Stinglehammer
Hi, this is my Talk page. Feel free to leave a message. --Stinglehammer (talk) 13:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Research Project
editHi Stinglehammer I'm an anthropology student doing an online research project on wikipedians and their motivations and ideals for writing and editing wikipedia pages. I was wondering if you would be interested in answering a few questions I have - sort of like a small online interview.
Best Karoline Husbond (Student at University of Texas Austin) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Karohusb
Hi Stinglehammer - many thanks for hosting the WiR event earlier this week! I've had another go at a new page and have published one on Frances Murray (suffragist). I found quite a lot but since this is only my second entry I'd appreciate any feedback! --Louise WIR (talk) 17:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Stinglehammer
Published page on Emily Blathwayt, but maybe linked to the sandbox rather than properly published, any help welcome. I have put in some reverse links biography pages mentioned in the article created. hope this is ok
Kaybeesquared (talk) 13:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Stinglehammer
Almost completed a page on Emily Blathwayt, it is in my sandbox. Will try to complete over the next couple of days - and even upload if I can.. Happy Easter
Kaybeesquared (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
HI Stinglehammer
Help! someone has added the picture to my new page on Agnes Husband (the one I have asked permission for) but I don't know if it was the museum/gallery who owns the copyright or who did it?
If they check on Monday they may think it was me and pursue breach of copyright (ugh?)!
Kaybeesquared (talk) 16:44, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
HI Stinglehammer
Thank you for yesterday's session and help with page on Agnes Husband
Your training and guidance were invaluable.
You kindly offered to give me wording to write to institutions to request use of images to enhance the page.
I would appreciate that advice.
--Kaybeesquared (talk) 12:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, this is my Talk page.--Stinglehammer (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Notability for novels
editThought that this might be useful :) Standards of notability for novels
What is Public Domain should remain Public Domain
editUpdated guidance from the UK Intellectual Property Office Lirazelf (talk) 13:28, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Unified login
editDetails here. Lirazelf (talk) 13:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Stinglehammer (talk) 23:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, this is my talk page. feel free to leave me a message some time. Stinglehammer (talk) 11:11, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Request for comment: Lead sentence for train or railway stations
editIn what way should the lead sentence of articles dealing with railway stations or train stations be fashioned? See discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#Request for comment: Identification of train or railway stations in the lead. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
WIR A+F
edit
Hoping you enjoyed the recently-held in-person Art+Feminism meetup, |
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 19:48, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Art+Feminism: Modern Scottish Women 2
editHi there! Thanks so much for coming to the Editathon on Saturday and for helping out, much appreciated! I hope you enjoyed it, as ever if there's anything I can do to help. please don't hesitate to ask! Lirazelf (talk) 11:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Invitation to our April event
editYou are invited... | |
---|---|
Women Writers worldwide online edit-a-thon
|
--Ipigott (talk) 15:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)
Shhh! Spies!
editYou are invited... | |
---|---|
Women in Espionage worldwide online edit-a-thon
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 13:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC) (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)
- Hey Ewan, forgot to drop this off on your talkpage after sending the other invites via MassMessage. Please feel free to distribute it to others, or if you'd prefer to compile a list, I can distribute it after work today. Cheers, --Rosiestep (talk) 13:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Demonstration
editWell, that was probably more traumatic than it should have been, but we got there eventually. I've deleted the userpage. I'll delete the talk page (you know we don't usually do that) after a suitable period. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Zzuuzz: Thanks for that! Appreciated.Stinglehammer (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Spy week activities
editThanks, Ewan, for all your efforts in connection with Spy Week. I see from here that quite a few people participated in your event. They also appear to have created a few more articles than the one posted under your "Outcomes". I have also added a link under your Outcomes to the WiR page listing articles created or improved during the WiR Women in Espionage virtual event which is continuing for a few more days. If you still have contacts with your participants, please inform them they are very welcome to continue their efforts under our Espionage editathon or join in any of the other virtual editathons under Women in Red, including Women Writers which is continuing until the end of the month. I, for one, will be happy to assist you and the newer participants if any of you run into any difficulties.--Ipigott (talk) 09:48, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Me too - Do see the twitter feed Victuallers (talk) 10:45, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Victuallers and Ipigott: - Apologies for delay, involved in Wikipedia presentation all day yesterday. Have updated the outcomes on the Spy Week 2016 event page now. And will contact editors so we can keep it going for next few days at least on the Wikiproject Women in Red virtual editathon. Thanks again. Stinglehammer (talk) 13:20, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- You've made a very good job of the Outcomes. Well done!--Ipigott (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- From the Recruiter's Desk at The Signpost (yes, I wear that hat, too)... Hi Ewan, @Victuallers and Ipigott:. Please consider writing an article for the SP regarding our Spy Week collaboration. Some of the tweets are absolutely awesome. Some of the stories (dentist turned Scandinavian Mata Hari) are compelling. Length of piece doesn't matter; informative + catchy does matter, e.g. we used "Shhh! Spies!" for the invitation header so something like that. In advance, thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:30, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Victuallers, Rosiestep, Ipigott, and Megalibrarygirl: Hi. Sorry for just getting round to this but been super busy with OER16. Don't know if anyone else is already on this but I'll need to write up Spy Week for the university's news bulletins so happy to supply something for Signpost too if I can get a few pointers on what's required. All the best, Stinglehammer (talk) 16:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thx :-) Victuallers (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Stinglehammer, our co-Editor-in-Chief is @Go Phightins!: and he can give you pointers for a Signpost article. Cheers, --Rosiestep (talk) 21:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
- From the Recruiter's Desk at The Signpost (yes, I wear that hat, too)... Hi Ewan, @Victuallers and Ipigott:. Please consider writing an article for the SP regarding our Spy Week collaboration. Some of the tweets are absolutely awesome. Some of the stories (dentist turned Scandinavian Mata Hari) are compelling. Length of piece doesn't matter; informative + catchy does matter, e.g. we used "Shhh! Spies!" for the invitation header so something like that. In advance, thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:30, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
user talk page stuff from editathon
editHallo, I've just added a new section to User talk:Padraigin1 but it's appearing within the boundary of your previous edit to that page, the welcome template and associated messages about the editathon. I can't work out how to "close off" your addition: could you have a look at it please and sort it out? If you've put the same message on other editors' pages there may be the same problem elsewhere! Thanks. PamD 12:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
- @PamD: All sorted now. Thanks for the heads up! Stinglehammer (talk) 16:52, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Glasgow Wiki Meetup 30th April
editHi Ewan, I'm so sorry but I'm going to have trouble attending tomorrow's wiki meetup. A member of staff called in sick and I'm going to have to work. I'll definitely miss the sharmanka performance, but I'll try and make to some of the wiki meetup if I can, although if work is busy I might miss it altogether... :( Elflin (talk) 20:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Elflin: No worries. No one else has officially signed up for it (got couple of maybes) so may just wait and see if anyone comes along and head off myself if not. Keep in touch though, hope to do this again and get a wee Glasgow Wiki scene going if poss. Btw, Sara said you've been looking at setting up something yourself? Would be good to learn more, but another time perhaps? Drop me an email with your preferences for venues and I'll happily set something up (and rope Sara in once she's recovered from the Beltane Fire Festival). Laters... Stinglehammer (talk) 21:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Stem cells
editAre you associated with these editors [1]? Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:51, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Doc James: Not as far as I know, we don't kick off till 12pm GMT today so any content will most likely be added around 2.30pm-6pm GMT. I'll check none of our proposed editors have jumped the gun though. Stinglehammer (talk) 09:45, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Okay this group is adding content that is based mostly on primary sources, some of it contains copyright concerns, and it is overly promotional of stem cells IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Ada Lovelace Editathon
editI will try to be around (in particular in the afternoon). LoopZilla (talk) 09:31, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry to say, cannot do much, if anything. LoopZilla (talk) 15:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Want to help test advanced new tools planned for Recent Changes?
editHi Stinglehammer! I’m reaching out to you because our logs tell us you’re an active Twinkle new user welcomer. The WMF Collaboration team is working on new tools that we hope will be useful to people engaged in reviewing recent changes, fighting vandalism or supporting new users. We want to test them for usability with editors who are experienced with relevant wiki work. If you’re interested in helping to shape this new technology—we’d like to hear from you.
The testing should take about an hour, will be conducted online, and will take place during the next few weeks. To participate, please email dchen[at]wikimedia.org with the subject line Twinkle Welcomer. Include the following information:
- Username
- Email where we can reach you
- Your city or time zone
- Best time to talk to you
- Your primary use(s) of Twinkle or Recent Changes (e.g., reviewing recent changes, reviewing with a particular focus (specify), anti-vandalism, new-page review, welcoming new users, etc.)
Thanks!
