User talk:Megalibrarygirl/Archives/2017/October

Feedback needed on project proposal: Investigating the Impact of Implicit Bias on Wikipedia

Hi Megalibrarygirl! Here is the current draft of my project proposal: Investigating the Impact of Implicit Bias on Wikipedia. I value your input and would greatly appreciate your feedback. Please share it on the project proposal discussion page. Thank you in advance! Best, Jackiekoerner (talk) 04:25, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Jackiekoerner: Just dropping in on this conversation, my other half, Rhonda doesn't edit Wikipedia very often, but systemic bias is something we do discuss. She's not very keen on the discussion interface, finding Facebook and Twitter much more intuitive, and I can't promise she's got any free time to do an in-depth analysis. Nevertheless, it might be worth trying to get off-wiki views on this from people who are aware of Wikipedia and can articulate clearly enough to give you useful data, but aren't interested in being part of the "community", and there's more of these than you might think. I can see if I can persuade her involvement. Related comments here and here. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:41, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Tell Rhonda about the $4225 contest and see if she's interested!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:38, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie333, thanks for your feedback! I think that would be an excellent part 2. I could see speaking to people not on Wikipedia about why they aren't and how implicit bias might play into that. This would be great to develop solutions to make it so MORE people feel comfortable on Wikipedia and other projects. Thanks! Jackiekoerner (talk) 21:45, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jackiekoerner: I did review your proposal on meta. Keep us updated! I'm very curious to see how it turns out if you get funded, esp. in the areas I highlighted on the page. :) And thank you, Ritchie333 for your valuable input. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. I personally never use Twitter at all and I'm not particularly fond of Facebook, finding it difficult to track all the discussions there. But then, I'm also a person who isn't huge on remembering birthdays and stuff either. Montanabw^(talk) 09:11, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest/Missing articles

Hello MLG. I'm thinking of splitting this into six continent much like the contest. Just checking you're OK with that before I do so as you've done most of the work on them so far. There's a great tool in wikidata search I linked at the top for finding entries from some of the missing ones.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:36, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to have to do it as it slows my computer down :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:28, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. There are some great sources on Wikidata. Seeing all of the women that need pages is really amazing: not in a good way, per se, but it just shows how much work needs to be done. The sad part is that these lists just scratch the surface of the problem. Let me know how I can be of assistance. I find adding names to be a calming project when I'm feeling agitated by day to day goings on in the real world. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to but in here, Dr. Blofeld, but I'm really surprised you refer to the "great tool" for Wikidata here. For some time now, we have been using the far more sophisticated approach which not only turns up red links but displays them with key info, images, etc. If you think there are countries which can benefit from Wikidata, I would recommend our current practice of red link listing. Please let us know what they are and we can prepare any lists that are missing.--Ipigott (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh I know, I mean it's good being able to filter them for countries which don't have lists and view them on the site. Of course our tabled lists are better, perhaps we should try to get one for every country. Of course more entries cab be found manually. Djibouti for instance doesn't have entries on there but will have missing articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I think you may be underestimating what you can do with Wikidata, Ipigott. Here is an example page that shows a list women with featured articles in other languages that do not have an English Wikipedia article. Such a query takes a few minutes to write and is updated automatically. It would be extraordinaryly difficult to do by hand. Wikidata is worth looking into. Mduvekot (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting here, Mduvekot. I am fully aware of the usefulness of Wikidata and make wide use of it in preparing informative lists of missing articles on women by country, occupation, etc., using the kind of approach you mention. All I was trying to explain was that an informative list is more useful than the basic output of the tool Dr. Blofeld was pointing to. To illustrate the kind of lists I am referring to, look at the recently created Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Egypt which displays a range of useful items of information for those keen to create new articles. You can find a full index of lists of this type on our main Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red page under worklists. If you think important areas are still missing or if you think we are not making full use of Wikidata, please let me know and I'll try to go even further.--Ipigott (talk) 06:40, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

The Oceania lists really need a lot of work as aside from Australia and NZ they're practically empty at the moment!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:02, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll look into it, Dr. Blofeld. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:05, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I think most missing won't be on other wikis. I did some work on politicians of Oceania a while back and they tend to have missing women bios. Artists as well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:30, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Frustration and thanks

Thank you for agreeing to move this into the main space. I understand why you were being cautious, now that I see how petty and silly some of the remarks have been on my conversations on the User page. And I'm sorry, but this experience has been so frustrating and so unnecessary that it has indeed turned me off of the whole enterprise. When I taught we used to warn our students that Wikipedia was not a reliable source, but I thought it had been getting much better, and I do think it has upped its game. But I now realize that it IS indeed meant largely for popular "notability" and not for intellectual content. When there would be questions about whether the first woman curator in Austria and the woman who retrieved Nazi stolen art after WWII is notable enough, while a quiz-show winner of the 1980s is not questioned at all, then I'm flummoxed. Too many instructions, too many big fish in little ponds making regulations and establishing themselves as "keepers of the regs". (I don't mean you, Megalibrarygirl!) I'm astonished that my entries for Hanns Diehl and Annie Harmon ever got through, although I know that my husband, who inserted those entries (I wrote them, he dealt with Wikipedia's arcana) had enormous frustrations with the process. Please let me know when you do move this into the main space! Esauboeck (talk) 17:00, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

I wonder if you have even read my page!!! I have quoted the Schedlmayer dissertation in my entry! I read the whole thing! I have made a reference to the page in which Spitzmüller is mentioned in the entry! I have done all the research there can be done in Vienna, I have uncovered all of the items that you and lpigott have mentioned. I am a librarian myself, and an art historian. Esauboeck (talk) 17:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck My German is terrible and all of the words look the same to me and yes, I see that you did quote it. I thought I found something new. My apologies. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:16, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts, Megalibrarygirl. I admire your tenacity in dealing with the arcana of Wikipedia. Esauboeck (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck: I'm really happy to see that Anna Spitzmüller is now in the mainspace. I see that the article has already been viewed 133 times. I've also looked at the other articles you worked on with your husband, George.boeck: Annie Harmon, Hanns Diehl and Margaret Collier Graham. They all look well up to standard. If there are other Austrian figures or institutions you would like to see included in the English Wikipedia, please let me know and we can perhaps work on them together. Like you, I spent some time in Vienna in the 1960s (I worked in the Kärntnerstraße) and still have close connections there. Perhaps we could put together a short piece on the Austro-American Institute which you redlinked in your article. In any case, if ever I can be of any assistance, please let me know. As a footnote, I agree with you that many of the editors reviewing new articles on Wikipedia have little appreciation of how to assess the notability of people. It's something we need to face up to all the time but most of us learn how to avoid problems quite quickly. I very seldom run into any trouble myself and have written hundreds of articles about women and their works.--Ipigott (talk) 11:21, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I too am glad to help any time, Esauboeck. While Ian is a polyglot, I am best at research and can usually assist with sources, as I have access to multiple archives. There is sometimes an issue because I live in Mexico, but I have developed tactics and tools to get around IP issues and access for many topics. I too very seldom have run into issues on articles I have written, but when I do, I quickly stick my hand up to a few trusted editors who are always willing to step in. There is a learning curve for Wikipedia for sure. I was ready to quit almost daily when I first started, but I am working toward creating my 1000th article by the end of the year with only 1 deletion. If we are ever going to be able to change the policies that work against scholarship, we have to retain scholars, so I hope you stick around. SusunW (talk) 13:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I can help you with learning the ropes around here, Esauboeck. Also, I'm well-connected in the community, so I may be able to assist in that way. I've written a lot of articles myself and I'm a polyglot, too (but not German language). So you see, you can count on several of us to be your wiki friends, supporting you in your work around here. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you. I appreciate your support. For the moment, I think that Spitzi is the one I really wanted to see on Wikipedia, and don't have a lot of others that I want to go through this gauntlet for again! I wrote the other two pieces,on Annie Harmon and Hanns Diehl, as a favor to others, and my husband dealt with the submission process. He wanted to share a lot more subjects, but he's so frustrated by this experience that he may give up on Wikipedia all together. Give us some time and we may come around again. In the meantime, good luck! Keep up the scholarship! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 17:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I forgot to sign that last entry with the little tildes! Esauboeck (talk) 18:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

And thanks for the list of other people who need entries. Perhaps when I cool down a bit, I might consider working on them. Esauboeck (talk) 18:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

@Esauboeck: definitely take your time, but if and when you are ready, we are here to help. I'm glad Ipigott and SusunW and willing to help, too. You couldn't be in better hands: both are amazing article writers. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:02, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Love your userpage!

