User talk:Carrite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Contents

And so on and so forth...[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ray Blume, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Power forward. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Art+Feminism @ Portland Institute for Contemporary Art (March 18, 2017)[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Art+Feminism edit-athon, which will be held at the Portland Institute for Contemporary Art (415 Southwest 10th Avenue #300, Portland 97205) on Saturday, March 18, 2017 from 10:00am – 5:00pm. For more information, visit Eventbrite.

Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Carrite. You have new messages at Cameron11598's talk page.
Message added 22:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Cameron11598 (Talk) 22:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William L. Patterson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St. Vincent. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

April events at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg

Welcome to Women in Red's
April 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Participation is welcome in any language.

Tsuruko Haraguchi, circa 1910.PNG
Wendy Binks in Bologna H3116 C.jpg
European sub-regions (according to EuroVoc, the thesaurus of the EU).png



(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) ----Rosiestep (talk) 18:40, 24 March 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

help needed[edit]

Hi, I am User:bashereyre. I contribute across the site but principally to the Anglicanism section. This article Michael John Keatinge has been nominated for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael John Keatinge Could you see what you think Bashereyre (talk) 10:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

It's a close call but I think the debate will end in a keep. Carrite (talk) 16:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for File:88-cb&q-scabroute-poster.jpg[edit]

Copyright-excl.svg

Thanks for uploading File:88-cb&q-scabroute-poster.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner) 17:45, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

About becoming an administrator[edit]

Wikipedia needs you! Take the poll.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia so far; they are very much appreciated. Your experience and tenure have been an asset to the project.

Have you thought of becoming an administrator since 2013, this time permanently? It can be enjoyable, challenging, and a great way to help Wikipedia.

To receive feedback on your chances of successfully requesting administrative privileges, consider starting a poll:

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

Thank you!

Are you reading this on another user's talk page? If you are experienced and trusted, and would consider becoming an admin, you are very much encouraged to take the poll.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon @ PNCA Library (April 29, 2017)[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Art+Feminism edit-athon, which will be held at the Pacific Northwest College of Art (PNCA) Library at 511 NW Broadway on Saturday, April 29, 2017, from 11am to 4pm. For more information, visit the Facebook event page.

Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg

Welcome to Women in Red's
May 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Participation is welcome in any language.

Adath Jeshurun Women's League costume party, Minneapolis (4419484936).jpg
Test cricket - women - 1935.jpg
Pacific Basin Human Geography Cultural Zones.jpg



(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 19:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Disambiguation link notification for May 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bryan Money (numismatics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Token. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:09, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Meetup Invitation[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Asian Pacific American Heritage month edit-athon.

This will be held on the first floor of the Knight library at the University of Oregon.

For more information please see: Wikipedia:Meetup/Eugene/WikiAPA, a Facebook event link is also available on the Meetup page.

  • Date: Friday, May 26, 2017
  • Time: 12:00 pm – 4:00 pm
  • Location: Edminston Classroom, Knight Library, Room 144
  • Address:1501 Kincaid Street, Eugene, Oregon, 97403-1299

Hope to see you there!

(This message was sent to WikiProject members via Wikipedia:Meetup/Eugene/WikiAPA/MailingList on 23:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC). To opt-out of future messages please remove your name from the mailing list.)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4[edit]

Hello Carrite,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 580 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Berkey-Joshua-H.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Berkey-Joshua-H.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Grrrrrrr. Malfunctioning bot — valid fair use rationale provided. Bot deletes the file from the article, then another bot nominates the file for speedy because it is an "orphan." Carrite (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cochrane-Charles-H.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cochrane-Charles-H.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

GRRRRRRRRRRR.... see above. Carrite (talk) 18:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Friedman-Jeffrey.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Friedman-Jeffrey.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR...... see above. Carrite (talk) 18:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pokrovsky-MN.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pokrovsky-MN.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Annnnnnnnd.... We're at AN/I over this... Carrite (talk) 19:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Prager-Robert.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Prager-Robert.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

That makes FIVE of my valid Fair Use files fucked up by this bot. I should bill somebody for my time. —Tim, pissed.

June 2017 offerings @ WikiProject Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg

Welcome to Women in Red's June 2017 worldwide online editathons.

Hiawatha MET DP371840.jpg
Pride-female.svg

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

July 2017 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg

Welcome to Women in Red's July 2017 worldwide online editathons.

Ballet dancer Katharine Cook striking a pose, 1931 (29892825481).jpg
60C0074BA4FF-1 Джемма Халид.jpg
Women in Sarees.jpg


(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Wiki Loves Pride at PNCA: Tuesday, June 27[edit]

You are invited to the upcoming Wiki Loves Pride edit-athon, which will be held at the Pacific Northwest College of Art (511 NW Broadway) on Tuesday, June 27, 2017, from 5–8pm. For more information, visit the meetup page or Facebook event page.

Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on[edit]

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Allow private schools to be characterized as non-affiliated as well as religious, in infobox?

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Old style dates[edit]

Hi Carrite, I just noticed your edit at Charles Lee (general). "Old Style" dates were in use in Great Britain and its colonies until 1752. As the start of the year was usually not 1 January but 25 March, dates in January, February and March look like they're a year apart from their New Style counterparts, even though the actual difference is just 11 days. I've restored the templates to the article. Thanks for your effort to combat vandalism, even though this particular case wasn't in bad faith! Ibadibam (talk) 02:43, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I learn something new every day. Carrite (talk) 03:06, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Carrite, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
  • Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

  • Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
  • The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:

General project update:


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red's new initiative: 1day1woman[edit]

1day1woman.png
Women in Red is pleased to introduce...
A new initiative for worldwide online coverage: 1day1woman
  • Create articles on any day of any month
  • Cover women and their works in any field of interest
  • Feel free to add articles in other languages, too
  • Social media hashtag campaign: #1day1woman

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 03:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

August 2017 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg

Welcome to Women in Red's August 2017 worldwide online editathons.

Members of the Native American Women Warriors, a Pueblo, Colorado-based association of active and retired American Indians in U.S. military service, at a Colorado Springs Native American Inter Tribal LCCN2015633462.tif
Emira Woods011.JPG
Canada (orthographic projection).svg


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

A new WiR initiative starting in August[edit]

1day1woman.png
Introducing...
WiR's new initaitve: 1day1woman for worldwide online coverage
Facilitated by Women in Red
  • Create articles on any day of any month
  • Cover women and their works in any field of interest
  • Feel free to add articles in other languages too

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Materialism-and-Empirio-Criticism.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Materialism-and-Empirio-Criticism.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. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:02, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Young Communist League USA and a wikilink[edit]

Hello pal,

I think that our current article is about a different Carl Ross. Add that to your "to do" list. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michigan AuSable Valley Railroad[edit]

Really? Not a single source that counts under WP:GNG? YGBSM? Think about it. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen () 04:43, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you![edit]

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 13:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

After reviewing your recent contributions on my talk page[edit]

I'd like to ask you to stay off my talk page. Thank you.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 16:24, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jimbo Wales - That is a general community information and project page akin to the Village Pump, so I will respectfully decline your request. It would make for an interesting and useful ArbCom case as to whether you own it, and I encourage you to pursue resolution there. Carrite (talk) 16:28, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Jared Taylor[edit]

