Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Regarding this, you could opt either for ((sfn)) or ((rp)) instead. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:05, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, thank you Nikkimaria! The latter is probably more what I'm looking for, although as I consider it, I see why the former would be used more often. Just trying to figure out how to do this in a way that least makes ordinary readers feel like they're slogging through academic-paper levels of byzantine formatting to figure out where info came from...

In any case, thank you again, appreciate the links to the primary options! Innisfree987 (talk) 01:02, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the page for the infobox template. The influence fields are no longer supported, therefore not needed. They should be worked into prose. ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 02:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I just saw your second edit. lol ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 02:38, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arg yes so sorry and thanks for your understanding about that Crash_Underride. Next to tackle the last 100 edits or so of vandalism and reversion there so that I'll again be able recognize good edits when I see them! Thanks for your help. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I saw your copyedit tag on the article Good Old Schooldays. I was wondering what should be copyedited. Your help will be appreciated. Thank you. In Memoriam A.H.H.^{What, you egg?}. 16:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey In Memoriam A.H.H., thanks for asking--I appreciate the follow-up! In this case it's pretty light work: checking punctuation (as a rule on Wikipedia, references should go after the comma/period/etc. rather than before; song titles go inside quotation marks), italics for names of publications, double-check for typos. We can tag-team if you like--if you want to make a pass at it, I can have another look and see if anything got left behind (I know sometimes it's just hard to notice things in your own work; the Guild of copyeditors is a lifesaver!) Meanwhile thanks for your entry--wonderful to have this improvement of the site's film history coverage! Innisfree987 (talk) 16:30, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words about the article! I would be happy to tag-team, in order to improve it. Thanks, and have a nice day! In Memoriam A.H.H.^{What, you egg?}. 16:53, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary is concerning. In the absence of editing I have been formulating the layout and contents, and am hunting the vitally needed resources. My preference for the layout is by New World colony, though this article may be destined to become a hub, with specific pages dedicated for regions, e.g. Planter class of Louisiana. What are your thoughts? – Conservatrix (talk) 22:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Conservatrix: Well content matters including any possible forks are more appropriate to the entry's talk page so all interested may weigh in, but I'll reiterate here, as I mentioned there, my concern that you've created and now expanded an entirely unreferenced entry. Without references, there is essentially no possibility of the entry satisfying the encyclopedia's neutrality requirements, as WP:NPOV and WP:NOR tell us entries should seek to accurately summarize how reliable secondary sources have described a topic--if you're not working from sources, it's not possible to represent them neutrally. References on this topic are widely available, beginning with scholar.google.com; if you hit paywalls on scholarly articles, WP:The Wikipedia Library will almost certainly be able to help you out. I would very much urge attending to properly referencing what can be and revising any material that does not reflect high quality sources before you continue to expand, or you really will risk having the entry deleted or at best draftified as WP:NOTESSAY.

As I noticed your userboxes (specifically interest in academia), I will just add: the above described content policies can sometimes mean that what an editor wishes to write is more suitable for a venue other than Wikipedia. If you wish to write detailed original research and/or your personal interpretation of, say, one small group of people in one state, there is a place for that (a dissertation perhaps?), but Wikipedia isn't it. Wikipedia only does the sometimes-mundane task of giving succinct overviews for a general audience of other people's original thought and research, as published in respected sources. That's understandably not always what everyone wants to do! But for better or for worse it's the task at hand here. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:01, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The planter class features heavily into the development of American culture as an arbiter of class-based social structure and adapted European architectural styles. Wikipedians love writing about slavery, seemingly taking every opportunity to recall its horrors, but what is a hero without its villan? As noted on the talk, this page is neither about slavery or war but the men and women of a dominant social class and their influence on modern civilization. I ask that nobility be deleted moments after my planters are relegated to a WordPress blog. – Conservatrix (talk) 04:21, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conservatrix: this is totally unrelated and unresponsive to the WP content policy concerns I described. That's up to you tho, as the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and so ignoring content policies will only mean you run into more difficulties. I'd advise having a look at WP:SOAPBOX as well. I mention all in sincere hopes it assists with your editing here. Best wishes. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 20:44, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Hello again from Women in Red! July 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/83|Sub-Saharan Africa]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/84|Film + stage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/85|20th-century]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/86|Women Rock]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|Notable women, broadly-construed!]] Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Are we losing momentum? London calling (the Mayor of London!) Publication about Wikipedia's coverage of women mathematicians Women in Red is featured in Toolhub
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