Writing a pseudo-article is such an awesome way to share some information about yourself! Best of luck on your well-deserved RfA, though judging by the early returns I don't think you are going to need any. :) CThomas³ (talk) 03:43, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah... shame I'm about to tag it per WP:FAKEARTICLE :p ;) — fortunavelut luna 13:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Cthomas3 and Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: I needed a grin! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:31, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

You mean grin surely :D — fortunavelut luna

Draft:Cranston Public Library

If you need a break from RfA stress, I cordially invite you to take a look at Draft:Cranston Public Library (because I took a look at your user page). The creator is having some issues understanding reliable sources, and seems to have run into some socking issues on commons. However, I think there's potential here, but I'm no expert on what makes a library notable or which journals are generally accepted. If you've got time and interest, great! If not, great also. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 04:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@78.26: I'll check it out after I answer the questions that popped up overnight. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Spitzmueller entry

HI Megalibrarygirl: Is this the way I respond to your message about needing more sources for my entry on Anna Spitzmueller? I am baffled that you would need more sources than I have listed here! Part of the reason I wrote this was because she is such an influential and important WOMAN of her time and place about which so little is written! What kind of sources do you mean? Isn't a three-hour video from the Albertina Museum in Vienna a good enough verification of her significance? I can include a whole raft more of her writings, all in German, but she is only mentioned briefly in a gillion dissertations, and other articles. I am really vexed by your question! I thought that this was the purpose of trying to add more women to Wikipedia--that they are underrepresented in the literature.

Keep in mind as well that she came from an era when it was not polite or desirable to be self-aggrandizing. Do you need more sources about ME? I'm really angry about this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 22:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck Yes, you got this right! Thanks for reaching out to me. Working on women's biographies on Wikipedia can be tough. They are often more likely to be targeted for deletion if there aren't enough sources. In my opinion, Spitzmueller looks notable. But adding more sources will ensure the good article you've written will stay on Wikipedia without being challenged. If you have news sources or reviews of her work, that would be great. I can't access all of the information about her, but know it's out there. It's OK if it's on offline source. A good primer on women's bios is here: WP:WMN. So in a nutshell, I want to move your article into mainspace, but I'm worried it will be unfairly targeted without more sources. Please feel free to contact me for further clarification or help. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

AARRGH! There aren't any more "sources", and that's why I wrote about her! Who would challenge what has been written? Does that mean someone would think I made this all up? Is that the reason you can't "approve" this? Explain to me what sources would be appropriate, OK? Perhaps if you look at my page again--I have added my CV--my own credentials will be validation enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 23:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Esauboeck: I understand your frustration. I have found a little bit more about her. For example, I found this mention of her teaching in Vienna https://www.newspapers.com/clip/14167195/. I guess we could try moving the article out to mainspace and see what happens. I'm just very protective of women's bios: I want them to "thrive" on Wikipedia. I was hoping you might have additional resources in German that I don't have access to. In addition, I can have members of my WikiProject take a look at it. I'll post on the talk page and see if we get some hits there. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

There are many mentions of her in dissertations, and in newspaper articles, but really, you want all of those, too? I really cannot believe you think that a 3-hour video from the Albertina is not enough! And I will say again: THE REASON I WROTE THIS WHOLE PIECE, AS I MAKE CLEAR IN MY BLOG, IS THAT SHE WAS SO OFTEN INVISIBLE BECAUSE SHE WAS A WOMAN IN A MAN'S WORLD AT A TIME WHEN MEN TOOK ALL THE CREDIT! If you really want me to put in every single mention of her that I have, then OK, but that seems really overkill. I even have a mention of her giving a talk at the Library of Congress! So please, do with it what you will, I cannot imagine why or how anyone would "target" this inclusion. On what grounds? Seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 23:27, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Is the question mentions of her in English? Is that what you mean by more sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 23:41, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck I probably shouldn't have used the word "targeted." What will happen is that if someone thinks the article doesn't pass WP:GNG, it will be nominated for deletion. I don't want that to happen. I'd say, go for the "overkill." It not only protects your article, but helps others interested in the topic be referred to your sources. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

No, I'm done! If you want to add more, if your friends find more, fine. I really cannot imagine that someone will take issue with this, but if they do, so be it. I am truly baffled by these intricacies, when I think of the truly inadequate entries I have seen in Wikipedia, for all manner of important figures, and less important ones as well. Perhaps I should just submit this to the German Wikipedia page, but I would have to do a lot of work to get a good translation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 00:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck I understand your frustration and I didn't want to cause any of it myself! I can work on it and I'm happy to help. I love working on women's bios. If you have anything, let me know. Some of our editors, like Ipigott are fluent in German, so maybe he or someone he knows can find other sources. Also, maybe I'm being too conservative and should just move it out, (pinging SusunW). I just wanted to make sure you had a good experience on Wikipedia. I'm sorry if I've made it more complex and frustrating for you. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:50, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I really do think you're being overly cautious here, but knowing what kind of weirdly picky criticisms and revisions my husband has had to go through with perfectly legitimate Wikipedia entries before, you may be right. I think I'm just going to give up on this whole Wikipedia enterprise, though. Why not just throw this one out there, and see what happens? I mean, really, are there people out there that are THAT picky and small-minded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 00:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm just questioning what KIND of sources you think would be helpful! As an academic, I have given you the most important of her publications, and see no reason that you would need references to her name in newspapers or other organs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 01:00, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

