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.

This is a notice about Category: articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. There might be as few as one page in the category, or zero if someone has removed the expert request tag from the page. 124.40.70.66 (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC) Creation of an article: Akihiro Yamada -Wikipedia

Dear Administrators/Shakespeare experts/Friends/Ammarpad/Stormy clouds,

A week ago, in my first approach to Wikipedia, I wrote as follows: 'I am glad to find online a Japanese entry about me: ‘山田昭廣 - Wikipedia’. However, I think that an English entry would be of more use since I am a specialist of English literature, especially Shakespeare. I know that I am not entitled to create an English entry titled ‘Akihiro Yamada – Wikipedia’ myself. So I wish you to be a host for it on your website. What I would like to state in it is very short and the text would run as follows: Akihiro Yamada (born 1929 in Nagoya) is a Japanese scholar specializing in English literature and bibliography. He published some twenty books on Shakespeare and his contemporaries. For more information, visit him at http://researchmap.jp/yamada-akihiro-6002/?lang=english'

This message received three responses, one of them appearing on a 'Teahouse' page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia Teahouse/Questions/Archive 835#Creation of an article: Akihiro Yamada -) reads as follows: 'Essentially, the IP asked about the creation of an article about themselves in en.wikipedia.org, translated from their entry in ja.wikipedia, but was aware that they could not create a translated autobiographical article themselves owing to the obvious conflict of interest. They were subsequently advised to refrain from editing matters related to themselves, and advised of the potential pitfalls of an article about one's self. Finally, the ultimate advice given, which still stands, is that, if a subject is notable enough to merit an article, someone else will create it. If this is not satisfactory, consider requesting a translation. Given the existence of the Japanese article, the inertia to create an English one, given sufficient coverage in reliable sources, is likely lower than from scratch, but such a request would still be heavily scrutinised, and the downsides of an article would still persist. Hope this helps, Stormy clouds (talk) 12:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)'

I appreciate this advice very much. It has prompted me to write back the following, this time to this page, in the hope that some expert reader will regard my proposal as reasonable enough to consider seriously: Since English-speaking specialists will find the Japanese version of little use, I am proposing for their benefit (and mine) an English version, though very short (which he/she may expand by visiting me at the provided URL, given above). The English version will be of great use to them who would share academic interests with me in order to advance scholarship, simply by clicking the Wikipedia if my proposal be in its website. I am afraid that a mere translation of the Japanese version, primarily addressed to Japanese scholars, will be utterly of no use to English-speaking specialists. I do not know if I am 'notable enough to merit an article' but may I mention that my biography will be found in various editions of Marquis *Who's Who in the World* (U.S.A.) as well as in various publications of International Biographical Centre in Cambridge, U.K. I do hope that there will be some volunteer expert(s) willing to be a host of this entry. Best wishes. Akihiro Yamada— Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.40.70.66 (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Wikipedia:Requested articles would be the best place to request an article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:00, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad and Stormy clouds: see above --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. Personally, I understand the allure of a Wikipedia article, but there are barriers that must be overcome. The rationale The English version will be of great use to them who would share academic interests with me in order to advance scholarship, simply by clicking the Wikipedia if my proposal be in its website. does not instill confidence regarding the value of the article, nor does the (non-existent) idea of a host of an article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a networking tool for academia nor a web host for people's work. I would suggest verifying that the article would be appropriate as an encyclopedia article, and that it is here for the right reasons. However, if any passing editor believes that the reliable sources exist (excluding the subject themselves, who has a conflict of interest) and pass the general notability guidelines, then be bold and go for it. Stormy clouds (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Bill Libby is a lightly sourced article. A new editor purports to be his daughter.[1], [2] To date they have ignored WP:COI and WP:V callouts on their talk. Appreciate any assistance on point, including reconciling any improvements where they can be sourced. UW Dawgs (talk) 00:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

@UW Dawgs: if there are problems with a COI editor, the best place to resolve that would probably be Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:16, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

