User talk:PamD

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.
06:01 Tuesday 29 November 2016 - - - - WELCOME TO MY TALK PAGE

Please click "New section" above to leave any new message, and please sign your message (just type ~~~~).

If you leave a message here, I will reply here unless you ask me to reply elsewhere, to make discussions easier to read.
If you reply to a message here, please indent (start the line with ":") and sign your message.
If you are discussing any particular page, please provide a link to it - it makes life easier for me and anyone else seeing this page.

Thanks. PamD

COI Notice[edit]

While this isn't looking at your editing... looking at one of the parties talk pages seems to indicate you might be interested in this.

Assumptioncollegeofdavao listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Assumptioncollegeofdavao. Since you had some involvement with the Assumptioncollegeofdavao redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Gorthian (talk) 01:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

User group: New Page Reviewr[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello PamD.

Based on the patrols you made of new pages during a qualifying period in 2016, your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed.

New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

You emailed me that I can edited my own page. (Geraldine Aron)[edit]

Regret I have no idea what I did wrong. There were errors and I attemped to change them and add some more facts. Please remove whtever I did wrong. I suppose an entry with errors is better than none. Many thanks. GERALDINE ARON (elderly, no idea what a tild is!!) Ps when I put my name into google, a photo of an actress pops up as the main picture. She is Lara Flynn, an actress who was in one of my plays. Many thanks if you can adjust that to show my pic, as it is creating confusion. Yours Geraldine Aron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerwalsh (talkcontribs) 12:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Gerwalsh. PamD 14:29, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Message for kind Pam D[edit]

Thanks so much I will try to provide what you need for the bits I added. But meantime just go with whatever you think appropriate I was hoping to remove the photo not replace it with one of me all the very best and sorry to give you extra work. Geraldine aronGeraron (talk) 16:14, 21 November 2016 (UTC) Geraron (talk) 16:14, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, PamD. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


Hi PamD. Got the notice on my talk page regarding the above article. And I'm confused. On the NPP tutorial, it says to tag articles if there are no references, which this article already was. I checked to make sure the village existed, and since it was tagged, marked it as reviewed. Did I misread the tutorial someplace? Not that I mind adding references, but sometimes if the article has no interest for me, I simply check to make sure it doesn't need to be deleted, and tag it. I don't do much NPP work, but there is such a backlog, I thought I'd help out, so any advice is welcomed. Onel5969 TT me 16:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi onel5969 - allow me to chip in here. As the edit history on that page demonstrates, I did a lot of editing, including lotsa cleanup, added Pinpush map, formatted the only proper reference, formatted the external link and, shortly after, Yamaguchi先生 redirected the page, (a perfectly intelligent redirect were it not for the fact that I was working on the article). So I posted Yamaguchi先生 - s/he said fine, revert - but it had already been reverted by someone else - and most recently someone has added the "Hitchcock" reference. All around it seems what was worth no more than a redirect 48 hours ago has become a modest article. Despite all the confusion, I think this new Curator suite of tools, while giving rise initially to some evident confusion, might well prove an awesome upgrade. Thanks to you both. MarkDask 18:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@Markdask: @Onel5969: I replaced that Hitchcock ref - it had been added in October 2013 but removed on 21 Nov 2016 with no explanation (the first of many edits by a now-indef-blocked editor). A messy history. (I replied at User_talk:Onel5969#I_have_unreviewed_a_page_you_curated to the first post above). PamD 22:35, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

December 2016 at Women in Red[edit]

Bessie Coleman, First African American Pilot - GPN-2004-00027.jpg
Roza Shanina.jpg

December 2016

Two new topics for our online editathons
Women in Aviation and Women in the Military
Our geographical topic of the month is
Caribbean Women
During the period of 21 Nov - 8 Dec, we are also supporting
BBC 100 Women

Women in Red

Women in Red logo.svg

(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

New Page Review - newsletter[edit]

Hello PamD,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
Breaking the back of the backlog
We now have 280 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.
Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

Delyth Morgan, Baroness Morgan of Drefelin[edit]

Hi Pam - I wondered if you would do me some assistance. The Delyth Morgan, Baroness Morgan of Drefelin article has been of interest to me since June 2011, when it became common knowledge that Peers of the Realm were calling their holiday homes their main Residence so as to optimize their use of expenses allowance - it was a very tawdry time. Delyth Morgan ended up claiming the full £140k cost of her holiday home, (details available in the edits of the time), by switching primary addresses. I hit the article hard at the time on the subject, but I eventually had to back off and request assistance as I had a COI at the time; Delyth is my ex-sister-in-law. By happinstance it was Jimbo himself who jumped in and dealt with the issue, and I aint been back since - until today. I read through the article and almost every paragraph begins "Morgan". I think it is more appropriate that each paragraph begins "Delyth Morgan", because to address her as simply "Morgan" is accusatory. I would have done the necessary editting myself but I thought I ought to leave it to a more independent editor. Take a look - Delyth is more deserving than to be addressed solely by her surname - but I'm happy to defer to your judgement in the matter. Thanks MarkDask 01:08, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@Markdask: There's nothing "accusatory" about using surname-only to refer to the subject of a biographical article - it's standard WP practice, see Theresa May. Articles littered with forenames tend to be those written or edited by editors with a COI: paid agents, family or at least enthusiastic fans. For chapter and verse see WP:SURNAME. Hope that helps. PamD 10:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)