Jump to content

User talk:DGG/Archive 142 Nov. 2018

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

                                       ARCHIVES

DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Barnstars, Awards, etc.

Reminders

Topical Archives:
Deletion & AfD,      Speedy & prod,        NPP & AfC,       COI & paid editors,      BLP,                              Bilateral relations
Notability,               Universities & academic people,       Schools,                       Academic journals,       Books & other publications
Sourcing,                Fiction,                                               In Popular Culture      Educational Program
Bias, intolerance, and prejudice

General Archives:
2006: Sept-Dec
2007: Jan-Feb , Mar-Apt , M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D 
2008: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2009: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2010: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2011: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2012: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2013: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2014: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2015: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2016: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2017: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2018: J, F, M , A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2019: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2020: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2021: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2022: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2023: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O

 

            DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Editing News #2—2018

[edit]

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter • Subscription list on the English Wikipedia

Did you know?

Did you know that you can use the visual editor on a mobile device?

Screenshot showing the location of the pencil icon

Tap on the pencil icon to start editing. The page will probably open in the wikitext editor.

You will see another pencil icon in the toolbar. Tap on that pencil icon to the switch between visual editing and wikitext editing.

Toolbar with menu opened

Remember to publish your changes when you're done.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has wrapped up most of their work on the 2017 wikitext editor and the visual diff tool. The team has begun investigating the needs of editors who use mobile devices. Their work board is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are fixing bugs and improving mobile editing.

Recent changes

[edit]

Let's work together

[edit]
  • The Editing team wants to improve visual editing on the mobile website. Please read their ideas and tell the team what you think would help editors who use the mobile site.
  • The Community Wishlist Survey begins next week.
  • If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly. We will notify you when the next issue is ready for translation. Thank you!

— Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:George Soros

[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:George Soros. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
  • A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
  • The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

  • Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
  • The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about AfD -- also Papadosio

[edit]

(1) How do I find old discussions from an article that was previously deleted?

(2) In particular, I am interested in discussions regarding the band Papadosio which had apparently five failed attempts at creation:

  • 01:20, 26 January 2017 DGG (talk | contribs) deleted page Papadosio (A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject) (thank)
  • 20:44, 13 November 2012 Anachronist (talk | contribs) deleted page Papadosio (A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content): See WP:BAND for inclusion criteria) (thank)
  • 18:24, 1 November 2012 DGG (talk | contribs) deleted page Papadosio (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject) (thank)
  • 04:06, 19 February 2011 Nakon (talk | contribs) deleted page Papadosio (Expired PROD) (thank)
  • 05:36, 2 December 2009 SchuminWeb (talk | contribs) deleted page Papadosio (Speedy deleted per CSD A7, was an article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble that didn't assert the importance or significance of the subject. using TW) (thank)

I have seen the band play to a large audience, and I know they are considered fairly significant here in Ohio, and I believe they have a significant following. So I was a bit surprised there was no wikipedia page, as are others: [2]. I found what I believe might be sufficient WP:RS:

  • "EXCLUSIVE: Papadosio's Anthony Thogmartin And Billy Brouse Discuss Red Rocks, Alex Grey, And The Process Of Creation". Live for Live Music (L4LM). 2017-04-13. Retrieved 2018-11-04.
L4LM is used eight times as WP:RS in Phish, once in Destroid, once in List_of_concerts_at_The_Anthem, once in Grace_Potter_and_the_Nocturnals, twice in Live_in_San_Diego_(Eric_Clapton_album), once in Garcia_Live_Volume_Five.
Although the The Badger Herald is a student-run newspaper it is "[a]vailable at newsstands across campus and Downtown Madison, Wisconsin and published on the Web, it has a print circulation of 15,000" and is an "independent newspaper" run as a non-profit.
Technique (newspaper) is another student newspaper with a circulation of 10,000.
I saw Jambase listed as WP:RS in a number of music articles.

There is also this photo on WikiCommons. The other admins who deleted are pinged too. I don't want to try to re-create it if you all think it will go just as badly this time as it did the first five times. --David Tornheim (talk) 01:29, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@David Tornheim: Bands that are well known only locally won't get a Wikipedia article. If the band clearly meets one of the criteria in WP:BAND then it can have an article, but with respect to criterion #1 (coverage), we need evidence that they are notable outside of Ohio. Interviews are considered primary sources and don't count toward notability, and student newspapers are tightly-local newspapers. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
None of the four I provided are from Ohio. Badger is Univ. of Wisconsin. Technique is Georgia Tech. I believe the other two are nationwide. --David Tornheim (talk) 17:24, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
student newspapers in general are unreliable for the notability of performers on that campus,, since they include articles on an indiscriminate basis . My recommendation in to try again in Draft space. DGG ( talk ) 18:28, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sylvia Spring - "deleted self-serving promotional quotes"

[edit]