I got your message regarding the notability concerns for this article. I am aware of the notability guidelines for Wikipedia, and I feel that there are more than enough non-trivial, independent sources to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Obviously, there aren't as many sources as larger bands, but as far as sourcing for bands go, there is a variety of sources that are not reproductions of press releases, and that deal mainly with the band itself. I feel that the tag is unnecessary for the article. The Billboard.com, SunCity Paradise, and KQED.com articles discuss the band in depth, and along with the other sources, I feel the article more than passes the notability standards for Wikipedia. Angryapathy (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll copy this over on the entry's talk page and reply there, so that everyone interested in this content matter may participate. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:52, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing over 50 reviews during the 2018 June Backlog Drive, please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping New Page Patrol and keep up the good work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 19:01, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		An exciting new month for Women in Red! August 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/87|Indigenous women]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/88|Women of marginalized populations]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/89|Women writers]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/90|Geofocus: Bottom 10]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative Notable women, broadly-construed!]] For the first time, this month we are trying out our Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in August. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

On 23 July 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Shinobu Hashimoto, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:13, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello Innisfree987, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

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

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a personal or professional or political relationship with Sarah Jeong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.80.232.203 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don’t. (I’m not sure how anyone could have a political relationship with her, as to my knowledge she is not in politics. Tech and law reporter AFAIK.) I often contribute to WP pages about poets, writers, journalists, and so forth; her bio is one I had added a bit to, I think last year?, so I was notified by the Wikipedia watchlist system when many edits began being made there recently. If you’re interested in how the WP “sausage gets made”, I encourage you make an account, that’s one of the many useful features you can access when logged in! Innisfree987 (talk) 06:20, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have brought the unfruitful Sarah Jeong discussion to dispute resolution and am notifying you because you have commented on the Talk page since August 3. You can find a link here: Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Sarah_Jeong. All the best, Ikjbagl (talk) 12:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closure here, for record-keeping. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

I am posting this on your talkpage out of an abundance of caution solely because you recently edited Talk:Sarah Jeong and, as the message says, not suggesting any policy violation by you. Abecedare (talk) 01:55, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Abecedare, sorry to be a dunce, I've apparently made it three years without finding my way into a situation where these were handed out and so I don't totally know what I'm being alerted to. Generally I get that DS means the ban hammer will be wielded liberally but I guess I'm unclear as to whether are there specific editing restrictions other than what I'd ordinarily be aware of? Sorry about this--I read the above links as well as a bunch of links contained within and I'm still not totally clear so I figure better to ask! Thanks. Innisfree987 (talk) 02:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Currently there are no specific editing restrictions for the Sarah Jeong article/talkpage (besides the protection, of course). So the notice is simply a means to make editors aware of existing policies (BLP, NPOV, RS etc) so that they don't run afoul of them out of sheer ignorance (or claim that they did :) ). If specific discretionary editing restrictions (eg, 1RR) for the article are implemented, they will be advertized on the article talk-page and/or through edit-notices and the above message is also supposed to serve as a reminder to editors that they should, in general, look out for such restrictions on pages they edit. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 03:05, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, roger that Abecedare! Thanks so much--you got to just my question, which was that I've seen 1RR here or there, but I couldn't tell if I was supposed to understand that was implied in DS, or only for certain topics, or how I'd find a list of which topics. Etc. Got it now! Thanks so much, you've solved a mystery for me! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:57, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that a CU on User:ESparky has revealed no other accounts or editing from their IP. As the autoblock on the IP has now expired, vigilance is still required. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:57, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah--thank you very much for the head's up Kudpung, that timing is good to know. Will monitor. Perhaps Jytdog's COIN examination will provide more context as well. Thank you both. Innisfree987 (talk) 01:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided that every time I go to the movies and see the Hate U Give trailer I'm going to do some major work on the book article. I see my fair share of movies and it's getting regular play so I expect, given the high quality sourcing available, that when all is said to have improved enough to nominate and then have it receive GA. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:24, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I love that plan--and a great choice, as indeed there's so much there. Thanks Barkeep49. I'll pitch in as I can! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(And sorry to regular Barkeep who is surely wondering how they ended up pinged on this conversation--I'll spare you a second ping, but if you see this, apologies for the mistake!) Innisfree987 (talk) 03:32, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons! New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/91|Women currently in academics]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/92|Women + Law]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/93|Geofocus: Hispanic countries]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]] Check it out: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Monthly achievement initiative: September 2018|Monthly achievement initiative]] All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#The Endless Night of Wikipedia’s Notable Woman Problem (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hi, you asked for feedback on your hook promotions. Please copy and paste the whole DYK credit line, including the subpage parameter. I fixed your promotions. Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:59, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks so much, Yoninah! Can I ask, is there any reason (maybe something technical?) that the examples in the blank sets don't show that parameter? I removed it because I was trying to match the model. If it's not possible to make the model look identical, maybe we could add this detail to the instructions at least? (so newcomers don't keep creating this extra work for you!) Just a thought. Thanks again for the hand! Innisfree987 (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure; I've never looked at the model. Pinging @Maile66:, who has created templates for new hook promoters in the past. Yoninah (talk) 21:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at the instructions below. Under "Open the Prep area where you intend to add the hook", item #4 ... is this the answer you're looking for? — Maile (talk) 21:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Handy copy sources:

Ah ok--thank you both. Yes, Maile66, that gets at the issue (though it'd probably help to correct the typo in point 4.b.1--"if not" rather than "it not"? I'd just DIY but I fear breaking the template!) FWIW, the instructions I was looking at were Template_talk:Did_you_know#How_to_promote_an_accepted_hook and the additional instructions it links to, Wikipedia:Did_you_know/Preparation_areas; might help to add either the point about the subparameter or the link to the "at-a-glance" instructions in there somewhere.

And/or, if it's possible, I think it'd be great to update the model credit in the blank prep page, which for the credits section currently reads Example format...(Follow this or you WILL break something) and then just shows ((DYKmake|ArticleName|Editor)), without the subpage parameter. So that additionally introduced some confusion; I don't know if it's possible to make the example credit look like ((DYKmake|ArticleName|Editor|subpage=ArticleName))? Maybe that would screw up something technically, or for that matter, not always be correct? I've only done a few of these, so I'm out of my depth, but thought maybe inquiring at this stage was worth it if it could help the on-boarding instructions for new participants in the project. Thanks for your assistance! Innisfree987 (talk) 22:50, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Typo corrected. Thanks. As for the rest, I think you need to start a thread over at WT:DYK. That pre-dates me on DYK, and any real changes to templates and the process needs to be discussed there. — Maile (talk) 23:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job on promoting new hooks today! Another heads-up: we try to alternate bios and non-bios. Sometimes it doesn't work, but usually it does. Yoninah (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Yes that bit of the instructions I did find, but I did notice myself tripping up when a hook linked to a few different subjects--I'll make sure to pay close attention. Thanks for all the help Yoninah! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:14, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Innisfree987, I saw you had made some constructive changes to Sequoia Capital in the article's not-so-distant past, and wonder if you might be interested to have a look at my proposed expansion draft for one of its partners, Jim Goetz. I have a COI with the subject, specifically I am working with Mr. Goetz to seek an improved biography about him, so I should not make direct edits to the page. But I believe the current article is not very good, and so I've researched a new version that I think is informative without being promotional and carefully follows NPOV, RS, etc. If you have the time and are willing to have a look, you can see the draft in my userspace and the full explanation on the article's talk page. Let me know what you think! Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 13:33, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, this has been taken care of. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 22:17, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given the controversies surrounding it, do you think that The Hate U Give deserves to be added to the category "Obscenity controversies in literature?"MagicatthemovieS (talk) 03:45, 5 September 2018 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS[reply]

Interesting Q! I’ll read the sources on that specifically in the AM so I can give a more informed reply. I meant to anyway, actually, as the line in the prose about it surprised me, and I wondered about due weight. More TK! Innisfree987 (talk) 06:30, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

You are receiving this message because your username or portal was listed as a participant of a WikiProject that is related to Africa, the Carribean, Cinema or theatre.

This is to introduce you to a new Wikiproject called AfroCine. This new project is dedicated to improving the Wikipedia coverage of the history, works, people, places, events, etc, that are associated with the cinema, theatre and arts of Africa, African countries, the carribbean, and the diaspora. If you would love to be part of this or you're already contributing in this area, kindly list your name as a participant on the project page here.

Furthermore, In the months of October and November, the WikiProject is organizing a global on-wiki contest and edit-a-thon tagged: The Months of African Cinema. If you would love to join us for this exciting event, also list your username as a participant for this event here. In preparation for the contest, please do suggest relevant articles that need to be created or expanded in different countries, during this event!

If you have any questions, complaints, suggestions, etc., please reach out to me personally on my talkpage! Cheers!--Jamie Tubers (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alberto Morillas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that perfumer Alberto Morillas has created nearly 7,000 fragrances? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alberto Morillas. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), 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.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:03, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Olivia Giacobetti, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Olivia Giacobetti (pictured) popularized the use of figs in perfumery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Olivia Giacobetti. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October! New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/94|Clubs]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/95|Science fiction + fantasy]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|STEM]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/97|The Mediterranean]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

This article is titled Standards Institute of Israel but the official, legal name of the entity is Standards Institution of Israel (SII). I'm not well enough versed in wiki marks to retitle the article and add a redirect from the first, incomplete wording. Can do? Would appreciate it very much. All the Best! Shir-El too 10:33, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Shir-El too! I'm afraid I'd rather not make any big changes (like the title) to an entry that's really lacking sources and I don't have time to do the research on this one (it's way outside my expertise). I'd suggest asking at WP:Help desk or adding the ((Help me)) template to the entry's talk page and someone who does have time will be along to assist! Innisfree987 (talk) 17:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, but it's ironic: the correct title is in the first line of the article. If that isn't sourced... Cheers! Shir-El too 20:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that the page is in bad enough shape that it needs examination of all the sources (if any exist) as well as relevant WP policy on organizations (not my specialty) to be sure it qualifies for an entry in the encyclopedia and I'd want to do that before I did anything else, like a page move. And I haven't the time. But if it's of interest to you and you have the time, adding good sources would be a good contribution there! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:52, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. 4 on my TtD list! When Freedom House is in something like good shape I'll be back for your opinion. All the Best! Shir-El too 04:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC) PS If you like jokes, where do I send them?[reply]

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which has been dedicated to improving contents that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora.

This is a global online edit-a-thon, which is happening in at least 5 language editions of Wikipedia, including the English Wikipedia! Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section, if you haven't done so already.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing Users who are able to achieve the following:

• Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
• Country Winners
• Diversity winner
• High quality contributors
• Gender-gap fillers
• Page improvers
• Wikidata Translators

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:50, 03 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/98|Religion]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/99|Deceased politicians]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|Asia]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): WikiProject AfroCine launches (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

I worked on a new article which given our editing intersections in the past might be of interest to you. In particular I was struck, as I explored the sourcing from major children's lit RS, about how it was nearly all white voices commenting on the book. I ran out of steam before I could go searching for some African American commentary on the book, but thought you might have the desire and access to resources to do so. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:42, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for flagging this for me Barkeep49! I'm a bit busy off-wiki at the moment so it might take me a little while to get to it, but absolutely, I'd very much like to look and see what additional sources I can come up with. Thanks for letting me know--and for the new entry! Innisfree987 (talk) 18:51, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Hate U Give, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the shooting of Oscar Grant motivated Angie Thomas to write a short story that became the basis for her debut novel, The Hate U Give? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Hate U Give. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), 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.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Innisfree987, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing ((copyvio-revdel)) on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Innisfree987:, you seem to have a lot of experience nominating DYKs, can you help me on this one:Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Dr._Horatio_Q._Birdbath — Preceding unsigned comment added by The lorax (talk • contribs) 15:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The lorax! My time on-wiki is a bit limited just now, so I wasn't able to sort it out completely, but I've made a couple tweaks and listed it for review at DYK Nominations (that's the one bit you'll want to make sure you do after starting the template), so a reviewer should be along and can likely help straighten out the rest. If not, you can definitely find more help at DYK Discussion or at WP:Helpdesk. Sorry I couldn't be more help--I wanted to at least get you started since there's a time restriction on DYK and it might be a week or two before I could go through it fully. Hope that helps a bit at least! Innisfree987 (talk) 23:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

Thank you very much for signing up to participate in the Months of African Cinema global contest/edit-a-thon, and thank you for your contributions so far.

It is already the middle of the contest and a lot have been achieved already! We have been able to get over 200 articles created in over seven (7) languages! The figures soars to up to a thousand, if Wikidata entries are included. Furthermore, there have been about 5 in-person gatherings of Wikipedians in different countries across the world to create articles about African(a) cinema!

We are very excited about what has been achieved so far, but your contributions are still needed to further exceed all expectations! Let’s create more articles before the end of this contest, which is this November!!!

• Article suggestions can be found here. You can also add to this list.
• Some notable reliable sources for African cinema can be found here. Again, this list needs expansion.
• Interested in Wikidata translation? check out the Occupation Drive, which is being led by Wiki Loves Women, in support of the contest and the project!
• Please remember to list articles you have created or improved in the Article Achievements section of the contest page, so that they can be easily tracked.

Thank you once again for being part of this global event!

Kind regards.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Innisfree987,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

• Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Innisfree987. 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)[reply]

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/101|Photography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/102|Laureates]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/103|Countries beginning with 'I']] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): BBC 100 Women 2018 (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 13:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

On 3 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article M Train (book), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Patti Smith's title for her second memoir, M Train, refers to a "mind train", the train of thought that can lead anywhere? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/M Train (book). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), 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.

Alex Shih (talk) 12:08, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Helen Hays, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that over the course of 45 years of conservation work by ornithologist Helen Hays (pictured), the tern population of Great Gull Island increased tenfold? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), 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.

Alex Shih (talk) 12:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Innisfree987,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, dear, thoughtful Gerda Arendt! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Lucas (composer), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Ikhtiar H (talk) 16:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019, Volume 5, Issue 1, Numbers 104-108 Happy New Year from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. January events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/104|Women of War and Peace]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/105|Play!]] January geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/106|Caucasus]] New, year-long initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] Continuing global initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]] Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]] To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list Image attribution: Nevit Dilmen (CC BY-SA 3.0) --Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019 -

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Gerda Arendt--a very bright and happy new year to you! Innisfree987 (talk) 04:47, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't see it clearly enough to do anything. You're free to file a report at WP:SPI, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, Thanks so much, input’s greatly appreciated. Innisfree987 (talk) 16:30, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am in process of getting Children of Blood and Bone up to GA standard. If you have a chance, I would welcome any assistance in copy editing the rather extensive plot section I have now written, and which I used to replace the extensive clan section (which was a lot of OR)and character section (which I tend to avoid per MOS guidance). Figured since you started the article you might be interested in doing so, but if not, no worries. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:40, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that's great Barkeep49! Definitely. Thanks for those big cuts/rewriting--I meant to address it but had been daunted by the wall of text. Happy to help with copy editing and any other way I can! Innisfree987 (talk) 00:46, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I had decided to do some work on it in December considering all the acclaim it has received and was scared away from that wall of text myself so I had to actually read (well listen) to the book. Having looked at the history I would suggest UPE by Melsfelton who did most of that writing. Anyhow, thanks for the work you've already put into and know I will be continuing to work on it as well. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:36, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Barkeep49, that one is a real headscratcher! It caught my eye as well but I couldn't figure who'd be incentivized to pay for an addition of that nature (I've seen similar that are cover for WP:REFSPAM but it wasn't obvious that was the issue here). I wondered if it had been copy-pasted from some kind of reading guide but Earwig didn't turn anything up, not that that's conclusive. Puzzling. Anyway, onward and upward! I think it's a great GA candidate, thanks for your initiative! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My thinking was given the money behind this, that the publisher hired an outside PR firm who hired someone who did the work; could be a little more or little less direct. But yeah I agree that this is a good candidate. I'm looking forward to diving into the sources and seeing what we find. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not being paid to make edits to this site. If you will notice in the talk section, the information I removed that you then re-added was the subject of intense debate where I was vindicated. Too many people have been using this site as a smear page for far too long. I occasionally work to clean it up and provide balance when new graffiti gets put up. Since I am currently furloughed due to the shutdown I have some extra time on my hands.

All my edits conform to the BLP standards. Review them for yourself. Everything is sourced and in a neutral point of view. I would be happy to go over them with you if you like. Ashburnian (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ashburnian, thanks for your message. Sorry to hear you're dealing a furlough and thank you for spending the time contributing to the encyclopedia. Please do have a read of the COI policies, which provides good advice on conflicts that extend beyond paid editing: since you mentioned on your talk page discussing the entry's material with its subject, these policies are relevant to your editing of this entry. The chief recommendation is that those with a personal relationship to the subject make suggestions on talk page and see whether there's agreement, rather than editing the entry directly. Here that's particularly advisable because it appears you have repeatedly removed material that's unflattering to the subject, which coming from someone with a personal connection to the subject severely undermines the legitimacy of the entry. If instead you raise concerns on the talk page and leave it to an uninvolved editor to make the changes as they see fit, the entry has much more legitimacy. I have read the contested source, the entry's talk page, your talk page, and the editing page history, and I don't see that there is the consensus you describe above; however I will read all a second time and reply further on the entry's talk page so we can rectify this. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Black is a politician that represents my district. It was easy enough to ask him about something. I understand that it certainly does appear I have repeatedly removed material that is unflattering to the subject because for years that is just about all the material there was. People who disagree with his politics have repeatedly placed nothing but negative information on this page (which is, in itself, a violation of COI guidelines). The only material I have removed is either unverifiable, poorly sourced, not written in a neutral point of view, or some combination of the three. Similarly, the information I have added is all sourced, non-controversial, and written in a neutral point of view to provide additional content or to provide balance and context to negative information. If I was looking to create a fluff page, there is certainly a dearth of remaining material I would try to remove but I am not. All I am trying to do is provide balance to this page in accordance with BLP guidelines. As I said before, I am happy to review all my edits wtih you. Ashburnian (talk) 20:16, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

The Months of African Cinema Global Edit-a-thon was concluded on 30 November 2018, and we've had amazing results. Over 570 articles were created across 8 language-Wikipedias. 7 in-person gatherings of Wikipedians were organized across different parts of the world.

All our winners have been recognized and you can check the complete list here.

For a pilot event, all our expectations were surpassed and we have you to thank for that. Thank you so much for being part of this global event! Thank you for helping to fix African content gaps on Wikipedia! We hope to see more of your participation in future AfroCine events and activities. Please remember to signup on the main WikiProject participants page, in order to get updated with these activities.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111 Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. February events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/109|Social Workers]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/110|Black Women]] February geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/111|Ancient World]] Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]] Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]] Join the conversations on our talkpage: Socialites Twitter - Forgotten African American Suffragists Women in Red image uploads to Commons Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0) Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]] --Rosiestep (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hi there. I removed the link per WP:ELNO #10 as well as MOS:LAYOUTEL. As there wasn't any other "official page" that I saw, I left the Twitter account in the info box even though social media accounts are not typically included because a lot of her activity is there ("Official" pages generally meaning their personal website). Info in External links is not there to dupe what is in the article, it is more like "here's something that should be incorporated directly in it if it is a reliable source, and if it's not a reliable source, it is here for additional support - let the buyer beware." I kind of view it as leftover tidbits that are interesting to nibble on, but it can get cluttered up easily so I tend to try to nip that in the bud where I can, out of habit - perhaps overly so. Thanks for working on the article. LovelyLillith (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok, so to clarify: for sure agreed, LovelyLillith, that Externals links should not duplicate anything in the body of the entry or the references. However, the infobox isn't considered part of the body--a surprisingly important distinction because, as you're maybe aware, infoboxes are a remarkable source of contention (read: edit-warring), to the extent they are subject to ArbCom discretionary sanctions (!) So as a rule everything in an infobox should be found elsewhere in the entry, particularly because as an entry improves and may attract folks who bring things up to GA/FA standard, there's an increasing possibility the whole infobox will be deleted. And per WP:ELMIN, I have the understanding (I think similar to yours) that while we strongly prefer official sites over social media, in absence of an official site a single social media account is permissible.

Anyway. It's not the biggest deal, for now the link's there somewhere, but it felt worth explaining where I was coming from because the matter of duplicating material in the infobox and the rest of the entry seems likely to come up somewhat often. Happy editing, Innisfree987 (talk) 21:33, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually no, I didn't know that it wasn't considered part of the body of the article - so you've taught me something new, thanks. I did know that infoboxes had some kind of negative buzz over them, but wasn't sure of the details. LovelyLillith (talk) 18:12, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LovelyLillith, I understand completely, it came as quite a surprise to me! I personally favor infoboxes--they make information machine-readable, which allows for a variety of uses of data that aren't possible when the same information only appears in the rest of the entry--but I don't feel nearly as strongly about it as some who are opposed, so I tend not to count on that always being there as a source of info for the reader. Definitely not something I expect anyone to know unless they had encountered the Infobox Wars though! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon my failure adding primary and secondary sources verifying my submitted edit & content. Please note, although Word Choice, Tone, and Inclusion of certain aspects mentioned, including the example of bias and assumption listed in the rant decrying said behaviours, all terms and points are not opinions. Whilst I assume and don't deny fault, because of the nature behind the direct quote and body of the statement, if proper citation saw inclusion and proper application, would it allow the now-removed edit to stand? Or, would it require adding a possible link to another existing/new article? I've read the suggested information and reason I'm posting is seeking verification and clarification.