• Esauboeck, without having looked at the article I am going to guess that you need secondary, not primary sources. Yes, we need references from newspapers or other organs--that's how this works. And please sign your messages so I don't run into these edit conflicts. Drmies (talk) 01:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck I don't know if this will help, but I came from an academic background as well, so I understand your frustration. WP is not the same, in fact, in a lot of ways, it is the opposite of creating an academic work. One cannot do original research, one cannot draw conclusions, primary sources are frowned upon, especially ones created by the subject. Her interview can add details to the secondary sourcing, but it is not considered as a source which verifies that she meets the General Notability Guides. That being said, I don't think the problem is lack of sourcing per se, more like it is hard to judge the sources because most of them are off-line. The goal is to have sufficient coverage in secondary sourcing to complete a comprehensive biographical piece without original research having been done. It doesn't (or I should say shouldn't) matter if the sources are in English, but there is a real bias (though the guidelines do not require sourcing to be on-line) if someone cannot access the sourcing. The best way to combat that is to make sure that you have in-line citations to the sourcing that is available. When whole paragraphs are uncited, it is a red flag for reviewers. Add citations as they occur in the sources to the article, at a minimum at the end of the paragraphs. If the majority of them come from your sources other than the interview, it should be sufficient, IMO, for Sue to move it to mainspace. If the majority of the material comes from the interview, that would be an issue, as the bulk of the entry cannot come from primary sourcing. I hope this helps, please ping me if I can help in any way. SusunW (talk) 02:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to you all. I give up. Given these attitudes, I guess Fr. Dr. Spitzmueller doesn't deserve a Wikipedia entry. Oh, well....I'll try on German Wikipedia, maybe. And Megalibrarygirl, I see where you're coming from now. I would still like you to try to put it up. If it's shot down, then so be it...I don't want to play in this sandbox anymore.Esauboeck (talk) 02:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck: I see you have taken a deep personal interest in Anna Spitzmüller. I enjoyed reading your detailed biography here. I have a feeling you must have come across useful sources elsewhere, documenting all the items you cover. I'm surprised you could not find any obits. Perhaps the Austro-American institute in Vienna can help you out. In any case, I think your article could be moved to the Wikipedia mainspace as it is but we should maybe wait a few days to see if anyone else can add sources. I hope this frustrating experience does not discourage you from writing more articles on Wikipedia. You are obviously a talented writer. P.S. I have found a useful secondary source: Weissgärber, Hermann (2016). You Can't Copy Tradition: A View on the Eventful History and Bilateral Work of the Austro-American Institute of Education from 1926 – 2016. Volume 1 (1926-1971). BoD – Books on Demand. pp. 155–. ISBN 978-3-7412-1906-1. I've added it to the lead but you could draw on it for referencing the body of the article.--Ipigott (talk) 07:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC).

Sue: If you are really interested in following this further, Spitzmüller also has a biography in Lexikon österreichischer Frauen, Böhlau Verlag. Perhaps one of your Austrian librarian friends could copy it to you.--Ipigott (talk) 09:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ipigott: Thanks for the info. I do want to help Esauboeck put her into Wikipedia and I'm happy to add sources. I'll reach out to my librarian folks. :) @SusunW: Thanks so much for your perspective. I really do think Spitzmuller is notable, but I wanted to ensure it was "watertight" before I moved it out. I've been trying to help clean out the backlog in AfC for notable women and ran across the article. I think I'll give it a few days, then move it based on your advice. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:44, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Ipigott, you should note that I have cited Weissgaerber's book in my article, since I provided Weissgaerber with the sections on Spitzmueller's history that he includes in that book! He quotes me throughout! I wrote most of this while in Vienna, I studied at that Institute, and most of my information came from Viennese sources. I had several librarians at the Nationalbibliothek and the Bibliothek Wien help me with my research, we scanned all of the Austrian newspapers for other obits, and found none. As for the Lexikon oesterreichischer Frauen: please show me the entry for Spitzmueller that you have found, because she was not included in the volume that I consulted in Vienna. Perhaps she was in a later or earlier volume?Esauboeck (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck: You may have contributed to You Can't Copy Tradition but from the copy I can see on the internet and the biographical data I have found, you are not cited as an author. Maybe it would help to remove your name as the author in the citation, in which case it would be a valid secondary source. Spitzmüller is listed in the index of the 4th volume of the Lexikon, 2016 edition: see here.--Ipigott (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for showing me the list of names from the newest Lexikon. I am proud to say that Petra Unger, who contributes to the Lexikon, added Spitzmueller to the newest edition based on my information! She had told me she was going to do that, but I didn't know the newest edition had already appeared (I met with Unger in 2015). Megalibrarygirl, do you want to include that reference, too? Esauboeck (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Yay! Thank you Ipigott Poco y poco progresamos! Now to find the actual entry. SusunW (talk) 16:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I have made one more reference in the Spitzmüller entry. May we now proceed to put it up? Or is there something else I need to do first? Do you put it up now or do I have to do that? Esauboeck (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I would also note that Ipigott's reference to the Lexikon oesterreichischer Frauen is for the newest volume, which was not available when I wrote this entry. I'm pretty sure that Petra Unger is responsible for including Spitzmüller in this volume, and that the information came from me; we met in 2015, and she thanked me for alerting her to the omission of Spitzmüller everywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esauboeck (talk • contribs) 23:02, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck: The obituary by Gunz, In memoriam Anna Spitzmüller, seems to be an important source. I see that it was quoted by Christina Schedlmayer in her dissertation and that you are also using it as a reference. Do you have a full copy? If not, Megalibrarygirl many be able to access Kunsthistoriker aktuell 1/2002, p. 8 and see exactly what details it includes.

Before you move the article into the mainspace, I think it would also be useful for you to expand the lead, describing in more detail why Spitzmüller was an outstanding figure. Otherwise it could be moved to mainspace anyway where others will be able to contribute more easily.--Ipigott (talk) 09:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ipigott, Esauboeck, and SusunW: thank you all for your patience. I'm going to move the article out into mainspace so that it will be easier for others to contribute. I'll be keeping an eye on it. I am unable to access the particular journal, but I did find this article which may or may not be of use. :) Thank you all for your help in making sure this new article is as successful as it can be. Easauboeck, I hope this experience has not soured you on writing for Wikipedia. We need more editors to contribute information about women, especially women from non-English speaking countries. I hope you understand I was just trying to make sure this article would thrive on the encyclopedia. I hope to work with you again in the future. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Esauboeck. I really enjoyed reading the Spitzmueller article; she is definitely notable. I see how frustrating this experience has been in getting the article to "mainspace", and I am truly sorry for that. Still, I hope you stick around! My personal experience was very different. I created my first article in June 2007 and thought I was writing in a void: no one interacted with me for weeks.

I thought this list of missing women art historians might interest you (if not, no worries). It was compiled for WikiProject Women in Red by a "bot", listing all the women art historian articles in other (not English) language Wikipedias. There are similar lists for women art critics, art collectors, illustrators, and so forth. Also, I'm adding Missvain and Alafarge to the conversation as they have academic backgrounds in these areas and, maybe even more importantly, they are friendly/helpful Wikipedians. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I want to join in on thanking Esauboeck for the splendid work on the Spitzmueller page. I am another editor who gets enormously frustration over some of Wikipedia's rules, and it's also the case, as Megalibrarygirl indicates, that a certain level of paranoia over deletionism comes with the territory. You might want to consider (a) not putting drafts through AfC at all and (b) securing Autopatrolled rights so that your articles don't have to be reviewed by random people with inadequate expertise. I read your bio on your blog— and seriously, there is not much Wikipedia needs more right now than someone with your kind of background in research & writing. Cheers, Alafarge (talk) 01:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Edit summaries

It's a shame this never came up before really- but if you go to Preferences > Editing, you can check the box for "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary"- it stops you from saving the page without a summary. Perfect! Promise SoWhy you'll check that box! (although I agree it's not a major malfunction when it's just in user space) Good luck — fortunavelut luna 16:54, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Oooh! Good tip, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi! Thank you! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Came here to suggest the same thing, as usual, FIM beat me to it. In addendum, remember that articles you create as drafts in your userspace will sooner or later be in the mainspace and then people will want to know why you made the changes you did. On a side note, since you are involved in WIR and known to find sources others can only dream of, I could use some help at User:SoWhy/Jessie Duckstein. I worked with what I could find on GBooks and Newspapers.com but I guess there is more to be found in book form, so if you have some spare time, I'd be happy for the help. After seeing an episode of Archer(!) where they mentioned Alaska P. Davidson as the first female FBI agent and being shocked to find that she had no article, I kinda set a goal to create articles about all female agents before 1972 (three women) but the age of the subjects means there are limited online sources. Regards SoWhy 07:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Perfectly answered

Hi, as I said you've already got my support, but I just wanted to drop a note saying I'm thoroughly impressed with your answer to my question - it shows you have a significant amount of clue, compassion and level-headedness. You're going to make a great administrator, and I look forward to working with you -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 17:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

PS, for the above thread about personal information, once you're an administrator I recommend you copy all the wikitext from that page, delete the page, and paste it all back in (removing the personal information before saving). Unfortunately, the amount of harassment you receive will increase once you start using the bit -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 17:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

@There'sNoTime: thanks for stopping by and I appreciate the idea for removing personal info. I am going to have to decide what I'm ok with because I am a public person in general. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I just edited your userpage to correct a closing tag

Here. This seems uncontroversial enough, but well.