People wishing to join the queue to whitewash *cough* remove POV from this article are welcome to supply alternatives to the ongoing and popular RfC. I believe options D through G are taken, but be sure that yours will get a fair glance or two. Edaham (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Guess what, Edaham? We're talking about the first line of the lead. Nobody is whitewashing (I see what you did there...) Jack Shit. There are plenty, plenty, plenty of identifiers of the subject's nefarious politics, his racism, his reactionary ideology, and his despicable publishing empire in the body of the piece. If you have such a limited understanding of what Neutral Point of View means, and you really feel the need to throw pejorative identifiers as a fundamental description in the first line of an encyclopedia article, you need to *cough* do a little thinking about what it means to be a Wikipedian and ask yourself why you feel compelled to make an encyclopedia article into a political foil instead of providing unbiased information for our readers. Carrite (talk) 16:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Also, for the record, I DID supply alternative wording and was hatted for the effort. Carrite (talk) 16:47, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to answer you because I am as you say, inexperienced and have a limited understanding of Wikipedia. I am learning though (I'm even taking the Wikipedia adventure as we speak) - and one of the things which encourages me is how, in spite of my fledgling status, I am addressed as a spokesperson for the current state of the article. I'm truly flattered. I'm a hair's breadth from being convinced to actually help you whitewash Jared's page! Edaham (talk) 17:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
One thing I've learned is not to get too worked up when overt activists start loading the deck with a page; they're gonna do what they're gonna do and it's a big encyclopedia and there are plenty of places to work without conflict. But it really is a violation of the fundamental spirit of the encyclopedia, what they are doing to that lead. "Adolph Hitler was an Austrian-born political leader who was elected Chancellor of Germany in 1933 and who served as the supreme leader of a one-party state until his death in 1945." That'd be an NPOV first line. And THEN: and he did this and this and this and this and this resulting in ten million deaths (or whatever the scholarly-established number is) — which is a summary of the body of the biography below. As opposed to "Adolph Hitler was an anti-Semitic dictator and warmonger whose totalitarian rule resulted in the death of ten million people" — which, while equally true, is not phrased neutrally. Anyway, I've said my piece in that debate. Have a good day and if you need any help or advice with the software or the culture of WP, don't hesitate to drop me a line or an email offwiki at ShoeHutch@gmail.com. —tim /// Carrite (talk) 17:39, 15 August 2017 (UTC) ping: Edaham
Joking - and Hitler references - aside, I made (a few days ago) a proposal as you are suggesting and I've rerefefenced that proposal in my last post on the talk page for the article. I'm really tired now, so I didn't actually link it to the precise spot in that mammoth discussion. If you sift through and retrieve it, dust it off and go over it, you'll probably find it's to your liking - given what you've suggested thus far. Back to the analogy. Here's a difference in your analogy you might want to consider: most of what was written about Hitler in order to furnish our article on him was, naturally given his sphere of influence, written in academic text books. In addition to that, it would be wrong to source his article entirely from news outlets as we have better sources available. Jared Taylor however, is at best a media personality in a set of trends amid a niche of society whose main interface with Wikipedia is via the press. If you want a Wikipedia article to accurately reflect the difference between Hitler and Taylor, do you think we should impose identical guidelines or should we look at this on a per case basis? Edaham (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
I think the edge cases — a Hitler or a Stalin or a Pol Pot or a Francisco Franco or a Mussolini or a Mao — are useful. If one can accept the NPOV approach to any of these such figures, and understand that complete, honest, neutrally worded biographical coverage will amply expose the viciousness and criminality of their regimes in their historic context without the necessity of cheating with epithets, then the biographies of contemporary pipsqueaks become a very simple thing... The same exact approach. In terms of sourcing, obviously the nature of sources is changing as we move forward into the internet age; the biographies of the Jared Taylors of the world are provisional anyhow until serious scholarship begins to appear about what are now current events five or ten years hence. An old line is that "newspapers are the first draft of history," and that's still true — it is one good thing about Wikipedia: that even if we do the wrong thing now, in the long run NPOV will triumph because it is the essential principle around which Wikipedia is built, the glue that keeps the project from flying apart. I've got faith in that much. Carrite (talk) 18:17, 15 August 2017 (UTC) ping: Edaham
if it can survive having me as one of its editorial staff I think it's got a good chance. You are right that sources are changing. In this case pretty fast. Taylor hasn't done anything really interesting or notable yet (realitively speaking(. He's just been given a forum and said a bunch of rubbish stuff. Speaking freely I'm fine with accepting that all these efforts over one word are really just part of a phase the article will continually go through until it gets deleted as being trivial.. or possibly vastly expanded in the event that Taylor manages to kick all the not white people out of the US. I'm watching rick and morty in Shanghai, so you couldn't want for a more disinterested editor to copy edit. Do email me many hundreds of years after I die to let me know what the outcome was though! Edaham (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Carrite - I'm thinking WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV is quite clear in stating Biased statements of opinion can be presented only with attribution. For instance, "John Doe is the best baseball player" expresses an opinion and cannot be asserted in Wikipedia as if it were a fact. What I've seen happening is quite the opposite. I have yet to find a policy that clears us to state opinions as fact in Wiki voice if the same opinion has been stated multiple times. Could some editors be confused by the terminology "he stated" thinking that makes the opinion factual, or perhaps it's the fact that it was published that they think opinion becomes factual? Lenin said something along the line of "a lie told often enough becomes the truth" and Alinsky said "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Could that be how aggregate opinions become a fact? I also wonder how many would pass this short test? Atsme📞📧 20:40, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Carrite, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

  • Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
  • Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much[edit]

Order-of-the-Red-Star.jpg The Workers' Barnstar
Sitting around drinking whiskey and discussing Eugene Debs and eclipses and Oregon and Morris Hillquit and the Venceremos Brigade and Wikipedia was really enjoyable. Debra and I will never forget the hospitality that you and Laura extended. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:20, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Let me know anytime you're in the neighborhood, Jim! —best, tim /// Carrite (talk) 05:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

September 2017 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg

Welcome to Women in Red's September 2017 worldwide online editathons.

Ana Recio Harvey.jpg
Olympic Road Race Womens winners 2, London - July 2012.jpg
New Zealand Simplified.svg

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

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Please stay off my user talk page - 2nd request[edit]

Carrite, I have asked you politely to stay off my user talk page. I hereby repeat that request. I find your comments negative, unhelpful, and disruptive.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Per my previous comment above, you are welcome to open an Arbcom case if you feel that the policy of Wikipedia:Ownership of content (WP:OWN) somehow does not apply to User talk:Jimbo Wales. In specific you might find this passage illuminating: "Wikipedia offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. Nevertheless, they are not personal homepages, and are not owned by the user. They are part of Wikipedia and must serve its primary purposes; in particular, user talk pages make communication and collaboration among editors easier. These functions must not be hampered by ownership behavior." Thank you for understanding that you do not own that page, nor are you entitled to unilaterally control participation on this de facto project page. Ping: Jimbo Wales —tim /// Carrite (talk) 00:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to the club. - Sitush (talk) 14:35, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikiprojects[edit]