There is a strange leap in Wikipedia's numbering of the Shimun line of patriarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East that is surely a mistake. The succession indicated includes Shimun XVII Abraham (1820–1861), Shimun XVIII Rubil (1861–1903), then the surely mistaken numbering, perhaps due to a mistyping of XIX as XXI, by which the immediate successor of Shimun XVIII is given as Shimun XXI: Shimun XXI Benyamin (1903–1918), Shimun XXII Paulos (1918–1920), Shimun XXIII Eshai (1920–1975). Bealtainemí (talk) 09:30, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I have now mentioned this anomaly also at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard. Bealtainemí (talk) 09:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Since a week has gone by with no comments from others, I will correct the numbering if, after a few more days, there are still no comments. Bealtainemí (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Guglielmo Della Porta and Guglielmo della Porta seem to be about the same person, but with different content. Someone might want to merge them and maybe do a little cleanup? --Sotho Tal Ker (talk) 01:11, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, there is some discussion on social media whether Donna Strickland, who became only the third female Physics Nobel Laureate today, might have had a Wikipedia page before today, which was then deleted in 2014. There is a log entry that a Wiki lemma with that name was deleted in 2014: [3] - unfortunately, the admin who deleted that page does not appear to be active on WP any more. I'd appreciate any pointers to how it might be possible to retrieve that original page, and reconstruct what might have happened there, and why. Markus Pössel (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Not in answer to your question but Draft:Donna Strickland was created 28 March 2018 and declined at WP:AFC 23 May 2018 - lack of significant coverage. Thincat (talk) 18:57, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Markus Pössel: she had an unsourced biography posted in 2014. It was deleted because it was a copyright violation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for your answers. As for the "lack of significant coverage", the WP:NACADEMIC criterion "president of a major scientific society" (in her case the Optical Society) should probably have been enough at that time to justify an article even without significant coverage. Is anything preserved to show what the copyright violation consisted of? Markus Pössel (talk) 21:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Generally, content on Wikipedia is hidden instead of deleted. That means that most deleted content is accessible, though, in some cases, not even administrators can access it. In this case, the deleted content was a simple copy-paste from her profile on The Optical Society's website. Someone already merged those deleted revisions into the existing article. I assume anything that was recoverable from those revisions was incorporated into the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:27, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know about hidden vs. deleted! I did, in the meantime, find the direct link to the later (March/May 2018) deleted article draft which, for the record, is here. I also came across a thoughtful essay by the editor who rejected that draft (although I disagree with some of the points he makes), namely User:Bradv/Strickland_incident. Markus Pössel (talk) 14:59, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that's an interesting essay. It's not an easily solved problem. It would probably help if we had more volunteers with expertise in something outside of pop culture. Wikipedia is extremely good at documenting trivia about TV shows and video games. It's not so good at determining if a scientific society is prominent. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:31, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Dear all, just a neutral pointer that there is a discussion about a proposed change of WP:PROF going on at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(academics)#Proposal_for_addition_to_specific_WP:PROF_notability_criteria that would appear to be of relevance in particular to those writing new biographical articles for Wikipedia. Markus Pössel (talk) 07:03, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Could someone please double-check if the Southern Gospel Museum and Hall of Fame and the Gospel Music Hall of Fame are the same entity and if so, why Lou Wills Hildreth is listed as inducted in 2007 and 2005 please?Zigzig20s (talk) 09:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

		Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives New: Religion Deceased politicians Asia Continuing: #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

Three years ago I requested a third opinion on Talk:David M. Cote, and received what I felt was a very well-thought out and measured response. I've since been unable to gain any real traction with implementing the necessary changes (in part due to my COI). I later requested mediation between the editor who added the content that I felt was unsuitable and myself, but he rejected that request. Another editor removed the content entirely, but it was later restored. I requested an edit to move the content to Honeywell instead, by that request was deferred with the placement of a split and merge template. I also tried reaching out on the BLP Noticeboard but got no responses there either. At this point I'd just like to reach a real consensus on the issue. Is it appropriate to include material regarding a company's political donations under a CEO's tenure on his BLP? It seems to me that it unfairly implies that the CEO was directly responsible for the rise in political donations.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 22:44, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

So, you should be posting the question more neutrally, and not pushing people to answer in a given direction. That said, I agree with you, unles it canbe shown that the donations were at the personal direction of the CEO (in which case there should be sourcing that says that, and in which case we can say he directed it as well), then it is not appropriate for their BLP article - in general. However, if a majority of RS report that, especially in a more biographical context (as opposed to just reporting the donation when it happened), then it may be appropriate, but there should be multiple sources clearly indicating the notability of the CEO in relationship to the donation ResultingConstant (talk) 00:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

This would be better raised at WP:BLPN. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@ResultingConstant: I wanted to be open about my conflict of interest and give as much context as possible, I'm sorry if I came across as biased in my question. That said, given the lack of evidence demonstrating an explicit link between Cote and these political donations by Honeywell, how would you recommend proceeding from here? I don't want to make any direct edits given my COI. I do think, as I mentioned above, I think it would be suitable for inclusion on the Honeywell article. Would you be willing to collaborate on this, or if not, refer me to someone who might have an interest?

@NinjaRobotPirate: To what extent do you agree with ResultingConstant's assessment? I agree that this would be more suitable at WP:BLPN. For your reference here's the original posting I made there, but it got no response. Is there anywhere else I could take this question?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I haven't really looked at it. If dispute resolution failed and nobody responded at BLPN, you can try a request for comments. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Georgetown University. Ergo Sum 22:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

There is a discussion concerning Tom Pryce, a featured article associated with this project, taking place at Talk:Tom Pryce#Nationality in infobox for those interested. -- DeFacto (talk). 08:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

NASA MSFC Employee Tries To Make Serkan Golge's Past Disappear This looks very much like somebody should keep an eye on that page. --Stone (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I came across this draft on a scientist while reviewing new pages submitted via WP:AFC. The article is terrible & full of 'cruft, but the subject appears to be notable under WP:PROF and possibly WP:NAUTHOR. If there's anyone here interested in taking a look and possibly rescuing this page, that would be great. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:06, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Greetings! Not too long ago I requested a handful of possible categories for the article on MicroStrategy CEO Michael J. Saylor at Talk:Michael_J._Saylor#Categories to help group it with similar articles.