Hi DGG, I notice that you have edited this article. I have no problem with that, but I do wonder why you described it as "deleting self-serving promotional quotes". I have no connection at all with Sylvia Spring - I had not heard of her before I saw the AfD. I included quotes from her as I thought they were interesting. Perhaps they are not appropriate for the style of Wikipedia - as I have said, I am new here. But they were in no way "self-serving" or "promotional", and your assumption that they were is unfounded, and unnecessary to include in a description of the edits you have done. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:08, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

there's a problem with our terminology here: we use promotionalism to include advocacy. Just as it is essentially impossible to write an articles about a consumer product without some degree of promotionalism, it is essentially impossible to write about an advocate without including some degree of advocacy. Anything qwrittene about a good cause has the effect of advocating for it. There is no cut-and-dried solution here--it takes careful writing and rewriting to get the most objective article possible that is still not a mere directory entry. I made a partial attempt towards this, but I am not satisfied with the result.
the comments referred to are ones she made, in an apparent effort to promote her own importance. They are therefore inappropriate in an encyclopedia.We sometimes will include a limited number of such quotes fro a famous person; she is notable, not famous. In my opinion there is much more promotional material to be removed--she is an advocate for a cause, and the description of her causes belongs in the subject articles about them. Some of the organization don't have articles--perhaps they can be written. Furthe, the inclusion within the text of extensive paragraphs of quotations from the reviews is in m opinion not a good idea. The best way to handle these is to but them in the footnotes as part of the citation. I did the minimum I thought necessary, and I hope that you will work on it further. DGG ( talk ) 18:44, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't template those who died

[edit]

Can you perhaps, if you have to tell a user who died that an article he or she was involved with is up for deletion, do that without a template, but addressing those who watch the page and could do something about it. I'd not expect the one who died to do something. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't do that again: using a template that says "If this is your first article", among others. I find it shocking, and your reply on Kevin's page disappointing, sorry. - I agree that a post there was needed, but not with a template. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's an automated thing, not a lot one can do about it. Twinkle doesn't show you the talk page it notifies for deletion debates. Maybe there should be some sort of flag to let the code know. Guy (Help!) 23:59, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I rarely even look at userpages Twinkle notifies. I focus on the content not the users. Legacypac (talk) 03:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's a simple matter to undo or remove a template on someone's usertalk who has died; people have been doing that for years. Not sure why this is an issue or why someone using the standard tool for XfDing and CSDing deserves a scolding for something they do not and cannot control. It's not a personal attack or a bad-faith accusation. DGG and others are not going to stop using Twinkle for XfD and CSD in lieu of manual XfD/CSD, and most editors don't normally have time to check and see who created the article in question, so just remove the notification if you don't feel it should be on that page. Softlavender (talk) 06:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry that I was not aware how automated this process is. I would not remove a post from a talk page which is not mine unless in a case of clear vandalism. Next time, I will reword the content in my own words, saying that it was originally a template. I could imagine that our clever software could be taught to recognize the "deceased" template, or category, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DGG, thinking a bit more: could that template (be programmed to) say more clearly that it is the result of an automated process? So that I don't hold you responsible. - Sorry if I overreacted, but some messages on Kevin's page were blatant vandalism which I reverted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but who cares? Twinkle posts automated notices to accounts that are blocked, abandoned and so on. Who cares really? When we use Twinkle we are rarely opening these pages to look at them and (no disrepect intended) neither is the departed editor. Legacypac (talk) 07:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I care. So may others who miss him (and too many others who died). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but it is automated and not a personal attack or anything. You might request full page protection to prevent posts onto the page. Legacypac (talk) 08:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry not to be clear. The notice that something seemed wrong with the article needs to be there, for us to repair. Just not that style, if possible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's the only style that's going to be used. It's standard and automatic. So you can either remove it if you don't like it, or keep it there so others can see that there was a suspected copyright problem which might need attention and fixing, or archive it after a while when the matter has been settled. The same thing would happen if one of Kevin's creations was PRODed or AfDed or CSDed or XfDed. That's just how the system works nowadays, and it is a good system which works extremely well. Softlavender (talk) 08:49, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
One of the benefits of assuming good faith is that it lowers our stress levels, allowing our statements to be more clearly expressed. Neonorange (Phil) 09:45, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What is the user page in question? We can full-protect it so the automated edits won't happen anymore. ~Awilley (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:Kevin Gorman. Would someone using Twinkle get notified, and could proceed manually? It would be a shame if a decent article was deleted because nobody saw a notification that something seemed wrong. I can't take all articles of those I know have died on my watchlist. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Protection levels that stop my Twinkle stop me from editing the page just the same. If it is an important article others will have it watchlisted and/or an Admin should do a double take. Tons of inactive editors are not watching their talk anyway, not sure why this is functionally different. Legacypac (talk) 15:43, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Starting over: The top of Kevin's talk says "Their user page is preserved here in their memory", - a little later we read how important his contributions to female philosophers were, and that an edit-a-thon in his memory was planned. - Then, in 2018 the templated suggestion to delete one of these articles, not really edited since 2014. The article looks like this now, and I may be the only one who finds the whole thing just sad. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

you have things out of proportion. What is truly sad is that he died so early; what is particularly unfortunate for WP is that we lost an excellent editor, and a still more excellent organizer and advocate. As I knew him, he was not the sort of person to think all of his work was perfect, any more than I think mine--although what he accomplished in the early days of the education program was much more important to WP than anything I have been able to do here. DGG ( talk ) 20:46, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. (I still think "not perfect" - which we should admit for all our work - is different from "guilty of so serious copyright violation that deletion seems the only help", but if it's out of proportion and not assuming good faith, I'll have to live with that my imperfection.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Allen (philosopher)

[edit]

Hi, DGG! You may have seen that I changed your speedy tag to copyvio blanking at Amy Allen (philosopher). As you know, I'm still fumbling about trying to learn the ropes here, but it seemed to me that there was a reasonable amount of rescuable content in the page (Earwig gave me about 42%, and a good deal of that was proper names). If I'm wrong about that (or anything else you happen to see me do), do please say, or just undo. I'd meant to leave you this note earlier, but had to go out in a hurry. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a further look at this-- I too do not rely or computed percentages, but do my own comparisons. If it is a question of assembling an article out of quoted fragments, opinions about the correct course varies. And since there is no consistent practice, I never insist on my own view in this. DGG ( talk ) 07:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
and since I see on the article talk page another good editor agreeing with you, I think it very probable that I did misjudge. Experience is a very incomplete protection against occasional error. DGG ( talk ) 07:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SDBCT

[edit]

This took redirects to the whole new level of usage. I couldn't get the reason of not deletion. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 04:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Eglise Luthérienne Libre en Suisse

[edit]

Hello, DGG. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Eglise Luthérienne Libre en Suisse".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus 08:24, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Growth team updates #3

[edit]

Welcome to the third newsletter for the new Growth team!  

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

Two Growth team projects to be deployed in next two weeks

We will be deploying the "Understanding first day" and "Personalized first day" projects on Czech and Korean Wikipedias in the coming weeks. See the new project pages below for full details on the projects, and our project updates page for their progress.

  • Understanding first day: learn about the actions new editors take right after creating their accounts. We will be careful with user privacy, and we hope to share initial results in December.
  • Personalized first day: learn about new editors' objectives by adding some optional questions to the new editor’s registration process, and personalizing their onboarding. We hope to share initial results in December.

Third Growth team project begins

  • Focus on help desk: direct newcomers to the local help desks where they can ask questions to help them make their first edits. We hope to have an initial experiment running in December.

Best practices for helping newcomers

We are going to direct newcomers to help desks. But what's the best way to reply to a newcomer there? We have gathered some best practices for successful interactions, based on community experiences and some external documentation. The page has also been reviewed by some experienced community members who suggested some changes. That page is now open for translations. Comments and suggestions are still welcome!

We are still looking for volunteers

Do you want to participate to our experiments? We are looking for new communities to work with us (especially a new mid-size wiki), and people to become ambassadors to help us to communicate with the different communities. Discover how you can involve yourself or your community.

Also, please share this update with your community and interested people!

Learn more about us

You can visit our team page to find out why our team was formed and how we are thinking about new editors, and our project page for detailed updates on the projects we'll work on.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot, 13:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC) • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of vegetarians

[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of vegetarians. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AFC reviewing

[edit]

Thanks for the info on reviewing. Also, I mentioned your page at User_talk:Onel5969 and forgot to ping you. Otr500 (talk) 13:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion patrol

[edit]

There's a discussion about prod patrolling at ANI and I mentioned you there as another patroller that it would be good to hear from. In the course of discussion, it was noted that WikiProject Proposed deletion patrolling is not very active – no-one has posted there for over a year. Perhaps we should do some spring-cleaning and compare notes about best practice. We might also request some time-saving scripts or tools in the Community Wishlist. Andrew D. (talk) 13:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help with article deletion

[edit]

Long time, no see. Hope you are well. I've been going back and forth with somebody about Everlane, an unremarkable (in my opinion) clothing retailer that nevertheless has a gee-whiz promotional article on Wikipedia (not the first or last such article on Wikipedia). I would like to nominate this article for deletion, but for the life of me I can't find a page in Wikipedia that explains how to do that. Can you help? Is there a template somewhere I can use? Thanks for your past work purging fluff from the online encyclopedia that everyone can edit. Chisme (talk) 22:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chisme go to Preferences, Gadgets, and check Twinkle and set your preferences to do everything including turning on your CSD log. You can than easily Speedy Delete nominate (WP:CSD) and XfD (nominate for deletion discussion) away all day long. See WP:AFD and WP:WP for more info. Good luck. Legacypac (talk) 00:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Not sure what's next...

[edit]

Defend Ukraine, Gbksoft and a look at this request for disclosure. Thx. Atsme✍🏻📧 02:17, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

clear enough. I don't like to block while the afdi s in progress, and after it's over, unless they write more, theres no need to. The virtue of afd in this case over speedy, is that it prevents re-creation. DGG ( talk ) 05:19, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:48:22, 11 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Robhmac

[edit]


Regarding Draft:Erie High School (Pennsylvania) I do not know what else you require for this article stub to be acceptable. I've included THREE external, third-party sources, including the school's official website, the school district's website, as well as the local newspaper article that documents how and when the school was formed by the merger of other high schools. It was never my intention to write a full article, just enough to update all of the other Erie high school pages that imply that they still exist as high schools. However, if I have not provided enough sources, can you give me some more details, such as what else should be added? Thank you so much.