I have paraphrased and removed some of the content you added to the above article, as it appears to have been copied from the copyright web pages https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/30/evelyn-gillan and http://www.scotsman.com/mobile/news/obituaries/obituary-evelyn-gillan-social-campaigner-1-3838293. I have removed the material from one of your sandboxes as well. All content you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. I also have removed some the quotations you added to the article, because our non-free content policy requires that non-free content can be added only when there's no alternative and should not be used to excess. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:48, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Hester Dickson Martineau
editWas working on this and not quite sure what happened, but the original was deleted... and the one I was working on remained. As you do... Hester Dickson Martineau Lirazelf (talk) 19:08, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Stinglehammer, as per the article he was a triple agent, hence the code name tricycle Lotje (talk) 14:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Stinglehammer
edit(Charles R. Knight, 1922)
|
Thank you for all you did for this project in 2016, Stinglehammer. May your house be safe, and may you and those having the privilege of your company enjoy good health in a Happy New Year 2017! Kind regards, Lotje (talk) 15:50, 5 January 2017 (UTC) Pass on! Send this greeting by adding
{{subst:User:Sam Sailor/Templates/HappyNewYear}} to user talk pages. |
Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
editHello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- ^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
- ^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
editHello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Mary Susan McIntosh
editHello! Your submission of Mary Susan McIntosh 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! DavidCane (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Helen Alexander Archdale
editHello! Your submission of Helen Alexander Archdale 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) 22:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- Stinglehammer, it has been over a week since this was posted here. Please respond as soon as possible in order to continue your nomination. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
A page you started (Evelyn Gillan) has been reviewed!
editThanks for creating Evelyn Gillan, Stinglehammer!
Wikipedia editor Mduvekot just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thanks!
To reply, leave a comment on Mduvekot's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Wikimedian in Residence BoF at Wikimania 2017
editHello!
My name is David Alves (User:Horadrim~usurped), and I'm an Wikipedian in Residence at RIDC NeuroMat (User:Horadrim). I've reach your contact through the Wikimedian in residence page in Outreach. As you may know, Wikimania 2017 is coming! I am here because, as a fellow WiR, I believe this would be a great opportunity for us to share experiences, discuss difficulties and exchange solutions, creating a community among us capable of supporting in other projects that would benefit from residents. In that sense, I have submitted a proposal of a Birds of a Feather activity to Wikimania that you can check out here. I hope to count with your support in this project and would like to invite you to join us if you participate in Wikimania. In case of any doubts, please feel free to contact me, either in my talk pages or by e-mail at david.alves outlook.com.
Thank you very much! Horadrim~usurped (talk) 00:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Mary Susan McIntosh
editOn 11 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mary Susan McIntosh, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that sociologist, feminist, and campaigner for lesbian and gay rights Mary Susan McIntosh was deported from the U.S. in 1960 for speaking out against the House Un-American Activities Committee? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Susan McIntosh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), 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. |
Category:Muse has been nominated for discussion
editCategory:Muse, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.
Pseudopregnancy
editHello, I'm Smjg. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Pseudopregnancy. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Smjg (talk) 13:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Celtic Knot and the like
editHi! I'm sorry I wasn't able to come to Celtic Knot, but please let me know about future events like this one. -Yupik (talk) 19:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Yupik: Hi Yupik, thanks for your message. Jason.NLW has been in talks to see if Celtic Knot 2018 can take place in Aberystwyth in Wales. Not sure how far on with plans he is but worth dropping him a message too. Best wishes, Stinglehammer (talk) 15:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
A page you started (Alice Emily Smith) has been reviewed!
editThanks for creating Alice Emily Smith, Stinglehammer!
Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Made a correction - she didn't die in 1905, that was just when one of the sources ran out of information about her (fl). Might be worth chasing up a paper copy of Chemistry was their life to find out more information.
To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Hidden Gems - thanks for coming!
editHAI! Just wanted to drop by to say thanks for coming on Friday, was great to see you - and I'm really happy to see a new Govan Stones page! Hope all's good with you :) Lirazelf (talk) 10:59, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 12
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Katherine Alice Burke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Women in Red November contest open to all
editAnnouncing Women in Red's November 2017 prize-winning world contest Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world:
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
Invitation to join Women in Red
edit Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past couple of months. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota. You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.14% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
MfD nomination of Talk:Simone Badal-McCreath
editTalk:Simone Badal-McCreath, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Simone Badal-McCreath and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Simone Badal-McCreath during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DGG ( talk ) 07:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
A page you started (Anthony Schrag) has been reviewed!
editThanks for creating Anthony Schrag, Stinglehammer!
Wikipedia editor Triptropic just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Nice work on the article for Anthony Schrag. Thank you for your contribution!
To reply, leave a comment on Triptropic's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
A page you started (Edinburgh: Picturesque Notes) has been reviewed!
editThanks for creating Edinburgh: Picturesque Notes, Stinglehammer!
Wikipedia editor Triptropic just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thank you for the excellent article on Picturesque Notes. A worthy contribution to Wikipedia.
To reply, leave a comment on Triptropic's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Request your support for metrics developments
editYou previously commented on
and we previously discussed metrics. I am with Wiki NYC, you work with Wiki UK, we both are Wikipedians in Residence, and we both do education. What is good for me I hope is good for you.
I appreciate your long term support for educational outreach and although US and UK do not collaborate nearly as often as I would like, I feel like we share a common interest in this Dashboard and that everyone in your social circle should take as much credit as you like for establishing wiki education outreach, along with all the others.
Now is voting time till 10 December. The Dashboard is rather high in the charts. 10 more votes, I think would be winning at this point. Please vote if you would. Canvassing is allowed; if this is within your interest, please encourage anyone at WM UK or in educational outreach to support as well. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:11, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
editHello, Stinglehammer. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi. You made a brief appearance on Norwegian WP on w:no:Diskusjon:Guy Fawkes Night. I have also tried to contact you on your Norwegian talk page. We fully appreciate that students need some leeway, but the article has not developed since November 29th. The added text is a machine translation and as much as I'd like to see a translation of the english WP article about Guy Fawkes, see w:no:Brukerdiskusjon:Linaria1, it is not possible to keep this addendum. The text is a machine translation and not Norwegian. Unfortunately English texts does not survive as legible going through the machine to what the machine calls Norwegian. They contain Norwegian words (mostly), but grammar and choice of words fails. I do hope you are in contact with the student and can explain that translations from English to Norwegian needs a human hand. I will have to revert the article now. --ツツDyveldi ☯ prat ✉ post 20:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Dyveldi: Hi, I have been on annual leave and have only just seen our message so this is the first time I have known there was an issue (I don't think the ping worked and I mistakenly assumed your message in Norwegian was about templates as I was trying to get some Norwegian templates created... and still am). I will raise with the student now. Can the article be moved to a draft space until the translation is fixed? Many thanks, Stinglehammer (talk) 01:04, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
- Figured something had happened, that is ok. That's why I made this little reminder as you obviously care about your students. Since the article existed in the first place this was not a question of deletion. I just had to revert the edit, which in a way is a pity since our article was (and now is) no more than a stub. Everything is still in the article history.
- -- We to not have draft space in Norwegian, but the student has been given a welcoming message. In this message it is a red link called «kladd» (sandbox) and following this link you create a subpage in your user space. This works well as a draft space. I see that you have several (and so do I). It is also possible to start a translation as a subpage. The problem in this case will be that as the original article is the older, the subpage should not be allowed to be moved to the article space replacing the old page, but text in the original article can be replaced with new text. This means that the original article keeps its history, but the revision history for the subspace article will stay with the subspace.
- -- Right now we are having a quite long discussion of what we should do with the machine translator thingummy on our top discussion forum; Tinget - Stans_maskinoversettelsene!. The quality of Yandex makes some of us despair and this is not the first case where users just do not understand that they must basically change all the text offered by the machine. We've had examples of users that can't write Norwegian (some of whom also can't read Norwegian) thinking of it as an invitation to translate. We are despairing because the amount of work left to the regular users on no.wp is formidable. The student (or you) can always ping me with questions or go to my discussion page. I do answer, but on occasion it takes some time, I do for instance not check the English watchlist every day and sometimes I'm busy, but I do try to follow up. I do not mind reminders if I use too much time. --ツツDyveldi ☯ prat ✉ post 20:09, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Courses Modules are being deprecated
editHello,
Your account is currently configured with an education program flag. This system (the Courses system) is being deprecated. As such, your account will soon be updated to remove these no longer supported flags. For details on the changes, and how to migrate to using the replacement system (the Programs and Events Dashboard) please see Wikipedia:Education noticeboard/Archive 18#NOTICE: EducationProgram extension is being deprecated.
