This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Take a look at what I had to do with the edit that User:Masuhi had done. I feel kinda bad, because it was clearly in good faith; but can you imagine the clutter of 160+ years of cut-and-paste party platforms? (And in Wisconsin I could probably do it, what with the Wisconsin Blue Book being online and all.) Can you make it clearer to her/him that this is not how you improve the article? I'd love to see some summary of the history of the DP of Mississippi and the Freedom Democratic Party; the challenges to the DP of Miss. delegations to various Democratic National Conventions; etc. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:39, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for contacting me! I will touch bases with her regarding the edits here, along with copyright violations. Again, thanks. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, would you mind helping me fix up my Wikipedia article? The link to it is Deaf history Galatians (talk) 15:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

• Good morning! I have a couple of questions. Do you have any specific questions about your article? Since you are editing the article as coursework, I can't ethically "fix up" your article, but I am happy to answer any questions you may have. I also recommend contacting your Online Ambassador. The OA that is assigned to your course is honestly more than willing to work with you on your article and answer any questions you may have. She is also a bit more familiar with your course. She can be reached at User talk:Nikkimaria. That said, since we're all volunteers, we don't keep office hours. I'm here and just hanging out, so feel free to shoot your questions at me. ;) Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Cindy,

I've been asked by Annie Lin with the Wikimedia Foundation to help out with reviewing articles from the problematic India student editor program. I see you're involved there. Can you give me some tips on how to get started? Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hey Jim! Here's a list of the instructions that I received. I've been ill these past couple of weeks, so I'm only about half way through my list of articles. When the list is missing "Online Ambassador comments", feel free to jump in and help there. Then make a comment on the list indicating whether or not you found copyvios and/or what needed to be done. Hit me back if you have questions.
  • Remove any plagiarized material (this is often easy to spot, as they've cited the source they plagiarized from, but sometimes you may have to Google chunks of text that look suspicious).
  • Move any unsourced sentences to the talk page of the article or just delete them.
  • Delete articles that are duplications of existing articles (or nominate it for deletion if you don't have deletion powers yourself).
  • Delete or move to the talk page any additions to Wikipedia that are so poor English that they need serious editing help before they should be on-wiki.
  • Delete any other problematic materials you come across. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:02, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips, Cindy. I have reviewed a bunch of these articles, and found that many of them are already gone, or redirects to broader articles. I hope that you are feeling better soon. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 16:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I've left a further note on User talk:Masuhi#Democratic Party of the State of Mississippi, in response to User:Sgelbman's suggestion about the Sandbox. The short version is that copyright violations are not allowed even in Sandboxes, but you may wish to take a look at the comment itself. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 13:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for keeping me in the loop. I've responded on your talk page. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:25, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand that external links count as sources; I generally base it off the references list by itself, though. If the page has no references:

1. There is no way of knowing what piece of text, if any, each external link is refering to.
2. It is possible that the external links may not be supporting the text, either.

Just figured I'd let you know. Again, thanks. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 16:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

• The BLP PROD is only appropriate when there are no sources provided, rather than poor sources provided. The articles you marked were clearly supported by references, however, lacking inline citations. If you have questions about whether or not the reference supports content, a quick look at the reference should alleviate any concerns. A mere mention of the subject in the reference would support the article enough to bypass the BLP PROD. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:23, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 17:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi My name is Shawna our group is working on the Sith page. Our intended approach is to split it into two major sections. One will be the history/Philosophy of the Sith in the star wars universe. The other will be the history of the idea of the sith and information about it from a real world perspective. Is this valid? We are going to work to achieve encyclopedia standards in both approaches but we aren't sure since we are dealing with fictional but really really widely written/imagined people. THank you!!! —Preceding undated comment added 22:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC).

