Women in Red

The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone.

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/101|Photography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/102|Laureates]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/103|Countries beginning with 'I']]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

BBC 100 Women 2018

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)
--Rosiestep (talk) 13:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Request for help/review

Hi there. I'm reaching out to WikiProject Awards and individual editors for help on the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize article. I believe the content is well beyond "stub" rating, but I may be too close to the article as few besides myself have been editing the content. Any advice, tips or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Litjade (talk) 11:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Litjade (talk) - I just looked at the (fantastic) article and it is definitely not a stub - ! Went to change the classification and was pleased to discover that someone had already upgraded the article to a B. Sheesh. (You are *not* too close to the article - it is nowhere near a stub - I suspect the "stub" classification was a mistake.)JSFarman (talk) 20:44, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thank you for having a look at the article and sharing your observations here. —Litjade (talk) 22:30, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello JSFarman,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

January 2019 at Women in Red

January 2019, Volume 5, Issue 1, Numbers 104-108

Happy New Year from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons.

January events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/104|Women of War and Peace]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/105|Play!]]

January geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/106|Caucasus]]

New, year-long initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]]

Continuing global initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]]

Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]]

To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list
Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list
Image attribution: Nevit Dilmen (CC BY-SA 3.0)
--Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello JSFarman, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
Chris Troutman (talk) 17:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thank you Chris! Hope to see more of you in 2019. Maybe even in person. Happy Holidays! Julie

Help reviewing proposed edits?

Hi!

I see you are a member of the Wikipedia project for journalism. I was a journalist for 25 years so it's a topic that interests me. Anyway, I have a conflict of interest with respect to the article about the journalist Jonathan Swan as a paid consultant to his current publisher, Axios. I think the article can be massively improved and I've made a series of proposed changes here: Talk:Jonathan_Swan#Request_Edits. If you could take a look, it would be much appreciated. I don't make edits directly on the article because of the WP: COI policy. But I am an experienced Wikipedia editor. Thanks! Ed BC1278 (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. I made most of your suggested changes.

It took much longer to do this than I would have anticipated. Last time I answer a formal edit request. :) JSFarman (talk) 22:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Igor Naming Agency references

In this edit, with edit summary "Fixed ref errors", the major aspects of the changes appear to be:

Conversion of a Seattle Times link from {{cite news}} to {{cite web}} even though it is a newspaper
Removal of a Los Angeles Times ref
Removal of a Fast Company ref
Conversion of Patriot Ledger and USA Today refs from {{cite news}} to untemplatted text with removal of some cite details

I'm undoing this edit as there is so much seeming damage. If you could clarify what error(s) you were trying to fix, perhaps I could help figure out a way to fix it without poor side-effects. DMacks (talk) 05:49, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DMacks and thank you. I was trying to fix the references that were marked in red with |access-date= requires |url= (help). For the Seattle Times, I was using the cite tool in wikitext editor. No idea why cite news became cite web, but I think you've found a new bug. (New to me, at least.) For the offline references I was trying to reformat so that the warning was removed but the info was preserved (USA Today and Patriot Ledger). I didn't realize that I'd deleted LA Times and Fast Company, don't know how I managed that.

I run into this error (or warning, or whatever) all the time - is there an automated fix? Or do I go back to using markup and abandon wikitext editor all together? Thank you! JSFarman (talk) 06:16, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I see those error notes now. In some cases, the "right" (or at least "technically correct and easy":) solution is to remove the |access-date= for refs that are published in a static hard copy. As the cite docs say, "Access dates are not required for links to published research papers, published books, or news articles with publication dates.". It's only really needed for web sources and other non-static content where the content could be different on different days. That's pretty unusual compared to how I was taught bibliographic style in school! One of the refs was easy to fix because you found the URL, so I just re-added it.

I never use automated editing tools (except Twinkle). I'm always frustrated when I come across corner cases and "simple changes" that wind up making a giant and confusing diff in the edit-history. But then again I'm used to writing all sorts of code, so writing raw wikicode is about as fast as using point-and-click when I want really tight control over what I do. DMacks (talk) 03:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you DMacks. For your response and for fixing the Igor article.

I am so all about "technically correct and easy." I'm *not* used to writing code, and I make mistakes that I can't figure out how to correct. Um, obviously.

Thank you again. JSFarman (talk) 05:02, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019 at Women in Red

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111

Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons.

February events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/109|Social Workers]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/110|Black Women]]

February geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/111|Ancient World]]

Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]]

Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]]

Join the conversations on our talkpage:

Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]]
--Rosiestep (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Restoring deletions

To say that someone's writing is controversial (and I believe you re correct in saying that Arnold's has been) while offering only a quasi-Festschrift of quotes seems to indicate that neutrality would lie in indicating where the disagreements lie.

Sorry that the mention of Kurt Cobain turns your stomach, but mention of Arnold's ongoing obsession with Nirvana is certainly relevant. For what it's worth, her reference to "Smells Like Teen Spirit" in her paper on rock festivals didn't come close too turning my stomach but did give me a slight headache. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LimaMonk (talk • contribs) 23:25, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LimaMonk. It's wasn't the mention of Kurt Cobain that turned my stomach, it was the quote's trivialization of his suicide. Moving the NY Times quote makes perfect sense to keep the article balanced. Thanks for doing that. PS - Nice use of "Festschrift." JSFarman (talk) 00:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to attend a Southern California Regional mini Unconference

Who: All Wikipedians & Wikimedians

What: Southern California Regional mini Unconference.

When: Sunday 3 March 2019, 2:00PM PST / 1400 until 4:10PM PST / 1610

Where: Philippe's at Chinatown, Los Angeles

Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN )

Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)

Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending, due to the limited size of the cafe.

(Delivered: 00:38, 10 February 2019 (UTC) You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list & the Los Angeles mass mailing list.)

Hello

I noticed that you made a minor edit to your user page and that motivated me to take a closer look. I read a bunch of articles and lots of your blog posts. You are a really good writer and a very interesting person. It is very good to know you a bit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the message notice and my first thought was that it was going to be someone complaining about an article I declined. I'm so glad that it is instead a lovely message from you. Thank you for the kind words (and all of the guidance) and very good to know you too! JSFarman (talk) 06:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Richard Cottle

Please, pray tell, how can Draft:Richard Cottle's brother and his Alan Parsons Project bandmates all have articles and NOT him, with a very lengthy list of credits to his name?!?!? That credit list in itself, with notable artists galore, establishes notability!!!!! 184.166.187.64 (talk) 16:56, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote in declining the submission, it is difficult to establish notability for session musicians. I am aware of his accomplishments and credits, but based on my interpretation of the notability criteria for musicians, neither Richard or Laurence Cottle (as his article now reads) meet the inclusion criteria. Please feel free to edit and resubmit as another reviewer might feel differently. JSFarman (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

re written with new, independent references Jamie Robson (actor)

I'm reaching out to you as the last person who reviewed for submission my Jamie Robson (actor) page. I have rewritten it with new, independent references. If you have some time I would be grateful if you could have a look before I officially submit it? Pcmdevries (talk) 10:54, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pcmdevries, I wish I could tell you differently -- his work looks amazing -- but the references used don't establish notability. You need to have multiple references (in my opinion, three is the minimum) from independent reliable sources that provide extensive coverage specifically on James Robson. I'm sorry! I just did a search and didn't turn anything up. JSFarman (talk) 04:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you JSFarman, I really appreciate that you took the time to look! It may just be a typo but his name is Jamie Robson (not James Robson). He has the same name as a Scottish footballer so to find articles about him you need to search for "Jamie Robson Actor" otherwise the results are confused with the Footballer. He is mentioned in this article in The Herald https://www.heraldscotland.com/arts_ents/17336354.ones-to-watch-2019-the-scots-set-to-make-their-mark-over-the-coming-year/ but I wasn't sure about using it as the article is about lots of different people. The Herald is the main national newspaper in Scotland. Would it help if this was included? Pcmdevries (talk) 10:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pcmdevries (talk), I am so sorry for the long delay. I've been out of town (and mainly off WP) for a bit. The Herald definitely helps, but you need to have several sources that provide more extensive coverage. I'll keep him on my google watchlist, and you should continue to add to the draft - let me know if you feel like you have the sources required and I'll re-review the article. Apologies again for my slow response! JSFarman (talk) 04:12, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JSFarman! Totally understandable! I really appreciate that you came back to me. I added the Herald Article and A Product Magazine interview and submitted the draft for submission. I've just added another Take One Cinema Interview reference as well. Any further pointers would be welcome! Pcmdevries (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. You're getting closer but it is still light on refs. Take One Cinema isn't a reliable source - it's written by volunteers (who are probably reliable but fall outside WP's definition of reliability). Thanks for your perseverance! JSFarman (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day LA, February 24, 2019

