Jump to content

User talk:StarryGrandma

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Janvermont (talk | contribs) at 16:23, 30 July 2020 (→question from Janice Lourie). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revdel on Diffusion equation

Hello. I wanted to let you know I removed the revdel template from this article. When I checked the link you provided it appears that the paper is released under the CC-BY 4.0 license. This actually is a license compatible with Wikipedia as opposed to the CC-BY-SA 4.0 license which is not. This is a confusing area in which we all occasionally make mistakes; if you think I've made one here please let me know. And thank you for caring about copyright, many do not, and I know it can be thankless work. [[User:|Xymmax]] So let it be written So let it be done 05:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Xymmax for checking. I think I have confused the two licenses before. It's always nice not to have to do a revdel and lose access to other editors' changes. StarryGrandma (talk) 07:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate to the talk pages consultation

Hello

Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.

We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.

Trizek (WMF), 08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate to the talk pages consultation - link update

The previous message about the talk pages consultation has a broken link.

The correct link has been misinterpreted by the MassMessage tool. Please use the following link: Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Trizek (WMF), 08:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 24 – 17 May 2019

Facto Post – Issue 24 – 17 May 2019
Text mining display of noun phrases from the US Presidential Election 2012
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Semantic Web and TDM – a ContentMine view

Two dozen issues, and this may be the last, a valediction at least for a while.

It's time for a two-year summation of ContentMine projects involving TDM (text and data mining).

Wikidata and now Structured Data on Commons represent the overlap of Wikimedia with the Semantic Web. This common ground is helping to convert an engineering concept into a movement. TDM generally has little enough connection with the Semantic Web, being instead in the orbit of machine learning which is no respecter of the semantic. Don't break a taboo by asking bots "and what do you mean by that?"

The ScienceSource project innovates in TDM, by storing its text mining results in a Wikibase site. It strives for compliance of its fact mining, on drug treatments of diseases, with an automated form of the relevant Wikipedia referencing guideline MEDRS. Where WikiFactMine set up an API for reuse of its results, ScienceSource has a SPARQL query service, with look-and-feel exactly that of Wikidata's at query.wikidata.org. It also now has a custom front end, and its content can be federated, in other words used in data mashups: it is one of over 50 sites that can federate with Wikidata.

The human factor comes to bear through the front end, which combines a link to the HTML version of a paper, text mining results organised in drug and disease columns, and a SPARQL display of nearby drug and disease terms. Much software to develop and explain, so little time! Rather than telling the tale, Facto Post brings you ScienceSource links, starting from the how-to video, lower right.

ScienceSourceReview, introductory video: but you need run it from the original upload file on Commons
Links for participation

The review tool requires a log in on sciencesource.wmflabs.org, and an OAuth permission (bottom of a review page) to operate. It can be used in simple and more advanced workflows. Examples of queries for the latter are at d:Wikidata_talk:ScienceSource project/Queries#SS_disease_list and d:Wikidata_talk:ScienceSource_project/Queries#NDF-RT issue.

Please be aware that this is a research project in development, and may have outages for planned maintenance. That will apply for the next few days, at least. The ScienceSource wiki main page carries information on practical matters. Email is not enabled on the wiki: use site mail here to Charles Matthews in case of difficulty, or if you need support. Further explanatory videos will be put into commons:Category:ContentMine videos.

If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rutherford page

Would you be able to help with the citation formatting at this time? TIA StevenBKrivit (talk) 20:20, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi StevenBKrivit. I've put the section with the formatted references on your talk page. StarryGrandma (talk) 13:10, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
thank you {{|StarryGrandma}} I appreciate your help and expertise
StevenBKrivit (talk) 16:49, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello StarryGrandma, are you really a grandma? starship.paint (talk) 09:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for accepting my submission.

Physicist article creation award
Thank you for accepting my submission to Articles for creation on the physicist Philip Moriarty, creating the article and assessing it as Start-Class. I started writing the draft at the Wellcome Wikipedia Workshop, Downing College, Cambridge and I have been working on improving the draft over the weeks to satisfy the academic notability guidelines. Habet Hominem sapientem manibvs (talk) 10:18, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Glad it worked. Awards from national scholarly organizations are always a good thing to look for in these cases. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:45, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re Nomination of Centre for Magnetic Resonance Investigations for deletion

Thanks for letting me know about this. I think that the right decision was made, as the centre in question nolonger exists. The MRI scanners are now all owned by the hospital trust, a situation which is wholly un-noteworthy.--Dj manton (talk) 10:37, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Lillian Moller Gilbreth

Thank you for your clarification on Mrs Gilbreth's family. Our 1948 edition of Cheaper by the Dozen does not make the distinction that you're later version, evidently does. Beth Timken (talk) 15:35, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barrett Watten Sourcing

Hello StarryGrandma,

I've seen that you have engaged in the work toward consensus on the Barrett Watten page, which seems to be in need of an additional source. I believe there is a follow-up article being published in the Chronicle of Higher Ed, and was wondering if that second reporting from the same source would be sufficient.

Thank you! --Justanotherpoet (talk) 19:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello again StarryGrandma,

It seems the Barrett Watten page remains protected from non-verified users, so I thought the best way forward was to contact you directly. A follow-up story has been published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, which verifies the university's findings and the authenticity of disciplinary decisions against Watten, as listed in the Dean's letter. https://www.chronicle.com/article/This-Professor-Was-Accused-of/247705?cid=wcontentlist_hp_latest If this is paywalled for you, let me know. --Justanotherpoet (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know. I do have access to the Chronicle and see that this covers Watten's response too. StarryGrandma (talk) 16:48, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

<material removed by admin>

Cutthepretense, I am not an administrator. Wikipedia articles have the obligation to be neutral. "Found guilty" may not be libel but it is not a neutral statement nor a statement of fact. "Guilty" is a criminal conviction in a court of law where the accused had the opportunity to mount a defense. The university findings came from an investigator's report and are being contested. We recommend that editors who are emotionally involved with a topic not edit that topic. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Barrett Watten, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Grenier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:46, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Citation bot in user space

Oh sorry, yes it should. I'll check better next time. Nemo 05:24, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

Hi StarryGrandma, that talk page has been protected to stop those kinds of comment from being added. There appeared to be allegations in that post that were not in the Chronicle. It's obvious that there's a campaign against the BLP subject, and Wikipedia is being viewed as an important part of it. That has to be resisted. SarahSV (talk) 00:15, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SlimVirgin, thanks for cleaning that up. They shouldn't be visible here. Actually all those are in the Chronicle article - I had assumed one of the findings was something else (not so serious) and was going to accuse the editor of exaggerating, but I just looked it up and I was wrong. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:45, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi SarahSV (talk), what exactly were the allegations against the article’s subject that were not in the Chronicle? There were four charges explicitly listed in the Chronicle piece, and those charges were sourced with an official university document. It seems increasingly clear that Wiki admins are failing to maintain a factual and encyclopedic stance because of an overabundance of caution. Watten is not teaching (the “currently teaching” are courses from 12 months ago, Winter 19) because he was removed from his duties after being found guilty of the charges previously listed above ^^. A campaign against the subject? Wikipedia as an important part of it? Hardly. Wikipedia is literally just one way many of his victims and friends of his victims have used to vent their frustration at years of abuse. The university found him guilty. Watten did not dispute the charges. Academics and graduate students editing Wikipedia pages to reflect those facts does not make those facts untrue.

I’m sure you’ll redact this comment as per this site’s clear policies (I understand and hold no ill will for that), but I sincerely hope you read this comments, take them seriously, read the source material (two Chronicle articles and the university’s official decision), and realize that the facts are the facts, no matter who follows Wikipedia policy.

