User talk:Smmurphy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
User talk • Archives: 1 2 3 4 5
User:Smmurphy: TalkContributionsAbout meIn progressScribblesHeroesStream of conscious'
I prefer not breaking up conversations. If you leave a message for me here, I will respond here.If I have started a conversation on your talk page, feel free to respond there, unless I forget, in which case you may feel free to ignore this message.


Wikipedia Library[edit]

Thanks for the recommendation to apply to the Wikipedia Muse. I have tried to register for a Wikipedia Library Card and apply for access to Project MUSE and Questia. While there is a waiting list for JSTOR, I have access there through my William and Mary Alumni Association membership. Thanks again for your encouragement. There are several scholarly books on Robert E. Lee on my Christmas list, so I hope to make further efforts at contributions with better sourcing than wp:primary sources in the near future. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! I'm happy to help. Smmurphy(Talk) 03:16, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Weil[edit]

Hi, are you replacing your !vote with a different vote, or withdrawing from the AFD altogether? Yoninah (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@Yoninah: I have a nuanced view at AfD. I think subject specific notability guidelines should rarely be used as justifications for deletion. I think GNG and the golden rule is derived from V, NOR, and NPOV (I have a hard time interpreting parts of NOT and generally don't use them in my reasoning at AfD). Briefly, in my reasoning, the RS part of GNG comes from V and NOR. The multiple sources part of GNG comes from NPOV (that is, it takes multiple independent sources to ensure that an article doesn't reflect a single POV). I think the page comes from verifiable information and does not represent original research. I don't tend to !vote delete for POV concerns alone if there isn't something unencyclopedic about the POV (hagiography, undue disparagement, etc.) I'll clarify at that page, but my intention is currently not to be tallied as a !vote. Smmurphy(Talk) 17:15, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Bristol Bill is a delightful addition to Wikipedia. (Why is it that old-time robbers seem so charming?) E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:14, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for this and your kind words. Smmurphy(Talk) 04:25, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Template[edit]

Do you need these templates ... I keep them on my userpage to cut and paste so no bare urls <ref>{{cite news |agency= |via= |title= |url= |quote= |newspaper=[[New York Times]] |date= }}</ref> <ref>{{cite news |agency= |via=Newspapers.com |title= |url= |quote= |newspaper= |date= }}</ref>

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Thanks for the reminder. Actually, I do it the way I do to save me time. For newspapers.com, typing the citation out like I do takes a few seconds while typing all of the symbols ("|", "=", etc.) takes almost a minute. Plus, I use the citation as the name of my clipping at newspapers.com, which I think is a good practice. It would probably be a good thing to slow down, but I'm a bit lazy and I like to work relatively fast. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Fast is good, we need to feed Siri and Alexa with information, when the AIs take over they may remember our contributions and spare our lives while enslaving the rest of humanity. --RAN (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you for creating Randal B. Vandavall!Zigzig20s (talk) 07:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Zigzig20s: Thank you so much! I wrote a large number of related article to this one at the end of last year and early this year and I'm glad you like it. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Which ones? Roger Williams University (Nashville, Tennessee) needs a major clean-up.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:38, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: Oh no, I just noticed your reply. My project was to write an article for every individual covered in the book: Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising. The full list is on that page - Vandervall was chapter 77. I've used the books TOC for the list, which is a bit unorthodox but I couldn't think of a good way to organize a list of 177 people (alphabetical seemed arbitrary and hard to read) and the TOC is as NOR as I could come up with. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

SPI regarding you[edit]

In case you weren't aware: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smmurphy. – Joe (talk) 16:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: Thanks for the note. I did happen to see it but hadn't been technically notified or pinged and didn't feel I had anything to say (I did not post under that ip and dont purposely edit without being logged in). The user who posted it, User:Rusf10, has recently gotten some push back on a number of AdDs they submitted. This led to a couple conversations at ANI regarding that users interactions with User:Unscintillating and a deletion review. I am hopeful that things stay cool but am aware that doing minor HEYMANs and !voting against Rusf10 could seem frustrating. Do you have any advice? Should I be more proactive? Smmurphy(Talk) 17:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I had noticed that they'd been throwing themselves into AfDs recently, and can't say I've been impressed. What do you mean by be more proactive, though? – Joe (talk) 20:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
By proactive I meant should I comment at the SPI? Smmurphy(Talk) 20:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Oh right. Nah, I think it's fairly obvious you aren't socking. I'd just wait until one of the checkusers or clerks has a look at it. – Joe (talk) 20:46, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

John Renna[edit]

Can you help with sourcing for the article on John Renna, I am on holiday and do not have access to newspapers.com, or even a standard keyboard. --RAN (talk) 23:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The page is a little outside my areas of interest or ability, but I added a couple of sources and some information to the article: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/16120203/asbury_park_press/, https://www.newspapers.com/clip/16120086/renna_will_leave_state_post_daily/, and https://www.newspapers.com/clip/16116442/kean_names_aid_cited_in_probe_the/, the later two of which are particularly about Renna. To avoid any accusations of canvassing, I'll consider this a good faith effort to improve wikipedia, but I will refrain from commenting at the AfD as a request like this could be frowned upon. Thanks for the invitation to look at the page, though; Renna is definitely an interesting character. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Silas X. Floyd has been accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
Silas X. Floyd, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 TT me 16:17, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of John W. Overton[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of John W. Overton at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Wasted Time R (talk) 00:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Daniel J. Miller[edit]

Nice "detective" work on Miller Jr. Son pre-deceased dad and I saw something that I did not pursue about him being buried at the Air Force Academy. I didn't see anything suggested page eligibility for Son.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 15:29, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you; pointing out the mistake was actually your work, though, and from that the conclusion that Jr was the son was clear to me - so nice job by you and many thanks. I agree that his son doesn't seem to be a suitable subject for inclusion in the encyclopedia at this time, although I am usually fine with adding reliably sourced birth and death dates of the parents and children of a biography to a page. Smmurphy(Talk) 15:35, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
I think "Nka Liang" is Nha Trang. Spelling Vietnamese names was always a challenge. That Army Aviation unit was stationed at Nha Trang. OBE now but it was nagging at me. <grin>--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 18:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

T.P. Smith[edit]