Also... You include a lot of personal info on that userpage. Once you are an admin (which is probably going to be soon, by the looks of things), that page will get quite a few more eyeballs (even if you do not get dragged into mud fights). Attached to the eyeballs will be, statistically speaking, quite a few weirdos, and I am not sure you want your email address to be listed here. I don't want to sound like a know-it-all, it's your choice and all that, but if you have never gotten any hate mail, trust me on that one and remove the email. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 18:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Tigraan: thanks for the advice. I'm not sure what to do about all of it. The thing is that when I first joined Wikipedia and then became more involved, I felt that being as open as possible was the way to go. So far, I've been very lucky about not being harassed online in any venue (except Twitter). I'll think about it. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

If you just remove the email from the page, it will probably cut down the risk of hatemail by a large factor (maybe you could request it WP:OVERSIGHTed, if you want to purge the page history as well). You seem to have Special:EmailUser activated, so I don't see any reason to just put it out in the open.

As for the rest, well... We probably have very different standards about what we are OK with sharing on the internet. It is your decision to make. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 20:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not going to take a position on how much you should share; everyone has to make that decision themselves. :-) I will, however, note that if/when you become an admin, you could remove all the info you want, then revdel all the old revisions of your userpage. (I've done it over at User:The ed17.) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 04:10, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps I shouldn't be intervening here but I really welcome Megalibrarygirl's openness. I have been pretty active on Wikipedia for over ten years and have also included my email on my user page. As a result, I have had many direct contacts from people interested in the articles and biographies I have worked on. In all cases they have been polite and often extremely constructive. I still regularly correspond with quite a few. I am not interested in becoming an administrator (had too much of that in real life) but if I were, I would not remove my email. In any case, I'm very pleased to hear MLG is nearing adminship. She's one of the best.--Ipigott (talk) 10:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

• They won't oversight (supress) the email address as a punitive measure, nor is it normal procedure to. But, revdeling it is actually a good move; as an admin (or even a normal user), you never know who's going to use your details as a stick against you. My point just being, internet is not a nice place and that's the best-case scenario. Please do not take my weirdly pessimistic attitude for its word, it's just my two cents. :) --QEDK (愛 • 海) 16:18, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate everyone's input here. Thank you Tigraan, Ipigott and QEDK for the advice. I am going to think about what I can/will live with since it is important to me to be a public person. I exist. I am a woman. And I have the right to be a woman on the internet. That's always been my take. But I've never been seriously harassed, so I don't know what that will be like. I will give it serious consideration, though. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:35, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Best Wishes

I do not think it worthwhile to pile on in the RfA, but I did want to thank you for your article work, and good luck. Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:40, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Alanscottwalker! I appreciate it very much! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

This is a message to Alafarge: how do I respond to someone specifically on these threads? Again, Wikipedia is counterintuitive! Anyway, I just wanted to thank Alafarge for her support and good advice! If I ever get up the courage to put up another entry, I will follow her advice, I think! Esauboeck (talk) 23:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Esauboeck if you want to repsond to Alafarge type {{u|Alafarge}} or to reply to a bunch of folks {{yo|Alafarge|SusunW|Megalibrarygirl}} SusunW (talk) 23:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Alafarge AND SusanW, thanks for the advice. Where do I find that straight line on my keyboard? Esauboeck (talk) 23:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

@Esauboeck: On mine it's to the left of the "Z", the shifted version of the "\" key. But I think keyboards vary in layout of their non-alphanumerical keys: good luck. PamD 08:05, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Still haven't found it on my keyboard, yoinks! I just use the built-in drop down editing menu > Special characters > Symbols > | Neil S. Walker (t@lk) 08:59, 12 October 2017 (UTC) Addendum: Good lord. Inspired to search again, I found that I just needed to change my keyboard setting to "English (United States) US keyboard" and the pipe miraculously (ahem) returned to the correct spot: SHIFT+\ Live and learn, people, live and learn. Neil S. Walker (t@lk) 09:08, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Glad you found it. For the future: If you have a numeric keypad, you can also insert the character by holding down the ALT key while typing 0124 on the numeric keypad. Regards SoWhy 09:10, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Signpost wikiproject report request

Hi Megalibrarygirl, would you be willing to do another WikiProject report? This would be a little different from usual, as there are six projects (Military history, video games, Medicine, Oregon, Skepticism, Women's health) which have been using a new tool to recommend new project members. The tool's author has proposed a draft article but I though it might work better as (or with) a WikiProject report. What do you think? Cheers, Evad37 [talk] 03:18, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

@Evad37: is this the tool created by Bobo.03? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:49, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's the one I built! I am trying to put up a signpost/report to publicize it. Bobo.03 (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I can help edit the draft and interview others who have used the tool that Bobo.03 created. I've helped use it, too, though, Evad37, so if there's no conflict of interest, I can help. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:58, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't think just using the tool would be a conflict. Though if you think it's appropriate, you could have a disclaimer note in or at the end of the article. - Evad37 [talk] 00:44, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Evad37, thank you for working on this. I wonder how long would this process take? I wish to have some timeline if possible. Thanks! Bobo.03 (talk) 02:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Bobo.03: Well, there's two factors to consider here: However long it takes to conduct the interviews and write up the piece (which can vary, depending on how much time Megalibrarygirl and the interview respondents have available), plus however long until the next Signpost is published (publishing frequency is roughly every two-to-three weeks). Sorry I can't give you anything much more precise than that. - Evad37 [talk] 00:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

@Evad37 and Bobo.03: if I get involved, I probably won't be up to doing much until after the 16th of October. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I think it would be fine. Thanks for your help! In the meanwhile, anything I can assistant on this, @Evad37:? Bobo.03 (talk) 14:31, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Respect

I did like the way you handled Q.8 in your current RfA. You AGFf'ed and got on with answering the question. I am sensing a strange (and I am convinced) purely subconscious attempt to protect you purely due to some gender-related thing. You brushed aside what could be arguably called borderline censorship, assumed good faith to your questioner, and gave a powerful response. I did not want to pile on previously - your qualities are patently obvious - but it was that response that got you my vote. I look forward to working with you in the future. Simon. Irondome (talk) 02:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

This is a really amazing compliment. I appreciate it a lot, Irondome. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

• + 1, just what we want to see in admins. Congrats on passing (an hour early, but meh). DrStrauss talk 19:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, DrStrauss! I was petrified to try, but I'm glad Ritchie333 and Rosiestep encouraged me. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:58, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

I think you deserve this for having the patience to answer all 28 questions and keep your head. 28 questions!?! What has RfA come to... Anyway, congrats! – filelakeshoe (t / c)  20:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Filelakeshoe:, Thank you! I'll take that tasty beer. I'm going to pretend it's my favorite IPA. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Your RFA