Robhmac (talk) 18:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If it were up to me it would be acceptable. But the purpose of AfC is to evaluate what the consensus is going to consider acceptable. The current opinion here is that unsourced articles on high schools will be deleted. I have argued against this for many years, and I thought that I had established the principle that high schools would always be considered notable or the purposes of WP. In the last year, the consensus has been otherwise, in spite of the greatest effort to prevent this change that could be made by me and the others who agreed with me. One of the characteristics of the way things work here is that the interpretations of the rules are not fixed, but can change. Nobody here can tell other people here what they must do: there is no such authority, and consequently sometimes not a great deal of stability. there really is no alternative between there being an authoritative top-down decision making and relying on the general agreement ( we could do it by voting--we don't , we do it by a sort of rough consensus.) It would be irresponsible of me to tell you it was OK when I think it likely that this will not be the decision.
How much sourcing is required is however an open question. I suggest that you first check for articles about the school in the local news sources--here ought to be some, especially if there was a period of changes in the organization and consolidation of schools in the district. Then the best approach might be to write a combination article, High schools in.... . I shall certainly support it, and I hope others will also. But the nature of WP is that neither I nor anyone else can make any promises. DGG ( talk ) 05:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft article

[edit]
Hello, I certainly came to pick your brain, seek opinions, and learn. The article Draft:JBJ95 was on the list and it also showed it was a duplicate title of JBJ (band) that is now defunct. The JBJ band was actually a temporary project group, managed by Fave Entertainment, that disbanded on April 30, 2018. Two members signed a contract with Hunus Entertainment and Star Road Entertainment and started JBJ95. These bands, as well as [I.B.I (band)]] that was apparently active in 2016-2017, are a product of Produce 101 and Produce 101 (season 2) with YouTube presence.
The circumstances are somewhat similar to Topp Dogg (2013) that became Xeno-T in 2018 when Stardom Entertainment merged with Hunus Entertainment except only two members of JBJ (band) became JBJ95.
Anyway, the draft appears fairly well sourced, even with biographical references, but is really too new. Since JBJ (band) is defunct and related I am wondering if JBJ (band) and JBJ95 should be merged since JBJ (band) was only on a temporary contract, probably a result of the show and the contract not renewed, or should there be two separate but totally connected articles.
I would lean with a merge of JBJ (band) to JBJ95 (band), that would also remove the like name issue, and content treated like Topp Dogg in the Xeno-T article, which seems now to be historical,. I am a fan of parenthetical disambiguation only when absolutely needed but feel JBJ95 alone is ambiguous. Most of these articles are the result of what is known as "Temporary K-Pop Acts" through the Mnet (TV channel) survival show with some turning permanent such as Wanna One producing the related One: The World tour.
At any rate this is above my current comfortable (confident) ability and there would be some redirect changing. If you are tied up I can move on with any suggestions you have or you can jump in and I will learn from the results. Otr500 (talk) 20:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
not my field, but in general, if there is a major change in a group, such as here where only 2 of the 6 members formed the new group, there might be justification for a separatearticle. Personally, I think we should routinely use parenthetical qualifications to clarify all possibly ambiguous terms, more so than is in fact the consensus,. In particular, I would include them in this case, because it is not at all obvious they are musical groups, and there is a standard use of three-letter alphabetic terms as gene abbreviations, so there isa real possibility of confusions DGG ( talk ) 06:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly not my field. I was not a fan of parenthetical disambiguation, after a bout of many articles that were done so artificially over natural, which might have been some reasoning for the negative consensus, along with the mass using looking too much like Britannica, but in these cases there is a very clear need for parenthetical "qualifications" (I like that term in cases like this) not just between bands that got Draft:JBJ95 listed at "Category:AfC submissions with the same name as existing articles" but the gene abbreviations you mentioned. The new band is too close in name (JBJ versus JBJ95) and listing "JBJ (band)" would still leave JBJ95 stuck "out there" and ambiguous. I do see some notability on the new(er) band, even though they only have one very recent release (mini album Home 10-30-2018), as their actual forming was only announced 10-04-2018 . I am going to pass on this as too new for me with cleanup issues, like the "Home" album being listed under the Discography section of JBJ (band), that was likely just parked there. Well, I was just looking things over and exploring. Thanks for you advice, Otr500 (talk) 15:51, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Only edit

[edit]

[3] from the account. I'm clearing stale userspace drafts Legacypac (talk) 01:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

was't initially obvious to me. I'm not sure if there is really recent consensus her, but I may have missed it. . DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Anne Akiko Meyers

[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Anne Akiko Meyers. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Lactobacillus kefiri

[edit]

Regarding your note on Draft:Lactobacillus kefiri, all accepted taxa are inherently notable. The only times a species page is not warranted is if it is in a monotypic taxon and the genus page exists, or for prehistoric species where the species are not that distinct in the fossil record. Not saying that draft was ready to roll otherwise, though. --Nessie (talk) 15:20, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

certainly they are. I've been saying so for 11 years here, and it is one of the areas where there has been consistent consensus, mainly because the people who do not understand the subject do not edit in the area. But, as you say, it is still the case that this is a very incomplete article , especially because it is a well studied species and economically and medically important. The article when I saw it did not even have the taxobox giving basic biology, and gives only one of the multiple applications -and the single reference doesn't even support the statement of that particular use in the article. Further, the application specified is unlikely to be the most important one at least to a general reader--and for good measure that use, as a probiotic, would require a MEDRS compliant source.
There is a difference between an article on a species of interest only to specialists in a group, and that on an organism like this. I therefore considered it not only incomplete, but seriously misleading. .It would in my opinion not be a good idea for it to go to mainspace until it has been expanded,. Normally I would say an article even so incomplete can be fixed in mainspace, but not when it is misleading to that extent, and on a topic relating to human medicine.
what really surprises me is that we did not already have an article. You are a very experienced editor in this area; you do not need to use the AfC process. I assume you do because you do what your work reviewed. DGG ( talk ) 16:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IOTA_Technology Review