• Hey Shawna! A quick review of my talk page found your lonely question above. Just a couple of reminders. Make sure to post new comments using the "new section" link at the top of the page. This posts your question or comment at the bottom of the page in chronological order. If this isn't done, an automatic tool may archive your question without giving me time to see it. Also, make sure to sign all of your comments with four tildes, i.e., ~~~~. I'm going to be honest with you. I know nothing about your subject. However, articles of a fictional nature are generally written exactly as you have stated. Checking the WikiProject for additional help will be a great asset in the development of your article. You can find more information here. Wikipedia:WikiProject Science Fiction. Please don't hesitate to contact me again if you have more questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I need help with my article. I have all the information and photos however I do not know how to include the citiations and references properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasJosephSimpson.D.S.M (talk • contribs) 03:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

• Can you add your questions to the article talk page? Post your citations there and I will take a look at them. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 04:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (companies). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 18:17, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Cindamuse, I'm sure you're already reading the discussion, but since Voceditenore and I are leaving a note for every ambassador to let them know about the USEP discussions, I wanted to let you know we're doing so. The message I'm leaving is "You may be interested in a discussion about the future and the growth of the US education program along with the future of the Wikipedia Ambassador Project here." Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 04:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Cindy, I realise the organsiers consider the support of the community to be important, but on the other hand, there have been several clear statements that the state of that support is not their concern. It may nevertheless be worth pointing out that while the students will be relying heavily on mentorship from their OAs, they might not be aware that there is a (kind of) task force working on RC, and NPP who may well not even be aware of education programmes. Students may be taken aback to see their edits and/or creations handled in what they feel to be an abrupt manner and without explanation other than mainspace templates and user warnings. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hey there. Great thoughts. I agree that there's a community-wide disconnect between the long-standing WP community and the students and Education Program. The various stakeholders don't appear to acknowledge, care, respect, or concern themselves with the needs of all parties involved. There needs to be a balance. I have to say that I agree with many of your comments made in various places regarding the WMF and the concerns held by the WP community. My professional background includes facilitating corporate training courses to introduce and implement self-directed work teams and total quality management. I teach nationwide courses on statistical process control to identify program and process flow and hindrances in order to eliminate waste and increase productivity. Honestly, the solution to many of the issues on WP involving the education program seem second nature to me. However, resolution and success will remain elusive, until all parties and stakeholders arrive at a place of mutual respect and establish common goals, working to identify and implement solutions. Too much time is spent pointing fingers. In my opinion, the Global Education Program was built on sinking sand. The house was built, followed by several parties moving in and setting up shop, but the construction crew failed to build a solid foundation. Honestly, I have just as many concerns with the USEP and IEP as the next person. Some days, I want to scream at the head in the sand mentality which is oftentimes found pervasive at the WMF level, as well as community members that stand on the sidelines and cry foul, but refuse to become involved in the process to bring resolution to the issues identified. Some days, I'm quite pessimistic with the lack on WP. But I fend off that negative mentality by working to find solutions. Right now, there are proposals being developed and implemented that work to address many of the concerns being expressed community wide. While it's important for the community to share their concerns, the horse is long dead. We all know the problems. Now, let's work together to identify solutions. Based on your comments above, one thing I can do is propose that the curriculum and CA training sessions implement presentations about the RC and NPP teams that students will encounter as they progress through the course. If you have additional thoughts, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 19:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Please do not delete intentional disambiguation redirects. These redirects are created in accordance with our finely balanced policy at WP:INTDABLINK, under which we route disambiguation links through "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects to prevent false positives from appearing on the lists of pages requiring repair, which prevents unnecessary work for disambiguators. Because articles occasionally need to refer readers to the actual disambiguation page instead of a solution on the page, all disambig pages are supposed to have the "Foo (disambiguation)" redirect for this purpose. Also, certain templates such as the template for listing multiple species designations are designed to automatically route through such redirects, and deleting those redirects prevents those templates from functioning properly. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cindamuse, I was wondering if you could take a look at my article, Misogyny and mass media. There is still a lot of information I need to add but the end of the semester is coming up fast and I would like to get it to a point that I am happy with. I would love some feedback about what I have so far. Thank you.DianeElizabeth66 (talk) 00:17, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• This article actually corresponds with my professional background. Due to a conflict of interest, I will limit my comments to more style and form. Overall, make sure to read and review the Manual of Style and go through each point in the manual to ensure that your article is in compliance. A couple of the troublesome issues that I can see involve section headers and lead section compliance. Review the sections that you have that only present one or two sentences. Either flesh them out or add them to other sections. The article requires copy editing. Also, be sure to go through the article and edit for letter, word, and paragraph spacing. I would eliminate the quote boxes and use the content in prose. Certainly, remove the quote boxes from the lead section. Remember to use words for numbers one through nine and symbols for numbers 10 and above. Quote songs and italicize albums. Other than that, the article needs more balance. Each opposing view of the issue must be accurately and thoroughly presented. We don't need Too Short reading the article and saying, "Hey! Back the truck up!" Let me know if you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 17:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
• Thank you so much for the help. I will be making those style and form changes over the next week. I would love to hear some of your own personal opinions about my article, especially as someone who is a student and not a professional. DianeElizabeth66 (talk) 15:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for agreeing to be our ambassador. My students will have their drafts ready to post in about a week. Because they are group projects, they are using a 'sandbox' on our course site for composition.Vanpsyc (talk) 00:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• No problem. Can you offer a link to your sandbox? I looked at the course site and couldn't find it. I'll keep an eye on the article(s). Let your students know that I'm here to help. They shouldn't hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I am having trouble with uploading a picture to my article. How do I go about do that? I also am not sure if I nominated my article correctly. Is there a way you can check if I followed the necessary steps. Emoni12 (talk) 15:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• You can check out the guidelines for uploading images here. As far as your DYK nomination, instructions have been provided on your talk page from an editor that works specifically with the DYK nomination process. When people post on your talk page, it's important to engage in conversations with them to ensure complete understanding of the process. Please note that there are remaining issues with the Delta Phi Epsilon (social). Maintenance issues were identified in October, but unfortunately, remained unaddressed. I have removed unsourced content that reflected close paraphrasing of the organization's website. Articles on Wikipedia are written based on external sources. Please do not include this information in the article without writing the content in your own words and providing references. In order to establish notability, there must be significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. At this point, the article does not meet the threshold for notability. I recommend foregoing the inclusion of images, and focusing on locating reliable and independent sources to support the article. Anything less may result in deletion of the article. Nobody wants that. Let me know if you have more questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 16:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:President of Croatia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, My article for Comm375 is "Effects of teen advertising on body image." It isn't finished yet (I'm still adding more to it & it needs some work), but I was wondering if you had any suggestions on how to improve it. Thank you, Aja99 (talk) 21:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Aja99