Didn't notice your reply at Jimbo's talk page until after it archived. I wasn't thinking of the WPMED and MILHIST projects at all when talking about barriers to entry, but mostly the narrowly topical ones with few active participants left but TAGTEAMS of a handful of individuals who effectively own "their" entire category.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  01:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Draft:John Bourgeois[edit]

I have moved John Bourgeois to Draft:John Bourgeois. You may continue improving the article in draft space, and submit it for restoration to mainspace once it is sufficiently cited. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

ping[edit]

I mentioned your name over at Jimbotalk. I am pretty sure you have that page watchlisted, but I figured the polite thing to do would be to notify you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 12:26, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I actually haven't been paying much attention the last couple days. Carrite (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Karl H. Wiik[edit]

Hello Tim,

Any chance that you might have a reliable source discussing this fellow? Most grateful. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jim. I hadn't heard of him before but there doesn't seem to be any lack of sources dealing with him, a couple of which I own. An interesting political story. I will play with it a little before I get back to proofreading... Carrite (talk) 13:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
This is a big, big figure in Finnish left wing politics, as you probably know. It's probably a full day's work to do a proper biography of him. I will try to pick away at it a little bit as warm-up writing but am in the final month getting V. 1 of the Debs ready for Haymarket and don't have the block of time needed to do it right, at least at the moment. There is very substantial English-language sourcing available and the amount in Finnish must be massive. best, —tim /// Carrite (talk) 14:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC) Ping: Cullen328
Jim, you can mine sourced content from the Swedish and Finnish Wikipedia pages about him. The Russian page is crap. Carrite (talk) 15:09, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Carrite, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

  • On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
  • Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Joan O'Hagan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joan O'Hagan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan O'Hagan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Claire Ridgway marked for deletion[edit]

Hi. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia editing and I wondered if you could elaborate on why you removed my flag for deletion on the Claire Ridgway page? As far as I could see, it did not meet any of the notability guidelines: the subject is a blogger who has self-published a few books. I could not see any notability criteria that this met. All the sources are the subject's own websites and I was unable to find independent sources other than promotional materials. It looks as if the page was created as self-promotion. Thanks. HistoryGill (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Gillian, thanks for asking. There are three kinds of deletion at Wikipedia — "Speedy Deletion" which happens when a certain small set of obvious conditions are met, such as, for example, something that is completely made up or something that is nothing more than a libelous attack; "Proposed Deletion" or "PROD," which is for routine matters with deletion an obvious result, such as, for example, an article by Shirley Smith about her uncle John Smith, who was a routine veteran of the Vietnam War and who died recently (See: Wikipedia:Proposed deletion); and "Articles for Deletion" (See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion), which is the normal venue for discussion of the merits of a challenged piece and multiple Wikipedians offer opinions on whether a challenged piece does or does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia based upon our established labyrinth of notability rules.(See: Wikipedia:Notability).
In my opinion, given her publication history and specialization in one subject, there is certainly a debatable case to be made for keeping the Claire Ridgway piece and that discussion about it should therefore happen at Articles for Deletion. I don't have a strong opinion about whether the article should or would be kept after a deletion debate at AfD, but my sense is that there is at least a fair chance there would be a Keep result there. You are welcome to nominate the piece there if you feel strongly about it. There should be an "XFD" link that you can follow on the editing page under the "EDIT" heading to make the nomination process easy if you choose to do that. Best regards, —Tim /// Ping: Historygill
"SPEEDY DELETION" — Almost instantaneous, one nominator (usually from New Page Patrol), one concurring Administrator kills it.
"PROD" — One week waiting period, no debate, one nominator, anyone can stop the process if they present a rationale.
"ARTICLES FOR DELETION" — One week period (can be held over up to three more weeks if no consensus emerges), one nominator, anyone can opine about the fate of the article based on inclusion rules, administrator rules on the outcome based on the debate. Carrite (talk) 17:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Hi Tim (that is your name, right?), thank you for your comments at my RfA. I hope that I'll be able to answer your concerns with my actions rather than my words. Cheers, ansh666 23:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Help to stop Walter Beer deletion[edit]

Carrite: If you have a moment, could you please take a peek at the bio stub on Walter Beer and then share you vote for or against deletion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Walter_Beer? While I would prefer you vote to keep the stub, your expertise in both Wikipedia and subject matter far outweigh mine... Gratefully --Aboudaqn (talk) 14:49, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Would still be grateful for your input on Walter Beer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Walter_Beer --Aboudaqn (talk) 20:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
It didn't look like a GNG pass, so I stayed away. Sorry. Carrite (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