[edit]

Hi DGG, I have been rewriting the IOTA Wikipedia page. Could you give me your criticism as I work towards your blessing of publishing it as an article? - Tsangares (talk) 16:37, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  1. . It is not clear whether this is an already adopted technology, or one that is still under development. If it has not yet been adopted, it may not be possible to write an article unless there are already substantial 3rd party independent published reliable sources, discussing it. Too many of the references here are from their own web site. Too much of the article talks about prospective future additions.
  2. . In particular, when you discuss uses, you need to distinguish between actual known uses for the technology supported by 3rd party reliable sources, and prospective uses supported only by the company web site.
  3. . You also need to write in an encyclopedic manner, not aas ifyou were lecturing us. "It is important to note that ..." should be rewritten as "X... " Check alsothat you are using formal wording, not phrases like "off of". . DGG ( talk ) 17:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey DGG, thank you for reviewing my page. I was going to start revising the page on your suggestions when I realized someone deleted it. Is there any way for me to get the draft back? I spent a whole weekend writing what was there. Tsangares (talk) 00:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Slabovia

[edit]

Hey DGG, I can understand why you might not think that Slabovia is notable. However, I would like to appeal to you for reconsideration under the following reasoning:

  1. . Slabovia was selected to host MicroCon 2019. This bi-annual event currently does have a page
  2. . Both of the previous hosts of MicroCon have pages. Specifically The Republic of Molossia in 2015 and the Kingdom of Ruritania in 2017

stephenwclarke (talk) 20:57, 12 November 2018(UTC)

it has previous ly been speedy deleted 3 time by three previous admins. I merely declined to move it to main space. the criterion for moving to main space is that It has a reasonable chance or surviving an AfD. I think it does not. Perhaps after the 2019 convention gets reported there may be more of a chance. DGG ( talk ) 18:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Viscounty of Rohan

[edit]

Hello DGG! Thank you for your comment on my draft for the viscounty of Rohan. I've thought about it and, re-reading the House of Rohan article, I suppose the "draft" content could be moved to this page. Otherwise, it would make duplications. What do you think about it?--Aziliz Breizh (talk) 15:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

yes, needs merging. and what is also needed is a proper expansion of this article based on the frWP, and then translations of the missing supporting articles. I could do it, but you could clearly do it better. DGG ( talk ) 21:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural advice

[edit]

Hi,

I've done a substantial edit on Draft: Fifth Wall Ventures, which was previously deleted in an AfD. It's been a few months and there are many more sources. What is the proper process to get this reevaluated? Is it to go back to AfD and ask for a new vote? Or is it to re-submit as a draft on AfC? Or something else?

Thanks,

BC1278 (talk) 16:27, 13 November 2018 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

you might want to start by removing the opinions of the founders about their own company, and also removing material that seems directed primarily to potential investors. Then you should consider whether the sources about the companies they have invested in actually are relevant here. Once it looks less like a press release, resubmit at AfC. DGG ( talk ) 21:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:DGG Could you take another look at Draft:Fifth Wall Ventures? a) I removed the paragraph that I think you were referring to when referencing the opinions of the founders about their own company; b) I am less clear as to the content you think is directed primarily to potential investors, but I cut back some material that's my best guess about what you meant. I didn't write anything with that intent, and the company didn't direct the writing of the article, so I wasn't sure what you meant; c) I know the sources about the companies they invest in don't establish notability and could even confuse the reviewer as they are looking for the reliable sources in the references that establish notability. But I think a basic question anyone interested in reading/learning about a VC firm would ask is what companies they have invested in. For the purpose of brevity and readability, I've reduced what I think is useful information to a bulleted list. But if you think it's a bad idea even as revised, please let me know. And I added an AfC Comment to make it easier to spot sources establishing notability from the bigger reference list.
Aside from the sourcing, there are two things that make this VC fund stand out. I hope I've adequately addressed these in the draft. First, it's the largest VC fund just doing real estate technology. It used to be the only one but several have sprung up since "PropTech" has been attracting huge amounts of investment this year. Fifth Wall has raised two new and very large funds since the last AfD review. Second, in some ways the business model flips VC investing on its head. Instead of looking for start-ups that are trying to fill a hole in the market (then finding clients), Fifth Wall typically asks its investors (some of the biggest companies in real estate) what its real estate technology needs are, then it finds start ups that offer the technology. It sets up the large investors/real estate companies as clients of its portfolio companies, creating a built-in market.BC1278 (talk) 19:03, 14 November 2018 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

ArbCom

[edit]

