User talk:Megalibrarygirl/Archives/2017/September
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Diana
I'm afraid I'm here to ask you for some urgent rescue work again, and this time it's on Death of Diana, Princess of Wales. It's queued to go onto the main page (as part of "On This Day") in about six hours but it's not in a very good shape, and under normal circumstances we would pull it. However, given the amount of news coverage this has had in the past week (being the 20th anniversary of the event tomorrow), I have held off in the hope I can get a team to retrospectively source the article. Can you help? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:43, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Ready and willing: I'm on it. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, I think we're down to a handful of [citation needed] tags, plus some questionable sources regarding the conspiracy theories which need looking it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- No problem Ritchie333. I was also thinking it may need some copyedit. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- I can't disagree with that. It ought to be possible to pull a decent article together with a proper copyedit and using the few book sources that actually discuss the whole event in a dispassionate factual tone. Given how much hot air this subject has brought up in the tabloid press over the last 20 years, I feel we should at least have a well-written, factually accurate and neutral article on it that people can go to. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:06, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 I did some copyedit & added references. I think I cleared up a lot of cites needed, but I also added one. I can add more tomorrow if needed. There's a lot in Newspapers.com. I hope the article is up to snuff! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:54, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- I can't disagree with that. It ought to be possible to pull a decent article together with a proper copyedit and using the few book sources that actually discuss the whole event in a dispassionate factual tone. Given how much hot air this subject has brought up in the tabloid press over the last 20 years, I feel we should at least have a well-written, factually accurate and neutral article on it that people can go to. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:06, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- No problem Ritchie333. I was also thinking it may need some copyedit. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, I think we're down to a handful of [citation needed] tags, plus some questionable sources regarding the conspiracy theories which need looking it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Ready and willing: I'm on it. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Home town girl makes good
Thought you might enjoy my Latina of the day. Delia Villegas Vorhauer SusunW (talk) 22:57, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- OMG, SusunW! I've been inside the high school she attended: it's beautiful. Also, I visit Las Cruces all the time. It's so cool to see people from your hometown on Wikipedia. :D Also, I love her smile. There's something so genuine about it. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I started collecting info on her yesterday and the more info I gathered the more I was impressed. My sister is a type-1 diabetic, so that was the first thing that caught me. Then by the 1977 conference and I was totally hooked. I knew I had to write her. SusunW (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm really glad you did, SusunW! I just finished the Pack Horse Library Project. I'd never heard of it until last week and I had to write about it. Now I'm tying up some loose ends on the article. It was a WPA program. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:12, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE that article. Women and books! What could be better. I think it should be your next GA nomination. SusunW (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, SusunW. It was really interesting and since it was a WPA project and you helped with all of those post office murals, I thought of you while I was working on it. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:19, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE that article. Women and books! What could be better. I think it should be your next GA nomination. SusunW (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm really glad you did, SusunW! I just finished the Pack Horse Library Project. I'd never heard of it until last week and I had to write about it. Now I'm tying up some loose ends on the article. It was a WPA program. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:12, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I started collecting info on her yesterday and the more info I gathered the more I was impressed. My sister is a type-1 diabetic, so that was the first thing that caught me. Then by the 1977 conference and I was totally hooked. I knew I had to write her. SusunW (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- OMG, SusunW! I've been inside the high school she attended: it's beautiful. Also, I visit Las Cruces all the time. It's so cool to see people from your hometown on Wikipedia. :D Also, I love her smile. There's something so genuine about it. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Seeking ceramicist article
Hello,
It was so nice to read your introduction on the Women in Red project page! Is it possible to ask for assistance in finding an article? It is not available from my library's subscription.
Betsy Wolfston. Ceramics Monthly [serial online]. January 1995;43:18.
Thank you for your time, and I understand if this isn't within scope.
Best wishes,
S SunnyBoi (talk) 09:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- @SunnyBoi: do you have the title of the article? If I don't have access, I can reach out to other librarians, too. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Oh, embarrassing, I have now been able to obtain the article! Thank you so much for your help, hopefully I can be better organised next time! SunnyBoi SunnyBoi (talk) 02:22, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, SunnyBoi. Don't hesitate to ask for help in the future. I'm a librarian, we love finding stuff. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Can you rescue this? There are sources, it's just far too girly-girl subject for me to deal with without reaching for the sick bag, I'm afraid. Either that, or I'm just an old fart who doesn't understand the youth of today. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:54, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: I'll take a look at it. Wow... a book called Adultolescence? Sounds totes legit. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well it checks out in a source and she's apparently got 4.5 million subscribers, so who am I to argue? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: I can't argue, either... I'm finding some decent sources in the sea of bubblegum. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:30, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333:, that's my kind of Gabbie! Now I want Pizza! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:56, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: I can't argue, either... I'm finding some decent sources in the sea of bubblegum. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:30, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well it checks out in a source and she's apparently got 4.5 million subscribers, so who am I to argue? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Want, want want .... what is this, "Wikipedian's slumber party, write articles, eat pizza and drink Jolt until everyone passes out in front of their laptop"? No chance, who'll do the washing up? Yes, muggins here, probably. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:16, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
I looked for more sources for Atherton House at SFgate.com and on google news and couldn't find any, can you help?Wikigirl97 (talk) 02:37, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- Page stalker here. Wikigirl97 books:[1], [2], [3], [4], and [5]. The National Register description here which gives architectural details, can only be viewed on Chrome. I learned this the hard way on several other articles I have done. Something is wrong in the coding. (On the ones I did, I input the website with the link and then added "|postscript=. Document can only be viewed using the Chrome browser.") SusunW (talk) 05:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks so much I added some more info to the page and thanks for introducing me to newspapers.com is it free? Also I do't know how to make the refs look all cutesy and right can you help? Lastly the newspaper article didn't seem to mention the house or did i miss it?Wikigirl97 (talk) 15:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi, Wikigirl97 you can sign up for Newspapers.com here once you have more than 500 edits. You're half-way there! Bookmark it and then apply. In the meantime, I have access to Newspapers.com, too and would be happy to clip articles for you if you need them. :) I can help you clean up your references. I use the Visual Editor most often to edit and it has a nice citation formatter. Also, thank you, SusunW for being my friendly page-stalker. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks so much I added some more info to the page and thanks for introducing me to newspapers.com is it free? Also I do't know how to make the refs look all cutesy and right can you help? Lastly the newspaper article didn't seem to mention the house or did i miss it?Wikigirl97 (talk) 15:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
- Wikigirl97 Newspapers.com is not free but you can apply for access through the WikiLibrary, once your Wikipedia account is at least 6 months old and you have at least 500 edits to the encyclopedia. Sorry about the San Francisco Chronicle clipping. I did not realize that it was in two parts. [6] is the second part, which says she left the estate to her children. I'll look at the references. The easiest instructions for completing references can be found here WP:WMN, i.e. use the template as shown in the doc. SusunW (talk) 16:20, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
- thankies girlsWikigirl97 (talk) 17:19, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately it turns out this editor is an abusive sockpuppet, sorry you were taken in by them Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:45, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting us know, Ritchie333. How frustrating. The truth is, SusunW and I have no way to know if someone is a sock puppet or not, so we always proceed as if a person contacting us in AGF. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- That's fine - that's how you should act, because we are here to write an encyclopedia - see User:Ritchie333/SPI considered harmful. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:50, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: True, and at least it turned out to not be a half-bad article about a historic home. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 *sigh* I am hoping that doesn't mean it will get deleted. The sources are good, Sue formatted them all, and I perused and edited the data. I guess I am naïve, as I cannot remotely figure out why anyone would ever become a sock puppet. Why bother doing something if can't do it the honorable way and if it runs the risk of being eliminated? Makes no sense to me at all. SusunW (talk) 22:00, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Nope, as long as other people have worked on it, it'll stay. If some admin does delete it, ping me, I'll restore it and dump a WP:WHALE on their desk. :-P Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:09, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, is this a reliable source? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:14, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Yeah, good call. That link goes to a blog that bills itself as "avocational." This is a better reference for the historic registry number: National Register. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, is this a reliable source? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:14, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Nope, as long as other people have worked on it, it'll stay. If some admin does delete it, ping me, I'll restore it and dump a WP:WHALE on their desk. :-P Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:09, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 *sigh* I am hoping that doesn't mean it will get deleted. The sources are good, Sue formatted them all, and I perused and edited the data. I guess I am naïve, as I cannot remotely figure out why anyone would ever become a sock puppet. Why bother doing something if can't do it the honorable way and if it runs the risk of being eliminated? Makes no sense to me at all. SusunW (talk) 22:00, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: True, and at least it turned out to not be a half-bad article about a historic home. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- That's fine - that's how you should act, because we are here to write an encyclopedia - see User:Ritchie333/SPI considered harmful. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:50, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting us know, Ritchie333. How frustrating. The truth is, SusunW and I have no way to know if someone is a sock puppet or not, so we always proceed as if a person contacting us in AGF. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Horse map
Do you mind if I alter the horse-icon map you used in the Pack Horse Library Project and use it in a couple of articles to show the locations of horse associations, arenas etc? I have a version in my sandbox here but can think of another couple articles I'd use it on besides the one that is intended for (it has no pictures, so it needs something). That is a really interesting article, by the way! White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:41, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Please do use it however you wish, White Arabian Filly! Glad you enjoyed the article, too. I love the idea of horseback riding librarians! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:42, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! I have the first two Foxfire books that talk about midwives and doctors riding horses in the mountains, and I'm wondering if the later ones might mention the riding librarians. They have a wealth of info on how the old-time mountain people lived and are fun to read anyway. White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:47, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, White Arabian Filly. Those women were certainly tough! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:52, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! I have the first two Foxfire books that talk about midwives and doctors riding horses in the mountains, and I'm wondering if the later ones might mention the riding librarians. They have a wealth of info on how the old-time mountain people lived and are fun to read anyway. White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:47, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
cerebral palsy overview?