• Thanks for contacting me. I've gone ahead and made comments on the talk page. Just a few minor issues that need addressed. Let me know if you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 02:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cindamuse, I'm an academic from Australia who has started using Wikipedia in a Research Methods course I teach. I don't have a lot of time for editing Wikipedia myself but work with my students on the creation of new articles or the enhancing of articles based on research they undertake in the course of their study. I wonder if you'd be interested in being a bit of a mentor for me? I'd like to become a more competent editor myself and have some guidance on using Wikipedia in an educational context. Thanks for your consideration. talk (Kerry) 02:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hi Kerry! Are you participating in the Wikipedia Education Program or Ambassador Program? I'm honored that you would contact me for assistance. That said, I am unable to currently take on additional responsibilities. Honestly, I'm burning the candle at both ends. I would like to recommend a few other ideas. One is the Adopt-a-user Program, another is the Wikipedia:School and university projects, and then there is the Adoption Program of one of our respected editors. Make sure to check those out. If you have questions, feel free to contact me for additional direction. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Block protocol. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I'm working on Motivations_for_joining_the_Special_Olympics for my Comm375 project. It's almost done and I'm trying to edit it more and looking where I can expand or improve the article as a whole. I was wondering if you had any suggestions on how to improve my article. Thank you. Laural17 (talk) 19:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hi Laura! I've gone ahead and provided feedback on the article's talk page. Feel free to contact me if you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I saw that you removed my Delta Phi Epsilon article. How can I make these proper improvements of this copyright that you say I did. Please guide me through this process and help me make edits to my article. Emoni12 (talk) 05:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• Were you able to read the note that I placed on your talk page? The content was removed due to copyright violations and lack of sourcing. The content that you added to the article was taken directly from the subject's website. Close paraphrasing and direct copyright violations are taken very seriously on Wikipedia and removed on sight. We also don't add unsourced content at any time. Take a look at the sources provided. They fail to establish the subject as notable, that is none of the sources provided are independent of the subject. We need to support the subject through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Please look for information in books, magazines, periodicals, etc. that are independent of the subject. Do not repeatedly use content from the subject's website. Additional note: don't forget to provide an edit summary for your edits. If you still have questions, please feel free to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 06:54, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Embassador, I've been working on the Youth Marketing Page, sub-section "Targeting The Demographic" for my class project with Zach McDowell. Would you mind taking a look at my section and help me wikify it with internal links just to make it look more legitimate? Thank you! Jules2013 (talk) 19:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hi Julie! I would recommend addressing other issues in the article prior to adding wikilinks. Please review the maintenance tag at the top of the article regarding synthesis and original research. The section that you have provided is an example of synthesis. You also have quite a few quotes in the article that are not sourced. We need to focus on a thorough rewrite of the entire section to remove the original research and address copyright violations and close paraphrasing.[1][2] We also need to provide clear citations in order to direct readers to where they can verify article content. The citations provided are linked to libraries and a footnote on a website. see Wikipedia:Citing sources for more information. Please make sure to use sentence case for section headings and remove the html line breaks. Rather than use the bold wikimarkup, simply add a semicolon before these sections headers and remove the word "The" from section headers. Finally, it is important to use the preview button before saving your work; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Let me know if you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 20:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cindy, Ive been writing for the GOProud page and wondering some things. Should i keep the introduction the way it is and expand off of that with the article or fine tune the new revised version that i had posted. thanks. MikeySwetz (talk) 00:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I am in Zach's Comm 375 class and I just had a question regarding what to do about my article that I have been working on. Every time I try to merge my article with the one that is suggested to merge with "sexuality in music videos," all of my writing gets deleted. Zach advised me to ask you to see if there was any reason why I am not able to merge my article or if I should just create my own without merging. I am very new to wikipedia so everything is just very confusing to me so any help/advice would be awesome! Thanks! Daniellecomm375 (talk) 23:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello! My article from Comm 375 UMass Communication for sustainable social change and development has a focus on Latin America as this is a region dear to my heart and a place I wish to live in. I would love to have other writers add on to the article about ongoing and future development efforts in other parts of the world as well. It would be great to see the article progress as sections for regions and countries are added on. Please read over what I have and make any needed sugestions for what should be changed/added/fixed. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odolgopo (talk • contribs) 00:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 23:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's December Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 1,000 articles and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions, including a brand new one for the single largest wikified article! All you have to do is put an asterisk next to the largest article you've wikified, and coordinators will check its wordcount after the drive ends. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks! Note: The drive starts December 1, and you can sign up today!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC).

Hello I am currently a student at Illinois State University in section 2 of Political Science 214 course. My question is that I am been trying to create an infobox on my article page, Nevada Republican Party. I was wondering if there was anything that may help me to accomplish this and make the article up to Wikipedia's standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamccab (talk • contribs) 16:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

>>This is a fresh talkback<<

Hello, Cindamuse. You have new messages at RA0808's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Your comment to me relative to Mark the Matchboy is wholly without merit. The material provided is not a combination of my own concoction, but rather what has been taught about the book as a piece of U.S. and political history at high schools and universities for decades. It appears in the AP US history exams periodically. Unfortunately, because the web is bereft of certain citations, I was unable to find references to Alger's work, which has become more arcane over time. The book should be referenced, as should the term "Algerism" which reflects the core of Libertarian and Conservative thinking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theclevertwit (talk • contribs) 13:35, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs			Cleanup
	St Paul's Theological Centre			Kakushi Buki Jutsu
	Worship Central			Chhiyali
	Gary Polonsky			List of programs broadcast by Global
	Prashant Bhushan		Merge
	Aaron Snyder			Online shopping
	Teucer of Babylon			Baby diaper cake
	Jaffar Public School			PIM Dense Mode
	Karen Wexler		Add sources
	Crow Rate			SIM lock
	Hyundai PM580			Sandy Millar
	Ratimir of Serbia			Dead Voices on Air
	Scenario (computing)		Wikify
	Metropolitan Klezmer			Singletary Center for the Arts
	K-911			Petaw payan
	Gohana			Tata-Dhan Academy
	T.R.A.C.I.E.		Expand
	Aldaspan			Maritime Analog
	Infomedia Nusantara			Street Wars (film)
	The Cheese Shop			Dark Vengeance

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cindamuse, I am a student in the Comm 375 course and was wondering if you could look over my article and give me some feedback on my work so far. My article is Impact of the Internet on Hip Hop. If you have the time to help I would really appreciate it :). Sjeanbap (talk) 23:17, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• I've provided a review on the article's talk page. Hit me back if you have more questions! Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 23:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, we talked earlier in the help chat and you offered to look at my page. little league world seris on television. I was just wondering if you are still willing to do that tonight thank you. Richardw8704 (talk) 02:53, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry, I haven't been able to get to your article yet due to a migraine that came on earlier. I'll take a look now. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 05:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cindy! Just a brief update from Brunell's Gonzaga course. Hoping that all students will quickly list their article and username info on our course page, but it's been nearly a month and we only have one group's articles listed. I've reminded them via Laura, so hopefully more will come in over the weekend.

On Tuesday, 12/6, we'll hold a practical lab where students receive help with edits and potentially with moving content from their sandboxes. It will mostly be review, but I'll be briefly covering the following new topics:

• Moving your article from your sandbox to Wikipedia
• Linking your article with Wikipedia cross referencing
• “Did You Know?”, "Good Article" and "Featured Article" nominations

Is there anything in particular that I should emphasize or provide additional coverage on? Thank you very much for your time and expertise!

Best, Adrianpauw (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• Hey Adrian! I'll be sure to keep an eye on the class and their articles. Just a couple of things that would help for Tuesday. In order to move articles, accounts must be more than four days old and have made at least 10 edits. Before moving any articles to the mainspace, make sure each article is supported by significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Make sure the article clearly states how the subject is significant and/or important. The article needs to present notability, making sure to verify all such claims. The DYK, GA, and FA teams are seriously backlogged. The process requires the participation of the student submitting the article. However, we cannot guarantee that any articles will be assessed before the course ends. We've put out a call for assistance, so maybe things will begin to pick up. Just let students know that the turnaround time can be as long as three months. I would also suggest that students consider submitting their work to requests for feedback. Other than that, just let students know to have fun and don't hesitate to engage with the community. Oftentimes, other editors leave notes or alerts on the student's talk page, but the students are hesitant to talk back. If there is an issue with the article, the lack of response has oftentimes led to deletion. Let the students know that we're here to help. No, really. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 05:52, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Hi! Thanks so much for the info. Two follow up questions:

1. Do all user contributions (those listed on their contribs page) count as an edit? Do contribs on another user's talk pages count as edits, or does the edit have to be on an article's main page or discussion page to count as one of the 10? I'm assuming that this won't really be an issue for us: students have had their accounts for a couple of months now, hopefully at least one person in each group will be able to get 10 qualifying edits in. Plus, all the articles students have listed so far are existing articles, so it could be that there won't be too much call to move content from their sandboxes. I don't know of any specific plans for brand-new articles. But I will keep you posted!

• Each account must have the ten edits/four days; all edits listed on the 'tribs page counts.

2. If a student wants to move 2-3 paragraphs from their sandbox to a content area, should they disclose that in their edit summary? Perhaps include a note that says "developed in my sandbox"? Just want to make sure we're following etiquette and being transparent!

• No need to indicate the content was first written in a sandbox. Just state what was added to the article, i.e., "added content and refs on the benefits of chocolate" (I made up that subject myself.)

Thank you once again, your expertise is invaluable! Adrianpauw (talk) 18:20, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

• Answered inline with the questions above. Let me know how it's going and how I can help! Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 23:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

This is just to let you know that I have now created over 100 pretty good articles and have two official GA's (Fantastic Light and Duke of Marmalade). And I wouldn't have done so if you hadn't steered me in the right direction with Storming Home a few months ago. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

• I am honored that you have shared your thoughts here. Couldn't have come at a better time. That said, I am impressed with your work. You have become a true asset to the community. One of these days when I get a spare moment, I would like to write an article on a horse that was in my family named Shaftesbury Turk. If that day ever comes, I'll be sure to look you up and follow your lead! Again, thanks for your kind note. I'm happy you're here! Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 01:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, We are in Laura Brunell's Feminist Thought class working on the wikipedia edits for Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann. We strongly believe these pages would be improved with our intended edits. We, however, cannot edit them because they appear to be locked. Is there any way you can help us out with this? Our wikipedia user names are 4Nperson for Michele Bachmann and julietdarcy for Sarah Palin. Sincerely, 4Nperson (talk) 21:55, 6 December 2011 (UTC) & julietdarcy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4Nperson (talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

• Welcome to Wikipedia! These two articles are highly contentious and prone to vandalism. For that reason, the articles have been protected from editing by new, unconfirmed editors. The article about Palin is one of the most viewed articles on Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, any change to the article is reviewed or watched by 752 editors. The Bachmann article is reviewed or watched by 207 editors. I would recommend that any changes you intend to make are proposed on the talk page of the article. In order to become an "autoconfirmed" editor, essentially unlocking articles, your editing account needs to be in existence for at least four days, with ten edits made. Oh, to sign your comments, just add four tildes (~) after your post. ~~~~. If you have more questions, don't hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 22:16, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you, Cindy! 4Nperson and julietdarcy, keep asking questions as you need to. I'll look for your proposed edits on the articles' talk pages--how interesting to be able to engage with these contentious articles! Best, Adrianpauw (talk) 16:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Drive by tagging is discouraged, as you know. Please come participate in the discussion here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ace_Baker

MiszaBot III (talk) 13:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ace Baker (talk • contribs) 06:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

ARCHIVES → 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 -->

Archives

no archives yet (create)

Professor Kutateladze has been a world leader in vector lattices and optimization. There is no question about academic notability. Somebody should add secondary references, of course, e.g. by citing Math Reviews.

The article is a stub.