As a member of MicroStrategy's digital marketing team, I am the company's current sole representative on Wikipedia. Per Wikipedia rules of engagement, I will not be making edits to MicroStrategy-related articles and will be making suggestions on article discussion pages.

Can someone with experience editing biography articles review this request?

Thanks in advance for your assistance!

Regards,

Andrewggordon84 (talk) 17:10, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

There is an RfC ongoing at Talk:Ron Stallworth regarding the use of a high school yearbook photo for a biography. Please visit and comment on the appropriateness of using this image on the page; or comment on a generalization of that question re other biographies. Thank you. Dicklyon (talk) 20:54, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

For a number of years we have been experiencing a steady decline in the number of administrators as a result of attrition and a declining number of editors willing to consider adminship. Things have reached a point where we are starting to experience chronic backlogs in important areas of the project including noticeboards, requests for closure, SPI, CSD & etc. If you are an experienced editor with around two years (or more) of tenure, 10k edits give or take and no record of seriously disruptive behavior, please consider if you might be willing to help out the community by becoming an administrator. The community can only function as well as we all are willing to participate. If you are interested start by reading WP:MOP and WP:RFAADVICE. Then go to WP:ORCP and open a discussion. Over the next few days experienced editors will take a look at your record and let you know what they think your chances are of passing RfA (the three most terrifying letters on Wikipedia) as well as provide you with feedback on areas that might be of concern and how to prepare yourself. You can find a list of experienced editors who may be willing to nominate you here. Finally, I may not have this page on my watchlist, so if you want to reply to me directly please ping me. Thank you and happy editing... -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

The photo shown on (https://www.google.com/search?q=judge+allyne+r.+ross&rlz=1C1NHXL_enUS697US697&oq=judge+Allyne+R.+Ross&aqs=chrome.0.0l2.3360j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) belongs to Lauren J. Hartz. Please see, https://jenner.com/people/LaurenHartz.

TrueLaStudent (talk) 07:13, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Tell Google; the picture in that search result has nothing to do with Wikipedia. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:09, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Opinions are needed on the following: Talk:Aaron Hernandez#Update. A permalink for it is here. The discussion concerns Hernandez's sexuality and how much detail to include on it, and WP:In-text attribution. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:41, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see this thread at WT:COP.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:46, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:33, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I uploaded a new image of Waymo CEO John Krafcik at Wikimedia Commons: File:John Krafcik 2018.png, since the existing image does not show Mr. Krafcik as clearly. Would anyone here be able to help with adding the new image to replace the existing photo in the infobox at John Krafcik? You can read my full request on that article's Talk page. I am making this request on behalf of Waymo and Mr. Krafcik, so I will not add the image myself. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:39, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done This is has been done. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys. The Sebastian Croll article appears to about Sebastiaen Jansen Krol. The source for the discrepancy in dates and (Anglicised) spelling between the two is a local US regional history book from 1854, although it seems the author may have copied the date from a Dutch almanac-like work from 1833. These sources simply appear to be wrong; the dates are impossible, and the coincidence of two people with the same rare name both being the first commander of a 20 person fort is unrealistic. See Talk:Sebastian_Croll. I propose getting rid of the article, which appears to have been created solely to push an unlikely etymological theory by a lady in 1909 regarding the origin of a snack which by then had become popular in New York. Leo 86.83.56.115 (talk) 12:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

There is a request to clean up the lead sentence and potentially add an infobox at Donald O. Clifton that WikiProject Biography members might want to consider. I will not edit the article because of my conflict of interest. Don Clifton is the late former chairman of Gallup, where I work. Thank you. GallupMS (talk) 00:36, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

As per Spintendo’s instructions on the talk page of the 'Duncan Barrett' article, I have modified my original edit request.

In the Duncan Barrett article, section 'Work as Writer & Editor', second paragraph, would you please edit the sentence: “However, it came under attack from critics who objected to its pacifist politics and questioned its accuracy.[citation needed]” to read: "However, it came under attack from some critics who objected to its pacifist politics ^{[citation needed]} and others, such as Phil Tomaselli who questioned its historical accuracy.^[1] The words in bold show where the changes are, but do not need to be in bold in the article. Thanks *ptrs4all* (talk) 18:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the statement in the article is now worded the following way:

However, it came under attack from critics who objected to its pacifist politics and questioned its accuracy.

This is the "status quo" version which has been displayed for about 4 years, but it's in need of a citation. I guess the question is (and *ptrs4all* please correct me if I'm wrong) would you like the report shown above added as the reference for this claim? And is there any other wording which we should add that is necessary? Please advise.  Spintendo  18:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

I have revised the instructions for the edit request in the hope that the changes from the original sentence to the new sentence are now clear.