Welcome to the admin corps.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:43, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Most heartfelt congratulations, Sue. While I personally cannot imagine ever wanting to become an admin (had enough supervisory experience during my career to last 3 lifetimes) I am thrilled to have you as a go-to when needed. Best of luck! SusunW (talk) 20:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate your support, SusunW! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Congrats :)

Congrats on such a successful RFA :) I'm sure you'll do an amazing job with the tools! TonyBallioni (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, TonyBallioni! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A big hooyah for a fellow veteran :) ☆ Bri (talk) 22:38, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Bri! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Congratulations on one of the most successful RfAs ever! —MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 22:14, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

My most favorite kind of cookie! Thank you, MRD2014! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Congrats on the RfA :)

Dysklyver 22:42, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

OMG! Too cute! Thanks, A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Welcome aboard, MegalibraryGirlAdmin (good title for a movie)

Woo! Hoo! Let the bells ring out and the banners fly! Welcome aboard. Admin dashboard might be a useful link for you. — Maile (talk) 22:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, Maile66! I need all the help I can get. :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations! Alex Shih^Talk 22:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Alex Shih! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Now you're an administrator

... people like Francis Schonken can't hassle you any more. If they do they're likely to get blocked. Schonken doesn't want you to discuss the issue of sexist administrators - here's the question in case you didn't see it. What's your view?

Additional question from 62.30.231.67

29. Congratulations. It looks like your RfA is going to succeed by the biggest margin ever. Please read this exchange:

Ah, that ref desk troll – better known as Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Vote (X) for Change – supposed to be of the female persuasion, btw. Blocked. I'll the page is now on my watch list, but no guarantees. Favonian (talk) 14:59, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I wonder who persuaded her.... _Muffled ^Pocketed 15:00, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Her progenitors have much to answer for! Favonian (talk) 15:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi's behaviour is so consistently bad that an editor recently challenged him to a duel Special:Permalink/805458887#Straw poll: Ban Baseball Bugs from the Reference desk.Do you consider the tone of the discussion to be sexist? Another example was cited here: [1]. Jayron32's comment was made three weeks after this:

… "I like my coffee like I like my women... Frigid and bitter..." --Jayron32 13:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

The edit summary was:

Strange prices: budumbumchisss

Please read this exchange:

I was replying to a comment by Blueboar on the subject of Christianity and to do so I quoted a previous Humanities desk post. The filter rejected it claiming I am a "Ref desk Nazi". I fail to see why editors discussing Christianity should be categorised in this way. Maybe the filter should be retired? 92.8.220.234 (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, you got caught by the wrong filter. Nice to see you again Vote (X) for Change. --Jayron32 17:53, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

You've probably been following the Harvey Weinstein story. Alice Evans refers to "sociopaths in positions of control in Hollywood"[2]. Do you think Wikipedia has a similar problem with its administrators and do you have any ideas for solving it? 92.8.220.217 (talk) 13:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.185.152.105 (talk) 08:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

'Congratulations!. You really deserved it. I enjoyed reading the amazing number of strong messages of support. There's certainly lots you can help with on WiR but it would also be good to have your assistance on all the related projects and discussions on women. If ever I can help you out with anything, don't hesitate to let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 09:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

welcome to the mop corps

Congratulations on your successful RFA! It's now your turn to hear what the puppy told me after my RFA passed – ten long, sordid, I'm-typing-this-stuff-when-I-could-be-knitting years ago:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable. I'd be shocked if you haven't done it already.) Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.) Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.) Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for? Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway. Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able. Katietalk 23:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. Or perhaps worse. Who knows. All rights released under GFDL.

LMAO! I love this, KrakatoaKatie! Thank you! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: I don't believe I have ever seen a more accurate description of the job. — Maile (talk) 00:15, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, for running for adminship, and congratulations on the successful RfA. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Northamerica1000! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:44, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!!!--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:53, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

• Piling on... Well done indeed, and welcome! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Sphilbrick and Dodger67! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Well done

From a new administrator to a very new administrator: Congratulations! Jump right in. There is plenty of work to do. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes! It does feel that way, Cullen328 and I feel like I'm already behind! But I'm equal to it. Call on me anytime. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

congrats on adminship

Hi Megalibrarygirl,a great big congratulations from the Penguin Cabal, SQUARRKKK!!!! Coolabahapple (talk) 06:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Coolabahapple thank you! Penguins rule and so does Linux. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Welcome to the admin corps, Megalibrarygirl! Now that you're in, you will quickly see that this is no "officers club" where everyone sits around in fancifully embroidered lounge chairs reading books: this is WAR against the vandals! Learn to polish your boots and scrub those latrines, and to practice the ancient art of mop-fu! You'll need a lot of caffeine for this, soldier. Here, have some coffee: the only drink I trust to keep me alive! —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Reporting for duty, K6ka, coffee in hand! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

To work!

Congratulations Mega on your remarkable success in your recent RfA! I will not pile on with congrats because I feel I commented as to your skills and excellent inter-personal relations skills and your independence in the thread above, 'Respect'.

As I said there, I look forward to working with you. Now, down to work. I was surprised that Rose Rosenberg is not redlisted in the W.I.R project by country. Rose is a distant relation of mine, and I first heard of her at a young age during family talks. She was the Private secretary to Ramsay MacDonald for 15 years, and had a very colourful life generally. She was the first Jewish woman to achieve high office in the British political scene and was in addition only the second female PS in British history. this will give you a good intro into the background of her. I think she would satisfy WP:NOTABLE guidelines. I would like to work with you on creating an article about her. I am unsure whether I would be allowed to however, as she is a distant relation. However, I think no major COI exists. I would be happy to work with you on this, if Rose interests you as a potential subject for an article. Once again, congratulations! Regards, Simon. Irondome (talk) 01:44, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Irondome! She sounds very interesting! I think that SusunW would be a good person to rope in since she is amazing at digging out details on women's lives and may be interested as well. Since she's a distant relation, I don't think there is a COI, but just to be on the safe side, why don't you let us take the lead? Please feel free to provide us with any sources/pictures you may have since that would be totally OK. I'm still sorting through a backlog since going through the RfA interrupted my workflow, so I'll add her to my list and ping you as things go forward. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:31, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I have found plenty of information that shows she meets our notability requirements, but so far, no basic biographical information. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Looks like she was born in 1909, (age given as 20 in 1929), so let me do some research in genealogical databases. SusunW (talk) 17:54, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Irondome Since you are a distant relative, maybe you can assist? I find nothing about her in the press that I can definitively say is her after a 1939 shark catch. ;) I am unable to ascertain any genealogical ties, as I don't have enough biographical information to do so. Do you know parent's names, did she marry, when she died? It may be that additional information can be located in secondary sources if we have this information. Thanks! SusunW (talk) 18:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

