User talk:EricEnfermero

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


Questions? Comments? Advice? Talk to me.

Jason Heyward article review[edit]

I've returned from vacation, and began addressing the comments you left on Jason Heyward. There are also new modifications throughout the article, mainly superficial. Given the amount of time I have, I will do my best, as my replies will not be very quick. My gratitude for the flexibility you have shown. Cheers! Elcid.ruderico (talk) 22:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

The initial feedback section you started is now answered, save one point. I wasn't sure of the best way to check for dead links, i.e., if there is a more efficient way than manually opening each page one-by-one. I will continue searching.Elcid.ruderico (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I'll take a look and begin a section-by-section review. If you go the article's GA review page, there is a GA Toolbox in upper right corner of the page. One of the choices is External Links. That will lead you to any dead links and such. EricEnfermero (Talk) 20:13, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narayan Sadashiv Hosmane[edit]

There is no reliable source to verify that Narayan Sadashiv Hosmane is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry. Zenqueue (talk) 06:14, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I was looking into that. I thought it was a little strange that I couldn't find a list on the RSC website. To me, the solid H-index obviates the need for the FRSC though. EricEnfermero (Talk) 06:18, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Solid H-index? You need to read this page: The Hirsch index of scholarly output: New measure, ongoing debate. It is not that hard to find researchers who have high H-index but they haven't produced any paradigm shifting papers. Zenqueue (talk) 06:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
I realize it has limitations, but it's a common measure used in AFD discussions. WP:PROF doesn't really say anything about paradigm shifts. We should really take this discussion back to the nomination though. The points you make on my talk page probably won't be seen by the admin that ultimately closes the AFD discussion. EricEnfermero (Talk) 06:40, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this[1] and your insights. There are many not that notable researchers who have been awarded a research grant by the Humboldt Foundation. The AFD page was closed by an admin and the result was keep. Although consensus is that the article meets the relevant notability guideline, I still think that there are many issues with the page, e.g. there is no reliable source to verify that he is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry. Many thanks, Zenqueue (talk) 02:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Conyers Farm[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Edmund C. Converse[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Elmer Ernest Southard[edit]

DYK for Tilly Walker[edit]

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:31, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

The images used fall under fair use.[edit]

Per section 107 of US Copyright law:

§ 107 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use40

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Is Wikipedia not for research? Is Wikipedia not for profit? Jp10101 (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Fair Use does apply.[edit]

Perhaps you should be educated on US law? It is applicable unless you're making the claim that Wikipedia is not a research or scholarship site and is for profit. Jp10101 (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

WP has far more to consider than US copyright law. The WP policy on fair use, WP:FUC, is clear. Free images could easily be created of these subjects by anyone who attends baseball games. EricEnfermero (Talk) 06:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)