If you feel it is appropritate, you could add: "An article published in 2017 stated that Skirth's memoir was satirical and amounted to a literary hoax."^[2] Thanks *ptrs4all* (talk) 18:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello project editors, there is currently a move discussion in progress at Talk:Operation Hope Not#Requested move 17 November 2018, which I believe should be renamed to Funeral of Winston Churchill per the WP:NAMINGCRITERIA guidelines. Please take a look and contribute to the discussion. U-Mos (talk) 05:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello. I work for Executive Writing, and as part of my consultancy work, I've drafted an update for the article of David Kramer, who serves as co-president of United Talent Agency. You can view my proposed edit at User:EWChristine/David Kramer (talent agent). I believe I've disclosed my conflict of interest appropriately. Thank you in advance for any help. EWChristine (talk) 18:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

We've got two Rfc occurring at the talkpage of Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government, concerning infoboxes of politicians. More input would be appreciated. GoodDay (talk) 16:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Could I please ask people to keep an eye on the article on Jakob Kullberg? A number of editors have added allegations of sexual misconduct without citing a source. Thanks. --Deskford (talk) 12:08, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: Photography Laureates Countries beginning with 'I' Continuing: #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) 13:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The article Jim Harrell Jr. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 05:31, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm interested in created some sort of sub-project for Rubik's Cube Speedsolvers and I don't know how this is possible — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gh4380 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

The article Rosco McGlashan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:N The page lacked any non-primary references, and while I managed to find one to save from WP:BLPPROD, I still question notability and would like to consult the Wikipedia community as to whether this article should remain.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. NoCOBOL (talk) 13:15, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I opened a proposal to trim the passenger lists at Passengers of the RMS Titanic a few weeks ago. We've only received a few responses. so I'm reaching out to related Wikiprojects for more input. Editors are invited to join the discussion here. Thanks –dlthewave ☎ 20:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Neurocogsci/sandbox Is this biography ready for main space (is it notable enough)? Neurocogsci (talk) 18:09, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello biography writers

For Assessment you follow Category:Unassessed biography articles, but it does not seem to contain drafts. Is this intentional? The reason I'm asking is because I mark drafts with wikiproject tags routinely, biographies are quite common, and I would like to ensure they are on your radar.

--Gryllida (talk) 03:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the template is clever enough to detect that they're drafts and put them in Category:Draft-Class biography articles instead. – Joe (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Nice, thanks. :-) Added this link to the category page (to both, actually) to make the connection more visible and discoverable. Gryllida (talk) 23:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

I just wonder: If Kathrine Windfeld died 6 February 2015, how is she still able to play? See http://www.windfeldmusic.dk/

Looks like Mark Twain who said: "The reports about my death are greatly exaggerated...."

Anonymoussimus 77.190.139.162 (talk) 17:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

You need to pay more attention. That website is for Kathrine Windfeld (musician) [da]. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't look like this has had much/any attention. I have placed a query on the talk page. Can someone with greater expertise than me look it over and formulate a plan of action, should any be needed? If this is the wrong place for such a query, please point me oin the right direction? Thank you MegaSloth (talk) 12:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

There is an ongoing RFC which may be of interest to the watchers of this page at Talk:Neil_deGrasse_Tyson#Request_for_comment_(RfC) ResultingConstant (talk) 00:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Can Wikipedians at WikiProject Biography review a request to firm up a few things at Talk:Judith McKenna? My request aims to confirm Mrs. McKenna's year and place of birth, add her role as CFO at Asda, and fix a typo. I am the official Walmart representative on Wikipedia. Like my colleague before me, I am limiting myself to Talk pages because of my conflict of interest. If there are questions, I'm happy to answer them. Thanks, Elizabeth at Walmart (talk) 19:19, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Elizabeth at Walmart. Please use the ((Request edit)) template to make edit requests. – Joe (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

This request was answered, but thank you for your advice, User:Joe Roe. I will certainly keep that in mind for future requests. Elizabeth at Walmart (talk) 22:18, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello. I work for Executive Writing, and as part of my consultancy work, I've drafted a small update for the article of Jay Sures, who currently serves as co-president of United Talent Agency. You can view my proposed edit at User:EWChristine/Jay_Sures. Additionally, I am hoping someone can update the infobox with his correct birthday-11/2/1966. I believe I've disclosed my conflict of interest appropriately. @Penny75, perhaps you would be willing to take a look since you have made edits to this page in the past? EWChristine (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

This discussion may be of interest to members of this project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:18, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

There is an ongoing discussion that may be of interest to the members of this board at [[4]] ResultingConstant (talk) 18:08, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

The term "free-lancer" used in the Wikipedia biography not a historical term! The word "freelance" is apparently a word invented by Sir Walter Scott for his novel Ivanhoe. A free-lancer, meaning a self-employed worker, is a corruption of this word "freelance". The correct historical term seems to be just "mercenary"! https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/freelance-origin-meaningAmand Keultjes (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

An RfC of interest to this project, "Is the Ritterkreuzträger Profiles series a reliable source for mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht?", has been opened at Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Please join the discussion here. –dlthewave ☎ 17:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

An RfC of interest to this project, "Is Die Eichenlaubträger 1939–1945 a reliable source for mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht? ", has been opened at Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Please join the discussion here. –dlthewave ☎ 05:33, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

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: Women of War and Peace Play! January geofocus: Caucasus New, year-long initiative: Suffrage Continuing global initiative: #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: 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

In creating this article on Michael Fentiman I own to a possible conflict of interest. I know the subject of the article. However, I have written it with, I believe, a meticulous eye to neutral point of view from what I have found on the subject. Everything is reffed to reliable sources, and it is these sources alone that make him notable. What has been extracted from these sources (positive/neutral/negative) I fondly believe has fair balance, but I am willing to be reviewed on this as I may be may be wrong.

