User talk:Another Believer/Archive 28
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Another Believer. 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. |
| Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
Question
Your recent revert of my edits seem to contradict the banner on the top of Category:Mass shootings in the United States which states "all mass shootings in the United States should be included in this category". Your edit defeats the purpose of this banner. I was adding this to a few pages that didn't include said category. However, a few pages do include the parent category and a subcategory for example: Aurora, Illinois shooting contains the categories Category:Mass shootings in Illinois as well as Category:Mass shootings in the United States. Shouldn't all pages be consistently categorized? Tinton5 (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Tinton5, Hmm, I'm not sure. I don't see the point in having entries in the parent as well as subcategories, but I guess I won't revert if you feel the parent category needs to be added back? ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:35, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello I was wondering if you had any tips for a new editor thanks EHTROITDE (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
- EHTROITDE, Hey, if you're interested in Oregon-related articles, I'd recommend adding Wikipedia:WikiProject Oregon to your watchlist. Lots of great editors there who can answer questions you might have. Welcome to Wikipedia, and happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:47, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Yvie
ResolvedBefore that Oddly didn’t embrace all the opportunities being a drag artist offered as he was just a “skinny, black, gay guy,” Oddly said.[3] Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:29, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409, I'm not sure why you're posting this on my talk page. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:29, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- You asked if there was a source for Yvie Oddly’s being gay. When I added the category the system didn’t allow me to add a comment so I posted here. Gleeanon409 (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409, Thanks for clarifying. I'll make sure the category has been added back. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:24, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- You asked if there was a source for Yvie Oddly’s being gay. When I added the category the system didn’t allow me to add a comment so I posted here. Gleeanon409 (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank You for Your Hard Work!
|
Current Events Ninja |
| Thank you for contributing to such as a sensitive topic like you did for the Virginia Beach shooting. <3 Snowycats (talk) 14:28, 2 June 2019 (UTC) |
- @Snowycats: Thank you for the recognition. I love starting and following the development of current events articles. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Question on Revert
ResolvedYou reverted an edit I made to the ZoomCare article and stated that the revert set it back to the sourced version, but the previous edit has no source. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ZoomCare&oldid=prev&diff=899198987&diffmode=source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tas50 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- Tas50, Thanks, I changed back to 37, but kept 2018 per the sourced introduction. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:36, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 23, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Your GA nomination of Women's March on Portland
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Women's March on Portland you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ashorocetus -- Ashorocetus (talk) 00:21, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Reversing Roe
Hi, there. I've created the article for the film Reversing Roe, but as you "created" it first as a redirect, it doesn't appear on my list of pages created. Is there anything I can do to make it appear on my list? Regards.--SirEdimon (talk) 00:15, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
- SirEdimon, If I'm being honest, I'm not sure. For future reference, when I'm looking to override a redirect, I usually write my article in the draft space (such as Draft:Reversing Roe) and then submit a request to have the page moved into the main space at Wikipedia:Requested moves. I don't know if Wikipedia:Requests for history merge is a place for help. Of course, you're welcome to simply claim credit, but I understand if you want the article history to reflect your work. I often just expand articles from redirects, just depends on the situation. There may be a solution but I don't know off hand. Perhaps a talk page stalker can point you in the right direction. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I have created the draft on my draft space before even realizing the redirect. I'll try the Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thanks for your help.--SirEdimon (talk) 20:05, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Women's March on Portland
ResolvedThe article Women's March on Portland you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Women's March on Portland for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ashorocetus -- Ashorocetus (talk) 21:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
- Ashorocetus, Thanks, I've replied in all section and am willing to revisit as needed. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:20, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Holocene (Portland, Oregon) copyedit
 | Hello, Another Believer. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Holocene (Portland, Oregon) at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Good luck with GA and all the best, Mini[[User_talk:|apolis]] 21:58, 7 June 2019 (UTC) |
- @Miniapolis: Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:23, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Women's March on Portland
The article Women's March on Portland you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Women's March on Portland for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ashorocetus -- Ashorocetus (talk) 22:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
- Ashorocetus, Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:23, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2019
Extended content
|
|---|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019). 
|
List of songs recorded by Florence and the Machine listed at Redirects for discussion
Resolved
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of songs recorded by Florence and the Machine. Since you had some involvement with the List of songs recorded by Florence and the Machine redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. feminist (talk) 14:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Are you able to find Franz Engelsman's death date please?Zigzig20s (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Zigzig20s, Maybe ask WikiProject Biographies? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
I improved this article mainly in late May. I’m not sure if it helps for the Wiki Loves Pride. Gleeanon409 (talk) 20:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409, You've made some improvements in June as well, and I'll probably make a few now as well. I invite you to add this to the Wiki Loves Pride list! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409 Actually, I went ahead and added, since I made some minor changes and added the banner to the talk page as well. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:13, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- You got there first! No problem.