Wikipedia Day LA 2019
Consider the Source

Please join the LA User Group, Wikimedians of Los Angeles, for an afternoon of panels, presentations and conversations on the subject of sources, and cake (locally sourced), in celebration of Wikipedia's 18th birthday.

Sunday, February 24, 1:00 PM-5:00 PM

The Ace Hotel (DTLA)

929 S Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90015

For more details or to sign up, see Wikipedia Day LA, or RSVP via Eventbrite.

Everyone is welcome! We hope to see you there. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

March 2019 at Women in Red

March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113

Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:
March: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/112|Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen]]
Geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/113|Francophone Women]]
Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman]]

Other ways you can participate:
Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]]
Join the conversations on our [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red|talkpage]]
Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred
Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]]
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Art + Feminism 2019

Art+Feminism 2019 Los Angeles Events!

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You are invited to join Art+Feminism's annual worldwide Wikipedia edit-a-thon and help close Wikipedia's gender gap at one of these Los Angeles–area museums this March! RSVP/Details here.

Sunday, March 3: The Institute of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles (DTLA), Noon–5p. Focus: Women+Comedy.

Saturday, March 9: Vincent Price Art Museum at East Los Angeles College (Monterey Park), Noon–4p. Focus: Latinx+Non-Binary Artists.

Sunday, March 10: Hammer Museum (Westwood), Noon–5p. Focus: Women+Film+Media

Sunday, March 17: LACMA (Miracle Mile), Noon–5p. Focus: Women+Design+Craft

Sunday, March 31: California African American Museum (Exposition Park/USC), 1–4p. Focus: Women of CAAM.

These Los Angeles events are co-hosted by online magazine East of Borneo and include step-by-step Wikipedia instruction for beginners. Bring your laptop or tablet computer and any reference materials you'd like to work from or share. People of all gender expressions and identities are encouraged to attend.

I hope to see you there! StaceyEOB (talk) - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for help on David M Posner page

Thank you for helping me to clean up David M Posner’s page. I am just starting to edit and am learning how to write for Wikipedia. Iamjessklein (talk) 23:02, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You did a great job on the article, Iamjessklein. My edits were minor. Thanks for writing the article! David Posner was remarkable. In so many ways. JSFarman (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested in mentoring me to make this article better, JSFarman? I'm not really sure where to go from here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamjessklein (talk • contribs) 17:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello JSFarman,

News

The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
{{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April editathons at Women in Red

April 2019

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117

Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:

New topics: Gender studies / United Nations / Dance
Geofocus: Portuguese-speakers
Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman

Other ways you can participate:

Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe
Join the conversations on our talkpage
Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred

Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

Draft: Scott Ellsworth

JSFarman,

I did a great deal of editing/clean up and redirecting of references to certain parts of Draft: Scott Ellsworth. I hope this clears up what you were referring to. I do have a bio pic in my possession sent to me directly from Ellsworth himself so the page can be more complete. Thanks for your help and I hope the page can go up now.

Shelyric (talk) 02:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shelyric. My response as a Wikipedia editor: Ellsworth's resume and interviews done by phone and email (presumably by you) are not valid sources, and you've used them as a source 22 times! Please read WP:Verifiability for guidance. As a side note, I think you are a fan (of radio and/or Ellsworth) but if you have any official or personal relationship with him you should read WP:COI.

My response as a real-life editor - the article is way too long. You should revisit and cut what is not essential to the narrative! (Removing anything that is not verifiable might be sufficient.) Thanks! JSFarman (talk) 16:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JSFarman,

Through the archived interviews and other links I got know Ellsworth's work. I got interested in doing the article because of his impact on interviewing jazz artists and entertainers on a nationally known level, he is a rare breed. As a kid growing up in the Los Angeles area he was well know. I contacted Ellworth so to fill in holes of his timeline, there would be no other way to do that. There is no biography written on Ellsworth. I can certainly cut more out but at some point there are certain facts about his life that only he could verify, especially the earlier years. I can cut down those references to only a few so to at least back up some of the earlier year stuff. Shelyric

Hello JSFarman,

re:Draft:Scott Ellsworth

I have done another round of serious edits for this page in question. The references from the 'interview' have been cut way down from 22 to only 7 (which would be necessary for that very personal information). It is far more dependent on more reliable sources you have pointed to as they can reinforce Ellsworth's notability. Un-needed information for the page has again been deleted.

Shelyric (talk) 05:36, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Shelyric. Based on the content of the article, I thought you were a student of radio and/or jazz - I didn't really think you had a conflict of interest. Just covering the bases.

Thanks for the edits. But still -- Wikipedia requires verifiability, and to be properly verifiable, the references need to be via an independent, reliable source. (It can sometimes be ok to use primary sources for personal information about the subject of the article, but an unpublished interview would be very hard to justify.)

Do you have access to any archives or databases? A library? I added a 2004 ref from the Riverside Press Enterprise - it provides a lot of info on Ellsworth - I will be glad to post the content on your talk page if you don't have access to it. I also condensed the lead. You can (of course) revert my edit (but save the source)! You can also resubmit the article - another reviewer might not be as concerned with sources as I am. Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 18:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shelyric. JFarman diplomatically says "an unpublished interview would be very hard to justify." I will be a bit more direct. Use of an unpublished interview is contrary to two of our three core content polices, specifically, No original research and Verifiability. Since you conducted the interview, it is original research on your part. Since it is unpublished, it is not verifiable. Any and all content based on "interviews with Scott Ellsworth by phone and email, January 2019" must be removed from the draft if you want this draft to be approved. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, Shelyric, if you write an article based in part on your interview, and get that published in some reliable source like a newspaper or a magazine, then that published article could be used as a source on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Again JSFarman.

I appreciate you pointing me in that direction and whatever research materials that can be supplied. No, there are only certain things I have been able to get a hold in terms of research materials (through Highbeam, etc.?). I never saw any lengthy article or interviews from the Riverside Press Enterprise or other Inland Empire (Southern California based) media resources who might have done an expose on Ellsworth. Anything would help so I can complete this research and finish the article properly (thanks!!!). To my knowledge, the only interview outside of my own was done for the jazz/festival symposium is with the Pasadena archives; Ellsworth does not get enough into his past to verify some things from earlier in his career in Colorado/Utah...it was not until he goes to KFI in Los Anglels that he gains national notoriety (for the most part). While Ellsworth was helpful with the information he supplied, he is in his 90's and I don't think he remembers every interview and article. YES...please post any content you have on my talk page I would really appreciate it!!!

Thanks Shelyric

I totally get it, Shelyric - there are people (particularly) women that I would like to write about but can't because the sources don't exist. I think you will have to dig way back into the past to find the coverage you need. I have found that going to the library is very helpful; I did an article on Harry Brand and most of the sources came from physical copies of newspapers and magazines from the 40s that the librarians at the Margaret Herrick Library found for me. I found the Riverside Press-Enterprise article through NewsBank. I've left the text on your user page. I'll keep looking. JSFarman (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait...I can't copy the article on to your user page as it is copyrighted material. If you email me (through the "email this user" link to the left) I will send it to you via email.

Hello again JSFarman,

I am sorry and maybe I am just not getting this...I am not seeing an 'email this user' tab to the left. Is this on your talk page? On the master Wikipedia page? Sorry for my ignorance.