(e/c):::Hi there Megalibrarygirl! I would be very happy to let others do the digging here! I was just a little sad that she didn't have a little mention on WP. As I say, I first heard of her as a child, and subsequently when I mentioned this to others in relation to politics etc I would invariably get a polite version of 'who the hell was she', so old Rose appears to have been written out of history, although there appear to be many mentions of her on a google book search. It is one of those 'she was your great great aunt twice removed by your grandfather's mother's cousin' which was the explanation I got as to connection. At least it sounded like that, and I was about 10. Unfortunately most of the U.K branch of my family have died or been scattered, so I am working on the task of figuring out my geneology. (I can never spell that word right :)) Most of the family moved to the U.S in the 1890's from the old Austro-Hungarian Empire and I believe Russian occupied Poland. The Adler branch of the family appears to have been the most notable, represented strongly in theatre and acting. If I can dig up any more info I will get in touch. Thanks for the ping MLG! regards, Simon. Irondome (talk) 18:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi SusunW and I really appreciate you taking the time. I just remember being given this info quite specifically when I was very young. It may be erroneous or there may be a linkage. There may be a connection to a cousin, Phil Rose, who I think shortened his surname because he was doing television work with Associated Television and other early British TV commercial channels. He was a professional musician. He settled in Israel 59-60 I think. There also seems to have been a Rosenberg who was a cameraman at Ealing Studios, who again I believe was known as Rose. He was trying to get my mum's brother, Lou Adler into Ealing as a trainee cameraman, but something went wrong. He ended up working for Kodak. This would have been early 50's. I will do some digging Susun. Whether she is some twice removed great aunt or not, she would make a good article subject. regards, Simon. Irondome (talk) 18:45, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Not that your adminship isn't a very fine thing, but here's special appreciation for all you did at Cranston Public Library while your RfA was running. Exemplary (and I imagine tedious) work, I am truly amazed at the talent and effort you lent towards this. Many, many thanks. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 18:45, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing the article to my attention, 78.26. Working on citations is actually kind of relaxing to me! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in gaming

Hi there, I was taking a look at your RfA page, and I see that miraculous abilities have been ascribed to you. :) I have several former articles in draft state at this time, and when you have a chance I was wondering if you would be able to take a look at these and see if there is anything you can do to improve them: Draft:Amanda Hamon Kunz, Draft:Crystal Frasier, User:Newimpartial/Emily Care Boss, Draft:Gaye O'Keefe, and Draft:Jessica Price. Even just a little bit of cleanup would be appreciated really, but if you can do more with sourcing or whatnot, I could probably publish them back to being articles! BOZ (talk) 06:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi BOZ, I'll definitely take a look! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you kindly! BOZ (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks much, Megalibrarygirl! I figured on Crystal Frasier, that one was merely redirected last year, and I moved it to draft to keep someone from trying to deleted it, so what you added may be enough to make it squeak on by the GNG... well, at least it's enough to give it a try, so I moved it back to article space. :) As for Emily Care Boss, that one got into draftspace as a result of AFD, but you found a few good sources so I figure that was enough to move it, and it someone challenges it then maybe we need a second AFD or DRV or something - but if no one challenges either of them, then I am happy with what we have so far. :) BOZ (talk) 05:26, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

@BOZ: I have a friend who has access to some more databases than I usually have at my fingertips. I'm going to ask him and see what else I can dig up. If worse comes to worse, you may want to include the information in the Pathfinders article for Amanda until there are more sources writing about them. I didn't find a lot of hits on Gaye or Jessica yet. But we'll see. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, fantastic, sounds great and thanks again! BOZ (talk) 18:44, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Megalibrarygirl, I don't want to ask for a bunch of your time, but I will ask for a little more if you don't mind.  :) There are about 30-odd tabletop RPG designer articles about women, and tabletop RPG articles are my own primary area of interest. As with many other fields, this one is particularly male dominated - there are a few hundred articles about male game designers! Several of these articles I looked at are very well sourced, but most are not. I don't know that there is any specific threat of deletion for any of them at this time, but of course any bio article with only one or two sources is always at risk. Rather than bring the whole list to you, I just pulled out seven of them that are currently tagged for needing sources; is there anything more you can add to any of these?: Anne Brown (game designer), Julie Ann Dawson, Lee Gold, Heike Kubasch, Wynn Mercere, Kate Novak, and Sue Weinlein Cook. BOZ (talk) 19:04, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

BOZ I'm not finding anything new on Anne Brown, Heike Kubasch and Julie Ann Dawson or Kate Novak. BTW, I totally remember reading Kate Novak's Azure Bonds when I was a kid. It really blew my mind. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, thank you kindly Megalibrarygirl! I appreciate anything you were able to do. If you are ever up for looking at more articles like these - either now or at some point in the future - just let me know. :) BOZ (talk) 21:04, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

BOZ I probably won't get to these until Monday or so, unless I end up editing tomorrow. That all depends on what my kids want to do with the end of the weekend. :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, enjoy your weekend! BOZ (talk) 02:09, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

You're too soft on these people Susan, before you know it they'll be asking you to get articles to FA for them. ;-) I had a quick look - Sue Weinlein Cook only had a small bit of personal information unsourced, so per WP:BLP that can simply go, rendering the tag superfluous. Heike Kubasch is mostly sourced except for her contributions to Monstrous Compendium, which I can fact-check to RPG fansites but not a lot else. Of course, for girl geeks, you can’t beat Sophie Wilson, who has her own exhibit at the Science Museum, London. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:18, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

LOL, Thanks, Ritchie333, but I think you have a soft heart, too, since you've been helping us out. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

LOL, well if you did want to put that much work into it, I wouldn't complain. :) BOZ (talk) 02:09, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Help with Filmography Readjustments

Would you be able to help me fix the filmographies for Martin Hub and Karin Booth. I tired myself but there are a bit of a mess, it would be very helpful! Thank you for you're time and consideration.Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Black BIC Ballpoint, I can add it to my list of "to-dos." :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Black BIC Ballpoint, I found sources, but I can't add films without sources, so Hub's page is a little bare. He has a lot of sources in Czech and Slovak, but I'm not fluent. I did find a couple of non-English sources that seemed decent, but maybe you know someone fluent? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know anyone either. I do appreciate what you've done for Hub and Booth alike, they came out looking better than before!Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 18:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Alba Rosa Viëtor

Thank you very much for finding some secondary sources. (talk) 17:35, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Joost.mollerus! I hope they can help. I looked in a couple of other databases, but came up short. I'll let know if I find anything else. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:04, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

An IPA for you!

A pint of Fullers IPA for you! You have good taste in beer. I like Marstons Old Empire, but this is my fallback brew when I'm in an IPA mood. Enjoy! Irondome (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Now I am thirsty! Thank you, Irondome! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Kudos

		The Original Barnstar
		For your excellent original work on United Order of Tents. Congrats on surviving the hell of RFA! Carrite (talk) 20:50, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Carrite! And feel free to bring any interesting topics to my attention in the future. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:01, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Disability and women's health

I think the draft is ready for mainspace. Before moving I would collect all the uncited sources currently scattered throughout the page to put them on the Talk page as "Sources for further development of the article". What say you? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:05, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, Dodger67! I've been slowly going through it and can continue work on it even after it's moved. I wanted to do more on maternity care. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I'm so sorry I hadn't realised your RFA had finished but anyway just wanted to say Congratulations on getting the bit :),
Happy editing blocking

–Davey2010^Talk 22:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Davey2010! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

November editathons from Women in Red: Join us!