Thank you! Sent by: xaosflux 20:28, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
Merging 2018 UK higher education strike with 2018 USS pension dispute
editHi there! Thanks for creating 2018 UK higher education strike. This covers the same topic as a page I created a while ago, 2018 USS pension dispute. It seems obvious to me that we need to merge these, but I thought I'd run it by you. Also, I'm not sure what the best name to use would be. The strike was not across all of UK HE, so perhaps your title is less appropriate? On the other hand, people might find it more readily. I'd appreciate your views! Alarichall (talk) 14:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
ACTRIAL
editCould I please ask you to read this before you comment further at the ACTRIAL talk page. It's another one of the many discussions that you appear to have missed. I am aware how I commented at the VP, but consensus can change, and as I said, I would support a renewed attempt to obtain special rights for the major facilitators, but I would oppose running an RfC for it until ACTRIAL becomes ACPERMANENT. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:58, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for this @Kudpung: - that makes for interesting & encouraging reading in a way. It appears to be an entirely civilised conversation with good points on each side and I welcome the comments that have been made about revisiting this now as a way to resolve any issue with ACTRIAL. RexxS's comments are virtually identical to my own position for what it's worth. I can't help but note that the Outreach editors I know didn't feature in that conversation - which is an issue we in Outreach to seriously address - but I think a renewed RfC might be a positive way out of this before things become too oppositional/intractable. Which is what I want to avoid as there does seem to be some consensus in this direction. I just question separating it from the ACTRIAL discussion. Aren't the two things inextricably linked? Stinglehammer (talk) 15:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Reply
editReplying to this here so as to further clutter that discussion: I made it clear that if you violate policies by seeking to turn that RfC into a referendum on your pet cause by canvassing editors who are so uninvolved on Wikipedia as to not know about arguably the most significant change that has occurred in it's history and who are unable to check WP:VPP, WP:VPR, and WP:CENT to see that a conversation is happening, I would take you to ANI. I do not want to do that, but I will if necessary. My frustration here is that you seem to be playing a game where you are unwilling to even listen to other people or see why they might find your actions disruptive or not in good faith. It's like talking to a wall.
Many members of the community, and me in particular, are bending over backwards to try to meet your needs and to work with you to get through a proposal that will meet them through, despite the fact that the community in the past has rejected the same proposal for the very reasons you want it. I'm sorry, but you cannot turn this RfC into a circus about outreach, which is what you are proposing to do. It is about one question only: whether or not ACTRIAL should be made permanent. Please do not try to derail it further by canvassing off-wiki to people who agree with you. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:34, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: There was no need for this comment. None. I'd already replied to your point in the thread and already agreed that the best way forward is an RfC on the Event Coordinator rights which you helpfully drafted. And I said I'd support that and already thanked you for that. Pet cause is a little harsh too. I appreciate that yourself and Kudpung have put a lot of time & energy into ACTRIAL and for this reason I could call ACTRIAL your pet cause. But that wouldn't be fair. The point I was making was that the reason we are having this discussion is because too few outreach editors are in the discussion; both now and historically. No game is being played. That's an issue of awareness and participation that needs to be addressed somehow and at some point (wouldn't you agree?) so that outreach and the wider Wikimedia community can understand one another and work better together. I don't accept the "too bad too sad" argument used against including people in these discussions when we can do better than this and I can't pretend that the discussion is being representative at the moment because I know of so many other usernames who could and should be involved in these discussions. But I am aware of WP:Canvas and already said I would abide by this. I really shouldn't have to say that again. Simply raising awareness and participation is what I'm talking about - not swaying an RfC one way or another. Social media can indeed be very effective in this respect for raising awareness. People affected by the change should know this discussion is happening. Involving other voices with a stake in the discussion in no way derails or creates a circus. We should be open about the fact this discussion is happening and not conduct discussions as if they are happening behind closed doors. It's the free and open encyclopedia after all. For what it's worth, I support improving quality control and ACTRIAL if it helps with this. Just not at the expense of outreach and the work many excellent Wikipedians do everyday. Would you expect me to say otherwise? In fact my position is really no different to that of Lirazelf, RexxS, Richard Nevell, Jason.nlw or any of the other editors working in outreach so I'm really not sure why you're singling me out here. Anyway, there seems to be a (hopefully) growing consensus on the proposal you drafted so that looks like a very constructive way forward. Stinglehammer (talk) 18:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- People affected by this change already have been given ample notice of this discussion on Wikipedia in no less than 9 different talk pages and noticeboards, including the centralized discussion. You have not agreed to follow WP:STEALTH, which is why I posted this. Even in the response above, you seem to be pushing for off-wiki notification when there is no need to do so. As Andrew has so helpfully pointed out, I have already posted this discussion just about everywhere possible using neutral language, so there isn't a reasonable argument to be made that active community members would be unaware of this unless they were notified via email or social media. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:49, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: I shouldn't need to agree to adhere to WP:STEALTH when it is just another form of WP:CANVAS which I have already said a couple of times that I am not doing. This is getting ridiculous. How many other forms of canvassing do I need to explicitly tell you I'm not doing? Besides, you only seem to be objecting to this in case I am stealth canvassing against your position. I have also already stated I am not against ACTRIAL or increased quality checks if outreach doesn't suffer as a result... which it doesn't have to. "Just about everywhere" is also not strictly true - otherwise we'd have many more voices in the discussion but I accept you will have posted on the main English Wikipedia boards. I still think we could do more when it is a big change like this but WP:CANVAS obviously ties your hands. (Which I'm still not doing). Stinglehammer (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, you were pushing to notify people via social media at the same time you were saying you were going to follow canvass. If you are saying you have no intent of placing any off-wiki notifications, then all is good. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: Asking about whether this would be acceptable in light of advice from a trusted editor colleague. You said it wouldn't so I did't. End of story. I'm looking to work within the guidelines here so we can arrive at a workable consensus. And the reason I asked is because I know my views are not mine alone (see Richard Nevell, RexxS, Lirazelf, Jason.nlw) and I know many outreach Wikipedia editors check Twitter, the Wikipedia & Education Facebook group, the Wikidata & GLAM group etc. sometimes as much as Wikipedia message boards and sometimes instead of the Wiki message boards. But are their views worth less because of this? Not exactly talking inexperienced editors here. Stinglehammer (talk) 20:37, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- I have less than zero sympathy for what you are saying: if someone is completely disconnected from the on-wiki community, then they likely shouldn't be doing outreach and representing our movement. If you are asking, the answer is no, it would not be acceptable to notify them off-wiki. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- I already asked. You already answered. We've covered this. For what it's worth, I really shouldn't be getting this kind of flak for merely making a suggestion about including other editors in a discussion that affects them. InsertCleverPhraseHere's suggestion of posting on an Outreach noticeboard seems eminently practical. Your stance about the on-wiki community is too hardline for me. There could be any number of reasons why people contribute massively to Wikipedia but don't follow or participate in certain discussion threads. The fact they are a timesink could be one reason. The fact they can often be robust, sometimes too robust, is another. I don't think this is a good enough reason not to be inclusive on large-scale changes like this but I don't think we can agree on this. Stinglehammer (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if it is too hardline, it is well accepted policy and consensus. Notification of individuals of a major policy RfC off-wiki is a bright line, which is why it received such negative feedback. You never asked about on-wiki canvassing or I would have told you the same thing as ICPH. If you need help, let me know. At the same time, as I said on the ACTRIAL talk page, I think the best thing now is to discuss the concrete proposal we have for meeting your demands. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: Thank you for this. I've just left you a message on the ACTRIAL page. I apologise if my mentioning of reaching out to others was poorly timed. I should not have mentioned it within the confines of an ongoing RfC. My intention was rather to throw it out there as to how we could better get more Outreach editors to contribute to discussions like this as my concern was rather that by starting the RfC so early we risked missing out on their views being heard. I now accept it may have been better if I had mentioned this elsewhere another time. I knew discussion of reaching out to folk offwiki might be something of a red line however so I sought to check with you in the first instance. No harm was meant. The incredibly strong reaction I received rather took me by surprise hence why I may have responded strongly in turn. I really don't see these as demands especially when we have gone all round the houses and ultimately all agree that ACTRIAL is a good thing and another stab at the Event Co-ordinators RfC would hopefully resolve the issues I raised (hopefully also including the Outreach editors I think would benefit from this RfC but I'll lean on you for advice on how we can best reach out to these editors within the guidelines). While my Oppose for Now vote was not the only one, if it means moving things forward on a more amicable footing I would be happy to switch to Support or at least withdraw my opposition. Best wishes, Stinglehammer (talk) 00:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if it is too hardline, it is well accepted policy and consensus. Notification of individuals of a major policy RfC off-wiki is a bright line, which is why it received such negative feedback. You never asked about on-wiki canvassing or I would have told you the same thing as ICPH. If you need help, let me know. At the same time, as I said on the ACTRIAL talk page, I think the best thing now is to discuss the concrete proposal we have for meeting your demands. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- I already asked. You already answered. We've covered this. For what it's worth, I really shouldn't be getting this kind of flak for merely making a suggestion about including other editors in a discussion that affects them. InsertCleverPhraseHere's suggestion of posting on an Outreach noticeboard seems eminently practical. Your stance about the on-wiki community is too hardline for me. There could be any number of reasons why people contribute massively to Wikipedia but don't follow or participate in certain discussion threads. The fact they are a timesink could be one reason. The fact they can often be robust, sometimes too robust, is another. I don't think this is a good enough reason not to be inclusive on large-scale changes like this but I don't think we can agree on this. Stinglehammer (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- I have less than zero sympathy for what you are saying: if someone is completely disconnected from the on-wiki community, then they likely shouldn't be doing outreach and representing our movement. If you are asking, the answer is no, it would not be acceptable to notify them off-wiki. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: Asking about whether this would be acceptable in light of advice from a trusted editor colleague. You said it wouldn't so I did't. End of story. I'm looking to work within the guidelines here so we can arrive at a workable consensus. And the reason I asked is because I know my views are not mine alone (see Richard Nevell, RexxS, Lirazelf, Jason.nlw) and I know many outreach Wikipedia editors check Twitter, the Wikipedia & Education Facebook group, the Wikidata & GLAM group etc. sometimes as much as Wikipedia message boards and sometimes instead of the Wiki message boards. But are their views worth less because of this? Not exactly talking inexperienced editors here. Stinglehammer (talk) 20:37, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, you were pushing to notify people via social media at the same time you were saying you were going to follow canvass. If you are saying you have no intent of placing any off-wiki notifications, then all is good. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: I shouldn't need to agree to adhere to WP:STEALTH when it is just another form of WP:CANVAS which I have already said a couple of times that I am not doing. This is getting ridiculous. How many other forms of canvassing do I need to explicitly tell you I'm not doing? Besides, you only seem to be objecting to this in case I am stealth canvassing against your position. I have also already stated I am not against ACTRIAL or increased quality checks if outreach doesn't suffer as a result... which it doesn't have to. "Just about everywhere" is also not strictly true - otherwise we'd have many more voices in the discussion but I accept you will have posted on the main English Wikipedia boards. I still think we could do more when it is a big change like this but WP:CANVAS obviously ties your hands. (Which I'm still not doing). Stinglehammer (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- People affected by this change already have been given ample notice of this discussion on Wikipedia in no less than 9 different talk pages and noticeboards, including the centralized discussion. You have not agreed to follow WP:STEALTH, which is why I posted this. Even in the response above, you seem to be pushing for off-wiki notification when there is no need to do so. As Andrew has so helpfully pointed out, I have already posted this discussion just about everywhere possible using neutral language, so there isn't a reasonable argument to be made that active community members would be unaware of this unless they were notified via email or social media. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:49, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: There was no need for this comment. None. I'd already replied to your point in the thread and already agreed that the best way forward is an RfC on the Event Coordinator rights which you helpfully drafted. And I said I'd support that and already thanked you for that. Pet cause is a little harsh too. I appreciate that yourself and Kudpung have put a lot of time & energy into ACTRIAL and for this reason I could call ACTRIAL your pet cause. But that wouldn't be fair. The point I was making was that the reason we are having this discussion is because too few outreach editors are in the discussion; both now and historically. No game is being played. That's an issue of awareness and participation that needs to be addressed somehow and at some point (wouldn't you agree?) so that outreach and the wider Wikimedia community can understand one another and work better together. I don't accept the "too bad too sad" argument used against including people in these discussions when we can do better than this and I can't pretend that the discussion is being representative at the moment because I know of so many other usernames who could and should be involved in these discussions. But I am aware of WP:Canvas and already said I would abide by this. I really shouldn't have to say that again. Simply raising awareness and participation is what I'm talking about - not swaying an RfC one way or another. Social media can indeed be very effective in this respect for raising awareness. People affected by the change should know this discussion is happening. Involving other voices with a stake in the discussion in no way derails or creates a circus. We should be open about the fact this discussion is happening and not conduct discussions as if they are happening behind closed doors. It's the free and open encyclopedia after all. For what it's worth, I support improving quality control and ACTRIAL if it helps with this. Just not at the expense of outreach and the work many excellent Wikipedians do everyday. Would you expect me to say otherwise? In fact my position is really no different to that of Lirazelf, RexxS, Richard Nevell, Jason.nlw or any of the other editors working in outreach so I'm really not sure why you're singling me out here. Anyway, there seems to be a (hopefully) growing consensus on the proposal you drafted so that looks like a very constructive way forward. Stinglehammer (talk) 18:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Please don't be intimidated by Ballioni's bluster and threats. He himself selectively canvassed projects such as NPP and AfC stating that "All are invited to participate". It is quite reasonable that other stakeholders should be notified about this too, especially if they will be directly affected. As this is a broad change across the project and primarily affects newbies who, by definition, are not yet well-connected, the outreach projects and co-ordinators are best-placed to do this. Please spread the word using the same language that "All are invited to participate". Andrew D. (talk) 17:25, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- I did acceptable on-wiki canvassing of affected WikiProjects using a neutral message that was also posted on community accepted forums. This is in no way equivalent to canvassing mailing lists or Facebook groups. The latter is utterly unacceptable. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Davidson, enough with your untruths and disruption now. I know our canvassing policies and guidelines better than most and certainly better than you. TonyBallioni is not threatening anyone at all. What you are doing however, is advocating disruptive behaviour, and that is not acceptable. If I tell you you could be blocked very quickly for that, it's not a threat. The community is well used your disruptive participation on discussions and has been begging you to be more reasonable for years including a case at ANI, in fact a lot of Wikipedians are now exasperated. Don't twist the canvassing policy to curry favour with your Outreach friends or you'll probably find yourself in even more disfavour and it won't be my doing. It would be risible if an outreach worker were in fact a blocked and banned editor and not good for the image of the encyclopedia. Is it your intention to bring Wikipedia into disrepute, or to promote it? We do not need negative press exposure so please don't lead Wikpedia down a scorched earth policy.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- The same also goes for Stinglehammer: Is it your intention to promote Wikipedia or bring it into disrepute?? ACTRIAL is such a powerful remedy for the massive abuse and misuse of Wikipedia, that as the biggest change to policy in a long time, it will certainly be picked up by the press, and I mean the serious press such as the Guardian or the NYT. It might even feature on a TV news roundup or late night show. Do note that no one needs to tip the press off, they watch our discussions like hawks for any newsworthy tidbits for a good scandal. Try what Davidson is advising and you'll open a can of worms that would negate all your Outreach work and do far more damage than all the bad articles together that ACTRIAL will prevent. For one thing, the New Page Patrollers would simply give up. And where would that lead? Rhetorical question because you are so disconnected with the encyclopedia you represent that you are not even aware of what NPP is and the challenges with which it would be faced if ACTRIAL were not to become permanent. Let's get that sorted out first, andwe will look at outreach and WiR and do whatever is necessary. −Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Depends what you mean by disrepute? I don't think messages of doom like this do us any favours either.Stinglehammer (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- The sky is not falling Kudpung, Wikipedia will not collapse under its own weight if ACTRIAL is not extended (and to be honest I expect it will be). People have been prophesying the end of Wikipedia since at least 2007 and we're still here. The rhetoric here has escalated just a little too far, so it may be time to try and cool things down.
- Stinglehammer, given the allergic reaction we've seen here to bringing more people into the conversation I think it best not to do that though I'm sure you've come to the same conclusion. Richard Nevell (talk) 21:08, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. A pity, I thought we were building an inclusive movement. We seem to be bemoaning Outreach editors not taking part in discussion threads and bringing down the fury of the Gods on anyone having the temerity to suggest reaching out to include them. In any case, I think InsertCleverPhraseHere's suggestion of posting on an Outreach noticeboard is a sensible one. Please note: I will not be the one to do this lest I incur more wrath. Stinglehammer (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- The same also goes for Stinglehammer: Is it your intention to promote Wikipedia or bring it into disrepute?? ACTRIAL is such a powerful remedy for the massive abuse and misuse of Wikipedia, that as the biggest change to policy in a long time, it will certainly be picked up by the press, and I mean the serious press such as the Guardian or the NYT. It might even feature on a TV news roundup or late night show. Do note that no one needs to tip the press off, they watch our discussions like hawks for any newsworthy tidbits for a good scandal. Try what Davidson is advising and you'll open a can of worms that would negate all your Outreach work and do far more damage than all the bad articles together that ACTRIAL will prevent. For one thing, the New Page Patrollers would simply give up. And where would that lead? Rhetorical question because you are so disconnected with the encyclopedia you represent that you are not even aware of what NPP is and the challenges with which it would be faced if ACTRIAL were not to become permanent. Let's get that sorted out first, andwe will look at outreach and WiR and do whatever is necessary. −Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- The sky wasn't falling on the passengers of the Titanic either - when they boarded it. At the present rate, if I stay with Wikipedia for as long as I've been on it and nothing gets done, by then it will not only be the victim of its own success but will also be as derelict as the city of Tchernobyl with perhaps some scavengers going through the rubble. And I'll be 82, probably won't have done another 91,000 edits, and I'll have handed my admin tools in and be and past caring. Stinglehammer and his friends are paid for what they do; I appreciate you trying to cast calm over troubled waters Richard, but try to see things from the perspective of the unpaid volunteer editors who contribute most of the content and maintain this encyclopedia. Castles in the sky? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- Kudpung I appreciate you have a lot emotionally invested in this policy, but I hope that when this all dies down you'll reflect on the above post and consider whether you may have gone over the top just a smidgen. Unfortunately I don't think we're going to get much perspective while mired in the discussion. Perhaps you were not aware, but I am also a volunteer and have spent countless hours over many, many years writing on this site. That doesn't give me ownership of it any more than anyone else. Which is a shame really, because Wikipedia would be fantastic if I was king for a day but it does mean I understand why people are treating this as a make or break moment. Happy editing, Richard Nevell (talk) 23:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- The sky wasn't falling on the passengers of the Titanic either - when they boarded it. At the present rate, if I stay with Wikipedia for as long as I've been on it and nothing gets done, by then it will not only be the victim of its own success but will also be as derelict as the city of Tchernobyl with perhaps some scavengers going through the rubble. And I'll be 82, probably won't have done another 91,000 edits, and I'll have handed my admin tools in and be and past caring. Stinglehammer and his friends are paid for what they do; I appreciate you trying to cast calm over troubled waters Richard, but try to see things from the perspective of the unpaid volunteer editors who contribute most of the content and maintain this encyclopedia. Castles in the sky? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
ITN recognition for 2018 UK higher education strike
editOn 20 March 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2018 UK higher education strike, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:06, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
- NOTE: for it to stay in Ongoing, it'll need decent and regular (like daily) updates. So please, given that some of us supported this strongly, do that for us all. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks
editPutting this in a happier section as the above one got quite heated. Thank you for this. I really do appreciate it more than you know. A bit about my work style: I believe in finding solutions and middle grounds, and I really dislike getting drawn into discussions as to what is necessary before X happens or what group needs to be consulted when, etc. My goal is always to find the solution that everyone can be happy with, or at the very least, can achieve a broad consensus.