Michael Fentiman has emailed me and expressed concern that he believes there is an over-stressed play review negativity in some parts of the article which could adversely affect his career. Is he right in his observation that the article is too focused on reviews? I would appreciate others looking what is written, specifically by checking the sources relating to the text, and suggesting any suitable or necessary rewriting. I have added this request to the article's Talk page, but it might be ages before anyone comes across it there. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 18:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm wondering if Kilman is notable enough for a stand-alone article per WP:BIO. He doesn't appear to be notable enough per WP:NACTOR or WP:MUSICBIO, but maybe he's notable enough as a radio personality. I'm not seeing finding lots of WP:SIGCOV about him and he appears to be more of a local celebrity than anything else. He has been connected to some well-known radio personalities and has had some bit roles in some well-known movies, so maybe a redirect is possible here as an alternative to deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: this is a coordinating area for WikiProject Biography. If you think an article topic is non-notable, please use WP:AFD or WP:PROD. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion NinjaRobotPirate. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:15, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Perhaps I'll be embarrassed for asking, but I'm drawing a blank trying to identify the individuals depicts in these sculptures, which are installed in Mexico City's Chapultepec park. Any ideas? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm also curious about this statue, installed in American Park, Mexico City:

---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Erich Hartmann, 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. --K.e.coffman (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

I would like to invite comment on my question posted at VP WP:Village_pump_(policy)#Treat_surname_pages_like_disambiguation_pages? Coastside (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Coming across this image on commons. Wondering if this is the statue of Captain Thomas Abbey (Enfield, Connecticut). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lotje (talk • contribs) 19:57, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Input is requested regarding the infobox photo of Robin Williams at Talk:Robin Williams § Infobox photo. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:11, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Justin Baldoni#Birthmark in his left eye. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:04, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I would welcome any comment here: Talk:Michel van der Aa#DEFAULTSORT change. Thanks. --Deskford (talk) 17:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Please note that Vicki Gunvalson, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 14 January 2019 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Hello, I'm Jan, and I'm an employee of Northrop Grumman. I am interested in helping the Wikipedia community make relevant updates and improvements to the Wesley G. Bush article. I've educated myself on Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines and will do my best to follow those entirely. My hope is that someone on this page will review my proposed changes to the article, which I've posted at Talk:Wesley G. Bush, and put them into effect. If you have any questions, feedback, or comments, please do not hesitate to reach out. Thank you! JanAtNorthropGrumman (talk) 21:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

The article on Ernst Troeltsch has been rated as stub class, but might be long enough to be brought up to start class now (see the talk page on this article). Vorbee (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

I have been working with an editor to update the article for Donald O. Clifton, the late former Gallup chairman. That editor has not been active in a few weeks, so I ask if any WikiProject Biography members can consider cleaning up just a few small sentences for better readability. Details are at Talk:Donald_O._Clifton#Birthplace_in_Introduction. I will not edit the article because of my conflict of interest. Thank you. GallupMS (talk) 20:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

This has been fixed. GallupMS (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Helmut Wick, 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. --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

I was about to edit Template:Marriage/doc to add guidance that the end date of a marriage should be omitted if it was ended by the subject's death, since I believe this is covered by MOS. Unfortunately I can't find the MOS page that says this. Am I imagining it or has my search-fu deserted me? Hairy Dude (talk) 02:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Hairy Dude: Good question. ((Infobox person)) doc for |spouse= says For deceased persons still married at time of death, close the date range with death year. However, I have seen removal of death dates (e.g., this edit to John McCain by TropicAces and this edit to Robin Williams by Paul Erik). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 22:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but I was always under impression (and corrected a time or two by Admins) to leave it be since they were technically married at the time of their death.TropicAces (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)tropicAces

There were at least two discussions regarding adding some clarification or guidance about this issue – see Template talk:Marriage/Archive 5 – but they did not appear to result in any clear consensus. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I started the discussion at Talk:Jim Rash#Instagram post a while ago; I invite you for some input. -- George Ho (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

What are the criteria for including an award in a biographical article? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Hans Waldmann (fighter pilot), 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. --K.e.coffman (talk) 17:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111 Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. February events: Social Workers Black Women February geofocus: Ancient World Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: 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: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

I think there should be an article covering the Spanish 2-year-old boy named Julen (some sources say Yulen) who fell down a very deep but narrow well. This happened on 13 January and currently rescuers are attempting to reach the boy - it's not known if he's still alive or not. I believe this deserves its own Wikipedia article, and there are articles about similar cases in the past: see Kathy Fiscus, Alfredo Rampi and Jessica McClure.

The incident has seen extensive news coverage from around the world. Some examples:

• Spain toddler stuck in deep borehole near Málaga - BBC News
• Rescuers hunt for 2-year-old boy who fell into 360-foot well in Spain - CNN
• Rescuers search for toddler who fell into 110-metre well in Spain - The Guardian

Can someone create this article please? I can't think of an appropriate title, given that only the boy's first name has been reported in the media. --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Why not create the article yourself? · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:00, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

I would but I am currently quite busy so I don't really have time to do so. --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 19:04, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

I disagree. IMO this fails WP:NOTNEWS, WP:LASTING, and the WP:10YT. See also WP:DELAY and WP:RECENTISM. If this were created I think it would almost certainly be nominated for deletion, which I would probably support. Just because something happens and it gets a lot of short term news coverage does not mean it belongs in an encyclopedia. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:12, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

FWIW, the article is at Death of Julen Roselló -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 05:18, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Do articles on a person's death fall within the purview of this wikiproject? (also... does that apply to: Murder of X, Assassination of X ... ?) -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 05:20, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

I've been doing quite a lot of work on the Kurdish refugee writer Behrouz Boochani since he (controversially for some) recently won a top literary award and is fairly topical right now (nearly 10k hits on his page in 30 days), and wondered if there's any chance someone could have a look and consider upgrading to at least a C? It's not just about him, but a whole number of other issues in Australian politics, human rights, etc. and I felt it important that since he's been in the news that people can read a bit more about him in Wikipedia than there was. Thanks. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

I have been working with an editor to update the article for Donald O. Clifton, the late Gallup chairman. That editor has not been on the article for a couple weeks, so I ask if any WikiProject Biography members can consider two requests. At the bottom of this request, I proposed an infobox for the biography. I also asked for a typo fix. I am an editor at Gallup. I will not edit the article because of my conflict of interest. Thank you. GallupMS (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done (by Michael Bednarek, here) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

This has been completed. GallupMS (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

G'day all, Helmut Wick has just been delisted as A-Class at Milhist, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Helmut Wick. You might want to check it against your own A-Class criteria. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Why are most (all?) of the Wikiproject Biography templates in vertical format (on Talk Pages) when all the other templates on the rest of Wikipedia are in horizontal format? Is there an automated way to change this?
Vmavanti (talk) 16:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

@Vmavanti: Can you give an example? I don't recall ever seeing a 'vertical' WikiProject banner and can't see how you would achieve that with ((WPBannerMeta)). – Joe (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Click on edit source at Talk:David FiuczynskiVmavanti (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

That's just a normal template with lots of whitespace. You can do that with any template, including ((cite web)). Putting each parameter on its own line wastes a lot of vertical space, but it can make complex templates more readable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:33, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

The article David Remo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the ((prod blp/dated)) tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Peaceray (talk) 20:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

		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: Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen Geofocus: Francophone Women 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: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 22:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

has competing versions and has been the subject of edit warring.The user I blocked contends the competing version is slander(sic). The other version is less sourced and is too promotional. If y'all could help resolve the dispute, it would be grand. Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

There is an ongoing discussion regarding the subject's alleged sex life and sexual orientation. Our guidelines and general practice with biographies is to avoid discussion of these topics unless they have been extensively discussed in multiple reliable sources. (BLP being an exception that doesn't apply in this case.) At the moment there is some disagreement over whether there is enough reliable secondary source coverage to introduce this into the article. Additional input from experienced editors would be appreciated. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, please review BLP, and first take note that this is a case where something sensitive & controversial is alleged about a dead person based on a "diary" which is never quoted, and is withheld from the public to see and verify. Diligens (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)Diligens

There are two issues it seems to me. Firstly what secondary material is around that suggests Deckers was a lesbian and/ or in a relationship with Annie Pecheur (sexual or emotional). And the extent to which such sources are reliable. The second issue is whether the article can make reference to Deckers personal diary which a secondary source claims to have seen and which they have used to discuss Deckers sexuality. Thanks. Contaldo80 (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

It seems to me one issue: A diary of a dead person where the possessor of the diary makes a controversial claim about the deceased and doesn't have any quote to provide. That claim itself is not a RS. And I don't see it as more reliable just because others decide to repeat a non-RS. I think it would be opening up a can of worms for the whole of Wikipedia to rule in favor of not quoting a diary that nobody has access to.Diligens (talk) 11:59, 21 February 2019 (UTC)Diligens

The researcher who obtained Deckers' diary had access to it, and presumably still does. He shared the information with the professional biographer/ screen-play writer whose work is mentioned in the article. You are implying that both of these people have deliberately falsified its content. Even if they "provided a quote", however, this would hardly make their claims any stronger unless the source material could be examined by a third party or put into the public domain? There must surely be other examples of where only one or two researchers have had access to a diary and they do not wish it to be released into the public domain. It is also just possible, of course, that there are other sources, about the relationship between the to women, that do not rely on this diary. We also need to agree how many different sources are needed in cases like this. As far as I know, the current policy guidance just says "multiple sources". I don't want to go into any greater details here as this thread was meant to be a simple request for information. with a link to the Talk page discussion which, as you know, is "ongoing". Martinevans123 (talk) 17:53, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