- Would you do me a favor and look at Desmond’s entry at [1]? As far as I can tell he is both 1. The most famous drag kid in the world and 2. The youngest professional drag queen in the world but I’m getting like no sources feedback that’s really definitive or even about the content I’d like to add. Am I at the right place? Should I start over that a fourth source was found? I don’t know what to do. Gleeanon409 (talk) 20:22, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: May 2019
Extended content
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
This week's article for improvement (week 24, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Membership renewal
You have been a member of Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) in the past. Your membership, however, appears to have expired. As such this is a friendly reminder encouraging you to officially rejoin WPMEDF. There are no associated costs. Membership gives you the right to vote in elections for the board. The current membership round ends in 2020.
| ReJoin Wiki Project Med Foundation |
|---|
Thanks again :-) The team at Wiki Project Med Foundation---Avicenno (talk) 05:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
GOCE June newsletter
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Nomination of Lung On Street for deletion
Extended content
|
|---|
 The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lung On Street until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 18:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC) |
Hey
Did you see my question on the talk page for Robert E. Lee on Traveller?MagicatthemovieS (talk) 04:08, 16 June 2019 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS
- MagicatthemovieS, Yes, but sorry I don't deal with DYK any longer. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:35, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Parish of Jesús María and Our Lady of Mercy
On 17 June 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Parish of Jesús María and Our Lady of Mercy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Philip II of Spain approved funds for a convent because his illegitimate daughter was living there? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Parish of Jesús María and Our Lady of Mercy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Parish of Jesús María and Our Lady of Mercy), 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.
— Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 25, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 14
Extended content
|
|---|
 Newsletter • June 2019
Updates: I've been focusing largely on the development side of things, so we are a lot closer now to being ready to actually start discussing deploying it and testing it out here. There's just a few things left that need to be resolved:
Some other stuff that's happened in the meantime:
Until next time, |
This week's article for improvement (week 26, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
July events from Women in Red!
Extended content
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
The Prom
I’m sorry but it is way too early to have that article in the mainspace. That is why I created it in draftspace. WP:NFF clearly defines filming as needing to be underway in order to exist or at least have a very detailed production history, which it does not. Rusted AutoParts 21:49, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of The Prom (2020 film) for deletion
ResolvedExtended content
|
|---|
|
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Prom (2020 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rusted AutoParts 22:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC) |
There is no mention of Super Moon at Dirty Heads
Hi. I see you created redirects for Dirty Heads' upcoming album Super Moon, probably presuming there was content at the band's article about it. There isn't. Please make sure there is a mention at the article you're pointing a redirect to before creating said redirect, or add it there after. Your redirects have been nominated for deletion enough times for you to probably know this, and I believe I've asked you to do this before. Thanks. Ss112 06:35, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:42, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Bad Karma (Miley Cyrus song) listed at Redirects for discussion
ResolvedAn editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bad Karma (Miley Cyrus song). Since you had some involvement with the Bad Karma (Miley Cyrus song) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. NØ 09:11, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
- Note: Relisted. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
The June 2019 Signpost is out!
- Discussion report: A constitutional crisis hits English Wikipedia
- News and notes: Mysterious ban, admin resignations, Wikimedia Thailand rising
- In the media: The disinformation age
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Traffic report: Juneteenth, Beauty Revealed, and more nuclear disasters
- Technology report: Actors and Bots
- Special report: Did Fram harass other editors?
- Recent research: What do editors do after being blocked?; the top mathematicians, universities and cancers according to Wikipedia
- From the archives: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching
- In focus: WikiJournals: A sister project proposal
- Community view: A CEO biography, paid for with taxes
This week's article for improvement (week 27, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Administrators' newsletter – July 2019
Extended content
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).
|
WikiCup 2019 July newsletter
Extended content
|
|---|
|
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC) |
Reading Kafka
 |
Thank you for watching over Franz Kafka and improving. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- Sure thing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:14, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 28, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Honey Davenport
.jpg)
I saw that the Honey Davenport article finally underwent its CE. I have to say, I am pretty disappointed: the copy edit introduced a number of unambiguous grammatical errors and included many other changes that, in my opinion, were disimprovements to the flow and structure of the prose. At least one other edit Wikilinked a magazine in the refs that was already linked in its first appearance in the published version of the article (which was not its first appearance in the markup).