It's worth noting this part of our biography of living persons (BLP) policy (WP:BLPCOI), bold added:

Wikipedia articles concerning living persons may include material—where relevant, properly weighted, and reliably sourced—about controversies or disputes in which the article subject has been involved. Wikipedia is not a forum provided for parties to off-wiki disputes to continue their hostilities. Experience has shown that misusing Wikipedia to perpetuate legal, political, social, literary, scholarly, or other disputes is harmful to the subjects of biographical articles, to other parties in the dispute, and to Wikipedia itself.

Therefore, an editor who is involved in a significant controversy or dispute with another individual—whether on- or off-wiki—or who is an avowed rival of that individual, should not edit that person's biography or other material about that person, given the potential conflict of interest. More generally, editors who have a strongly negative or positive view of the subject of a biographical article should be especially careful to edit that article neutrally, if they choose to edit it at all.

The BLP policy applies to all pages on Wikipedia, including talk pages, and note "or other material about that person". It's important to keep that biography completely separate from whatever's happening elsewhere. StarryGrandma, thank you for helping to sort it out. SarahSV (talk) 00:56, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SarahSV thank you for that succinct citing of the policy, which I certainly understand and do not imagine I am in a place to edit the article’s talk page. Considering their consistent history of referring to insider information, the account Historyofpoetry is also an inappropriate editor, but that’s neither here nor there. I hope the admins and editors continue to rely on the available evidence and source material above all else in curating the Watten page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justanotherpoet (talk • contribs) 01:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not just that talk page, this one too. You shouldn't discuss it anywhere on Wikipedia. This is a policy you'd be grateful for if you were in his position, and I trust you see the sense of it even from the other side. It's important that the Wikipedia biography not become part of this dispute. SarahSV (talk) 01:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for guidance with DMC article

I’ve just read your helpful response to my question. Just before I got it, I followed X201’s suggestion and added those pieces from the stub that should remain (company info box, categories, and external links) into my sandbox, and then planned to move (or request that it be moved, if I am not able to do it) it to replace the original. This is completely new to me. Should I remove this content and follow your directions? Or maybe you are also talking about a move? I really appreciate your help! TrudiJ (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TrudiJ, a move isn't a good idea because that erases the existing history of the article. Just copy the entire contents of your sandbox into the article, replacing what is already there. Try it and see what happens. If there are problems they can easily be fixed. Wikipedia could use much more work on craft and textile topics. Figuring out how all this works isn't easy. It has taken me years to work out how to do things here, and I've used computers since 1962. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:38, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
StarryGrandma,I think it worked! I ended up using the Source editor. Thank you for your guidance. I have worked on the Crewel embroidery article extensively, and I'd like to keep working on needlework and textile topics. One more question for you: on the DMC Talk page, the stub designation remains. I don't know if I am able to remove that, or if a bot does, or if I need to worry about the stub template it mentions. Would you happen to know? Or should I not worry about this? TrudiJ (talk) 20:09, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TrudiJ, glad you find my user page useful. I need to keep information handy or I forget where I have seen it. The article grades including Stub are defined at Wikipedia:Content assessment. The letter grades are usually assessed by Wikipedia projects, but the stub status can be removed by any editor once the article is expanded. Wikipedia:Stub has more details. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of strawberries for you!

What a great set of resources on your User page! I will explore them as I attempt to learn more about editing. TrudiJ (talk) 20:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Refs in templates

Following up on your input at WP:VPP#Refs in templates, you might be interested in Wikipedia talk:Templates#Refs in templates. Cheers. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi StarryGrandma, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


response and Janvermont (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2020 (UTC)question from Janice Lourie

I received your helpful note on my talk page and I am not sure where I should have thanked you for it.

Two weeks later I think it is here Everything you say is correct. I raise my hand and say ready and willing. Thank you for giving me my best 90th birthday present. Jan 

I also saw your edit and appreciate the updates. I am confused now because my name has disappeared from the noticeboard and I wonder are we still engaged in forward motion? Am I asking this in the right place?Janvermont (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:StarryGrandma&oldid=970320049"