Wow! Thanks so much for your help. I had almost given up on that one. I'm so glad you were able to track down some sources. Mechanics Bank and Richmond Planet may also interest you. And I just started an article on architectural historian and preservationist John G. Zehmer Jr. who seems to have had a lot of influence and success. Sorry if I caused any edit conflicts. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: No worries. 19th and early 20th century African American biography is one of my favorite areas of editing, and I enjoy it very much. Feel free to let me know if you are having trouble finding sources on such articles and I'll do my best. I'm unlikely to edit much about Zehmer, but have edited extensively articles similar to Mechanics Bank and Richmond Planet in the past. Thank you for your contributions, by the way! Smmurphy(Talk) 16:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Fantastic! It was a thrill to see you rescue that article. Thanks again. I will try to drop you a heads up if I come across more interesting subjects. Always lots to do. Happy to have your help anywhere that interests you. Please let me know of I can be of any help in your efforts. Take care. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Monroe Morton and Richard Foster (abolitionist) are two other articles I was working on recently. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:00, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

They look pretty interesting; I'll look into these over the next few days. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

I will let you know if I get stuck on sourcing on such subjects in the future. Usually there are some sources out there online but I was really coming up dry on that one. Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:55, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I have a question. The article on Carrie Allen McCray describes one of her books as a memoir. But the title indicates it is about her mother (Black daughter of a Confederate general). She would have been the granddaughter I believe. Should some kind of clarification be made? Was it a memoir? Thanks for any insights. FloridaArmy (talk) 19:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

It is described as a memoir in the two sources at the bottom of the article that mention it, and that works for me. I think the difference between a memoir, a biography, and an autobiography are often matters of taste and marketing. I wouldn't make any clarification that isn't in the sources, but do agree that in this case the wording of the usca.edu source (https://web.archive.org/web/20070506103127/http://www.usca.edu/aasc/mccray.htm) is more clear and the article could be edited to follow that. Smmurphy(Talk) 20:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: I've finally gotten around to contributing to the article on Monroe Morton. Most of what I found had to do with his political career, if you like you can add more on his business career. In particular, his business work is currently all in the lede but not in the body. If you have info, go ahead and add it into the body, either by changing the political career section to just a career section or by creating a business career section. Also feel free to rewrite the lede, of course. I've gathered some notes about Foster and will try to edit that page this afternoon as well. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:48, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Cool!!! I will have a look. Any chance you cam find some sources for Voice of Nomads? Seems like a fascinating festival. Thanks for all your help. I haven't yet followed up on the news site you recommended.. FloridaArmy (talk) 22:57, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: I've contributed to Foster's page, now as well. Are you interested in submitting one (Foster) or both of them to DYK? Technically to contribute to DYK, a page has to be less than seven days old or expanded five-fold in the last seven days. If you are interested, we'll need to expand Morton a bit more, but I think we can do that easily. I'd like to submit them quickly so they can get on the main page by the end of the month. Smmurphy(Talk) 23:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm happy to help in any way I can. I will try to expand the Morton article tmrw. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I added to the Monroe Morton article. Is it enough? I haven't done DYK nominations so I will leave that part up to you if it's okay? Please let me know what else needs to be done as far as the article is concerned and how much more needs to be added if any. Have a great day. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: It should be enough. I'll take a look. In the meantime, do you have any idea about hooks? I'll submit the DYKs in the next day or two, but a good hook is important. The Foster hook seems easy, something like "... that Richard Foster was an officer in the United States Colored Troops in the civil war, and with his regiment established the Lincoln Institute, a school for African Americans." For Morton, something like: "... the Monroe Morton built the Morton Theater, which became a cornerstone of the Hot Corner, a center of Black society and business in Athens, Georgia." I'd really like your ideas for either of those, both for primary and alternative hooks. Also, I don't think I'll look at the Voice of Nomads page; its a bit outside of my area. Smmurphy(Talk) 15:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Those hooks look good to me. Something about Monroe Morton being one of the welathiest African Americans in the south might also work. Would have to add that bit but I've seen it noted that he was described that way in contemporary accounts. I found sources for the VoN article in Cyrillic (Russian alphabet). :) Thanks again for all your help. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
For the Morton Hook I think it woild be better to say the Morton Building where Black professionals worked and a theater was located or some such. The theater was and is part of the building. Just a minor clarification maybe I'm being picky. "Morton Building and its vaudeville theater" works too.FloridaArmy (talk) 16:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
For the Foster Hook I would include the word abolitionist. Seemed to be an important factor in his life and also gives a hint about his ethnicity as he led the colored troops but was not, as I recall, African American himself. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: I submitted them both to DYK: Template:Did you know nominations/Monroe Morton and Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Foster (abolitionist). Feel free to add an alternative hook if you have something in mind. As always, feel free to contribute to either page as well. But do be careful to make sure your additions are reliably sourced, as while under DYK, the microscope is especially focused on issues like that. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Excellent!!! Those look great. Thanks for doing that. I tweaked them. Please revert if I did any damage. Thanks again for all your help and good works. FloridaArmy (talk) 19:25, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, your tweaks are very helpful. I undid half of your change to the Morton page - as there aren't separate articles for the theater and building, one link seems sufficient. The other tweak is great - grammar is not my strong suit. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Oops, I would have sworn there was an article on the building! My mistake. Thanks for fixing. Party on. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Yuya Kiuchi[edit]