Hi, I've been working on the cerebral palsy article (and its revamped daughter article, Management of cerebral palsy) for a few months now, mainly working on adding current sources and bringing in more information about the whole lifespan, some of the social model of disability (although disability studies is still a bit of a mystery to me). I see that you've been working on a bunch of disability stuff yourself, and was hoping you could help me with a problem I've found. I'm struggling to gain an overview of cerebral palsy myself - part of the reason why I started editing the article was because I wanted to know more. The most detailed websites available on CP are those made by lawyers, who want parents to sue their obstetricians. I feel like I've exhausted the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and other prominent .gov sources. When I go to medical textbooks, they tend to use CP and other developmental disabilities as shallow examples in thematic chapters, rather than have a chapter about CP itself. The definition of CP seems to have changed about ten years ago, too, with increased understanding of the neurological underpinnings of CP (while it seems that practically, assessment is still based on presentation rather than on brain imaging everyone with CP). The book chapters I have found focussing on CP tend to be about specialised aspects like eating or adulthood, rather than an overview. I have also been using the WP:MED's source search template to assist me in finding current review articles on CP, but these articles only briefly define CP. How can I find WP:MEDRS-quality, in-depth overviews of CP to build up my understanding and improve the article? Thank you for any assistance in this matter. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 02:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- There should be some journal Review Articles that do this. maybe we should shift this discussion to the talk page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:34, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for your thoughts on this, @Casliber:. I have in the past gotten help from Doc James and other members of the medicine project, but I was thinking that for this foundational 'what is' content, a librarian might be the go-to person. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 04:19, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
A clear discussion of signs and symptoms, based on quality, current sources. Suitable sources for unsourced statements. Research trends? Maybe even a diagram could be made of the signs and symptoms, like in the multiple sclerosis article? Hope this helps clarify. 122.108.141.214 (talk) 07:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @122.108.141.214 and Casliber: I can try to find whatever you're looking for. Are you looking to fix the areas that need expansion and clear up the citation needed areas? Thanks for stepping in, Casliber! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm looking to generally wrap my brain around CP, with a special focus on 'the signs and symptoms of CP', as I think this is currently the weakest area of the article. From my improved understanding, I will then improve the article (or allied articles, if that makes more sense) to make it clearer, better researched, and generally more useful to readers. I have been using the MEDRS template to find sources from PubMed, but I think I need something more foundational in focus and something more in-depth, like a book chapter. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 23:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, 122.108.141.214, I tend more towards the humanities, but if you have a link to an article that you need access to, I can try to get it for you. I can also reach out to other librarians to help out with the search. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm looking to generally wrap my brain around CP, with a special focus on 'the signs and symptoms of CP', as I think this is currently the weakest area of the article. From my improved understanding, I will then improve the article (or allied articles, if that makes more sense) to make it clearer, better researched, and generally more useful to readers. I have been using the MEDRS template to find sources from PubMed, but I think I need something more foundational in focus and something more in-depth, like a book chapter. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 23:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @122.108.141.214 and Casliber: I can try to find whatever you're looking for. Are you looking to fix the areas that need expansion and clear up the citation needed areas? Thanks for stepping in, Casliber! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for being so enthusiastic to help, even though this is pretty close to a cold call and not quite in your area. If your strength is on the humanities side, perhaps I might work to your strengths, and then get a referral to any more medically-specialised librarians that you might know. (And that way I can demonstrate my ability to improve the article further, if that would be helpful to the referral effort.) I have some library access, but thank you for the offer of finding articles if needed. I think there's definitely room for improvement in the humanities areas in the article as well as the signs and symptoms section. In terms of the humanities, it's getting hard for me to work out 'what's missing', and 'what's out there in the lit that I just haven't seen yet', and 'does it need to meet MEDRS if it's a more social issue?' and judging the 'so what-ness' of what I'm finding. I don't know where to start with disability studies. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 00:14, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- 122.108.141.214 well, any way that I can help, I'll try. As for help getting started, you may want to post on WikiProject Disability's talk page. Also, a good editor to talk to is Dodger67 who is involved with the project, too. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:30, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Mother of All Rallies
Do you have any interest in collaborating on Mother of All Rallies, about a failed pro-Trump rally? Based on one editor's comment on the talk page, I assume an AfD nomination is planned, but I think the event is notable based on sufficient secondary coverage. I don't think the article would be terribly long, so possibly something we could knock out quickly. No pressure, just curious! ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invite, Another Believer. I've put myself on a (kind of) Trumpcation for a bit. I think I'll decline for now, but if you need some references and are stuck, I'll totally lend a hand because I like working with you. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:04, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- No worries! Thanks for the reply. I'm totally get the Trump break. I took a bit of one myself, though I'm still waiting for the Impeachment March review to commence, and I can't help myself with this (not) "Mother of All Rallies". ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, Another Believer, it was pretty sparse, though on Twitter I saw they held an impromptu dance party at the MOAR. It's good to know that some things are universal: dance being one of them. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- No worries! Thanks for the reply. I'm totally get the Trump break. I took a bit of one myself, though I'm still waiting for the Impeachment March review to commence, and I can't help myself with this (not) "Mother of All Rallies". ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
- Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!
Technology update:
- The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225
General project update:
- On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
- Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
- To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Special Barnstar |
| For your excellent hard work building the missing women lists for the contest! Thankyou! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:17, 15 September 2017 (UTC) |
- You're welcome, Dr. Blofeld! I still have a few more to add, but I get to them later. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Also appreciate you contributing to the 50,000 Challenge. Over 2000 articles now is good but still a long way to go. At some point it would be good to run some US based contests, I had hoped to see the one Rosiestep was interested in being run for the US states and am disappointed that it came no nothing. I think we could do with some general contests for the US, not just women, the whole works need improving, but a US contest could have the largest prizes for improving women bios or something.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yup, Dr. Blofeld, unfortunately, WMDC had funding for a US Women Contest in the current Simple APG -year ending Sept 30th- but not the new one. :( --Rosiestep (talk) 20:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Also appreciate you contributing to the 50,000 Challenge. Over 2000 articles now is good but still a long way to go. At some point it would be good to run some US based contests, I had hoped to see the one Rosiestep was interested in being run for the US states and am disappointed that it came no nothing. I think we could do with some general contests for the US, not just women, the whole works need improving, but a US contest could have the largest prizes for improving women bios or something.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
hi Megalibrarygirl, great save with Feelings (i admit i was a bit slack with checking for reviews, but was genuinely surprised at not seeing any in the first 5 pages of a gsearch:)), i've also added it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00.
Coolabahapple (talk) 02:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Coolabahapple! They weren't going to pop up on a Google search since they were buried in databases--I didn't find any on a Google search either. Since I used to do Children's storytime at my library, I was familiar with the book. In fact, I'm sure it's one my own mom (also a librarian) probably read to me. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
New recruits to WiR
Hi Sue. You seem to have missed the message I left for you under "Recruit new editors for the project?" on the WiR talk page. Given the way things are moving forward with Bobo's development, I thought it might be sensible if one person could coordinate a list we can all contribute to. I spent quite a bit of time going through Bobo's lists for July and August and drawing up a list of editors to whom we could see out invitations but both Rosiestep and SusunW now seem to think we should invite everyone on the list. We could perhaps do this as a one-time experiment but it might be more sensible to look more carefully at what those on the list have been doing. But I'll leave it up to you. In any case you might like to reply on the WiR talk page.--Ipigott (talk) 11:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ipigott: I'd be happy to start recruiting. Do we have a template? I think it may be useful to invite certain editors to specific editathons, like those who are interested in sports for example, to our Olympic editathon. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with you that it would certainly be a good idea to invite those interested in sports to our focus on the Olympics. I put together an analysis of Bobo.03's lists for July and August here which also contains a draft invitation. You will see that Bobo's latest list for July has a mouse hover function revealing the main interest(s) of the editors which he explains here. As there are not many days left in the month, I think it would be great if you could handle the invitations within the next couple of days. Bobo has also been inquiring about progress.--Ipigott (talk) 06:28, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! Also, I did embed an invitation template. You can see it when you click the invite button. The template is from Ipigott if that would work for you purpose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobo.03 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with you that it would certainly be a good idea to invite those interested in sports to our focus on the Olympics. I put together an analysis of Bobo.03's lists for July and August here which also contains a draft invitation. You will see that Bobo's latest list for July has a mouse hover function revealing the main interest(s) of the editors which he explains here. As there are not many days left in the month, I think it would be great if you could handle the invitations within the next couple of days. Bobo has also been inquiring about progress.--Ipigott (talk) 06:28, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Women in Red October editathon invitation
 .jpg)  
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Need help from a librarian
Hello, again, Susan,
I've been working on Carole Chaski to save it from deletion and have been stymied by repeated deletions of content and what I thought were reliable sources: diff1diff2diff 3 diff 4. So, first, could you eyeball the diffs and perhaps suggest some better sources? I'm used to limited use of primary sources for uncontroversial facts, and I've not found anything on the suspect reliability of library records for supporting a PhD. Thanks for any help you can muster. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:58, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Grand'mere Eugene: I'll certainly take a look at it! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:05, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Grand'mere Eugene: I am confused why these were reverted. But in order to avoid an edit war, I'll try to find additional sources. I've found some sources on Newspapers.com. I've added one to the article already. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:17, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Do you fancy working on a potential good article? I started cleaning Karen Carpenter's article up, (yeah, I'm usually a straight out rock fan, but what can I say - "Goodbye to Love" is one of my favourite songs ever 'cause of that kick-ass guitar solo at the end) found a few additional sources, and now suddenly it's looking like a potential future GA. At the moment, what I really need is sources for everything that I have put a {{fact}} tag next to. I am picking them off slowly, but what I could particularly do with is a copy of Randy Smith's critically acclaimed biography which I believe should be able to cite everything. I'm working off a Google Books preview, but it's no substitute for the full-length "dead trees" version, and my library doesn't have a copy. I wonder if yours does? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Ritchie333 Hi! My library has one copy... and it's checked out! However, there appear to be copies at the local community college and at UTEP. I might be able to nip over and check those out next week. There's some journal articles that discuss her on Project MUSE, too. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:59, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'll have a look in my newspaper archives, and see what else there is. (The Times archive has a brief column the day after her death, and an obituary a few days later, but that's about it). Heck, if push comes to shove I can probably buy a second-hand copy on eBay or something. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:52, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Stalker here. Ritchie333 it is available in archive.org [7], but unfortunately someone has it checked out. Since one can only check stuff out for 14 days, you can put yourself on the wait list if you sign up for a free account. I love this check out service they have started! SusunW (talk) 21:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Gosh, I knew archive.org has got days and days of old Grateful Dead concerts, but not books. I'll give that a look. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 out of copyright books they have by the bundle. Those that are still copyrighted, you can "borrow". The beauty is you get the whole thing, without the missing pages from Google. Obviously, they don't have every book, but it's a great place to check. Since Mexico doesn't have lending libraries, it is my go-to source besides Sue :) SusunW (talk) 22:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- I've stuck my name in the queue for the book. I also used another book on there to rescue Meg Patterson from AfD. Good times. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:45, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 out of copyright books they have by the bundle. Those that are still copyrighted, you can "borrow". The beauty is you get the whole thing, without the missing pages from Google. Obviously, they don't have every book, but it's a great place to check. Since Mexico doesn't have lending libraries, it is my go-to source besides Sue :) SusunW (talk) 22:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Gosh, I knew archive.org has got days and days of old Grateful Dead concerts, but not books. I'll give that a look. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Stalker here. Ritchie333 it is available in archive.org [7], but unfortunately someone has it checked out. Since one can only check stuff out for 14 days, you can put yourself on the wait list if you sign up for a free account. I love this check out service they have started! SusunW (talk) 21:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'll have a look in my newspaper archives, and see what else there is. (The Times archive has a brief column the day after her death, and an obituary a few days later, but that's about it). Heck, if push comes to shove I can probably buy a second-hand copy on eBay or something. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:52, 22 September 2017 (UTC)