"implying that both of these people have deliberately falsified its content"? No. People often mistakenly believe something is implied when it is not. It's also called a "rash judgement". Just look what happened to Dolly Parton in the news the other day. She was suspected of being gay because she had a best girlfriend even though she is still married to a man for about 40 years. Luckily she is alive to deny it, and she did. Rash judgment; because some people "want it" to be true. Luckily Decker was also alive to deny it, but the denials are in European papers, which I haven't located yet. As for the man who possesses Deckers' diary, when you know about him, it really doesn't look good for him to be considered a reliable source by any means: https://dachadwick.wordpress.com/2009/05/02/the-singing-nun/ -- Diligens (talk) 22:49, 21 February 2019 (UTC)Diligens

Why exactly was Dolly "lucky" there? I think any discussion of D. A. Chadwick, or of sources in "European papers you haven't found", belongs at Talk:The Singing Nun, not here. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Lucky that she didn't die and have the real truth about her endlessly questioned against her will. Diligens (talk) 23:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)Diligens

Does WikiProject Biography (or Wikipedia as a whole) have a policy about whether to use "United States" or an abbreviation, such as "US" or "USA" after cities and states in infoboxes? I see many infoboxes in biographies that list a place of birth or death as "City, State, US", while others have just "City, State". I prefer the latter, but I haven't found a specific policy or guideline to cite. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Joachim Müncheberg, 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. –dlthewave ☎ 21:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I have nominated Heinrich Bär for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. –dlthewave ☎ 17:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Attention WikiProjects. We are designing a bot to do auto-assessment (among other tasks) and would appreciate your feedback. Qzekrom (talk) 01:23, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Can Wikipedians review a request for a small fix at Talk:David Cheesewright? The article says Mr. Cheesewright is the president and chief executive officer of Walmart International. This is incorrect. He is the former president and chief executive officer of Walmart International. Are editors available to update the introduction? I am the official Walmart representative on Wikipedia. Like my colleague before me, I am limiting myself to Talk pages because of my conflict of interest. If there are questions, I'm happy to answer them. Thanks, Elizabeth at Walmart (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

A merge has been proposed. Interested editors are invited to join the discussion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:47, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Johann Mickl, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community 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. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, it's Jan from Northrop Grumman here to see if there are any editors at this WikiProject willing to take a look at my additional requests to update the Wesley G. Bush article? I am requesting to make a few updates to the Career section. My complete request is posted on the Wes Bush Talk page. Please don't hesitate to reach out with any feedback, questions, or comments. Thank you! JanAtNorthropGrumman (talk) 17:09, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Lots of biographies contain a large amount of categories to the extent that, as a reader, you no longer see the wood for the trees. Have you ever discussed cutting some of the categorization schemes specifically for biographies? Marcocapelle (talk) 12:14, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I believe that categories are hardly used by most readers so it may not be worth the effort for little gain. MilborneOne (talk) 13:05, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I realize that discussions regarding article corrections are not normally placed on this page, but it appears that the spelling of the given name for the subject of the article, "Jehdeiah Bowen," may have been typed incorrectly when the article was created. I have gone ahead and initiated a discussion about this ("Jehdeiah or Jedediah?") on the article's talk page, but aso thought it would be prudent to reach out to more experienced members of this wikiproject who have the permission to retitle/move this article (or make other appropriate changes as needed) since this appears to be more than a simple correction. Thank you in advance for your help. Kind Regards. 47thPennVols (talk) 03:10, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Richard III of England, 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. ——SerialNumber54129 17:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

− Please, someone can help me with these translations from Japanese to English, because I'm too busy: 烏丸家 (Karasumaru family), 亀井重清 (Shigekiyo Kamei), 片岡常春 (Tsuneharu Kataoka), 伊勢義盛 (Yoshimori Ise), 駿河次郎 (Jirō Suruga), 富樫泰家 (Yasuie Togashi). Thank you. --87.14.25.108 10:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Michael Jackson#Request for comments on restructuring the article. A permalink for it is here. Restructuring has been suggested in light of the recent Leaving Neverland documentary. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:15, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

This article—of interest to this project—is currently undergoing a peer review. All project members are welcome to comment there. Thank you! ——SerialNumber54129 19:03, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hans Philipp, 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. –dlthewave ☎ 12:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I have nominated Albert Speer for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello to the members of this project. I am wondering what the provisions are for dealing with the article of someone who is most likely dead but there is no info available regarding that fact. Please see the discussions at Talk:Margie Hines and Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#Can someone find an obit. While there is a slight chance she is still alive it would seem to be unlikely. Is there a way to handle it in the body of the article - maybe a footnote. Also is there some guideline on whether an article can be in both the of these categories Category:Possibly living people and Category:Date of death unknown. Any help you can give will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 19:25, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