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

• While you may personally assert that the subject has been a "world leader in vector lattices and optimization", the article fails to assert that claim. Can you add the assertion, supported by an independent and reliable source? Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 23:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Done (Leifman). Please don't CSD or PROD any more mathematicians' articles, without asking for help.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
    • My CSD and PROD had nothing to do with the subject's line of work, but the lack of compliance with community policy and guidelines. I certainly will not limit myself to refraining from working on these specific areas that clearly do not meet the criteria for inclusion. The placed CSD and PROD were successful in prompting others to address issues and bring the article into compliance. To that end, thank you for your work. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
      • Nobody wrote that you were discriminating against mathematicians. My concern was that you failed to recognize the prima facie notability of the author of 3+ monographs in the Mathematics and its Applications series, etc. Worse you CSD and PRODed the article.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
        • Nobody is stating anything about "discriminating" here. Discrimination would be the wrong word. You specifically stated "Please don't CSD or PROD any more mathematicians' articles". This would not be discrimination, but rather a mandate. As far as notability, the article failed to present notability in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines. The article as CSDd merely stated that the subject was a mathematician at a university, along with a list of academic books or articles of which he participated in writing. No indication that the subject or books were significant and/or important. If the books and/or articles were significant, this was in accordance with your own understanding and not that presented in the article itself. Again, your decline of the PROD was based on personal understanding of the subject, not reflected in the article at the time of the PROD. If the article would have indicated significance in some manner such as "Professor Kutateladze has been a world leader in vector lattices and optimization," I would have had no reason to place an A7 or PROD. Honestly, rather than deriding me here, I think a better choice would be to simply respect the process, add the information of which you are familiar, and continue to improve the article to the point where significance/importance and notability are clearly defined. No harm; no foul. Again, your work here is commendable. I have no beef with you. Thank you for improving the article. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 10:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

My apologies: I misunderstood the article and thought that you'd failed to observe the Lob Sakha bit. I stand by my decline, although for different reasons: since the Samajwadi Party has 22 members in Lob Sakha, people that stand for election to Lob Sakha as its candidates are important. You're probably right about her being not notable — here in the USA, many major-party candidates for Congress are not notable, even though with just two major parties, the candidates tend to get a bigger percent of the coverage than I'd guess they would in India. Nyttend (talk) 23:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Hm, after finishing my message, I read your editnotice and realised that you're in the USA and that you prefer a response at my talk page. Sorry about that; I responded first and didn't read it, so I thought you were perhaps in India and didn't reply at my talk. I'll just copy this response to my talk page. Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard von Krafft-Ebing. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Professor Kutateladze has been a world leader in vector lattices and optimization. There is no question about academic notability. Somebody should add secondary references, of course, e.g. by citing Math Reviews.

The article is a stub.

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

• While you may personally assert that the subject has been a "world leader in vector lattices and optimization", the article fails to assert that claim. Can you add the assertion, supported by an independent and reliable source? Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 23:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Done (Leifman). Please don't CSD or PROD any more mathematicians' articles, without asking for help.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
    • My CSD and PROD had nothing to do with the subject's line of work, but the lack of compliance with community policy and guidelines. I certainly will not limit myself to refraining from working on these specific areas that clearly do not meet the criteria for inclusion. The placed CSD and PROD were successful in prompting others to address issues and bring the article into compliance. To that end, thank you for your work. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
      • Nobody wrote that you were discriminating against mathematicians. My concern was that you failed to recognize the prima facie notability of the author of 3+ monographs in the Mathematics and its Applications series, etc. Worse you CSD and PRODed the article.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
        • Nobody is stating anything about "discriminating" here. Discrimination would be the wrong word. You specifically stated "Please don't CSD or PROD any more mathematicians' articles". This would not be discrimination, but rather a mandate. As far as notability, the article failed to present notability in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines. The article as CSDd merely stated that the subject was a mathematician at a university, along with a list of academic books or articles of which he participated as part of his role as professor. No indication that the subject or books were significant and/or important. If the books and/or articles were significant, this was in accordance with your own understanding and not that presented in the article itself. Again, your decline of the PROD was based on personal understanding of the subject, not reflected in the article at the time of the PROD. If the article would have indicated significance in some manner such as "Professor Kutateladze has been a world leader in vector lattices and optimization," I would have had no reason to place an A7 or PROD. Honestly, rather than deriding me here, I think a better choice would be to simply respect the process, add the information of which you are familiar, and continue to improve the article to the point where significance/importance and notability are clearly established. No harm; no foul. Again, your work here is commendable. I have no beef with you. Thank you for improving the article. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 10:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)