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

Hello Megalibrarygirl/Archives/2017, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

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:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• 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) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Siobhan Flynn

I pinged you about this just now, but this draft is doing my head in. It looks salvageable, with lots of claims of importance that can be searched for, and there are loads and lots of hits when I type in various terms - just every single one falls short of what I would normally call an unimpeachable reliable source for a BLP. I wonder if you can succeed where I have failed admirably? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:14, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll take a look, Ritchie333. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Ritchie333 all I found were cites that show she was in certain roles. Maybe Dr. Blofeld will have some more resources or interest in looking into this since she's a Welsh actress. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Blofeld is not a Welsh actress. :-P I will have another look around, but for somebody who's been in so many films, and namechecked as an attractive redhead, it's mysterious how she's never so much as afforded an interview to The Guardian even once. Even Wickedly Welsh Chocolate was easier to rescue than this! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Ritchie333 Stupid grammar. Sorry Dr. Blofeld! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:57, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Input, please

I've just added an academic librarian's perspective to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Arbitrary break; could you provide a public librarian's perspective? Nyttend (talk) 23:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend, I'll take a look. Thanks for inviting me to comment. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for the input. I figured it would be useful to include, but I've always had an academic orientation (I only once interviewed for a public job, a reference position, and I was the runner-up), so I didn't want to attempt to describe your side of things. Nyttend (talk) 02:35, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm glad I was able to help a little, Nyttend. I wasn't even aware of the Wikipedia RefDesk project. It seems like a good idea on the surface. In general, I think reference desks of all sorts (virtual and physical) are important. We provide a unique service. I've worked in academic settings, too (though it's been years now since I did), but my impression is that all librarians face similar things at the reference desk. PhD's aren't always good at phrasing their questions, either. I suspect, though in an academic setting, you have less mental health issues to deal with and fewer people needing help to sign up for public assistance and so forth, though. Plus, don't most of you also teach how to use the library and so forth? Anyway, it's always good to talk to another librarian! Have a great weekend! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Before I got my current job (I'm in collection development), I'd mostly looked for reference positions, but I'd applied for anything I could do because I needed a job. Now, I've got an ideal mix — I love being in collection development (it's wonderful to be able to provide students and faculty with something that outright wasn't available to them until a few minutes before, I get to work with vendors to solve access issues, and sometimes I spend weeks working on big projects to obtain large collections to which suddenly everyone has access), but all of us still have shifts on the reference desk, so I get to have that face-to-face time with researchers (mostly students) and work with them to resolve what they're working on. I don't typically have how-to-use-the-library sessions (those are mostly the research-and-instruction librarians), although all of us have liaison work with a department, so I'll probably have some of that kind of work for my department. We don't normally have things like mental health issues or public assistance, although some time back I was contacted by someone from out-of-state who hoped to enrol and live off campus, so he wanted to know about transferring his Section 8 voucher. Nyttend (talk) 11:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Nyttend, I love collection development! I get to order all of our material for young adults and trying to figure out what will be interesting to them is a lot of fun. So many good books have been coming out for young adults. It sounds like you have a good job that gives you a lot of different experiences so you won't get bored! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:59, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!!!

Hi Megalibrarygirl,

Congratulations on your RfA and getting through the Spanish Inquisition.

I am a great believer in "ignoring all rules", some administrators want to live and die by the rules. Jimmy Wales once said "Ideally, our rules should be formed in such a fashion that an ordinary helpful kind thoughtful person doesn't really even need to know the rules. You just get to work, do something fun, and nobody hassles you as long as you are being thoughtful and kind" (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Ignore_all_rules/Archive_1#from_User_talk:Jimbo_Wales). There are just too many rules (that I don't know, even after 10 years!!!). I really get sick of the juvenile comments from some who oppose RfAs on the smallest of infringements. "To err is human". I feel if an editor wants to do the job of Administrator (and I don't), if they have say 6 months of good editing give them the job. As Jimmy Wales once said "...becoming a sysop is not a big deal", from Wikipedia:Administrators. SethWhales ^talk 20:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Seth Whales! It is refreshing to be finished with the RfA, though I think I did learn a lot from the process. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Mescaline cactus

I added more species to Mescaline cactus to not make the article redutant. --Jilja (talk) 21:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh! Good, Jilja. I was kind of second-guessing my decision anyway. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For being kind.

Jilja (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Jilja! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:04, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations! To you and to some others

"Closed as successful..." should have been "Closed as successful, after being subject to a few atrocious oppose !votes." Some of the best content I have authored has been related to cricket, and if I were to (ever) run for an Rfa (again), I don't think any editor would come out mentioning that therefore, they believe I would be tilted against football. Ergo, it was almost a disbelief in your Rfa to see such tainted gender-oriented views still being espoused by a few handful of our editors (including both experienced ones and even one who is !voting in an Rfa for the first time in his life). On the other hand, I actually found it very encouraging that there were quite a significant number of editors and administrators who showed their dissent at the said !votes. So along with heartiest congratulations to you, Megalibrarygirl, this is to convey thanks to a few other editors who stood for what I believe we all should stand for: The ed17, Gamaliel, Thibbs, Kudpung, GorillaWarfare, Snuge purveyor, Swarm, Mkdw, BsZ, Fuzheado, Dysklyver, Kablammo, Ad Orientem, Drmies, IOM, FIM, and some others I've missed. And of course, to Ritchie333 and Rosiestep too for nominating you. Once again, MLG, enjoy your stint as an admin. Cheers! Lourdes 03:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Yay! MLG, you're one of the most qualified candidates I've ever seen ask for the administrator bit. I'm ecstatic to add my congratulations to that of 281 other people. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

This RfA showed me in the strongest sense possible that Wikipedia is a community that comes together and supports one another. I kept an eye on everything, even though I was not going to get into arguing with the naysayers. I am humbled by many of the things that people wrote about me or in defense of me. It's an amazing feeling. Thank you, Lourdes. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I have been absent from editing since early in the month. I am sorry I missed the opportunity to support your RFA and push you toward 300 supports. Belated congratulations and good luck. Donner60 (talk) 04:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Question

View History screenshot

Can you tell me where/how I find out how many people have looked at a page? Someone told me that the Spitzmueller entry already had quite a few hits, but I don't know where I find that information. Thanks! Esauboeck (talk) 00:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Esauboeck! Yes, I'll walk you through it. First go to the article's page {Anna Spitzmüller). Then at the top, there are several tabs that read "Article | Talk | Read | Edit | View History" ect. Click "View History." Then click on "Page View Statistics," (See the screenshot). It will then take you to a page that will show a graph and how may viewers there are per day. :) Let me know if you need anything else! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:42, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Megalibrarygirl! I did actually figure it out! Now: I have made some changes on the page, addressing some of the questions posed. Are you able to remove the "Needs more citations" comment at the top of the sections? I can't figure out how that can be done! Thanks! Esauboeck (talk) 16:48, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

More Potential Collaboration?

Hi, Megalibrarygirl,

Thanks again for helping with Karin Booth and Martin Hub. I really appreciate it! If able, would you be able to add a few more things on you're "to-do list" as potential upgrades. The pages of Phyllis Kennedy (1914-1998), Caren Marsh Doll (b. 1919, still alive), and Dorothy Morris (1922-2011, Caren Marsh Doll's younger sister), need help with some of the biographical information and I am trying to compute a filmography for Kennedy and Doll but haven't had much luck. Hopefully, you might be able to help give these Golden Age of Hollywood Gals a facelift. It would mean a lot, thanks for you're time, consideration, and congrats on being, as I see, promoted to an administrator. You deserve it!Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 19:26, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Black BIC Ballpoint! I'm glad I could help earliers. I'll take a look at the other articles. A lot of the golden age actors and actresses are extensively covered in the news of their time. You may want to consider applying for access to Newspapers.com, which is where I find most of those sources if you're interested in working on these kinds of articles. :) In the meantime, I'll them to my list of "to-do's." Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for you're aid, your a blessing! I've heard of Newspapers.com, but am not very familiar with it. Will take a look and explore some more it in good time. Thanks so much for helping me give these gals some more "attention". Much appreciated!Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 17:46, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank You!