MarnetteD, coincidentally, another editor and I have had a similar exchange on Talk:Dusty Anderson. I will be interested to see what responses your question receives. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:29, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Something like that happened at Daniel Quinn (actor). I think we used the "possibly living" category at first, then hashed it out on the talk page. I tend to be stubborn about BLP, so I was a holdout on calling him dead. I eventually conceded to using what I thought was an iffy source, and we waited to include more details until we found something authoritative. My advice is to keep checking Google Books to see if a compendium of obituaries has finally been updated. That was the only way we found anything truly authoritative about his death. You may need to locate the resulting book in a library. WP:TWL might also be useful. I've used that to find all kinds of info hidden behind paywalls. However, my access timed out, and I never re-applied for any sources. I probably should. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

I've just expanded this stub article, focusing in particular on Moll's career. Does it now include enough information not to be classed as a stub? Seagull019 (talk) 13:39, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

It may be better off where it was. The sourcing is very poor. --Ronz (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion regarding edits to List of Photographers. The discussion is addressing the following questions:

• Within each section, should the entries by sorted alphabetically or chronologically?
• Should date of birth and date of death be added to entries?
  • Should nationality, date of birth, and date of death information be supported using reliable sources if that information is in the entry's corresponding article?
• Is the Photographers' Identity Catalog (PIC) a reliable source for nationality, date of birth, and date of death?
  • If a source is deemed reliable, should there be a limit on how many times it is used?

Your contributions are welcome. Thank you! Qono (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

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/Opt-out

--Rosiestep (talk) 18:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Lauri Arajuuri (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

Finnish film actor. I suspect that there is a language and cross cultural problem that hinders finding sources on him. Any links to Finnish newspapers or magazines archives for the late 1970s?7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:08, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry...I see this says not for corrections, BUT I have spent soooo much time trying to find where to talk about an article!! When I click talk to the left, and everything else I click on does NOT take me to talk concerning THAT article!!!

This is concerning Willie Jones, Congressman. On his wiki page, he has listed 2 different birth dates as well as death dates. I will not correct myself because I do NOT know which is correct.

And, any help getting me DIRECTLY to the talk links that actually talk about the article it's connected to would be greatly apprectiated!!!!

Jamie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiesreich (talk • contribs) 08:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jamiesreich: The talk page for Willie Jones (statesman) is at Talk:Willie Jones (statesman). There is a link at the top of every page to that page's talk. – Joe (talk) 09:40, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: The talk link I see is to the left which again takes me to a page where I see nowhere to "talk about the article. There are discrepancies that need to be addressed and I cannot get to the correct link. I am requesting specific and exact help please. Jamie 30 March 2019

@Jamiesreich: The information you have been given is correct, but the talk page has not yet been used to discuss the topic. You need to go to that page and click on the top menu tab for a new section, type in a suitable header in the header edit box, and then in the main edit box add your comment or question to start the discussion, sign it with four tildes, and put the page on your watchlist by clicking on the empty star in the top menu so you will know if and when someone else edits the talkpage. There is no guarantee that anyone will respond. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 04:53, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I've come into a situation in which two separate subjects are best known by the identical pseudonym/moniker for their graffiti crime. They're unrelated to each other, geographically separated and about a decade apart chronologically. If they were in different subjects, it would be reasonable to name them like Pseudonym(politician), and Pseudonym(author). When the level of notability difference isn't obvious and they're in exactly the same subject area how should it be handled? Presently, I've approached it by simply splitting the article existing under the pseudonym into sections. Unless they're both forked out to be titled under their real names and disambiguate the moniker into both of them, its not possible to assign the moniker "evenly". Has this come up in the past somewhere? Just as a contextual reference, this is the article on on which this situation arose.Mook_(graffiti_artist) Graywalls (talk) 18:44, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

As a suggestion without prejudice, Mook (Michael Monack) and Mook (Marcus Edward Gunther) seem like a workable disambiguation if the article ever needs to be split. What has been done in the current article looks good enough for the current situation. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 05:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether 136 biography portals are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether they should be deleted.

The pages will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Mikhail Lermontov (it's a bundled nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the pages during the discussion, including to improve the pages to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notices from the top of the pages. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:41, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Is this category really necessary? It could be huge and unspecific, Disney is a massive franchise now and covers tones of films. Govvy (talk) 18:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, My name is Ian Wikramanayake, I work for Charles Giancarlo at Pure Storage and recently submitted an update to the this Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Charles_Giancarlo. The updates I submitted include updates to Charles’ bio and job responsibilities, the addition of a missing infobox and an updated photo. I’d appreciate if someone could review and provide any feedback.

Ianwikramanayake (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys,

So I started an individual GA reassessment on this metalcore band's article nine months ago...yeah, you can say I got distracted, ahaha. I managed to let a whole season from my favorite hockey team come and go by before I finished the halfway done review. Anyway, I was reminded in March, and it had been bugging me at the back of my mind until today when I found time to do it. I have completed the reassessment and I am willing to keep it open a good long while - like a month - for improvements (it's only fair since I did accordingly). I am letting everyone know immediately, since there does seem to be a hefty chunk of work that needs to be done in addition to what I've already fixed, although I believe saving it is possibly feasible. Please let me know, either here or on the article's talk page, if you're interested in putting some work in. Thanks for your attention! dannymusiceditor ^oops 03:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

He was born on 7th august 1905 not 1925 as you mansioned. please correct the error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.50.202.18 (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)