File:190508-goodmorning-cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:190508-goodmorning-cover.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. Magog the Ogre (t c) 19:02, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Image information...[edit]

Can you consider adding {{information}} to your older uploads? I'm slowly going through a list of them and wanted to eliminate them from the query I am using, as you've clearly been contributing in good faith. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

That's not a required template and I've got neither the time or the interest in retroactively adding that, sorry and thanks. Carrite (talk) 15:34, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red October editathon invitation[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Welcome to Women in Red's October 2017 worldwide online editathons.
The first Pacific Disability Forum Women With Disabilities Conference, in Port Vila, Vanuatu, 20 April 2009. (10729002895).jpg
Tux Paint woman doctor.svg
NordicPassportUnion.png



New: "Women and disability" "Healthcare" "Geofocus on the Nordic countries"

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

Begin preparing for November's big event: Women World Contest

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

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Precious four years![edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkish Nobel laureates (2nd nomination)[edit]

2 Keep, 2 Redirect, 2 comment. How the result is redirect? --Joseph (talk) 19:25, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought you made the decision.

United Order of Tents Reply Comment[edit]

Thanks for the tip on the United Order of Tents! I started the article and learned a lot. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:47, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Very nicely done! Barnstarred... Carrite (talk) 20:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

November editathons from Women in Red: Join us![edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Welcome to Women in Red's November 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Robinson projection SW.jpg


New: The Women in Red World Contest

Continuing: #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) 16:19, 21 October 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Carrite, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming Wikipedia edit-a-thon dedicated to artists of color - Thursday, Oct. 26 at PNCA[edit]

On Thursday, October 26, a Wikipedia edit-a-thon dedicated to artists of color will be held from 4–8pm at the Pacific Northwest College of Art (511 NW Broadway). Learn more at Facebook. Hope to see you there! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Empty sections[edit]

Don't forget the empty sections at Frank P. O'Hare. Thanks for what you've done there. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:19, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Great Railroad Strike of 1922[edit]

Hello. I've just seen the great work you've done with Great Railroad Strike of 1922, and I was wondering if you wanted to expand Whitefoord Russell Cole?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

File:SDP-Election-Poster-1932.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SDP-Election-Poster-1932.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. Holdek (talk) 02:04, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

not a single memorable case?[edit]

There was a big dud in August last year that I never wanted them to open, but how could anyone forget the Garfield Gamaliel case?

You should run. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Ah, that was a big one. No way in hell that I'm running — how about YOU? Carrite (talk) 07:09, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Nope, not running, ROFLMAO. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:15, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the Shit Bucket Challenge[edit]

In this 2016 thread (the whole of that particular talkpage archive is interesting reading for any future historian of Wikipedia, particularly the extremely long first thread), Opabinia regalis—whom I've no reason to doubt—says For the last few years, traffic on arbcom-l has indeed been down ~60% from the historical peak (though I didn't look at the various other lists). But 2011 was already down ~40% from max., which would probably equate to around 20-30 incoming messages per day. I suspect—although I don't know—that there's still just as much timesink material as there was before and that the drop is largely down to a decline in "I am concerned that User:Foo is a sockpuppet of User:Bar" type messages, but that's pure guesswork. ‑ Iridescent 20:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