I don't want you to change your !vote if you don't want to, but the general comments about needing the outreach part of the puzzle solved first when we were working on a proposal to address them and put it to the community, combined with raising the idea that we had somehow excluded part of the community (we haven't. By any measure this is a very well advertised RfC), came off to me as you trying to take over what was designed to be a discussion to give a clear answer on one of the most talked about topics on Wikipedia over the last 7 years for what is a relatively minor (but important) part of the work we do here.
One of the things I enjoy most about Wikipedia is working with people to find compromises that work for everyone, and I think I'm generally good at it. What frustrates me is when I feel the other side isn't acknowledging the work that I have put in to try to work with them. That's the vibe I got from our discussions today because it was so focused on what hadn't been done rather than what could be accomplished and what we're trying to accomplish. Anyway, all that to say, I really appreciate your note at the ACTRIAL page, and I apologize if we were talking past each other and I said anything overly forward. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: Thanks for this Tony. I think we've absolutely been talking at crossed purposes today and we hopefully will both learn from this. I think you've imagined me as much more Machiavellian than I am. Always the danger when typing rat-a-tat-tat responses over several hours rather than talking for 5 minutes face-to-face I suppose. (I'm a pussycat and hate conflict). Someone else mentioned to me that I was feeling my way into this and that's true. I felt rushed by going straight into the ACTRIAL RfC (after I'd taken a couple of days break) that voices may have been missing and that the Event Co-ordinator RfC might get short shrift or put into the long grass. Unfamiliarity with procedural issues I suppose. I apologise if I came across as demanding. Not my intention. I suppose it concerns me when RexxS is sometimes brought up as the only example of an Outreach editor contributing to discussions but at this moment in time I'm not really sure what the best thing to do about that is. I think if anything this demonstrates that there is work to be done understanding one another better in terms of Outreach and the on-wiki community. That and we shouldn't assume the worst of one another. Do I need to just delete my Oppose for Now response and the messages within that particular section before I can change to Support? Best wishes, Stinglehammer (talk) 01:06, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- No problem: things get heated in project space sometimes. If you want to strike your oppose, what you would do is change
#'''Oppose'''
to#:<s>Oppose
and put the closing</s>
at the end of your signature on that comment to strike. Then leave a note on the support. This is again, only if you actually want to do it. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:14, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- No problem: things get heated in project space sometimes. If you want to strike your oppose, what you would do is change
DYK for Frances Ivens
editOn 27 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Frances Ivens, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that when the English surgeon Frances Ivens joined the military hospital at Royaumont in France during the First World War, she had no experience in treating men? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frances Ivens. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), 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. |
Tees Bridge pic
editHi, in a mood of great NON-hostility I reverted your Tees Bridge pic as I felt it was a bit small and distant. I'm absolutely not up for a fistfight over this, though, so happy to discuss it at the Talk page! Maybe that is your neck of the woods and you're thinking about the context in a way I'd missed or something ... ? Cheers DBaK (talk) 13:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for the note there. You'll see my response. I'm not 100% sure about but willing to give it a go. Others may have a view but it might be there for good. I won't intervene again. Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Welcome!
editWelcome to Wikipedia, Stinglehammer! Thank you for your contributions. I am Globetrotter83 and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}}
at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- How to write a great article
- Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Globetrotter83 (talk) 11:04, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Order of St. Sava
editHi,
Is there any chance you might be able to get the images (of medals and letters) on http://libraryblogs.is.ed.ac.uk/untoldstories/2015/05/20/william-hunter-1861-1937-the-order-of-st-sava/ released under open licence, please?
Cheers, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hi @Pigsonthewing:, I've asked our digital curator what the situation is with these images. Will see what we can do. Cheers. Stinglehammer (talk) 15:20, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
A goat for you!
editGoats!
Qaisjp (talk) 16:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
MEDRS and new editors
editHi Ewan, I see from your note at WT:WikiProject Medicine #WP:MEDRS and Cochrane review articles that you want to make sure a new editor can be supported, but may need some help navigating the higher requirements of WP:MEDRS. I'm naturally keen to see your work supported and I'm more than happy to pitch in with any help or advice I can give. Please feel free to ping me into any discussion where I can be of help, or drop me an email. If the new editor still needs any explanations, do let me know. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 23:06, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
- Many, many thanks @RexxS:. Yes indeed, if you are familiar with WP:MEDRS and can help User:Vivrolfe in terms of clarifying the issues with sources being used then that would be very helpful indeed. The discussion is here. Thanks again. Best wishes Stinglehammer (talk) 12:47, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
Request for clarification
editHi Stinglehammer: I just noticed that your "List of ships on Wikidata where number of statements is less than three" connects to many articles that I have written or on which I have worked. I am just wondering what does the "number of statements is less than three" mean? Is that a hint towards something that I can improve? Please ping me when you respond. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 11:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Category:Muse has been nominated for discussion
editCategory:Muse, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for expanding the article Beatrix Leslie. Could you please specify the page numbers and/or chapters of the "Scottish Witches and Witch-Hunters" source? Since it's an edited book with multiple authors, having more complete bibliographic info will improve verification. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 05:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Requesting your thoughts about editathon metrics
editHi Ewan. I’m circling back with some more questions on the editathon tool we talked about. More and better metrics are one likely focus for this project, so I’ve posted some questions about what metrics people like you need on the project talk page.
It would be a big help if you could offer some thoughts at the nearest opportunity. Thanks so much for your help! JMatazzoni (WMF) (talk) 05:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Article review
editHi, Thanks for all the information at the Ada Lovelace event yesterday - I've definitely caught the wiki bug! I've drafted my second article, but was wondering if you could offer any advice/feedback? I decided to write the article because Collette Roche was on a Vogue list of influential women, but I don't know if I've done enough to show that she's notable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Spacetime73/Collette_Roche
Many thanks Spacetime73 (talk) 13:40, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Spacetime73: that's so great to hear! Thanks for reaching out and apologies for taking so long to respond. This week has been espe3cially crazy busy. Will take a proper look at both pages later today. One thing is the full name should be emboldened in the lede e.g. Tara_Spires-Jones. Any additional sources we can cite to help with notability always helps make the case too. Will come back to you later anyway. Very best and thanks again, Stinglehammer (talk) 10:58, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of RudoNikita
editIf this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on RudoNikita requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mean as custard (talk) 11:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Spam
editHey, your account seems to have been emitting spam to the edu mailing list for two months now.[2][3][4] Please update your anti-viral software now. Some of that malware has been known for at least three years, so your anti-malware is seriously out of date.[5]
The mailing software seems to have been stripping the malware attachments from this mailing list, but the other people in your address book might not be so lucky. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
editHello, Stinglehammer. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
Checking a new page over
editHey Ewan, we met at the Women In Red session where I worked on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Diane_Maclagan :) hope this message finds you well
I am working on a new page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Explorable_Explanation - we're still not finished, we would appreciate any advice you have on making sure it does ok. You can get the basic idea from the definition section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamishtodd1 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Article in The Scotsman
editRe this piece in The Scotsman: It's disappointing that it says "A recent example of this ingrained gender bias was highlighted when Dr Donna Strickland won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 2018, one of only three women ever to do so. Her Wikipedia page was previously rejected by moderators who felt her contribution to physics did not warrant a biography on the online platform." This is what the media wanted to hear, but it isn't very accurate. The problem with academics who are not household names is that it is often difficult to find enough sources to write a rounded BLP article, and simply copying material from the university website or a person's other online profiles would fail a range of Wikipedia policies. It was pointed out that George Smith (chemist) did not have a Wikipedia article until he won a Nobel Prize in 2018 either. Unfortunately, it looks like Donna Strickland is going to be used to drag up the "Wikipedia is biased against women" trope for ever and a day, regardless of the facts.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- Perhaps the fact that it took a Nobel prize for Strickland to be covered in Wikipedia is indicative of a problem? While academics can be challenging to write about one certainly does not need to be a household name to be notable. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- The same could be said of George Smith (chemist). There was a long discussion about this at WP:ACADEMIC, which says "Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources" and on Jimbo's talk page, and there is no evidence that Strickland was discriminated against simply because she was a woman. Ultimately Wikipedia articles are only as good as the sourcing available.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:27, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is of course dependent on secondary sources for information. However, it is probable that as she was president of the Optical Society that such sources would have existed. My own area of work is archaeology rather than science, but it wouldn't be too challenging to write an article about a president of the Society for Medieval Archaeologists. The same could be said of Smith, and while it would not be incorrect the context would be different since Wikipedia's biographies of men outnumber women by something like 6 to 1. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:37, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
editThe Original Barnstar | |
thanks for your help and suggestions today! Charleslincolnshire (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2019 (UTC) |
I just noticed...
editNoticed a couple images I was working on were in User:Stinglehammer/List of Suffragettes when I was updating links to the restorations, and, well, have ruthlessly mining it for images to restore. And then decided to see who else was working on suffragettes, as, frankly, image work isn't always that collaborative, and, um... Hi! I'm the person teaching featured pictures at Edinburgh University at the next monthly meetup. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 06:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Basic mistake
editSorry I created and published this new article page without checking the various forms of her name (because it was a redlink on the WiR working page).