Do you think this professor and scholar is notable? I wasn't able to find much of anything from reliable independent sources online about him or his books. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Generally assistant professors are unlikely to be suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia on the basis of their scholarship alone. If you didn't find any reliable sources about him, why did you create the article? Smmurphy(Talk) 15:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I was reading part of a book he wrote, found some of it interesting, and wanted to know who he was. There wasn't an article on him here so I created one. I was surprised I couldn't find more coverage of him or his books. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:22, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I agree assistant professors are unlikely to be notable but I was wondering if his written work establishes notability. I thought it might be covered in scholarly sources not readily available online? FloridaArmy (talk) 16:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
One reason I asked was because it causes some people, including me, a lot of stress to have their work deleted, and it is sometimes difficult to keep calm and polite when work you value is nominated or proposed for deletion. Therefore I find it easier to be very careful to avoid my work being nominated than to take risks with the kind of articles I write. Another reason I ask is that I think it is impolite to make work for other editors. Some people like to write incomplete stubs with the supposition that someone else will expand them later. I recognize there is a place for that, but if you create something that you know will very likely be nominated for deletion, you are asking possibly dozens of editors to spend time reading and evaluating and possibly fixing your article. My thought is that if you are willing to create work for others, you should consider paying it back by doing behind the scenes work on wikipedia yourself (I recommend looking into WP:NPP, WP:WPAFC, or WP:BACKLOG).
To you point about offline sources, are you familiar with WP:TWL? There are dozens of different databases you can sign up for which give you access to sources including my favorites, newspapers.com and ProjectMUSE (I am a coordinator for ProjectMUSE). Sign up is free and you are probably eligible if your account is 6 months old and you have at least 500 edits. I strongly recommend you check it out.
To the question of Kiuchi's suitability for inclusion in the encyclopedia, if you really believe they are, you can remove the prod tag with an explanation and see what happens. If someone watching the page disagrees, it may be nominated for discussion at AfD, and you can discuss the matter and see how people !vote. Smmurphy(Talk) 17:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your response!
I will look into The Wiki Library resource. If a subject doesn't meet notability standards I can live with it being deleted. Ommmm
When I created an article on this author I suspected he would be notable. Regardless, it was interesting to me to work up the article and see what I could find. He's an interesting guy so it was actually quite fun. My conclusion is that it is too soon for the subject to meet guidelines here, but hopefully the start I made with help from others can be built on in the future. It is never my intention to make work for anyone. It's a volunteer project so I hope that any efforts people contribute are done willingly. I do try to help out in verious areas including at deletion discussions. I find it a bit daunting at times as many core values of Wikipedia (Five Pillars, "Sum of all knowledge", WP:PRESERVE) are thrown out the window and many valuable article subjects are deleted. I was very happy to find that Deletionpedia preserves many of them. Thanks again for your time and insights. Very much appreciated. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
That sounds great. I agree that it is difficult to deal with deletion when it seems to me that policy supports an articles suitability. Wikipedia by its nature attracts creative people like yourself who want to expand coverage. So there is a fairly steady stream of new articles even though new article creators often get frustrated and leave the project. It is a somewhat counterproductive cycle. There is another side as well, though. I don't understand their point of view exactly, but I know that my !votes and efforts to retain articles nominated for discussion at AfD are sometimes frustrating to people who prefer an article be deleted. I don't have an easy solution except, as you said, repeating a mantra or something similar. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

World War I Army stevedores (continued)[edit]

If and when the spirit moves you, the article on the stevedores is now at Stevedore operations, American Expeditionary Forces. I even found one of the troops on which we already have an article in Wikipedia; I hope to find more (black, not white).--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 17:43, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

That's great! I've been a bit backed up since before the new year, but will put it somewhere in the middle of the pile and will take a good look soon. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
@Gaarmyvet: I've finally gotten around to looking it over. I added a couple small things, but I think everything else I've found you've already included. Nice article, by the way. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:49, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. It would be nice to put a face on these guys. If you stumble across a single Black former stevedore who's otherwise notable, please holler. I guy I thought I had identified was a prizefighter and it turned out his nickname was Stevedore, I think. Don't make it a project.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 02:59, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/John W. Overton at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:21, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 26[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Jérémie Azou[edit]

Hi, I've made the two changes to the references you suggested. Red Fiona (talk) 18:33, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Great! Looks good. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:37, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

February DYKs[edit]

I'm not sure on how many hooks are already up there, probably plenty, but Madison Davis had some interesting aspects of his life. I started Alfred Richardson (politician) too but it is just a stub. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:15, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

You should consider submitting them, no worries about how many DYKs already are submitted. Doing so will help you learn and both of those subjects are interesting. If you do so, look at the rules at WP:DYK. In particular, I'm not sure that either of those articles are quite long enough - they need to be at least 1,500 characters of prose (not including formatting, infoboxes, categories, etc), your references may not be adequately formatted, and references should only rarely be to blogs. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Wills County, Georgia[edit]

Smmurohy, do you know anything about a Wills County, Georgia? I find some mentions of it searching "Wills County, Georgia" on Google Books but nothing subatantive. Is it a misspelling? Former county? Something else? Thanks for any insight or suggestions. Came up in a biography O was working on. FloridaArmy (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

You've been working on the slaves of Robert Toombs. Toombs lived in Wilkes County. Wills is almost certainly a misspelling of the same, and I'd not write "Wills County, Georgia" in any article. Smmurphy(Talk) 03:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Monroe Morton[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Monroe Morton at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

For meritorious actions in the field of 19th century African-American history[edit]

Rescuebarnstar.png The Article Rescue Barnstar
In particular, for your fine additions to Philip Joseph (politician). 24.151.116.12 (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Smmurphy(Talk) 19:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Monroe Morton[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 22 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Monroe Morton, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1910, Monroe Morton built the Morton Building and Theatre in the "Hot Corner", a center of African-American business and culture in Athens, Georgia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Monroe Morton. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Monroe Morton), 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) 00:02, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, worked nicely in the right month! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

You're far too kind. The DYK was all you and most of the credit for the article is also yours. If you or someone you know likes to add photo illustrations, an image of C.N. Love would be a welcome addition. He was quite a character. FloridaArmy (talk) 22:08, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
I looked for material about Love and didn't find any images. I did see that he was shot at the 1896 Republican National Convention in St. Louis, so if you are interested, you should keep looking for info on him, as there is a lot more to his story than what the article includes so far. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:19, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
this source uses images from contemporary newspaper accounts. I believe they would be in the public domain now? FloridaArmy (talk) 22:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
I agree it's a rough sketch at the moment and quite a lot can be added. I did note that he was shot and arsonist set his home in fire while he and hia wife were in residence. Crazy times. There's also accounts of how volatile political party meeting were and a fight he was involved in. FloridaArmy (talk) 22:28, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
In the US, things published before 1923 are PD. If you are sure the of the source, the image is in PD, although the cropped image might be copyrighted. Since you showed that to me, I found the newspapers.com version. Have you applied for newspapers.com access yet? That image is here: https://www.newspapers.com/image/64474186/?terms=Charles%2BN%2BLove and here: https://www.newspapers.com/image/76119782/?terms=Charles%2BN%2BLove. If you haven't yet applied, I strongly recommend you do so. In any case, let me know if you haven't, and I'll add the image for you. The version from the page you found is of better quality, but the copyright isn't perfectly clear to me. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png An inadequate expression of awe for your masterful expansion and sourcing of articles, most recently of Thomas Otho Travers, but it is something you do as competently and masterfully as any editor I know. E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:57, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you so much for your kind words and gesture. I'm not alone of those who see Articles for Discussion as a great place to find articles to improve and get immediate feedback, and I really appreciate all you do to the same purpose. I've found it very fulfilling to work on these over the past year or two, all the more so because there is a community of people who have similar goals. I like to thing the work we do has a high impact in that the some of wikipedia's weakest articles are given a more than passing cleanup through the process. Also, as you know, HEYMANs only exist when they are supported by !votes, so I really appreciate it that you (and anyone else) take a look at my contributions and if they do make a difference, !vote accordingly. I only really follow the History, Military, Math, Economics, and Abrahamic Religions deletion sorting lists, and I wonder if and hope there are others who are working on other types of AfDs. By the way, I'm super interested in any more specific feedback or advice, so feel free to follow up. Smmurphy(Talk) 23:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

culture, history, and thought

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Thank you for quality articles around culture, history, and thought around the globe, such as Native American identity in the United States, Lomé Peace Accord and many biographies, with a focus on North America and Africa, for collaboration such as for Monroe Morton, for "Tell me what you have contributed and I will tell you who you are", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the message, prize, and gem. I've just updated my User:Smmurphy/About me page, which you are quoting. It is quite nice to be thanked for articles I edited over a decade ago - and funny to me to have something I wrote a decade ago quoted back to me. Plus, Native American identity was definitely a very fraught article and the thought that I would ever be thanked for what was going on around that article was far from likely in 2007 when I was involved with it. That said, I'm surprised by how little those two articles have changed since then, and looking over those articles reminds me of the legacy we are creating. I've started contributing to DYK recently, and through that have come to be familiar with your work and am deeply impressed. The greatest thing for me, both on-wiki and off, is to read something I wish I had written, and I definitely feel that with your articles (particularly Zwißler). Anyway, thanks again for this. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:57, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for more praise than I gave ;) - I have a corner "blushing" on my talk. Good to know you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Odzala-Kokoua National Park[edit]

Thanks for updating the Liwonde National Park article. I'm curious if you think "Odzala National Park" should be updated to "Odzala-Kokoua National Park" at Template:National Parks of the Republic of the Congo, since the Wikipedia article has been moved. I submitted a request on the talk page, but another editor seems to think the article needs further updating before the template should be changed. I'll be suggesting updates for the article soon, but wanted to get a discussion going about updating the template in the meantime. Inkian Jason (talk) 21:11, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You are very welcome. As for your question, I don't know, sometimes templates use a shortened version of a name of an article - there might be something in the WP:MOS, but even if there is, consensus and WP:IAR sometimes outweigh the MOS. Also, you've tagged me to look at and edit over which you have a dispute. I don't know the optimal solution, but unfortunately I am travelling this weekend and I don't plan on looking into it. Thank you for keeping me in mind, though, and do let me know if there is anything I can do for you in the future. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
No problem at all, and thanks. Inkian Jason (talk) 22:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

Any idea what R. F. & A. L. stands for in relation to the Freedmen Bureau? Also, full name for Brigadier General J.C. Fullerton who was involved in a leadership role at the bureau? Seems like it should be simple to find answers but I'm coming up empty. Thanks FloridaArmy (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

RF&AL stands for "Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands" and is another name for the Freedmen's Bureau (the link I provided is a redirect). I assume J. C. Fullerton is Joseph Scott Fullerton, who was the head of the bureau in DC for a short while and later was sent on a mission to collect complaints about the bureau. That mission more or less failed, as he mostly heard good reviews. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:29, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Great! Thanks so much. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
A.A.A.G.? FloridaArmy (talk) 14:37, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Are you sure there are four "A"s? AAG stands for Assistant Adjutant General, a office held by officers in the bureau. It would be helpful if you pasted a link for more context, by the way. Good luck! Smmurphy(Talk) 15:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
See here on page 20. Thanks for your help. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
The first A is Acting, Darwin G Fenno was Acting Assistant Adjutant General (I haven't looked to see if he was ever confirmed), for instance see: https://books.google.com/books?id=FWdHAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA525&lpg=PA525. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:04, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Cool! Thanks again. The milotary, government and Wikipedia woth all their acronyms!!! FloridaArmy (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for John W. Overton[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 24 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John W. Overton, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that John W. Overton (pictured) was killed in World War I, a year after setting the world track and field records in the indoor mile and indoor 1000 yard (910 m) races in 1917? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John W. Overton. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, John W. Overton), 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) 00:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Richard Foster (abolitionist)[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 26 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Richard Foster (abolitionist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that abolitionist Richard Foster was an officer of the 1st Missouri Regiment of Colored Infantry in the civil war and, with his regiment, established the Lincoln Institute as a school for African Americans? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Foster (abolitionist). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Richard Foster (abolitionist)), 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, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Henry V. Plummer[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 27 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Henry V. Plummer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Henry V. Plummer was a chaplain with the US Army Buffalo Soldiers, while his son H. Vinton Plummer was a leader in Marcus Garvey's secret service and militia? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Henry V. Plummer), 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) 00:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for H. Vinton Plummer[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 27 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article H. Vinton Plummer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Henry V. Plummer was a chaplain with the US Army Buffalo Soldiers, while his son H. Vinton Plummer was a leader in Marcus Garvey's secret service and militia? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, H. Vinton Plummer), 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) 00:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

What's the trick?[edit]

for seeing large sections of material that only exists in snippet view in google books.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:17, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@E.M.Gregory: Here you go.

Trick[edit]

Let's say I want to find out what Chodakiewicz says about "Brzostowica Mała" in Ejszyszki: kulisy zajść w Ejszyszkach : epilog stosunków polsko-żydowskich na Kresach, 1944-45 : wspomnienia, dokumenty, publicystyka, Volumes 1-2. When I search at google books,[1] I see 3 of 4 snippets from pages 88, 213, and 242. The first one Starts out with "da, Brzostowica Mała by Grodno" If I search for that phrase at google books (searching all books), I get one result.[2] That result gives me a bit of information about what comes before the snippet, a fuller bit of the snippet reads: "Berdówka near Li- da, Brzostowica Mała by Grodno". If I search in that book for the begining of that phrase, "Berdówka near Li", I can see what comes before.[3]. So a fuller snippet reads:

"At times, the spontaneous rebellion manifested itself in a massacre of the Poles by the "locals" (e.g. Berdówka near Lida, Brzostowica Mała by Grodno).^34 In other instances the rebellion took a more gentle course with the revolutionaries simply disarming the Poles and handing them over to the Soviets."

The third snippet I see at [4] starts with the phrase: "motyl (motek zak?) of Brzostowica". If I search that phrase, I can see the rest.[5] With a little creativity I can also find the rest, via: [6], [7], [8], and [9]:

"34 On the night of 17/18 September 1939 r., urged on by the Communist Zak Motyl (Motek Zak?) of Brzostowica Wielka, a pro-Communist criminal gang led by Koziejko and Ajzyk (Icchak?), consisting of Belorussians and Jews, attacked the estate of Brzostowica Mała near Grodno and the nearby village Brzostowica Mała, where the administrative authorities were located. It appears that they slaughtered a large number of, if not all, the ethnic Poles in those localities. This massacre requires further investigation as do the killing of Polish soldiers by Belorussian and Jewish revolutionaries in Berdówka near Lida most likely on September 18, 1939. See Krzysztof Jasiewicz, Lista strat ziemiaństwa polskiego (Warszawa: Pomost-Alfa, 1995), 927, 1136-1137 [afterward Lista strat ziemiaństwa polskiego]; Wierzbicki, Polacy i Białorusini w zaborze sowieckim, 70-72; Ryszard Szawłowski, Wojna polsowiecka 1939: Tło polityczne, prawnomiędzynarodowe i psychologiczne; Agresja sowiecka i polska obrona; Sowieckie zbrodnie wojenne i przeciw ludzkości oraz zbrodnie ukraińskie i białoruskie (Warszawa: Antyk-Marcin Dybowski, 1997), vol. 1: 370; Wojciech Wybranowski, „Musieli zginąć, bo byli Polakami," Nasz Dziennik, 4 September 2001; Wojciech Wybranowski, „Są pierwsi świadkowie," Nasz Dziennik, 8-9 September 2001; Wojciech Wybranowski, „Komuniści przyszli nocą", Nasz Dziennik, 24 September 2001; Wojciech Wybranowski, „Kłopotliwe śledztwo: Dochodzenie w sprawie mordu na Polakach w Brzostowicy Małej utnęło w martwym punkcie," Nasz Dziennik, 2 October 2002"

Clearly, this is the footnote referred to in the first snippet, footnote 34. This type of thing is common, so pay attention to footnotes and try to make sure you know what is in the footnotes of snippets of interest to you. The second snippet in the initial search[10] is the same footnote 34, but in Polish. If I want, I can follow the same process to confirm this. My guess is that the missing snippet from the initial search is the same as the first snippet but in Polish. To confirm this, I can search for my initial search term with other words likely to be on the same page, such as "Brzostowica Mała" Grodo[11]. Now I can see a result on page 24. This result is clearly the same as the first result but in Polish. If it weren't, I could use my process and get the full paragraph or more around it to see what it is about.

The trick, then, is to search for a fairly unique phrase at the end of a google book snippet result in the global google books search. The result of that search will give a result from your book of interest with a little bit of text from before and after your phrase. You can then search the phrase from text after your phrase, often that search should be a search specific to your book of interest. This result will now be a new snippet from within your book of interest which is material after your first snippet. This process can be repeated. It is very effective for well-typeset-ted single column per page books in languages with good OCR. It is less effective but not entirely inneffective for two-column books. Page breaks can be tricky, but with luck can be navigated. It is easier to use this process to go forward than backwards.

Thanks. I've done more or less that, and it pretty much works, although I confess that sometimes, when an article at AfD has piqued my curiosity, I actually take a physical walk over to an actual library where, they don't blank any of the pages. Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
If your library has access to right-wing Polish language history books, then you're pretty lucky ;). I'm not sure if you already have, but Questia and Project MUSE at The Wikipedia Library can also give you access to more books. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:22, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Cute. (and thanks, Those are good resources, ones I sometimes forget to check.) But I couldn't resist your challenge to my library. Turns out it owns a copy of Ejszyszki: kulisy zajść w Ejszyszkach : epilog stosunków polsko-żydowskich na Kresach, 1944-45 it's listed as: Offsite DS135.L52 E357 2002; which means that if I ask for it, it'll take 2 days to get here. I'm very lucky to have easy access to such a library. Of course, if a 1939 event is at all notable, it is almost certain to be discussed in books that libraries keep premises. I am wondering whether there is an article about the series of communist revolts in this region in the immediate wake of the German invasion of Poland to which this town and the four murders could be added.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
I thought about that. The closest I could come up with is Soviet annexation of Eastern Galicia, Volhynia and Northern Bukovina, Occupation of Poland (1939–1945), or Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (1939–1946), but there might be something better. Smmurphy(Talk) 20:14, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
See Skidel revolt, which does however have very similar POV problems.Icewhiz (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

SPI[edit]