At Wikipediocracy I've asked Newyorkbrad — who should surely have some chronological perspective — about the backstage workload of Arbcom now versus the past. Hopefully he'll spot the query and answer, inquiring minds want to know. Before I forget, I need to barnstar you for your "Shit Bucket Challenge" line, which is one of the funniest (and likely the truest) things I've heard on Wiki this year. best, —tim //// Carrite (talk) 20:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm also responsible for "ANI flu", "Facebook for ugly people", "Bradspeak" and "Civility Police" (and a sizeable chunk of the text of WP:WikiSpeak), as well as being the originator of the "Wikipedia as gardening" metaphor which assorted Defenders Of The Wiki are fond of misusing when other people complain that their contributions keep being overwritten (its first outing was in this batshit crazy thread in which I finally lost my patience with Shalom and his socks and went into a full-scale rant). It may be that nobody ever reads any of my articles, but when it comes to introducing sarcastic phrases into Wikipedia jargon I'm probably near the top. (Incidentally, virtually all Arbs have content contribution pie charts the shape they are is somewhat unfair. While there are some career bureaucrats there, some of them have excellent histories when it comes to contributing content.) ‑ Iridescent 20:56, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh, now you're just trying to brownnose more barnstars out of me! My contribution to the lexicon is "SanFranBan"... I also think I first identified JW as a "constitutional monarch" but don't have documentary proof of that. As for the typical shape of Arbcom pie charts — no, that's actually a thing. Obviously, there are exceptions to the rule, but the typical is typical. Mainspace puzzle piece close to 1/4; Content writers are 1/2 or more. Carrite (talk) 21:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
"SanFranBan"? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:34, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
When an editor is banned by the WMF office in San Francisco, rather than by community discussion or an Arbcom decision. It's one of the perennial peeves of the Wikipedia Review crowd, although looking over the list of names, of those I recognize I can only see a couple with which I'd disagree. ‑ Iridescent 21:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Ah, that list. From the breadcrumbs it seems like a fair amount of these people were things that we are better off without. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:56, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
The only one that is really unjust in its essence is the ban of Kohs. In fact, JW&Co. hate him so badly that it looks like they put him on the list twice. I'll have to congratulate him on the honor. Carrite (talk) 22:02, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Unless there's something of which I'm unaware (which there may well be), Poetlister seems a bit unfair as well. I can totally see keeping him blocked, but I don't really see why he was so egregiously bad that he needs an additional super-block from Jimmy & pals on top of his existing site ban—it's not as if Wikipedia were suddenly about to change their minds and invite him back in. (Although that said, there are actually a few people supporting a return for Betacommand as I write this, so maybe stranger things can happen.) ‑ Iridescent 22:10, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh, I'll bet you Betacommand is already back. Carrite (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
I should also mention that I didn't see Poetlister's name on the list and agree that a superban for him is over the top. He's a regular at WPO and I've found him to be a reasonable person, even if I don't agree with him about everything, and I don't know about anything he's done beyond the really stupid impersonation shenanigans back in days of yore... Carrite (talk) 00:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
He's on there as Quillercouch, which was the good-hand master account. IIRC he bullshitted a sock to checkuser status on one of the minor projects like Wikiversity or Wikiquote a while back, which I suspect really annoyed the WMF. ‑ Iridescent 07:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
I just checked, FWIW - around 25 messages per day on arbcom-l in 2016, around 20 per day in 2017. Less shit in the bucket these days. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:22, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Will that have you diving back in for another round of The Challenge? Carrite (talk) 07:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Are you asking me or OR? If the former, definitely not; I don't have the spare time to commit to it and am barely active on Wikipedia these days. (My edit count is deceptive as I did a script-assisted search-and-replace of "recieve" and "targetted" recently which makes me look feverishly active, but the last piece of work I did which actually took time and effort was Selina Rushbrook back in March.) ‑ Iridescent 08:03, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
I was curious about OR. I figure you had reacquainted yourself with a life of sanity by now. Carrite (talk) 08:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
I hadn't decided till today, because I've had less time for Wikipedia since starting a new job a few months ago - but I figured if I was going to run then I should do it now so I get some weekend time to deal with questions. I am now a candidate, we could do worse than me, though I won't be too sad to see the end of the shitbucket if that's how it turns out :) Opabinia regalis (talk) 19:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Your presence did make the ArbCom proceedings far more interesting to read. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
You'll have my support, for sure. —tim /// Carrite (talk) 02:31, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I'll be honest, I'm surprised :) It's not like I've been doing anything useful in mainspace lately - do my pie chart for the last six months and I'll look like an awful wiki-bureaucrat. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:09, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
That's understood to come with the territory. Carrite (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

About ArbCom workload[edit]

Virtually all aspects of the ArbCom workload are down, not only (obviously) from the peak of circa 2006-2008, but also from even relatively recent years like 2011-2013.

For context, at this point, ArbCom does four primary things:

  • Deals with user-conduct problems that no one else can resolve. This includes admin-conduct cases because only ArbCom can desysop involuntarily, as well as editors perceived as having a mix of good contributions and problematic behavior so the noticeboards can't decide what (if anything) to do. This workload is down because for better or worse, the vast majority of these issues are now resolved on the noticeboards or other venues.
  • Decides which topic-areas are so replete with controversy, edit-warring, and name-calling that the ordinary editing rules should be supplanted with the more restrictive "discretionary sanctions" regime or one of its variants. This workload is down because many of the most contentious topics are under DS already, plus there has been a growth in "community-imposed" DS via AN or ANI.
  • Deals with issues that involve private information that shouldn't be discussed on-wiki. This workload is down as the WMF Office has agreed to deal with some of the most troublesome aspects. The daily e-mail load is still significant but it does not even come close to the era that Iridescent has described.
  • Selects Checkusers and Oversighters. That's a process we take very seriously, but it only takes place one or twice a year.

The only area where the workload might be up a bit is on the "clarifications-and-amendments" page, because with each passing year, a larger percentage of on-wiki disputes are outgrowths of or related to earlier disputes rather than brand-new ones.