Sorry for any problems this may cause you/WiR community! It will be deleted and I will try to take more care.
I had this (longer version of it) as a message on my Talk Page this evening
"Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Dr Elizabeth 'Elma' Innes. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Elizabeth Innes. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia......
Kaybeesquared (talk) 22:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Conectando
editThanks to all who hosted us and for the exhibition tour, I have created article on George Drever now. Probably need to see if any of the images and sound recording can be added to the page later.
Edinburgh events
editHallo, as Wikipedia:University of Edinburgh/Events and Workshops/Women in Red is linked from this month's Women in Red message, could you perhaps give that page a "Lead", so that someone hovering over the link gets a bit of an intro and not just "Booking"? I wondered about adding something on the lines of "The University of Edinburgh hosts monthly meetings to improve Wikipedia's representation of notable women." but it seemed a bit pushy! ... Hmm, just moved the {{TOC right}} down to above first section, as set out in the template documentation, but the nutshell doesn't show in a mouse hover, I suggest it still needs a lead. PamD 17:38, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- And then decided it looked better without the TOC right at all - but I think it still could do with a lead sentence. Oh I'll be WP:BOLD - added a lead sentence, please improve it, sorry if I'm treading on your toes! Spent a lovely couple of hours in sunny Princes Street Gardens on Sunday admiring floral clock and listening to pipe bands, in between trains en route to a funeral in Perth; didn't leave the station while changing trains on return journey in rain yesterday. PamD 17:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
A goat for you!
editThanks for hosting the session today!
A kitten for you!
editHi
A page you started (Marianne Woods) has been reviewed!
editThanks for creating Marianne Woods.
User:Newslinger while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:
Thanks for contributing this article to Wikipedia!
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Newslinger}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
— Newslinger talk 23:47, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
New page and question
editThis user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies. |
{{WiR 2019}}
As always thanks again for the WiR session and your advice yesterday, I created a new page also for Katherine "Kitty" Marshall as well as Violet Aitken now.
Looking at the main page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette#Great_Britain I noticed there is a section for Ireland and Great Britain but not highlighting Scotland although there is a category and list for Scottish suffragettes from the work you and others are leading on this year. I am rather reluctant to be brave and edit a 'main' article, perhaps you & other WiR leaders can think about increasing the prominence of Scottish women.
Thank you! Kaybeesquared (talk) 08:30, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
George Drever - scheduled for deletion
edit
I have tried to respond to this challenge and asked for the categories to be removed (soldier etc) instead; or return to DRAFT ARTICLE status. But I have added two BOOK references rather and hope that helps.
Not much time this next couple of weeks to do more.
Community Insights Survey
editShare your experience in this survey
Hi Stinglehammer,
The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on and off wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages. [6]
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English). [7]
Find more information about this project. [8] Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
Reminder: Community Insights Survey
editShare your experience in this survey
Hi Stinglehammer,
A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation's annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well the Wikimedia Foundation supports your work on and off wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.
Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.
This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).
Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.
Sincerely,
A kitten for you!
edithere's another one!
Hi, it's been nearly 3 weeks since you last responded to the DYK review. Please respond within a week or this nomination will be closed as stale. Yoninah (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: Apologies, been very busy time at the university. Will make changes to the article and submit for re-review later today/tomorrow if that will still work? Stinglehammer (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. Yoninah (talk) 11:50, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
- Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 22:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. Yoninah (talk) 11:50, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
New message from Narutolovehinata5
editMessage added 00:59, 10 October 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:59, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
- Are you still planning to pursue this nomination? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:53, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
A goat for you!
editHave a lovely goat :)
DYK for Lilias Adie
editOn 31 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lilias Adie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that forensic artists at the University of Dundee used 100-year-old photographs of a skull to digitally recreate the face of an accused witch in Scotland? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lilias Adie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lilias Adie), 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.
A goat for you!
editOn Halloween, I am sending you a sinister goat.
Some bubble tea for you!
editYou're a star (or a bubble tea, if you'd rather) V.madden25 (talk) 13:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC) |
Some baklava for you!
editsending something sweet Cardillac2019 (talk) 13:26, 12 November 2019 (UTC) |
A bowl of strawberries for you!
editThank you! Harrietstilleykelly (talk) 14:51, 12 November 2019 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
editSpeedy deletion nomination of Category:Buildings in Larbert
editA tag has been placed on Category:Buildings in Larbert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 17:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
=DYK Louie Cullen - TODAY 19 December 2019
editStinglehammer and Victuallers Hey guys, very excited that 'my' page on Louie Cullen is in today's DYK section - could not have done it without you - and of course thanks to those who sponsored the idea of it as a DYK in the first place! Happy Christmas
... that Louie Cullen, known as "the last of the suffragettes", started a prison hunger strike after her arrest for a 1908 attempt to rush into the House of Commons to promote women's right to vote in the UK? Kaybeesquared (talk) 19:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC) Kaybeesquared (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
editThe Special Barnstar | |
thanks for all your help and encouragement, your monthly edit classes and for all you are doing for wikipedia and for our students staff friends and WiR
Have a lovely Christmas Kaybeesquared (talk) 21:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC) |
DYK Pageviews
editLouie Cullen DYK got 2663 page views in a day. Thanks again to you Stinglehammer and all those who helped me with this DYK and also to learn about wiki-editing - mostly by trial and error on my part. Now I have just got to get a lot better at doing it right first time and also using the edit source mark-up language. Happy New Year! Kaybeesquared (talk) 13:44, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Women in Red workshops
editHi there, Stinglehammer, and thanks for the excellent progress you are making at your Women in Red workshops. Yesterday's event was particularly successful with several contributors adding the Women in Red box to their user pages, some of them even creating biographies. In fact only two of them, Gingerale88 and Laurarose2019, registered correctly as members of the project on the main Women in Red page. I have been informing the others on their talk pages that they should register there too. For those who have joined "officially", we are able to check whether they continue to be active on not as we have both active and inactive membership lists. Those officially listed as members are also added to our mailing lists where they are kept informed of virtual meetups, etc. Adding the WIR box to a user page automatically adds Category:WikiProject Women in Red members but does not update the official membership list. Maybe you could point this out to future contributors and encourage them to register. If they do so, they can also add a few words on their interests and on whether they need help with anything specific. They can even add a photo if they wish. You are, of course, welcome to register as a member yourself as we really appreciate the efforts you are making to promote the project. Sorry if this all sounds rather bureaucratic but I like to be able to keep a proper check on new participants. Happy editing! (cc Victuallers)--Ipigott (talk) 08:26, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
I see you have tagged the user page of your second account (EMcAndrew) with the WIR box but you have not yet joined officially.--Ipigott (talk) 10:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Ipigott: Thanks for this. I've now added the user box and joined the project. Part of what Laura is being tasked to do is to raise awareness, participation and more sustained community building/ongoing editing so we'll feed all this into our next workshop. Many thanks! Stinglehammer (talk) 13:51, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks. You are now fully registered as Stinglehammer. Maybe it's not worthwhile registered as EMcAndrew too. In any case, welcome to the project. It might also be useful to have a participants section on Wikipedia:University of Edinburgh/Events and Workshops/Women in Red for each meetup. It would make it easier to check on what your new contributors have been doing. If you need further assistance with anything, please let me know.--Ipigott (talk) 14:23, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
March 2020 at Women in Red
edit March 2020, Volume 6, Issue 3, Numbers 150, 151, 156, 157, 158, 159
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
April 2020 at Women in Red
edit April 2020, Volume 6, Issue 4, Numbers 150, 151, 159, 160, 161, 162
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
May 2020 at Women in Red
edit May 2020, Volume 6, Issue 5, Numbers 150, 151, 163, 164, 165, 166
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
disambiguation with two people (only)
editThanks for the latest WIR wiki-editathon today, it was good to learn new things and learn about more Women in Red. As it was ending you were helping me looking into the above. After a bit of further searching on the help pages, found the 'about' template was most useful and have adapted it for both Margaret Davidsons Margaret Davidson Margaret Davidson (suffragist) and Joyce Baird Joyce Baird (diabetologist) thank you and Laura! Kaybeesquared (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
June 2020 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red June 2020, Volume 6, Issue 6, Numbers 150, 151, 167, 168, 169
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 17:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
IP block exempt
editI have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking for a period of 3 months. This will allow you to edit the English Wikipedia through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.
Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions. Inappropriate usage of this user right may result in revocation. I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Some baklava for you!
editthanks for the goat and the webinar, very interesting! Leohavemann (talk) 13:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC) |
July 2020 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red / July 2020, Volume 6, Issue 7, Numbers 150, 151, 170, 171, 172, 173
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
August 2020 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | August 2020, Volume 6, Issue 8, Numbers 150, 151, 173, 174, 175
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September Women in Red edithons
editWomen in Red | September 2020, Volume 6, Issue 9, Numbers 150, 151, 176, 177
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
October editathons from Women in Red
editWomen in Red | October 2020, Volume 6, Issue 10, Numbers 150, 173, 178, 179
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
November edith-a-thons from Women in Red
editWomen in Red | November 2020, Volume 6, Issue 11, Numbers 150, 173, 178, 180, 181
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello!
editHello! Waving at you :) Sara Thomas (training account) (talk) 14:49, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
editDecember with Women in Red
editWomen in Red | December 2020, Volume 6, Issue 12, Numbers 150, 173, 178, 182, 183
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A New Year With Women in Red!
editWomen in Red | January 2021, Volume 7, Issue 1, Numbers 182, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
February 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | February 2021, Volume 7, Issue 2, Numbers 184, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 15:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
March 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | March 2021, Volume 7, Issue 3, Numbers 184, 186, 188, 192, 193
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Some stroopwafels for you!
editCan't wait to edit - thanks! :) Bronte3011 (talk) 13:33, 5 March 2021 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
editThe Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Hi Ewan - thanks so much for your help with navbox and the training and editing WIR and IWD. Your kindness to editors (old and new) deserves recognition and you deserve a wee break - enjoy the rest of the weekend! Kaybeesquared (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC) |
April editathons from Women in Red
editWomen in Red | April 2021, Volume 7, Issue 4, Numbers 184, 188, 194, 195, 196
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
category for criminal biography
editsuffragettes and criminal biography category
editJust noted today that Jessie Kenney was categorised in WikiProject Criminal Biography https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jessie_Kenney&diff=next&oldid=1006334363
Looking at this category there is not a section for political prisoners treated as criminals or UK suffragettes specifically?
But if Jessie Kenney is categorised that way, should her family and the rest of the Eagle House (suffragette's rest) suffragettes or the Holloway brooch and Hunger Strike Medal recipients be in this category too?
For consistency and connecting with the treatment of women's suffrage prisoners??
I am happy to help categorising articles for the women imprisoned if it is needed. Kaybeesquared (talk) 10:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
May 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | May 2021, Volume 7, Issue 5, Numbers 184, 188, 197, 198
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 21:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | June 2021, Volume 7, Issue 6, Numbers 184, 188, 196, 199, 200, 201
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Sylvia Blagrove moved to draftspace
editAn article you recently created, Sylvia Blagrove, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 21:47, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Discussion on Education noticeboard
editHi Ewan. There's a discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Education_noticeboard#RfC_on_banning_word_or_edit_counts_for_student_assignments that I thought you might be interested in. One of the comments references a booklet that you wrote. Cheers, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 18:10, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
July 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | July 2021, Volume 7, Issue 7, Numbers 184, 188, 202, 203, 204, 205
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Bessie Stivenson moved to draftspace
editAn article you recently created, Bessie Stivenson, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 TT me 14:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
August Editathons with Women in Red
editWomen in Red | August 2021, Volume 7, Issue 8, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 206, 207
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello Ewan
editI simply adore the polar bears on your user page. Hello, Ewan, my name is Asareel but I go by A or Rose or Wolf or any combination of that here on Wikipedia. I just like to give my name because it seems more personal. Genevieve is also an option but its what the older men in my village in Italy used to call me because they said Asareel wasn't Italian enough. News Flash to them, Genevieve is French but hey, who's keeping score? Any way, Ian (Ipigott) informed me that I may want to liaise with Victuallers and yourself on creating a list or subpages for the various workshops Edinburgh and WiR have collaborated on. I can lay the groundwork for it if we can get some simple facts or short history of the workshops. I think if we hit the high level details of some of the more prominent ones then we can always circle back and add in some of those we may see we want to add. Anyway, let me know what you guys are thinking and if you have suggestions please feel free to comment. The plan is to either add it to our current list, or make it a subpage of the list. --ARoseWolf 17:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
September 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | September 2021, Volume 7, Issue 9, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 207, 208
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Major developments ahead
editI don't know if you are still active as a WIR or in outreach. As I well remember the not too friendly comments you made at length on not being aware of the 6-year run up to ACTRIAL, the biggest single policy change since Wikipedia was created, I'm taking the initiative to let you know that there are are current overlapping talks at WMF level on a) IP cloaking, and b) banning editing by IP users altogether. These might or might not affect the operations of outreach workers who may be involved in the onboarding of new users or the organisation of editathons. There is no need for you to reply, but if you wish to, as I'm no longer active on en.Wiki, you can leave a message on my talk page meta:User talk:Kudpung. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
October 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | October 2021, Volume 7, Issue 10, Numbers 184, 188, 209, 210, 211
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A goat for you!
edit:)
November 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | November 2021, Volume 7, Issue 11, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 212, 213
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:32, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Concern regarding Draft:Sylvia Blagrove
editHello, Stinglehammer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sylvia Blagrove, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:03, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
editSuggestions for WIR humanities
editHi - these are now in wiki format from Excel in sandbox 10 - feel free to use if suitable.
December 2021 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | December 2021, Volume 7, Issue 12, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 214, 215, 216
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:13, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your draft article, Draft:Sylvia Blagrove
editHello, Stinglehammer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Sylvia Blagrove".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Women to the fore!
editHey...Thot I'd like to know.....
Wee wow 😯 today - there are 6 deaths on the Wikipedia main page and 5 are of notable women! A first perhaps! Or is it selection for me?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Concern regarding Draft:Bessie Stivenson
editHello, Stinglehammer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bessie Stivenson, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:06, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Femicide in the United Kingdom
editTemplate:Femicide in the United Kingdom has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:24, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
editThe Barnstar of Good Humor | |
Thank you for all the monthly WiR editathons, your patience and Zoom encouragement to students or other editors, and your consistent smile, energy and enthusiasm - it is infectious. Have a good break... ps Jean Aitken Bell article now in main area! Kaybeesquared (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2021 (UTC) |
Improving WiR membership
editThanks, Stinglehammer, for all you are doing to improve coverage of women. I know you are also interested in encouraging more Wikipedians to become members of Women in Red. In this connection, you might like to point to:
rather than making a simple link to the main WiR page.
One of the areas where we need to devote more effort if we are to reduce the gender gap is business. We'll be focusing on Women in Business in January and have also been working on the development of WikiProject Women in Business which you might like to bring to the attention of your team. You could perhaps include it in your page on Other WikiProjects. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 14:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
January 2022 Women in Red
editHappy New Year from Women in Red Jan 2022, Vol 8, Issue 1, Nos 214, 216, 217, 218, 219
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
February with Women in Red
edit Women in Red Feb 2022, Vol 8, Issue 2, Nos 214, 217, 220, 221, 222
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:11, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
You've got mail!
editMessage added 23:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
March editathons
editWomen in Red Mar 2022, Vol 8, Issue 3, Nos 214, 217, 222, 223, 224, 225
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
April Editathons from Women in Red
editWomen in Red Apr 2022, Vol 8, Issue 4, Nos 214, 217, 226, 227, 228
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
- Hi Stinglehammer,
- I saw your entry on female Saxophonists.
- I didn't like to just edit it, but thought I'd ask you to.
- Would you please include Australian saxophonist Jorja Chalmers, from Sydney, who plays for Brian Ferry, (2011- ), and has played for Take That, The Ting Tings.