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Icewhiz where you are reported based on AfD interaction.Icewhiz (talk) 19:50, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Icewhiz: Thanks for the note and your statement their. I was away for the last couple days, I don't know if I would have known what to add to the SPI, but it looks like it is already closed. Let me know if you have any suggestions of ways I can change my behavior to prevent issues like this in the future.
I'm not sure what to make of the dispute between you and User:Poeticbent, and I'm sorry if I've complicated things. It looks like it has stretched over a few different pages - and I haven't really looked through all of the relevant ones. I've tried to make my contribution to Massacre of Brzostowica Mała and to the page on Chodakiewicz, but it isn't my area of expertise or, really, great interest, so I don't plan on making many more significant edits. That said, I am able to read some scholarship. I'll try to keep an eye on things and, if I think I have something useful to add, comment now and then. I hope either of you feels free to let me know if I can be of help. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:37, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
I think this was a meritless filing (as did the closing admin) - I do not think you (or I) need to modify the behaviour. Regarding said dispute - there are quite a few articles in which poorly sources (e.g, much maligned ethno-nationalist figures, or in some casees not even that) are used to promote the fringe view of victim blaming Jews and justifying Polish massacres of Jews (the synopsis is "commie Jews killed and persecured Poles, so Poles responded in self defense or in justified anger). This is not a topic I was engaged in much upp to now (and what dragged me in was this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Szczuczyn pogrom, following which I noticed a wider problem of promoting fringe views).Icewhiz (talk) 05:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
From there I wandered over to Jedwabne pogrom which was in a very bad state (User:Chumchum7 is doing a good job NPOVing back to a reasonable state). I will also note that I've noticed that this Polish ethno-nationalist has crept into a very large number of more esotric articles. For instance the town of Stawiski#Jewish community describes Jewish atrocities towards Poles, a Nazi massacre (of whom the Poles took little part), and some minor revenge killings by Poles (who emerged from their forest hideaways, including prisoners released by the Nazis from the NKVD prisons, were led to acts of revenge-killing in German presence). Contrast this with say [12] or any account by a non modern Polish ethno-nationalist. This has also be commented on externally to Wikipedia, e.g. Wikipedia Continues the Crime and the Silence of Polish Participation in the Murder of Jews. Note our Stawiski article does not use Chodakiewicz - but it advances the same narrative he did (e.g. here).
My gut feeling is that Chodakiewicz's (and related circle) have basically picked up various esotric, less written about incidents, and then inflated and re-cast them in this narrative. This then got amplified on Wikipedia (particularly by one editor - peek at Stawiski's history) - who have inserted this content into perhaps hundreds of articles on lesser known/traveled subjects (e.g. a small town in Poland, a poorly documented killing of a Polish noble family in 1939, and many-many others). I haven't really picked up the gauntlet on this one - I've been touching this off and on. I think I will take Chodakiewicz to RS/n prior to cleaning use of him as a source.Icewhiz (talk) 07:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC) Took it there - probably due prior to doing massive changes in multiple articles.Icewhiz (talk) 09:54, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
I wasn't aware of the long history of conflicts over these articles (which includes many RFCs, SPIs, ANIs, etc) until your recommending I check out the history of Stawiski and I decided to look at the different editors. Needless to say, what I saw is enough that I am reinforced in my interest in keeping a healthy distance. I don't have a strong opinion about RS/n; I mostly edit in an area with a lot more easy-to-find high quality detailed scholarship (19th century US history vs Eastern Europe in the mid 20th century), so it is somewhat easier to figure out which sources are neutral and which are not, and such designation doesn't really require whatever happens at RS/n. Like I wrote, hopefully my contribution to Chodakiewicz helps editors who want to use him as a source to find criticism of him in academic press. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:58, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
@Icewhiz: To clarify, I will try to keep involved at Massacre of Brzostowica Mała and any spin-off articles that may form. I've struck my !vote at the AfD, as I don't see the disagreements at that article as being too disruptive that a NPOV article is impossible. Smmurphy(Talk) 15:41, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
When nominated - Massacre of Brzostowica Mała(old version) was essentially a sub-copy of Skidel revolt(old version), with some additional info on the Hrabia's family (and both mentioned each other). My thoughts were to delete Brzostowica Mała (based on lack of notability/INDEPTH of the particular event at Brzostowica Mała) and then work on NPOV in Skidel (seeing that as a topic for the wider revolt(s)). You've been taking Brzostowica Mała in the direction of the wider revolt(s) - the current content of the article devoted to Hrabia Wołkowicki is currently small(~30%?) of the current article, and if there were to be expanded for the wider revolt(s) it would get smaller - so I don't see how that would be the proper name. The wider revolt(s) do have sourcing (from a few different POVs)- e.g. Gross's Revolution from Abroad and a number of others.Icewhiz (talk) 15:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
In short - the point I'm trying to make - is that if you want to retain this one - it should be renamed and re-purposed to something else that is wider (and there are a number of choices in this regard). The overall affair involved conflict from all sides (including both the Soviet and Polish armies - these insurgencies where not separate from the Soviet advance - so I'm not sure if this does not go back up to Soviet invasion of Poland (and expanding the use of domestic insurgencies there)).Icewhiz (talk) 16:03, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I agree on all points. I don't think the outcome of the AfD will be, "Keep and salt any chance at a renaming or merge in the future". If it is "Keep", the option will be open to rename/merge. I'll try to work out what the right merge target could be and add it to the discussion at the AfD, although I am not sure the AfD will lead to any final outcome. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Edwin Belcher[edit]

This is an interesting historical figure. According to the letter he wrote, cited at the end of the article, he rose to the rank of captain and commanded white soldiers during the American Civil War while serving without disclosing his background. FloridaArmy (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2018 (UTC) FloridaArmy (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

It is an interesting figure! Keep it up. Smmurphy(Talk) 17:25, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Liwonde National Park[edit]

Hello again! I was curious if you had any thoughts about my request for the "Big cats" section at the bottom of Talk:Liwonde National Park. I "pinged" you there, but know not all editors have this feature enabled. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:38, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

I did see that, but was too busy to reply. I've done it now. Smmurphy(Talk) 17:25, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your help! Inkian Jason (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

I've noticed[edit]

You've also asked for the article on MoBM to be undeleted, and the deleting admin rebuffed you, as did me, twice, despite saying in AfD he would consider undeletion and userfication. As the DR will likely end in failure (given how it looks right now), I've asked for this here. Hopefully at least userfication so we can calmly review sources and see if any facts can be rescued/merged somewhere will prove uncontroversial. Sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:09, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Thanks for the note. That AfD was very divisive, in that two sides of an argument were strongly divided with little interest in finding common ground. I put in a late !vote for merge, as I think the common ground would be optimal, but the tenor of the discussion was such that the closing admin was probably right to make a definitive decision. That said, I do support the idea of merging some of the material from that page into a page about the wider conflict, either into the Skidel Revolt page or somewhere else. I'm not sure the best way to get there, though, and I can understand the hesitancy on the part of those at DR and REFUND to undelete the article, even as a userfication. I'll comment at the DR, as I think that is the best forum to get some traction... Smmurphy(Talk) 22:10, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive[edit]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
  • updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Salve H. Matheson[edit]

Greetings, when you have a few moment (really), I'm looking for a citation to support Salve H. Matheson getting married. I've been through Newspapers.com, newspaperarchive.com, and even old fulton postcards. The cite I'm using (in Family) actually says they went on their honeymoon; that's close, but... Thanks.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 01:13, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't find much. I do find that their engagement was announced in the Armed Forces Journal on September 20, 1947 ([13] and [14]). Given the obit says he died in January 2005 after 57 years of marriage, that means they married between September 1947 and January 1948. Since it also says they honeymooned in 1947, I think it is safe to say they married that year. I did find the marriage certificate for Salve's father on ancestry ([15]). Smmurphy(Talk) 15:05, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. This is the first time I found something useful in Fold3 that was available without a premium account. There's neat stuff in the European and Pacific Stars and Stripes, too.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 19:09, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Is that journal available at Fold3? I didn't realize Stars and Stripes was available there. It would be cool if they had copies of the WWII POW newspapers, too (such as that by recent AfD candidate, J. Frank Diggs, which you may remember). Smmurphy(Talk) 22:14, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Oops, I was unclear. Stripes is available at Newspaperarchive.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:21, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Smmurphy. 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.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • 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. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:45, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Ralph de Warenne[edit]

Here we go again: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph de Warenne (2nd nomination). – Joe (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 27[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • New collections
    • Alexander Street (expansion)
    • Cambridge University Press (expansion)
  • User Group
  • Global branches update
    • Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
  • Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Atlanta Black Star[edit]