Thanks Shelyric

No worries Shelyric. It can be confusing. Go to left hand nav of my user page and you'll see the prompt. Also - I just found an article ("The A to Z on Los Angeles Radio" from the Orange County Register from May 1995. It references a book of the same name (the A to Z of Los Angeles Radio) - the journalist wrote: "Going through the book is like browsing through an old high school yearbook. You recall the name of a friend on the radio and -- sure enough --_ that person's in the book: Jan-Marie, Scott Ellsworth, Jim Bain, Dick Haynes, Neil Ross, Amy Hiatt, Kathy Gori _ the list goes on and on." The book doesn't appear to be indexed on Google.

PS - He had a dog named Woofus! (Big Bear Grizzly (Big Bear Lake, CA) - July 23, 2003). JSFarman (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JSFarman, I am not sure if my browser is not allowing this (still do not see it) but I went ahead and gave you my email on your page. PLEASE erase this after you have emailed me...we will talk there. Shelyric

Hello JSFarman,

Thank you for the resources you supplied! Please look at the note sent (to email), I hope to have whittled the Ellsworth page down to exactly what is needed and is completely justified and can be moved on.

Appreciated, Shelyric

Hi again, Shelyric, It's so much better referenced. I'm going to remove the uncited info and accept the article -- more can be added when you find the references. (I'll keep looking too.) Thank you for your perseverance (and for writing the article)! Julie JSFarman (talk) 20:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JSFarman,

I really do appreciate the help and the fact you took extra time on this. Thank for helping to move the article forward as Ellsworth is an unsung hero who did literally hundreds of interviews of very important artists and his style was unique.

Again, THANKS!!! Shelyric (talk) 04:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:04:39, 3 April 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Lawsongeorge

Lawsongeorge (talk · contribs)
- Draft:The Coding Institute (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Request Assistent for page; Draft:The_Coding_Institute Hi JSFarman, I have got the message that, the page for Draft:The_Coding_Institute has been rejected. Actually we don't have enough coverage by third party publications. I just want to ask, if any genuine company and page has not enough coverage, what is your suggestion to get those approved from Wiki editors. Lawsongeorge (talk) 12:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lawsongeorge! Best advice: wait until you have third party references. :) JSFarman (talk) 16:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Gerda Arendt. Thank you times five. That you noticed my work made such a huge difference for me on Wikipedia early on -- it made me feel connected to the community, and it is one of the reasons I stuck around. JSFarman (talk) 21:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May you join this month's editathons from WiR!

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121

Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:

New topics: "May" women / Mayors / Environentalists
Geofocus: CEE countries
Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman

Other ways you can participate:

Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe
Join the conversations on our talkpage
Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred

Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Removing my animations

Hi there Mr/Ms Farman,

I see you went through and deleted a few of my animations...mainly footwear on various pages. You said they are promotional. Please be assured they are not. I have nothing to do with any of the brands where I posted these animations. I have been putting these animations up on various pages for years now and they almost always remain up there because the community feels they are a useful visualization of the products they manufacture. I have been through this before where an editor suspected I was working for the brands in question and I was able to prove this is not the case. Please let me know how we can resolve this.

Thanks

Karl Martini — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karldmartini (talk • contribs) 21:25, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Karldmartini, if it has been discussed previously, and the community reached a consensus that the animations were appropriate, I'll cease and desist. Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 22:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Julie. I will repost the animation from where they have been removed if that is OK? If you need further proof that these are not promotional, please see the oven ready chicken For which one user commented 'Thank you for creating the spinning oven-ready chicken, it makes me happy that the internet exists'.

This is being discussed at User talk:Karldmartini. I suggest consolodating all discussion there rather than talking about the same issue on two pages. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just saw the discussion. If I have anything further to add I'll do it on Karldmartini's talk page. On an unrelated subject, this is my new favorite userbox:

xkcd

This user cannot go to bed when someone is wrong on the Internet.

.

JSFarman (talk) 19:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

UC Irvine edit-a-thon on May 17, 2019

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You are cordially invited to an edit-a-thon this Friday in Orange County, focused on gender equity. The event is a collaboration between UCI and Women in Red.

Friday, May 17, 2019
10:00 am – 4:00 pm PDT (UTC-7)
Langson Library, Room 228, at University of California, Irvine

Points of contact:

Logistics: moderator, Prof. Adriana Briscoe
Schedule: facilitators, Roger Bamkin & Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight

For more details, including the registration link, please see the meetup page. Everyone is welcome! We hope to see you there.