I hope you run to be on ArbCom again. Please do. --David Tornheim (talk) 19:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At the last minute, I have decided to. The time it takes in relation to the useful work I can do is lower than almost everywhere else on WP, and I have been able to accomplish much less than I might have elsewhere, but perhaps what I have been able to do there has been something that few of the other people on the committee have been inclined to do. Unlike some of the other candidates, I am interested in accomplishing specific things. If people support them enough to elect me I will be pleased that the committee might accomplish something; if people do not support them, then I will have been saved the frustration of uselessly trying, and will be able to redirect my time to other projects here where I know I can be effective. DGG ( talk ) 22:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very glad to hear it, and wish you luck in accomplishing your goals. I may ask about them in the Questions for the Candidate page if they are not apparent from your Candidate Statement. --David Tornheim (talk) 02:00, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly did try to make them apparent there. I can clarify further , but will be reluctant to talk about individual cases. DGG ( talk ) 02:17, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your excellent well-considered responses to my questions. I am quite intrigued by what you had to say about WP:AN/I and some of your other ideas about dispute resolution. I will likely have some follow-up questions. If you would prefer discussing any follow up questions elsewhere than the candidate question page, so as not to clutter it up, that is fine with me, especially for anything you do not deem particularly relevant to your candidacy.
Do you know if there is a rule about "too many questions"? I have many more I could ask of all the candidates.  :) But I do not want to overstep limits or be unreasonably selfish.
I think that is wise of you not to comment on cases. I was a little surprised editors had asked candidates about particular cases, especially any closed case that the editor might have no familiarity with and could take hours of reading and diff review to properly assess. Reminds me of the Supreme Court confirmation process.
Notwithstanding what I just said, I may bring up a particular old ArbCom case and how it and its subsequent administration might have had a strong affect on content of a particular article (and no I never edited that article and did not participate in the case). If I do, it would be more about the rules imposed on the topic and upon editors in that topic area rather than anything about any particular editors or any particular editor's specific behavior. In general, I do not think it appropriate to discuss individual editors in ArbCom candidacy questions.
If there are any guidelines about what is and is not appropriate to ask in the questions, I'm all ears. I can't even figure out when the deadline is to ask them. Despite many years here, I've never been very good at figuring out where to find all of our obtuse and abstruse rules. --David Tornheim (talk) 10:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
there is no fixed limit of questions; it is possible for one person to ask too many, but I think one or two more would from you would not be unreasonable, DGG ( talk ) 23:12, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for your extremely well thought out answers to my two new questions! Wow. I don't think any other candidate will come even close to they depth of thinking there. You definitely have my vote.
I liked how you compared Aristotle and Plato's approaches to knowledge. I almost got a masters in Philosophy, so that interpretation is dear to my heart. Plato's Theory of forms I find particularly interesting. So, I if you would like to continue a conversation here about philosophy, I do have more questions--this is not in any way related to your running for ArbCom. If you prefer not to indulge me in a conversation over philosophy right now, that's fine--I know you have a lot on your plate with the run for ArbCom and other matters. If so, here's some questions: Couldn't one argue that Plato's forms are mystical in nature, and that Pythagoras worship of mathematics (Cult of Pythagoras) was a cult and a religion? And what do you make of David Hume's contention than belief in cause-effect is irrational? (Problem_of_induction#Hume) Kant supposedly solved the problem articulated by Hume, but I have never been convinced of that Kant solved the problem. What do you think? --David Tornheim (talk) 05:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW. as a non-expert. I think was both a mathematician and a founder of a religion. Plato also was discussing religion as much as philosophy. We cannot actually prove anything belonging the domain of physical objects, in the sense that we can prove mathematics. The scientific method is not induction in the sense Hume used it, but rather that it makes testable predictions about the world.in the sense of Problem_of_induction#Karl Popper . I'm really just repeating here the standard scientific way of looking at things. DGG ( talk ) 13:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Myla Villanueva

[edit]

Hi There, noted on your feedback about my submission (Myla Villanueva). I have rewritten my article for resubmission as of Nov 12, may I ask if this will be reviewed by you or another editor? Thanks! Angcorwut (talk) 03:53, 14 November 2018 (UTC) Angcorwut[reply]

It's definitely better. Whether it will pass AfD is hard to predct. The 2 usable sources for notability are the June 2012 and the Dec 2013 Philippine Star articles. We don't much credit interviews where the subject can essentially say what she pleases about herself, but these contain more analysis by the reporter. You need to do several specific things further: (1) The very first paragraph must say what the key element of notability is, which in this case is her 4 companies. It's OK to name them in the lede, but try to avoid adjectives of praise. (2)Never refer to anyone other than a popular performer by their first name alone. It's a promotional trick to make it sound informal, but an encyclopedia is a formal publication. (3) Any claim for "first" needs a really good 3rd party reliable source, not just an interview. (3) Don't make an internal links. If a firm doesn't have an article, just give its name and make a references to its web page where it gives her role--don't let it show up in blue, looking like there is an article.
I advise you to make these changes immediately. I'll let someone else review it. And remember, if they do move it to mainspace, anyone may challenge it. DGG ( talk ) 01:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

>> thank you for this feedback, I have updated my entry and I hope your team can review for approval. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angcorwut (talk • contribs) 07:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:39:03, 14 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by AdriP

[edit]


Because of my draft has not been accepted. Dear David,

I am writing you since my draft has been declined three days ago and I would really appreciate your help how can I improve my draft . Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Robert_Feranec It says: "Just like before, the references are not from major 3rd party reliable source, or are not substantial, and do not show notability . If there is nothing more significant, he is not appropriate for an article."