Greetings Smmurphy. I created an article on this subject after seeing it noted in another article. It's cited extensively on Wikipedia and in various books. Searching Google News the results come back with articles from the web media entity itself. I think it is notable based on its infkuence and the extent it is cited, but fidning some independent coverage would be great. I was hoping you might have ideas. Thabks for any help you or your talk page followers can provide. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: Sorry, I've been away for a while. I'm not sure I know anything about the site - my expertise is not really in current events and websites. It definitely looks interesting, though. Good luck! Smmurphy(Talk) 21:55, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look for me. I hope all is well with you. Happy May and beyond!!! FloridaArmy (talk) 02:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the Lizette Parker AfD[edit]

You asked to bring the discussion to your talk page, so here I am. I know you have a good track record of being on the right side of an AfD, and I think we're just going to agree to disagree. As I've said before, it's a very intriguing AfD because my before search brings up only obituaries as a possible WP:GNG pass. I'm simply curious on your opinion on this: If an obituary considers someone "groundbreaking," but no other sources show that, does that pass WP:GNG? SportingFlyer talk 05:22, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your question. I'm not sure if my answer is more than you ask, if the question really only has to do with the Parker article in particular, the discussion should stay there. But for a more general question, I think the discussion is already long enough there and continuing it there isn't terribly useful. In Parker's case, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by, "no other sources show that"? The significance of local level firsts like this are discussed in the two NJ.com articles, the Root article, and elsewhere (such as briefly here: [16]).
Another AfD that comes to mind where the only(?) sources found were post-mortem articles about the individual's legacy was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greene Fort Pinkston. In both cases, the article happens to be about a black person who wasn't really the first of anything but was considered (at least after their death) to have been remarkable in their accomplishments as a person of color. I don't think racism is really a big issue in either AfD, but it does play a big role in the articles' existence, I think. Indeed if the person had been white and had the exact same career, perhaps no article would have been written. The question of suitability hinges in part on the issue of how race changes how people's lives are discussed in reliable sources, and, in turn, how the perception of the importance of an individual convinces/inspires someone to create an article about that person in wikipedia. To me, if an honest reading of the sources suggests the article would fit into an encyclopedia which is allowed to be broad, deep, a gazetteer (WP:5P1) etc, then if the article passes the core content policies (WP:CCPOL) it might be suitable for inclusion. If I assume good faith about the initial author of the page, then I believe they found the subject encyclopedic. If I disagree, the onus is on me to make a good case that the subject doesn't meet V/NPOV/NOR/etc. In Parker's case, the obituaries are quite numerous (I count 15 [17]) and the post-mortem honors are somewhat impressive (a street, a garden at an elementary school, a memorial children's room in a library). I don't see a problem with learning about her only via things written after she died.
Sorry if this is just repeating in a longer and more meandering form what I said at the AfD. I started writing an even longer response more generally about AfD (the fundamental issue Bearcat and I were discussing), but I don't think that was the question you were asking. It was easier to delete that than to publish it, and I think perhaps this is more of a response to your question. Smmurphy(Talk) 07:49, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Mossi Kingdoms cleanup[edit]

Wow, did we ever find a terrible mess of content to try to salvage, huh? I've finally gotten all of one article into reasonable shape: List of rulers of Liptako. So far, I haven't redlinked any of the emirs, although I suspect that there's are enough sources to get Braahima Seydu, Bokari Sori, Nassourou Abdoulaye Dicko, and Ousmane Amirou Dicko stand-alone articles, at a minimum. I just... don't like writing biographies as much as other stuff, so I'm putting that off a little longer! Needless to say, the core Liptako article is also a travesty, because of course it is.

I'm not even sure how to sanely approach the rest of this. Gwiriko isn't a "Mossi state" any more than Liptako was (it was a satellite state of the Kong Empire). Tenkodogo, Wogodogo, and Yatenga are the canonical Mossi Kingdoms states, and it's tempting to handle them together, but they have long histories—I've got at least one source claiming Wobogo was the 30th Mogho Naba of Wogodogo (but the article on that title currently lists him as 32nd, so that's fun)—so I'm not sure that's viable.

The other articles are... awkward. Nungu was the dominant Gurma kingdom, and the Gurma aren't the same people as the Mossi. But that said, a lot of sources seem to address Nungu (and its satellite kingdoms, which are what all the rest of those things are) as one of the "Mossi Kingdoms" in a broad sense. I haven't even tried to see what's verifiable that far down the pipe. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

My understanding of WP:CWW is that if these lists are used in the new articles, some attribution is preferred (required?), which is I'm planing on going through the step of moving articles rather than just writing decent ones. Biographies are my favorite thing to write, and I'm happy to do so - you are right that the Liptako stuff might be the easiest to find sources on. I also agree about the messiness of the situation. The dates, orders, and existence of some of these rulerships are not always clear and certainly the association of the different entities with Mossi is incorrect, but I think it is fine to write that some of these things are based in oral history and imprecise. I'm pretty swamped at work, but this is more or less at the top of my wikipedia pile, so while it might take some time to get through them, it isn't the biggest project I've ever given myself, and I'm finding it interesting so far. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:40, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Fairly sure that CWW doesn't apply to my work on the Liptako list. I didn't use the rulers.org list or previous article content in any way, and wrote it from scratch from first principles. Indeed, the previous list has a raft of serious problems. Wrong dates, wrong kings, wrong titles. So I'm happy to consign it to the e-dustbin of history. I'm bumping this whole thing up to the top of my project pile, too, probably starting with more work on Liptako, including doing something about the state of the main topic article. I needed a break from silent era films, anyway, I suppose! Let me know if you run across any sources that go into the Gurma client states in detail, because some of that may overlap with the Koala-era Liptako history. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 19:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Sounds good. Smmurphy(Talk) 20:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018[edit]

Hello Smmurphy, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

  • WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

  • Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

  • A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

  • There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

  • Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

  • The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

  • Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
  • The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

The real issue is "#PolishRighteous" (or whatever the movement is called)[edit]

Which movement do you mean? Xx236 (talk) 09:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. You are likely familiar with the a social media campaign the Polish government has supported to defend the so-called Holocaust bill using the hashtag, #PolishRighteous (see "Polish death camp" controversy#Polish reactions). I do not know if #PolishRighteous is a movement, or what exactly to call it, but I think it represents a viewpoint which has limited if any support in peer reviewed historical writing. At User talk:Icewhiz, I noted that mis-using Mark Paul as a reliable academic historian is, in my opinion, a part of a more general issue that some editors believe that the campaign represents a good faith expression of historical consensus. So long as that view is supportable on en-wp, there is a strong possibility that conflict will exist between editors who desire to edit in support of these sorts of views of the Polish government and a number of thus far poorly-published historians on one hand and those who support the views of academic historians largely publishing outside of Poland on the other hand (there are, of course scholars living and working in Poland who are in the later camp such as Engelking and Stola). My view is that the perspective of #PolishRighteous-type views shouldn't exactly be considered fringe; it is, after all, the view of a large, free, and open national government. But in a historical article, it usually should not be included as a part of the main narrative if it isn't RS-compliant - and the works by Paul that I've seen certainly aren't RS. Smmurphy(Talk) 09:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Stola isn't a scholar only, he is a director of the POLIN Museum.
Engelking despises Polish peasants. If she publishes similar opinions about other minorities, eg. Afro-Americans she would be banned.
So called Holocaust historians in Poland are generally sociologists or linguists. They lack basic expertise in history, they don't speak languages. You can't become an expert if you don't speak Polish, German and Yiddish.
The level of ignorance in the West is dramatic, fringe. The idiots ignore basic difference - Poland was an ally, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania collaborated. Almost all texts criticizing Polish government contain errors and fake news. Why don't you criticize the anti-Polish propaganda but you criticize the Polish defence? People attacked by mobsters have the right to defend themselves. The alleged Holocaust law wasn't anti-Semitic. European countries and Israel don't allow Holocaust revisonism. Stories that Germany created Auschwit camp to make Poles happy are revisionistic. Several texts about the Holocaust law containe wrong pictures and some editors refuse to correct their errors. Critical commentrs are removed, so you may see only answers to the critics. Freedom of speach for fringe writers only.
Israeli accusations are based on survivors accounts. But accounts of Polish survivors are rejected as biased. Any survivor account is biased, any eyewitness account should be critically evaluated. Xx236 (talk) 07:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I think I should first make a tangential note. My interest in this area is primarily to do with maintaining standards of reliable sourcing. So while after review, I might find the views of Engleking or Chodakiewicz to be incorrect, I'm not opposed to their being used if they are published in high quality (RS) outlets. I prefer not to use a source affiliated with extreme right- and left-wing points of view - and when such a source is used, I would keep an eye out for criticisms of that POV. Because of my own point of view (Western center-left pragmatism, I guess), I probably tend to identify some right-wing sources as more extreme which a more right-wing editor might see as more mainstream. Luckily, I don't think that issue is present in our discussion about Mark Paul, who rarely publishes in RS (see particularly WP:SOURCETYPES).
Your comment starts with a mention of Stola and Engleking. I didn't, in my comment, recommend their use for any particular thing. I just noted them as examples of scholars in Poland who publish in independent, academic, peer-reviewed places. They may also publish opinion pieces and in non-RS places, such works should generally be avoided, I think. There may be exceptions, non-peer reviewed writings by widely recognized experts can be RS. It goes pretty far into the hypothetical to try to think about whether such a condition applies for something Engleking or Stola has written. In any case, I'm not sure what your point is with regards to them, you can feel free to come up with your own example of scholars in Poland publishing peer reviewed material (Musiał for instance).
You then talk about Holocaust historians. Here, you don't give any examples so it is hard to know how to respond or what you mean. I agree that a historian interested in using primary sources should learn the language those sources are written in. I don't think every historian needs to use primary sources, but lacking those skills would make it hard to be very successful or to publish very well (in highly respected peer reviewed journals). Myself, I speak passing German, can read Yiddish when written in a Roman script with some assistance, and can make out enough Polish to handle google-snippet sized chunks but would be exhausted if I had to read something like a multi-page hand written testimony (luckily I am not a historian of Poland).
You then talk about idiots and revisionism and bias. I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to and I don't think I want to find out. I agree that the peer review process isn't perfect, but it is fundamental to RS/V and is what is preferred here. A full criticism of the historiography of the Holocaust in Poland is far outside of my interest.
You say that I am unfairly criticizing the Polish defense. I partially agree, the position I had when I made that comment to Icewhiz probably isn't exactly correct. In particular, the way I wrote it makes it seem like I think other authors (I mention Chodakiewics, Wierzbicki, Strzembosz, and Musiał) should be treated in the same way as Paul. In fact, Paul seems to me the only source that has been unwilling or unable to publish substantially in peer reviewed sources, and thus can in practice be treated differently than the others. With two exceptions (published in Glaukopis and Leopolis Press), nothing Paul has written is suitable as a source for something disputed between editors. Those two exceptions should be treated carefully, of course, as I mentioned at Talk:Rescue of Jews by Poles during the Holocaust. Similarly, certain views of Chodakiewics, Wierzbicki, Strzembosz, and Musiał have been strongly criticized and should be used especially carefully as well.
However, you seem to mean that the way in which I am unfair is that I agree with critiques of the Holocaust Bill amendment. In this, I think you are wrong in a couple ways. First, I think the text of the Bill is not, obviously, inhumane. I have not heard of any prosecutions under the law, but I agree that it is likely to restrict free speech in an inhumane way, even without prosecutions. I think that view is moderate and fair. Second, I am somewhat uninterested in the Bill and have never edited any page related to it that I can think of, it is mostly meant to influence contemporary politics in Poland. I have not read much of the criticism of the bill and have only skimmed the wikipedia page about it. I'm not interested in editing there.
I think the most important issue here is that at Talk:Rescue of Jews by Poles during the Holocaust, I am trying to argue in support of RS for that page, while you, Icewhiz, Tatzref, GrizzyCatBella, Nihil novi, and some others are taking part in an argument covering multiple pages which focuses on a number of issues. I have beliefs about those issues (largely in line with Icewhiz's), but do not feel interested in spending a significant amount of effort to support them. I support the limited points of Icewhiz's RfC. I don't think Paul should be banned, especially if he publishes in a respected peer reviewed journal. I don't think individual authors can/should be banned - there may be exceptions but I can't think of them. I agree that certain publishers can/should be banned, and I haven' thought about whether or not PEFINA should be banned. Currently it is not banned although it is a poor source and should be avoided; RS covers that and I think no particular ban is necessary. Given current and past editor behavior issues, I am not interested in getting involved with the larger discussion. Given the lack of outside interest I think the only way the dispute will be solved is if one side of the issue gets blocked. For all those editing in the subject area, I hope that doesn't happen. Thanks again and feel free to follow up! Smmurphy(Talk) 15:58, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Mark Tatum - Thank you![edit]

Thank you so much for your helpful insight and advice in helping me create this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.231.50 (talk) 04:21, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 28[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

  • #1Bib1Ref
  • New partners
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
    • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
  • Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)