--Rosiestep (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello JSFarman,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June events with WIR

June 2019, Volume 5, Issue 6, Numbers 107, 108, 122, 123, 124, 125

Check out what's happening in June at Women in Red:

Virtual events:

New topics: Pride / Royals / Space
Geofocus: Mediterranean
Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman

Other ways you can participate:

Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe
Join the conversations on our talkpage
Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred

Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Elizabeth Chitty

Thank you!LorriBrown (talk) 19:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Thank you for the article and for introducing me to her work! JSFarman (talk) 17:39, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OUTWORDS Archive republish

Hi -- thanks for your support with OUTWORDS Archive page, which we've republished with new references from OUT.com, Bay Area Reporter, and KQED. Please check it out if you have time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_OUTWORDS_Archive Artfullheart (talk) 04:20, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Artfullheart, I just did a quick edit and accepted the article. I think it still might be a little short on references, but I suspect that there will be more articles coming related to the book's publication; please add them as they are published. And, since the archives are freely available, images can be used on Wikipedia! Thanks for persevering (and for writing the article). JSFarman (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JSFarman, thank you for accepting and editing the article! Artfullheart (talk) 19:57, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July events from Women in Red!

July 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 127, 128

Check out what's happening in July at Women in Red...

Virtual events:

New topics: Sports / Education
Geofocus: Microstates
Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman

Initiatives we support:

Editor feedback:

Check out the conversations regarding Sports, Sports, Sports!
Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe
Join the conversations on our talkpage

Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello JSFarman,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Rajesh Khanna MD Page

I got the message from wikipedia to use the following tag and ask for help form other users

Template:Advert tag

Regards

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kal_Spelletich

[1]

A belated welcome!

Archives

DYK for Harry Brand

Thx4thx

RfA

P.G. Morgan - comments

A page you started (Evelyn McDonnell) has been reviewed!

Autopatrolled user right

LA event this Thursday

Bughouse (Band, Australia)

File:All Music Homepage circa 1999.jpg listed for discussion

14:06:22, 12 September 2017 review of submission by Insulatedpolar

Jeremy McCoy (double bass) title change

Jeremy McCoy (double bassist)

Never mind

Follow up question

U.S. women in the Olympics and Paralympics edit-a-thon at LA84

22:05:59, 4 October 2017 review of submission by Rpsavory

Maureen Wroblewitz

The Daily Telegraph is not a good source!

Text box response

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Merger discussion for Anna Jones (businessperson)

Draft:KalSpelletich

Wikipedia Day LA 2018

Help with NBC News?

More with NBC News

Women in Red

Women's History Month 2018 at Women in Red

Wikipedia Day LA, March 31

14:29:13, 12 March 2018 review of submission by Kjburch1988

Steve Blackman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hyperplay_rpg

April 2018 at Women in Red

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

RCA

Edits to Peters Page

New Page Reviewer Flag

THE CARACAT article

Reminder: Wikimedia survey (corrected link)

New page reviewer granted

12:19:02, 17 April 2018 review of submission by JennyK2610

17:13:52, 18 April 2018 review of submission by Hayleycaldervibe2017

Quality Control Music

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Mina Sundwall

Thank You!

Arts Datathon!

Jerry Lorenzo

Nelson Broms

May 2018 at Women in Red

Wiki Loves Food

17:47:26, 8 May 2018 review of submission by Msabaker

Event coordinator

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Women in Red June Editathons

Help?

Building Helene Lerner's Wikipedia Page

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

July 2018 at Women in Red

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

September 2018 at Women in Red

7th Annual Los Angeles Wiknic

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

October 2018 at Women in Red

Nile Rodgers

Get ready for November with Women in Red!

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Request on 17:52:59, 31 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Artworkintl

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

December 2018 at Women in Red

Request for help/review

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

January 2019 at Women in Red

Merry Christmas!

Help reviewing proposed edits?

Igor Naming Agency references

February 2019 at Women in Red

Restoring deletions