- She has a wikipedia entry Jorja Chalmers
- thanks, User: NellEdward NellEdward (talk) 07:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
New article
editWhere did you intend to create Editing Wikipedia:University of Edinburgh/Events and Workshops/Creative Informatics? It's currently in mainspace, but does not belong there. Schazjmd (talk) 16:53, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've moved it to User:Stinglehammer/Editing Wikipedia:University of Edinburgh/Events and Workshops/Creative Informatics in your userspace. Schazjmd (talk) 17:08, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Schazjmd:, apologies - this was supposed to be a Project page subpage created at Wikipedia:University of Edinburgh. Have created a page accordingly and requested speedy delete of the incorrect page. Sorry about that. Stinglehammer (talk) 21:03, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- It's no problem, happens lots of the time. I just wanted you to know where I hid it until you could put it in its proper place. Schazjmd (talk) 21:04, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
A goat for you!
editI'm disappointed I can't be there for cake
Article assigned
editI am going to try for a stub for Helen Nicholson (child psychiatrist) added to dashboard but can't access Zoom or Google Docs to add to the who's doing what. Hope all is well and workshop is enjoyed by all who come, as much as I enjoyed my first WiR event 4 years ago! Kaybeesquared (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Edited so far:
Unfortunately latest edits won't save and only found one source ( due to a more famous author of same name ) so cannot publish as stub, even! Will have a go at completing over weekend, assuming WiFi back . Sorry about that. Happy editing to the WiR team. Kaybeesquared (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
May 2022 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red May 2022, Vol 8, Issue 5, Nos 214, 217, 227, 229, 230
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 04:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
June events from Women in Red
editWomen in Red June 2022, Vol 8, Issue 6, Nos 214, 217, 227, 231, 232, 233
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red in July 2022
editWomen in Red July 2022, Vol 8, Issue 7, Nos 214, 217, 234, 235
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Concern regarding Draft:Hazel Thornton
editHello, Stinglehammer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hazel Thornton, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Stinglehammer: How goes it. Great article. I noticed the page review copyvio came up on, regarding the text from www.abdn.ac.uk. Is that text from Aberdeen University public domain? scope_creepTalk 19:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Sarah Ejiama & Makoto Furutani-Seiki
editHi Stinglehammer, thanks for your online training that has aided my journey on creating pages as above. As been new, I wanted to clarify some issues with one editor regarding the page - Sarah Ejiama. The editor challenges her notability and reliable sources but from all I gathered and from the training, she's co-author over 4 different publication which she has contributed to and these were published in reliable journals as you will notice.
Please could you kindly review and advise thus?
Kind Regards Oceanview1590 (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oceanview1590 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
August Member
edithonorary Member of the comedic order of red women | |
Ewan thanks so much for organising over 60 editathons and in recognition I am pleased to recognise you as an honorary August Member of the comedic order of red women for the whole of next month. We hopefully will reduce our list of comedians, although there are dozens from the Edinburgh Festival - your help is always invaluable. Thank you! Victuallers (talk) 11:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC) |
- Thanks awfully, will mention to attendees and on mailout. Cheers! Stinglehammer (talk) 15:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Hazel Thornton
editHello, Stinglehammer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Hazel Thornton".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}
, {{db-draft}}
, or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:12, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red August 2022
editWomen in Red August 2022, Vol 8, Issue 8, Nos 214, 217, 236, 237, 238, 239
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red in September 2022
editWomen in Red September 2022, Vol 8, Issue 9, Nos 214, 217, 240, 241
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red October 2022
editWomen in Red October 2022, Vol 8, Issue 10, Nos 214, 217, 242, 243, 244
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A kitten for you!
edithi!
Happy New Year
editBell | |
Happy New Year HathawayDouzi (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2022 (UTC) |
Women in Red November 2022
editWomen in Red November 2022, Vol 8, Issue 11, Nos 214, 217, 245, 246, 247
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red in December 2022
editWomen in Red December 2022, Vol 8, Issue 12, Nos 214, 217, 248, 249, 250
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
editHello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red
editHi there, Stinglehammer. I see you've been cleaning up your user page. Perhaps inadvertently you deleted the WiR user box. As far as I can see you have always been a keen member of the project and have continued writing biographies of women. It would therefore be good if you could restore it.--Ipigott (talk) 07:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- whoops! that's it restored now.Stinglehammer (talk) 16:15, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red January 2023
editHappy New Year from Women in Red | January 2023, Volume 9, Issue 1, Nos 250, 251, 252, 253, 254
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
File:Peter Nguyen Van Hung 2015-12-13 a.jpg→File:Peter Nguyen Van Hung 2015-12-13 b.jpg
Women in Red in February 2023
edit Women in Red Feb 2023, Vol 9, Iss 2, Nos 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 259
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Manually confirming users
editHello Stinglehammer. Please review Wikipedia:Event coordinator. When setting the +confirmed flag on user accounts for an event, event coordinators should not add manual confirmed status to accounts for more than 10 days.
; please be sure to observe this value. The purpose of it is to ensure that the attendee, while in person at your event, is able to complete the event activities. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 16:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red March 2023
edit Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Disambiguation link notification for March 9
editHi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Madge Elder, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portobello. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red April 2023
edit Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red May 2023
edit Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
HAI PAL!
editHello from Berlin. *waves* Lirazelf (talk) 09:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red - June 2023
edit Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Disambiguation link notification for May 31
editAn automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beatrice Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Duntroon.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red July 2023
edit Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 7, Nos 251, 252, 274, 275, 276
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Speedy deletion nomination of Charlotte Mui
editHello Stinglehammer,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Charlotte Mui for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.
If you don't want Charlotte Mui to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Women in Red 8th Anniversary
editWomen in Red 8th Anniversary | |
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap! |
--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red August 2023
edit Women in Red August 2023, Vol 9, Iss 8, Nos 251, 252, 277, 278, 279, 280
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2023 at Women in Red
edit Women in Red September 2023, Vol 9, Iss 9, Nos 251, 252, 281, 282, 283
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red October 2023
edit Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286
See also
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A kitten for you!
editThank you for today's workshop!
A cupcake for you!
editthank you for inviting us to the internet! Lila436 (talk) 14:23, 18 October 2023 (UTC) |
Women in Red - November 2023
edit Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289
See also Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red December 2023
edit Women in Red December 2023, Vol 9, Iss 12, Nos 251, 252, 290, 291, 292
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
editHello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Editor experience invitation
editHi Stinglehammer :) I'm looking to interview people here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red January 2024
editWomen in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red February 2024
editWomen in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Some format issues about University of Edinburgh/Events and Workshops/Translation Studies - 2023/2024
editI apologize for not being good at English and thank you for your contributions.
Recently, when I patrol new entries on zh Wikipedia, I notice that most members of yours add a space before a footnote, we seldom do that in Chinese (Chinese punctuation is wider than English punctuation). As removing these spaces may require a significant amount of work, I would appreciate it if you could give a brief notice before the translation activity to reduce unnecessary work. It is worth mentioning that there is no clear policy or regulation restricting this approach, I am just here on behave of myself.
Thank you again for your contributions, your translations is better than most of us. Heihaheihaha (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks Heihaheihaha for this. Will certainly pass this information on to students and will encourage future student translation assignment to do this too. Any further advice and constructive feedback is always very welcome so thank you. Stinglehammer (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red March 2024
editWomen in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red April 2024
editWomen in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 19:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red May 2024
editWomen in Red | May 2024, Volume 10, Issue 5, Numbers 293, 294, 305, 306, 307
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 06:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red June 2024
editWomen in Red | June 2024, Volume 10, Issue 6, Numbers 293, 294, 308, 309, 310
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 07:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red August 2024
editWomen in Red | July 2024, Volume 10, Issue 7, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 312, 313
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 14:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red August 2024
editWomen in Red | August 2024, Volume 10, Issue 8, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 313, 314, 315
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 19:59, 25 July 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2024 at Women in Red
editWomen in Red | September 2024, Volume 10, Issue 9, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 316, 317
Online events:
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red October 2024
editWomen in Red | October 2024, Volume 10, Issue 10, Numbers 293, 294, 318, 319, 320
Online events:
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 08:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Welcome to my talk page
editThis is my talk page, please feel free to leave a message Stinglehammer (talk) 12:29, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
You efforts on Ada Lovelace Day
editThank you, Stinglehammer, for all your efforts yesterday in Edinburgh in connection with your Ada Lovelace Day event. It was obviously a very successful meetup with lots of enthusiastic participants. Well done!--Ipigott (talk) 08:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot @Ipigott for this. Always good to keep an eye on new pages (and new editors) that may need a little support. So thank you for all that you do and, on personal note, just a word of appreciation for reaching out like this as I do think myself and other editors really really do appreciate these little words of encouragement so they're always really welcome and impactful too. Many thanks! Stinglehammer (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in a research
editHello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Kind Regards,
Women in Red November 2024
editWomen in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323
Online events:
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 20:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research
editHello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Take the survey here.
Kind Regards,
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
editHello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Add a Fact survey and thank you
editThank you for testing out the Add A Fact browser extension! This extension was developed as an experiment by the Future Audiences team at the Wikimedia Foundation to learn about new ways of contributing to Wikipedia from outside of our website/apps.
We are planning to wrap up this experiment this December, sunsetting the extension and publishing our findings on-wiki. We’d like to invite you to take part in an exit survey to tell us more about your experience of trying out the extension, and to share any ideas you have about how to support new ways of contributing to Wikipedia. The survey is anonymous (see the survey privacy statement) and should take about 10–15 minutes to complete.
You can take the Goole Forms survey here.
Kind regards, MPinchuk (WMF)
17:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
In use template
edit- Temporarily installing the "in use" template to the 1976 Manfredonia arsenic page is a good idea. Perhaps that could be included as a routine step of the process for future GHC classes? For example, all teams add the template before commencing substantial editing of the live article, then take it down following submission for class grading. Some of this year's groups opted to edit the live pages à la carte and were quickly schooled by other editors, making traceability of the final assignment tricky to follow by markers. WilyMango (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red December 2024
editWomen in Red | December 2024, Vol 10, Issue 12, Nos 293, 294, 324, 325
Online events:
Announcements from other communities
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 18:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging