Content created and contributions
Awards and accolades I've received
This user co-nominated File:A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms - Pieter Aertsen - Google Cultural Institute.jpg become a featured picture on 21 December 2015.
This user helped "Acquacotta" become a good article on 10 May 2016.
This user helped "Applesauce cake" become a good article on 8 March 2016.
This user helped "Avocado cake" become a good article on 3 April 2016.
This user helped "Bean dip" become a good article on 23 August 2016.
This user helped "Beurre Maître d'Hôtel" become a good article on 18 March 2016.
This user helped "Carrot soup" become a good article on 2 February 2016.
This user helped "Chips and dip" become a good article on 2 March 2016.
This user helped "Clam dip" become a good article on 26 April 2016.
This user helped "Clementine cake" become a good article on 3 March 2016.
This user helped "Crab dip" become a good article on 16 February 2016.
This user helped "Deep frying" become a good article on 27 September 2015.
This user helped "Deep-fried butter" become a good article on 3 April 2016.
This user helped "French fry vending machine" become a good article on 5 April 2016.
This user helped "Jif (lemon juice)" become a good article on 5 June 2016.
This user helped "Lemon Drop" become a good article on 2 February 2016.
This user helped "Mushroom ketchup" become a good article on 3 April 2016.
This user helped "Naem" become a good article on 2 March 2016.
This user helped "Old-fashioned doughnut" become a good article on 7 March 2016.
This user helped "Pancake machine" become a good article on 9 March 2016.
This user helped "Pink slime" become a good article on 25 March 2016.
This user helped "Pizza cheese" become a good article on 21 February 2016.
This user helped "Plum cake" become a good article on 10 February 2016.
This user helped "Railroad Gazette" become a good article on 21 April 2016.
This user helped "ReaLemon" become a good article on 31 August 2016.
This user helped "Steak" become a good article on 25 November 2015.
This user helped "Testaroli" become a good article on 8 April 2016.
This user helped "Vegetable chips" become a good article on 10 April 2016.
My Wikimedia project contribution areas
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Northamerica1000

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg This user prefers to communicate
on-wiki, rather than by email.

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG As an expression of gratitude—and much in the spirit of my own article—I present to you a dessert staple of one of the most dominant ethnic groups of my region, which also happens to be one of my favorites. Thanks so much for your incredible work on the hot link (sausage) page and the nomination! I'm dumbfounded by all the sources you dug up. I was riding on the hope that someone had put the work into documenting it (hopefully Alan Lomax field recordings-style, being the piece of American culinary heritage that it is), but I just couldn't locate much, even in a university library system. Truly honored to have a Wikipedia icon make the article explode and give it some momentum!

And with that beer, I say cheers! 156ableitem (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

  • @156ableitem: Thanks for taking the initiative to create the article. It was surprising that Hot link (sausage) was not already in place. Regarding source searches, the {{Find sources}} template provides lots of options; check out the examples below. If you're interested in researching it, I know from this source that Pittsburg Hot Link Packers, Inc. in Pittsburg, Texas is a producer. In 1983, they were churning out 12,000 pounds of hot links per week. I added this to the article, but additional information about the company could be used to expand the article. North America1000 12:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Relisting time stamps at MfD[edit]

I made a template to aid relisting at MfD, {{Mfdrts}} (i.e. miscellany for deletion relist[ing] time stamp), due to the bot that manages the page making it necessary to place something along these lines under the {{pagelinks}} template (as you well know). Unless there is already a template of this nature or a better way of doing this (e.g. a script), of which I'm unaware, you may find this of interest. I'm also considering writing a guide page similar to Template:RfD relisted for MfD, again, unless one exists that I missed. I noticed that you often relist discussions at MfD (I mirrored your way of doing it to figure out how) and thought that you might have some insight. Best Regards,— Godsy (TALKCONT) 08:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

  • @Godsy: Good idea, and thanks for taking the initiative to create this. This should help out to make relisting more streamlined. North America1000 12:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Northamerica1000. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Feedback requested[edit]

I was looking at revamping the format of the "Companies of (country)" series of articles and I'm aware you've tackled this problem before. Using the general layout you used for articles like List of companies of Niger, I was thinking about using a table layout to make a sortable list that would include sector, HQ and founding date. I've made a draft for what Mali would look like at User:Kuru/sandbox.

Could you briefly take a look and share your thoughts? This will obviously be insanely time consuming for larger countries, so I'd like to get some input first. Kuru (talk) 03:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

  • @Kuru: Nice layout at User:Kuru/sandbox, and this looks fine to me. The sortable tables are a nice improvement in style. Yes, table conversions do take some time. I have a wiki-friend, Anna Frodesiak, who has helped me out with table conversions before, because she has a semi-automated way of merging the content into tables without having to copy/paste all of the data manually, which can be very time consuming. North America1000 05:52, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I'd be happy to help. Please paste anything you want into my sandboxes. These are free: User:Anna Frodesiak/Bronze sandbox, User:Anna Frodesiak/Silver sandbox, and User:Anna Frodesiak/Pink sandbox. Just give me instructions and I'll ping you when it's ready. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:23, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much! There's around 175 of these lists to convert. I'll do all of the small ones by hand, but I will take you up on your help when I get to the large ones (maybe 10 or so); this will also let me sort out the transform logic before approaching you. Will be a while - this is more of a spare time thing. Kuru (talk) 14:48, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Kuru: It might be worth it to put all 175 into a huge file. A field could be added to differentiate them. Then, I could run some macros on it to do the whole thing in one go. Then, I could run more macros to split them up again. Just a thought. In fact, I might be able to use a program to automatically grab the 175 out of the articles, but I'm not sure about that yet. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:53, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
@Anna Frodesiak and Kuru: Thanks for replying Anna. I forgot to add in my comment above, "if she has time, she may be able to help out". In other words, I didn't want to come across as assumptive that you would chip in, but I inadvertently did anyway! It's nonetheless refreshing that you are willing to do so! So difficult to find people to collaborate with sometimes. For our reference, here's the category page for lists of companies located in ___: Category:Lists of companies by country. North America1000 16:02, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Of course, I'm always happy to help. :) I'll take a look at the lists. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:53, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
It's a little messy; these articles were mostly spam magnets years ago. After a series of AFD kept them all, I've tried to clean them up as best possible and watch them. There are 174 I've tracked. Of that:
  • 136 are normalized (no spam, sorted by ICB cats, common format) are should be scriptable.
  • 7 are controlled, but in a complex table format, usually with detailed information where I didn't want to simply discard the original author's hard work.
  • 7 are not normalized, but de-spamed and sorted by some other sector system (usually just made up).
  • 9 are giant alphabetical lists that should convert easily, but will take a long time to fill in the extra fields. Obviously, List of companies of the United States is a beast.
  • 13 are new ones that I did not know existed (they were not in the category until recently). I think all of these were created by Northamerica1000 a while back and are in good shape - they just differ slightly in format.
  • 1 article is completely messed up, and I've been unable to get local consensus to change it (List of companies of Iran). I've been meaning to revisit it, but was going to wait until everything else was done before wasting more time there.
These have kind of been my "thing to play with when I've run out of important things and still have a little free time" for a few years. There's no rush; maybe I can get the 13 converted and in the can so I can get a feel for the new format - they should be easiest to convert since they all have the intro created and images picked by Mr. 1000. I'm most concerned about the 7 big ones. Kuru (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Kuru. Sorry for the late reply. Okay, I've had a look. I'll get back to you shortly, if that's okay. Many thanks for your patience. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Kuru. I'm all set. I'm looking at this. Is it what you want them to look like? So, please feel free to give me one to do and any instructions. From there, we can maybe figure out some automation. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

hmm[edit]

thanks for your edit - I fail to see how a sub-oceanic geographic feature can elicit a photos please tag :( JarrahTree 09:17, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

fair enough - my reading of the diff - you didnt remove the photo request - hahahah - underwater ridge photo requests ?? JarrahTree 09:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
@JarrahTree: Yep, no photo request was added. FYI, deep sea images do exist in the world, though. For example, check out this National Geographic gallery. See also Underwater photography. North America1000 10:30, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
come to think of it there a large amount of cc mages from NASA on commons, suppose the same could be expected for sub mariner territory JarrahTree 10:54, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Peppersoup[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 26 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Peppersoup, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that peppersoup is considered a delicacy in Western Africa, where some believe it has medicinal qualities? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Peppersoup. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Peppersoup), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I was reading the article and was wondering if it would qualify as a comfort food? I'm basing that question off the "feel good" comment in-article. If so, a link to that might be appropriate. Even better, it would be nice to have even a single African example listed at the other article. If not, then never mind my rambling. :) Matt Deres (talk) 20:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Matt Deres: I'd be okay with including this in the article, but only if a reliable source can be found that verifies peppersoup as a comfort food. Otherwise, such mention could be original research. North America1000 21:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 39, 2016)[edit]

Durer selfporitrait.jpg

Albrecht Dürer, famous German painter of the German Renaissance.

Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

List of German painters

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Brain damage • Education in Bangladesh


Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations


Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

September 2016[edit]

Hi Northamerica1000! I have decided to remove that content from Lega Basket Serie A because that is a wrong information about the Italian League. The new main sponsor will be decided soon, but it will be not Kia, as you can read in this interview to Federico Zurleni (CEO of Lega Basket). (http://www.sportando.com/it/italia/serie-a/212390/federico-zurleni-interrompiamo-l-avvitamento-verso-il-basso-del-basket-italiano.html) The interview is in Italian. He said that Kia had expressed interest to became the new main sponsor, but actually nothing has been done. 20WashingtonPaul (talk) 15:44, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

  • @20WashingtonPaul: The reason I reverted your change is because you removed content without leaving any edit summary explaining the changes. Please be sure to use edit summaries when removing or changing content, which will prevent misunderstandings.
When editing an article on Wikipedia, you will see a small field labeled "Edit summary" shown under the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

 
The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history. Edit summary content is visible in:
North America1000 14:52, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

U. Diane Buckingham[edit]

Having participated in it, I'm aware of the recent AfD. There are extenuating circumstances casting appreciable doubt on notability (coupled with premature AfD close) that have been voiced by myself, as well as 2 other eds (one of whom was on the "keep" side of that debate) to the closing admin, who never responded. There is a short summary of this issue on the talk page. If you were not aware of this and are only removing the notability tag procedurally, would you please consider restoring it? The alternative would be to re-open or start a fresh AfD, and, because the main source now appears to lack legitimacy, it would likely end in delete. The notability tag is there to allow some time for other sources to be found. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 16:45, 26 September 2016 (UTC).

  • @Agricola44: Thanks for providing the context. In summary, you opined to delete at the AfD discussion, and on the article talk page you stated your concerns about the source in question, and on the talk page SlimVirgin has changed their mind regarding their keep !vote at the AfD. On Michig's talk page, Lemongirl942 who !voted to delete provided input there. I hesitate to restore the notability template because this goes against the grain of all of the keep !voters at the discussion, essentially downplaying their opinions regarding the subject's notability. I recommend notifying all participants at the AfD discussion about the discussion occurring on the talk page about the source in question. In this manner, a more thorough consensus regarding the source may be achievable. North America1000 22:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
    • To me, the burden really seems to be the on the other side. AfD was closed only 15 minutes after the main source on which notability was based was basically found to be the result of "fanpage" public input. It seems clear that that one is disqualified, now leaving only a single, questionable source in which Buckingham's name appears in a list of "top doctors" compiled by a journalist with no medical training...seems to be a textbook argument for notability tag, especially since the very status of those "keeps" is now doubtful. Indeed, I see such a tag as an advertisement for eds to find more sources. In other words, the notability tag is entirely procedural in this case. I would propose that it be restored on this basis, though I would certainly be glad to notify the participating editors. What say you? Agricola44 (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC).
      • @Agricola44: You know what, upon further consideration, as a procedural matter, the tag should be all right after all. Yes, the tag was added after the discussion was closed, and is based upon the the questionable nature of the source, which did not receive adequate input in the discussion. I have reverted my own edit, restoring the notability template. Yes, I recommend contacting users who participated in the discussion, in hopes to obtain their input at the talk page discussion. North America1000 05:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Hmm...I was the closing admin and I did respond - here. And the AfD ran for over 7 days. My recommendation would be as NA1k has suggested to try to reach consensus on that source with the other editors involved, and if there is agreement that it isn't acceptable (and if no other sources come to light) start a new AfD. --Michig (talk) 16:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, but I think the point is that the AfD was closed 15 minutes after the main source was called into serious doubt. The objection of several editors was that it would have been better, and indeed quite appropriate to extend the discussion. However, given the current state of affairs, would it not be better to give some time to find more sources (with the notability tag)? Agricola44 (talk) 15:32, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Pinging Michig, so they see this, and because they were the closer of the AfD discussion. North America1000 20:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-39[edit]

18:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Visual Arts Collective Relisting[edit]

I hereby thank you for relisting the discussion for deletion regarding the Visual Arts Collective. Not only does this discussion, I think, deserve a wider ambit, the constitutional and artistic issues in play certainly deserve a place on Wikipedia. kencf0618 (talk) 22:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Question regarding creating an RfC about AfD's notability standards[edit]

Hello. I'm sure you're aware of how contentious certain AfD discussions can get, particularly involving any AfD that user:SwisterTwister is involved in. I believe the contentiousness stems, at the root, from a fundamental disagreement on what the criteria is for determining if a particular subject is notable or not, and I was wondering if an RfC on the subject might be helpful for everyone. The trouble is, I don't really know how to go about creating an RfC, and was wondering if, A) You agree that an RfC on notability requirements (regarding ST's favorite phrase "churnalism", regarding the validity of interviews, and regarding positive news articles on commercial topics in general) would be useful to reduce hostility and contentiousness in AfD, and B) If you'd be willing to help me create such an RfC?

Pinging user:SwisterTwister because I'm not trying to canvass against him or anything, I just want a larger forum that this major disagreement on notability requirements can be hashed out. Fieari (talk) 00:45, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Hi @Fieari: Regarding creating a Request for comment, check out WP:RFC and this section of the page. I am going to bow out of becoming involved in any of this, because 1) I don't view an RfC as warranted, and 2) I'm not interested in spending my time analyzing this user's edits and statements, which would be necessary to create an RfC. Also, at some recent AfD discussions I have participated in, claims by various users of sources all automatically being public relations content as some sort of default has been refuted at times within the respective discussions. However, sometimes sources are pr, so in my opinion it's best to analyze the sources on a case-by-case basis relative to each article nominated for deletion. North America1000 01:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Hot link (sausage)[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 29 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hot link (sausage), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in Texas, the hot link sausage is usually prepared using beef, while in Chicago, pork is typically used? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hot link (sausage). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hot link (sausage)), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 September 2016[edit]