Megalibrarygirl, thank you SO MUCH for your work on the Cranston Public Library article. I appreciate all of the detailed work that you did to make the article stronger and better. Thank you for your editorial support on this project! Dlestre19 (talk) 17:42, 23 October 2017 (UTC)Dlestre19

You're welcome, Dlestre19! It was fun to work on and I'm glad I was able to help. :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:14, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I wonder if you could step in here...

Greetings, Megalibrarygirl, and congratulations on your phenomenal RFA. As you are an active contributor at WIR, I wonder if I could ask you to step in here. I've pretty much completed a review, but the nominator (Keilana) is not really active at the moment. I do not feel comfortable fixing the issues as a nominator, but I've no wish to fail the review either: so if a third person could pick up the article and work through the fairly straightforward points I've raised, it would be much appreciated. No obligation. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 06:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vanamonde! I'll see what I can do to address the issues. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:43, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Oops! @Vanamonde93: Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:44, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks! And apologies for a deceptive signature. "Vanamonde" was not available when I registered, but it was the username I always wanted. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 17:12, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Hi! I was able to address most of the issues. A few I can't because I don't have access to the source. I hope that helps. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:23, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks, Megalibrarygirl. I think there were only two that you missed, one of which is a formatting issue that I will try to fix. I don't think either of them are serious enough to hold up the GAR any longer. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 05:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Your request for adminship

Hi Megalibrarygirl, I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Congratulations for both your successful nomination and for your place on WP:RFX200 - impressive! As always, the administrators' reading list is worth reading and the new admin help pages are most certainly available if you feel that you might require some practice with the tools in a safe environment prior to applying them elsewhere on the project. Good luck! Acalamari 20:29, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Gosh. When I started this RfA, I thought "I hope we don't have too many 'no need for the tools' opposes and we get somewhere in the region of Ansh666's support". I never expected you to become second only to Cullen328 as the most successful RfA of all time. I am not worthy! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: If you keep nominating people, we'll eventually have to create WP:RFX400 GAB^gab 00:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

• Congrats and Best Wishes.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
• Congrats! -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
• (edit conflict) Congratulations! Take it slow -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 20:36, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
• Congratulations for adminship !! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:33, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Congrats..The admins' T-shirt for you. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:33, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333, Pharaoh of the Wizards, Ad Orientem, There'sNoTime, and CAPTAIN RAJU: I was both humbled and flabbergasted by the whole process. I've learned a lot and I feel... proud and lighter and a lot of other feelings all mixed up. Thank you. I will proudly display the shirt! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

• That didn't go too bad ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm glad it didn't, Boing! said Zebedee. I was super scared to go through the process, but it turned out better than I could possibly have imagined. I learned a lot. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:54, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

• Congratulations! You fell only 32 votes short of the record, an awesome effort! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:01, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Hawkeye7! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

• I honestly could not be more delighted, for you and for the project! A very hearty thanks for standing. Innisfree987 (talk) 21:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Innisfree987: thank you! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you can, with big congrats for your co-nominator! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:51, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

• Congrats, MLG. L3X1 (distænt write) 22:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, L3X1! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:45, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

• Some pile-on congratulations for the second-most-supported successful RFA in history! Keep up the good work. epicgenius (talk) 23:10, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Epicgenius! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

• Congratulations again on a well-deserved successful RfA. You made it look easy. :) CThomas³ (talk) 00:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I was petrified the whole time, Cthomas3! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

• Glad to have you in the corps, MLG - you definitely earned it. Best of luck in all your adminly tasks. GAB^gab 00:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
• Sorry you didn't get to WP:RFX300 but nevertheless, congratulations and welcome to the corps! Now get to work! Regards SoWhy 05:50, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
• Congraluations! You are now an administrator. Happy admin work! Redgro (talk) 12:04, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
• Belated congratulations. Mkdw ^talk 15:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Megalibrarygirl:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:16, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

You too, Northamerica1000! And also a happy Dia de los Muertos from me on the edge of Texas and Mexico, to you! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:23, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Livin' on the Edge... North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:11, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

New article

Hi.
I recently created Joanne Isham. Would you please take a look at it to see if everything is alright? Thanks a lot in advance. —usernamekiran(talk) 21:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 05:15, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Review

Did you "review" the article? I am not sure. Because usually I get notification if a page created by me gets reviewed/patrolled (I didnt get any regarding Isham). The sys-op flag regarding reviewing is known to be trouble maker. Also, if a sys-op or NPP/R editor adds tag through Twinkle, or removes speedy nomination, even then the page gets marked as patrolled. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:53, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

It is now. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

lol. I didn't mean you should do it, I was just curious about the process. But thanks a lot! :D
—usernamekiran(talk) 18:10, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Usernamekiran I was going to pass it through anyway, I just forgot to dot the i's and cross the t's. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I knew it, it's right there on Queen II Side Black track four - "She boils and she bakes and she never dots her i's" Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:23, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

lolol. Thanks Ritchie. It was bugging me too. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

sys-op tools

Hello again. I realised you got the t-shirt and all, but not the useful links for tools. Maybe you know them all already, but still I should post them here. I am super lazy, so here is a ready-made collection. You can also find more tools/links at User:Usernamekiran/command base. See you around. :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 18:15, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I forgot to say thanks for the link, Usernamekiran! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:11, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

lol. No need to be so formal. Also, it is a good idea to create a userpage with all the tools/to do list, and similar stuff that one needs to keep an eye on. Like my command base. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:05, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Hannah Conduct

"Have you got any smokey bacon?" I mentioned this in passing yesterday elsewhere, but I thought if I could get a second opinion on this, you'd be the ideal person. This woman is documented as having a collection of 9,000 crisp packets (that's "potato chips" over your side of the pond). Now that in itself is not worthy of an article, sure, but she also has a Huffington Post page where she claims, "Her work has been published in a number of British newspapers including The Guardian and The Evening Standard and she has been a Semi-finalist in the Wildlife Photographer of the Year Competition." which sounds a bit more promising. I can't find anything on the Guardian or Evening Standard's website, and a search for sources is completely hampered by her name, which keeps getting switched to "Hannah's conduct" and giving me back pages of legal cases which are completely off-topic. I have a feeling I'm barking up the wrong tree with this one, but that whole "collection of 9,000 crisp packets" tickles my sense of humour and love of the slightly bizarre and eccentric enough to want to send a suitable article to DYK. Can you help? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:50, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll see what I can dig up later today. I like the whimsical side of life, too, Ritchie333. I wonder what made her want to collect crisp packets? My family likes Doctor Who, especially my son, and when he was little, he got a kick out of the "alternative" names for foods like chips, crisps, biscuits, etc. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:15, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

I looked into this last night a bit; not a whole lot of sources available, and could also be a WP:BLP1E situation. That said, something about Conduct could potentially be added to Potato chip § Potato chip bag. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333 and Northamerica1000: I found all the sources you already had. Lexis Nexis Turned up nothing, nor did my usual databases have anything. I like North America's idea of adding her to the chip article. I recently wrote about the woman who helped develop a certain type of taco shell, and I was glad to see she could be easily linked since the article already mentioned her. Since Content is young, she might become more notable in the future--hopefully for her wildlife photography! :D Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cranston Public Library

On 28 October 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cranston Public Library, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Cranston Public Library delivered 4,657 items to homebound residents of Cranston, Rhode Island, in 2016 alone? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cranston Public Library. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cranston Public Library), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Megalibrarygirl:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Happy Halloween to you, too, Ser Amantio di Nicolao! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:10, 31 October 2017 (UTC)