Could you please advise me which one? Since, I was really careful to use reliable references and sources, also I was cautious to add reference from third party sources after every fact that I wrote in the draft. I truly did not write the draft in few hours I made an effort to write the article from best sources. Also, I was in touch with Frayae about my previous draft and I have changed the infobox, removed external links, fixed the links and added references and sources. From her side the draft after my changes was good enough. However, I absolutely accept your opinion about my draft.

Also, could you please advise me when person is consider on wikipedia for example as a famous youtuber (depends on the number of followers?). Since, I believe that my article is useful for wikipedia and all information are truthful. Therefore, I would really appreciate to know specifically which sources are not enough or what would be enough as a reference since, I added sources from magazines, articles, school references etc.

Thank you very much in advance for your response and your time.

AdriP AdriP (talk) 17:39, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need substantial 3rd party independent published reliable sources, not mere notices or press releases, or interviews where the person says what he pleases. I'm not sure any of the source meet these. Announcements of his talks are just notices, and in general whatever is said in them comes from his own press kit. The net result is a promotional article, for the subject advertising his own courses and lectures. Consider for example the sentence "Currently, Robert is living in California (US) and his main focus is teaching online and sharing his experience through online courses, workshops, presentations, youtube and blog". Promotional writing is where the subject says what he wants the reader to know, but an encyclopedia article gives what the general reader might wish to know. DGG ( talk ) 23:56, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pointer

[edit]

I'm normally supposed to post my question here, per policy, but it seemed better suited there. Fram (talk) 10:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Michael Sayman has a new comment

[edit]
I've modified the article based on your feedback and have left a comment on your comment, which can be viewed at Draft:Michael Sayman. Thanks! -- Purplehippo458 (talk) 19:36, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom election questions

[edit]

You said "Of course it is by definition not appropriate to unnecessarily deceive the committee" (Alex Shih Q2). That could bite you in the ass ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Doria Ragland

[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Doria Ragland. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Susan Eubanks

[edit]

Hi! I was checking to see if there was an article about this topic, and I saw a message about it duplicating an existing topic. Where is this duplicated topic? WhisperToMe (talk) 10:10, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will get there, but probably after the Thanksgiving. holiday DGG ( talk ) 02:04, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Correction to deleted article- Emily Shuckburgh

[edit]

Hi DGG,

Would it be possible to undo the deletion of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emily_Shuckburgh&action=edit&redlink=1

I'll then fix the issue asap, it's my first article so I'm still learning here.

Thanks!LyraSilvertongue29 (talk) 18:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will get there, but probably after the Thanksgiving. holiday DGG ( talk ) 02:04, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou so much! It seems it was a borderline copyright issue so I can fix that easily, I just failed to see the notifications in time- will try and make sure that doesn't happen in the future.LyraSilvertongue29 (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex

[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Next Web

[edit]

DGG - in 2016 you nominated The Next Web for deletion. I can't see the deleted page but I assume, from the discussion, it was typical, self-referencing promotional chaff. In any case, I've recently had occasion to source content to something they published so took the liberty of checking to see if the notability situation had changed and I think it has, enough, to warrant a stub. Before I recreate it, though, I wanted to check with you to see if you agreed or not? I made a draft here. Thanks - Chetsford (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

in a few days, afte Thanksgiving. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wear your big pants tomorrow!

[edit]
Want more yams?
No thanks, I'm stuffed.
Wishing You A Happy Turkey Day!
Thanksgiving funnies...

What smells best at a Thanksgiving dinner?
Your nose.
What did the turkey say to the computer?
Google, google, google.

😊🦃 Atsme✍🏻📧 17:24, 21 November 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Rob Lipsett

[edit]

Hi DGG, fyi the article on Rob Lipsett which you nominated for deletion recently, and was deleted, has been re-created again. Spleodrach (talk) 15:53, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DGG

[edit]

Hi, I want to create an article for a website/video game I used to play, but I have some concerns. First of all, who do I talk to to get an article moved from sandbox to the mainspace? Second, this will be mostly based on my own knowledge. Is that allowed? Grimm324 (talk) 19:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When ready , you should submit it at WP:Article for Creation, but first you do need to base it upon third party references not personal knowledge. See WP:Verifiability for an explanation. DGG ( talk ) 22:11, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me if this is the wrong section...