Thank You! Please, take your time and respond whenever best suits your schedule. Have a wonderful day!

PVH PVHenry (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reading up on Wikipedia sourcing policies, Henry, P. V.!

Beyond that, the thing to remember is that that entry's purpose it to describe Riot grrrl. If you can find reliable secondary sources that specifically critique the movement on this point, you could potentially include those, subject to Wikipedia policy on WP:DUEWEIGHT (in short: one must consider how significantly reliable sources have covered that particular aspect, relative to all the rest of the coverage of the subject, and then only add it to the entry in appropriate proportion.)

But if no one else has brought up this issue with regard to Riot grrrl in reliable secondary sources, then making that analysis yourself is a violation of policy on WP:Original research, specifically the WP:Synth segment. Reliable sources that discuss such misuses of these terms, but don't cite Hanna or Riot Grrrl would have to be added to, for instance, a page on Stereotypes of mental illness (I'm surprised we don't have one yet!)

For better and for worse, Wikipedia has a limited role: we only record what's already been said in reliable sources rather than producing new commentary (see: WP:NOTFORUM). It's also WP:NOTCENSORED. So as concerning as that comment is, Hanna is a significant figure in the movement and that is how she discussed an aspect of her experience. So unless we have another reliable source further commenting, that's really all we can add to that entry.

I hope that's clarifying, at least, even as I imagine it's probably not an entirely satisfying answer. Innisfree987 (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!! I appreciate your very hasty and very helpful reply! You definitely covered and clarified all of my questions (plus a few aspects I didn't consider) as well as offering more helpful links and examples! Please, know I meant no offense towards any one (from the Scene & related figures, to the authors) and I share your suprise re lacking a Page! Defo something I'd love seeing and even possibly helping (after a lot of studying and understanding the necessary steps, of course) create!

Again, thank you so much for your time, help, information, and a great idea! If not too much trouble, I hope you don't mind me asking another question, or two, sometime in the future! Have a lovely weekend!

Cheers,

PVH PVHenry (talk) 17:12, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Henry, P. V., so pleased I could help! And certainly, if I can be of assistance again in the future, please let me know! My time on-wiki varies so if I don't get back to you promptly, you can always inquire at the WP:Help desk as well. Happy editing! Innisfree987 (talk) 05:45, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:RuPaul's Drag Race#RfC on names of transgender contestants. Nihlus 21:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Nihlus, thanks for the ping. Just a flag as I imagine you're inviting more folks--this link sends people to the main page rather than the RfC. Innisfree987 (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've fixed them. Nihlus 22:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113 Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: March: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/112|Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen]] Geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/113|Francophone Women]] Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman]]
		Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]] Join the conversations on our [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red|talkpage]] Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]] --Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello Innisfree987,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the ((rough translation)) tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• ((db-blankdraft)) was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	There's an "I" in team in Spanish (equipo), but there ain't one in English. You're the best teammate one could hope for! Dvora072096 (talk) 06:38, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117 Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: Gender studies / United Nations / Dance Geofocus: Portuguese-speakers Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121 Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: "May" women / Mayors / Environentalists Geofocus: CEE countries Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello Innisfree987,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019, Volume 5, Issue 6, Numbers 107, 108, 122, 123, 124, 125 Check out what's happening in June at Women in Red: Virtual events: New topics: Pride / Royals / Space Geofocus: Mediterranean Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Barkeep49 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Innisfree987 to be Editor of the Week for continuous efforts to improve the encyclopedia, particularly in working on articles of underrepresented groups. Innis just goes quietly about their business having created over 300 articles[1], authored 5 DYKS, and being an active patroller on many more. They exemplify the Wikipedia spirit as a wonderful collaborator, which I had the pleasure of experiencing firsthand while working together on improving The Hate U Give. His efforts over the last 3+ years at building a better encyclopedia are the sort that can be easy to miss but are exactly the kind that this award was created to honor.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

((User:UBX/EoTWBox))

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 15:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]