At this point, an arbitrator who also wanted to continue working in a content area should be able to. There will be times when deciding a case or participating in an important e-mail thread should take priority over other wiki-work, but that wouldn't be all the time or even most of the time. (On the other hand, if the arbitrator also decided to make regular use of the Checkuser right that comes on request with arbship and start plugging away on SSI, for example, that would be an additional time commitment. And I would say the same about Oversight, but there are relatively few suppressions these days as compared with rev-deletions, which any admin can now do.)

I hope this helps for you, and for anyone thinking about running. Just my individual perceptions and experience, of course. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:01, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

(Not sure whether this is worth a ping or not) One question, NYB. At least one sitting arb is also regularly involved in noticeboard discussions here as well. When I thanked him for that, he responded with a statement to the effect that maybe I shouldn't thank him, as arbs are supposed to not be active on the boards because such input might disqualify them from cases later. Any comment? John Carter (talk) 21:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Speaking only for myself, I try not to get involved in noticeboard threads where it looks like there's a controversy that might wind up in arbitration, to avoid unnecessary recusal situations and/or being accused of bias from a position I've already taken. On the other hand, there are plenty of other threads that either are straightforward or where I have something to say that I don't think others will cover, and I will participate in those sometimes. It's a judgment call. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:27, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

File:WomenInRedDubiousIllustration.jpg[edit]

FWIW, ADJEAD's Women in Red ad isn't remotely the most inappropriate use of the Wikipe-tan image (who lest we forget, was designed as the logo of the anime project, where it actually was appropriate in context). It doesn't come close to this proposed logo for the Christianity project. If you feel like going further down that particular rabbit hole, Commons:Category:Wikipe-tan has some weirdness buried in its subcategories which is almost worthy of Seedfeeder. ‑ Iridescent 18:38, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

WiR December highlights[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Welcome to Women in Red's December 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Wikipe-tan holding sign Season's Greetings.png
Dolley Madison.jpg
Tenby2555lg.JPG


New: "Seasonal celebrations" "First Ladies" "Go local!"


Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

Remember the World Contest closes on Thursday, 30 November

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

--Ipigott (talk) 11:13, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for File:VVAW-logo.jpg[edit]

Copyright-excl.svg

Thanks for uploading File:VVAW-logo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner) 19:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Carrite. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Henry F. Bowers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Americanism (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) 20:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Should we ignore viewpoints that appear on shirts[edit]

Hello Tim, I have read your user page and I found it very interesting. I have also read a few of your comments about Wikipedia elsewhere. So I thought I would move into your space here with a couple of questions about a television programme that I am currently watching. (Everyone else here is watching a movie called Gangs of New York, which they seem to find very exciting.)

The programme is called "White Right: Meeting the Enemy - Exposure", although perhaps the last part of that is meant to be separate. I think the BBC is involved, so I do not know if this content is available to people in your country. It is filmed and narrated by "Emmy Award-winning" Deeyah Khan.

One part that especially made me think of you was an interview with a young man -- who is relatively central to the programme I think, he reappears later in other clothes -- wearing a t-shirt that has a slogan saying "FUCK your Safe Space". The first word is in much larger type than the rest. He also seems to have some other issues. He recants some of his views later in the programme, I think.

If you do get a chance to watch the programme, I wonder what your opinion is of this young man and his viewpoint or choice of apparel.

Thank you for your consideration. MPS1992 (talk) 00:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Fascists suck. As for shirt slogans, there is no accounting for taste. Carrite (talk) 01:14, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

On a slightly separate note -- segregation academies[edit]

Your talk page mentions "mass exodus to segregation academies" as being a current and ongoing thing, but, Segregation academy, the article, uses the past tense right at the start. The explanation is that "While some of these schools still exist -- some with low percentages of minority students even today -- they are not, strictly speaking, segregation academies."

Do you think that this is a sufficient reason to describe segregation academies as something that existed only in the past tense? (The article implies decades ago.) MPS1992 (talk) 00:54, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

I think the PC word that the right wing southerners use today is "Christian Academies." Same shit in a new bag. Carrite (talk) 01:15, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Right, thank you. I am not very well-informed about religious aspects of American politics, which I suppose may make me ill-informed about American politics generally. (In many movies that I have watched, the African-American people seem very devout Christians.) Do you mean that the lede of the Segregation academy article is now accurate, or does something need adding or changing? MPS1992 (talk) 01:19, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
I haven't looked at it lately and have no opinion. Carrite (talk) 01:44, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) As a Southerner born, bred, and raised (and afterwards a refugee from the South), I can attest that segregation academy is a term that referred to private all-white schools during the era of desegregation. In fact, my best friend in college (a fellow Southerner) liked to accuse me of having attended a segregation academy. (My parents decided to put their three youngest children in the local private day school in 1970, the year that our local public schools were desegregated and the black and white public schools were merged. My older brother, who was going into his senior year of high school, stayed in public school.) Softlavender (talk) 02:00, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Carrite, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
  • Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