[edit]

I was wondering if you as a member of the arbitration committee could advise me; or direct me to someone more appropriate, regarding the right way forward in a dispute I have with a couple of editors on the English people page. Alssa1 (talk) 20:52, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

as I commented on the talk p. there, trying to find the right wording to express nationality is ofter impossible, and almost always not worth arguing about. DGG ( talk ) 22:49, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Review

[edit]

Hi DGG! I noticed that you marked the page Google News Lab as patrolled. When I came across it, though, it still had a lot of problems, such as not linking to the page for Google, not including projects on its talk page, not including categories, etc. I'm in the process of fixing those, but I just wanted to open a conversation with you, since it's my understanding that those things are required before a page should be marked as patrolled. You're more experienced at NPP than I am, though, so if there's a rationale behind marking that sort of page as patrolled, feel free to let me know. Sorry if this comes off as accusing you of not being thorough; I'm not trying to do that, but more rather just get a sense of what the norms are in NPP since I'm new to being a patroller. Hopefully that makes sense, and thanks for your thoughts! - Sdkb (talk) 09:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sdkb, You are correct that I did not really complete this adequately. Here's why: The basic decision I was trying to make, is whether it should be necessary to send it to Draft space for further work; I almost did that, but finally decided that first, it was not just notable, but quite important, and that on a topic of as general interest here as this, it would be more likely to get the necessary improvement in mainspace. I therefore marked it as reviewed, but found it necessary to stop at that point. There's no clear practice on how much tagging is needed at NPP -- I usually do the most critical issue only. I do not usually add categories, for there are a number of people here who specialize in it; uncategorized articles are automatically marked, and they will get the needed work (and because I have considerable disagreement with the way categories are used here, so I think it better not to interfere). I usually do add the basic links--others typically get added later. I normally try to make sure the first sentence at least is clear, and the overall organization reasonably standard. But fundamentally in NPP I am looking for signs that the article shouldn't be here at all, because of promotionalism or lack of notability , or copypaste. These are the things that should not be missed.
The additional work on it you did was correct, and illustrates the way WP manages to work: people here tend to make up for each other's deficiencies.
I should also add that as a teacher, I have found it very effective to make use of my inevitable errors for the purpose of explaining how I came to make them, do the others would learn. I'm therefore always glad to have them pointed out here so I have the opportunity. DGG ( talk ) 06:32, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's all helpful to know! Cheers, Sdkb (talk) 07:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undisclosed paid editing

[edit]

Hi DGG, hope you're well. I'm no longer involved in Afc but came across this guy, User:Jubair1985, by another route. If he's not doing undisclosed paid editing, I'm a Dutchman. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 18:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the deleted articles as well as the actual ones, I see only one (now deleted) article which would be incompatible with someone having a personal interest in the two fields they write about. That's not enough for proof. DGG ( talk ) 19:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As ever, you're a more generous man than I. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 20:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi DGG,

I was the original user who submitted the page. I have met the artist who did the project and gotten permission to use the pictures (in fact got the pictures from his son directly) and other information about the project. What can I do to fix the G12 and which part exactly was the issue?

Thank you for all your feedback, this is my first article.

Best,

H. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazalu (talk • contribs) 21:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(TPS) You're not the one who needs the permission as you're not the one hosting the material. Wikipedia itself does. Honestly, however, most of the time it's not worth it to copy-paste material from a subject's website due to its tone being unsuitable for an encyclopaedia article. You're probably best off writing a new page from scratch. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 22:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
and the permission , from the artist, assuming he owns the copyright to the entire web site, would have to be not just to post it on Wikipedia, but to make it available here with a CC-BY-SA license, which irrevocably permits anyone in the world to use it and reproduce it and modify it and redistribute for any purpose, even commercial, as long as the credit is given. See WP:COPYRIGHT for a further explanation.
But if you rewrote it, there could be an article. When you do so, omit the lists of Prominent leaders, Partners, sponsors, and Project Team. That information belongs on the project's own website, not here. DGG ( talk ) 00:13, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox family

[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox family. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rachel Parent for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rachel Parent 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/Rachel Parent (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Arbcom

[edit]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#2017 ArbCom and the GdB unban. Fram (talk) 11:11, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 18:23, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 18 – 30 November 2018

[edit]
Facto Post – Issue 18 – 30 November 2018
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.
WikiCite issue

GLAM ♥ data — what is a gallery, library, archive or museum without a catalogue? It follows that Wikidata must love librarians. Bibliography supports students and researchers in any topic, but open and machine-readable bibliographic data even more so, outside the silo. Cue the WikiCite initiative, which was meeting in conference this week, in the Bay Area of California.

Wikidata training for librarians at WikiCite 2018

In fact there is a broad scope: "Open Knowledge Maps via SPARQL" and the "Sum of All Welsh Literature", identification of research outputs, Library.Link Network and Bibframe 2.0, OSCAR and LUCINDA (who they?), OCLC and Scholia, all these co-exist on the agenda. Certainly more library science is coming Wikidata's way. That poses the question about the other direction: is more Wikimedia technology advancing on libraries? Good point.

Wikimedians generally are not aware of the tech background that can be assumed, unless they are close to current training for librarians. A baseline definition is useful here: "bash, git and OpenRefine". Compare and contrast with pywikibot, GitHub and mix'n'match. Translation: scripting for automation, version control, data set matching and wrangling in the large, are on the agenda also for contemporary library work. Certainly there is some possible common ground here. Time to understand rather more about the motivations that operate in the library sector.

Links
Account creation is now open on the ScienceSource wiki, where you can see SPARQL visualisations of text mining.
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) 11:20, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DGG/Archive_142_Nov._2018&oldid=1145685890"