  • If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

  • A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
  • Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
  • The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Maureen Wroblewitz[edit]

Help for improvement this article. Thank you!Ngochue456 (talk) 03:26, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Bios of models and reality television stars is not my forte, sorry. Carrite (talk) 15:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


Thanks for adding to Stow, Massachusetts[edit]

Thank you so much for adding the further reading sources to the Stow, Massachusetts page. I really appreciate it. It's really nice to have this list compiled, since I was about to go looking for those sources myself.

Gbear605 (talk) 18:47, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Gbear605:— My pleasure. Hopefully I got all the good ones. It's nice to see good work being done on that page. I just blundered into in when I saw an old local history book on ebay, which is usually how I usually get into adding the local histories... Carrite (talk) 02:28, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays[edit]

000003 Image Zweige im Schnee Lupus in Saxonia.jpg Happy Holidays
Wishing you a happy holiday season! Times flies and 2018 is around the corner. Thank you for your contributions. ~ K.e.coffman (talk) 00:22, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
@K.e.coffman — Thanks for the nice words. Hope you have a great 2018 as well. Carrite (talk) 00:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

New Year's resolution: Write more articles for Women in Red![edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Welcome to Women in Red's January 2018 worldwide online editathons.
Bengali Hindu women in prison in Alipur (c. 1856).jpg
KOCIS Hanbok fashion show (6557976891).jpg
Location map of British Isles.png



New: "Prisoners"

New: "Fashion designers"

New: "Geofocus: Great Britain and Ireland"


Continuing: #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) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New Years new page backlog drive[edit]

Hello Carrite, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

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.


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kate M. Gordon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unitarian (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) 10:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your participation in my reconfirmation RfA[edit]

Sorry that you felt I was disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. I assure you that was not my intention; I had no motive beyond those stated on the page itself, "accountability to the community", and my answer to question 5, "...five years ago, the community made a decision based on how they thought I would be as an admin. Now they can make a decision based on how I have been as an admin. I believe the community deserves the chance to review their decision based on facts, rather than conjecture." I did not realise what a furore the RfA would create; which in itself was probably justifiable grounds for opposition for a lack of judgement! Either way, I offer my genuine thanks for your input, and while I remain in favour of reconfirmation RfAs, I can now see that should I wish to go through a similar process in five years time, I either need to approach it in a different way, or work with the community to establish an approved process to do so. Harrias talk 19:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Trotsky sources?[edit]

Hi Tim, hope you are doing well and enjoying the New Year. I was reading the Leon Trotsky (for no reason other than I was trying to remember the name of the novel I read based on his life...) and I noticed that some of the sourcing and language could use some tightening up. I know you do work with American radicalism, but was curious if you could suggest some books that might be good for improving that article? All the best, TonyBallioni (talk) 02:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

TonyBallioni - This will be a highly watched, very tendentiously edited article, so don't jump in until you are really grounded in the literature. I've got Robert Service's Trotsky: A Biography (Harvard UP, 2009) next to my bed and I'm reading a few pages of that off and on. That seems like a pretty good introductory bio, if I were to recommend one book, that'd be a good one to start with. The literature on Trotsky is enormous, I've literally got the better part of a 7-foot bookshelf stuffed with stuff by Trotsky and about Trotsky. I try to steer away from "hot" topics because I don't play well with idiotic others which is why I haven't done much with that page... The other Trotsky bio that really needs to be read and mastered is Isaac Deutscher's three volume The Prophet triology (The Prophet Armed, The Prophet Unarmed, The Prophet Outcast). That's a fine place to start. Read for three months before you try to edit and be really fucking sure of your shit, that would be my advice. Best, —tim /// Carrite (talk) 03:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I looked at the history and it didn't seem that active, but your advice here is much appreciated. Part of why I was asking was because the volume of literature is so broad. Your pointers are appreciated. It's a bit out of my normal mainspace topic, but obviously one of the most significant political biographies of the 20th century, so I would like to see it have better sourcing and language. Anyway, I'll likely start with what you've recommended, and even if I don't edit, it should be a good read. Thanks again, TonyBallioni (talk) 03:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Maybe I exaggerate the risk of bumping into several tendentious dumbasses, but I wouldn't bet against it. Carrite (talk) 11:34, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
I appreciate your contributions regarding my topic ban as well as your thoughts on Arbitration Enforcement. --MONGO 13:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for the warm welcome and the barnstar! I'll be sure to reach out if I need anything. Lamblings (talk) 16:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Lamblings