Some of the changes struck me as true improvements or were pretty neutral, so I left those alone. I had to restore much of the article from its pre-CE version, though. Do you think this will present a problem? Normally in a case like this, I'd open a discussion with the editor who did the CE and comment on each change in detail. However, I'm traveling and pressed for time IRL, so initiating what could be a long talk isn't especially feasible for me at the moment. If someone attempts to revert my most recent changes, I will probably have to do it anyway, but this is a headache I hope very much to avoid. What did you think of this CE? I noticed you also restored at least one sentence from the pre-CE version. Armadillopteryxtalk 14:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Nope, don't worry. Sometimes I revert edits made via GOCE review as well. For me, getting GOCE review is generally helpful, and most of the time quite constructive. But, sometimes I disagree and undo some changes, and this has never been a problem with reviewing editors or the Good article review. By all means, please edit the article as you see fit. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:12, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Got it—thanks! Shall I go ahead and nominate it for GA? Armadillopteryxtalk 20:26, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Yeah, go for it! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:30, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks! Armadillopteryxtalk 20:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Yeah, go for it! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:30, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Got it—thanks! Shall I go ahead and nominate it for GA? Armadillopteryxtalk 20:26, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
I made some improvements and added content to the article, but I’m not sure if it qualifies as a WikiPride candidate. Could you please take a look? Gleeanon409 (talk) 16:31, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409, Sure, the campaign generally runs during the month of June, but some people continue updating the Results page outside June. I've gone ahead and added the banner and updated the Results page on your behalf. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:35, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking! BTW, I read that the WikiPride went from June to October. I’m hoping that’s the case as I’ve got a backlog now of articles I want to write that are within the LGBTQ umbrella. I figured I had until 1st November, but are we already past the deadline? Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409, Historically, the campaign has run during June, but Wiki Loves Pride is really about encouraging editors to create and improve LGBT-related content whenever. If you want to continue adding Template:Wiki Loves Pride 2019 to talk pages and updating Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride/2019/Results with your work, by all means, please do! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:20, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Wonderful! Thank you again. Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:34, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Gleeanon409, Historically, the campaign has run during June, but Wiki Loves Pride is really about encouraging editors to create and improve LGBT-related content whenever. If you want to continue adding Template:Wiki Loves Pride 2019 to talk pages and updating Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride/2019/Results with your work, by all means, please do! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:20, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking! BTW, I read that the WikiPride went from June to October. I’m hoping that’s the case as I’ve got a backlog now of articles I want to write that are within the LGBTQ umbrella. I figured I had until 1st November, but are we already past the deadline? Gleeanon409 (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
A belated apology
It's been a while, but I'd like to apologize for flaking on you and not reviewing the notability of the World Famous Kenton Club draft as I said I would. I found the notability of the draft rather tricky tricky to evaluate, and I kept putting it off so I could give you a thorough review. The perfect ended up being the enemy of the good, however, and I never got around to writing down my thoughts. I'm sorry about this. I just want to follow up with you so you know: don't hesitate to ping me if you need a second opinion on something again! Hopefully I'll be able to provide some feedback in a more timely manner next time ;) – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:54, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Lord Bolingbroke, Hey, no problem at all! I was mostly just pinging as a courtesy, since I had said I would. The editor who I was conflicting with has been banned from interacting with me, and I've already nominated two articles they attempted to delete for Good article status. Sorry you got pulled into that mess. I've been enjoying some of your other contributions related to Portland and Oregon. Keep up the great work! ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! After having edited here for some time, it feels good to finally get some new articles into mainspace. I saw the Graywalls thread at ANI. I thought about chiming in, but I dislike drama and just felt too heated at the time to contribute constructively. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 04:41, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2019
Extended content
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Nomination of Feminists: What Were They Thinking? for deletion
ResolvedExtended content
|
|---|
|
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feminists: What Were They Thinking? until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 TT me 16:25, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
|
Books & Bytes Issue 34, May – June 2019
Extended content
|
|---|
|
 Books & Bytes
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta! Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC) |
Stubs on Portland parks
Hello again! Are you sure articles like Northgate Park and University Park (Portland, Oregon) pass GNG? Why have you chosen to create articles on these parks rather than any of the other non-bluelinked parks at List of parks in Portland, Oregon? – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 17:58, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
- Lord Bolingbroke, I create stubs for park articles often, mostly as I visit them in chunks and connect entries to Commons, Wikidata, etc. I'd love to see stubs for more of the parks mentioned in the list and will continue to work on them as possible. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
- Frankly, I don't think creating these articles is a good idea. Taking Northgate Park as an example, I can find tangential mentions like this and this but no significant coverage. If the above articles were taken to AfD, you'd need to have some sort of IAR rationale for keeping them. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
For the record, I think an IAR rationale can be perfectly legitimate. I'm skeptical that some Portland neighborhoods like Crestwood, Portland, Oregon or Sunderland, Portland, Oregon pass GNG, for instance, but there are still encyclopedic reasons to have these articles. I should also clarify that I don't think there's anything particularly bad about these parks articles (they're accurate and verifiable); I just think it's important for policy to be applied consistently, regardless of whether an article creator is a newbie or autopatrolled. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
- Lord Bolingbroke, I understand, and some parks will have received more coverage than others (not to mention, there may be better coverage of Portland's parks compared to other metro areas). If you poke around Category:Parks in Portland, Oregon, you'll see there are some nice entries for even some of the city's minor parks. Many of them were established as protected areas decades ago and there may be some helpful PP&R sources and I'd be searching the Oregonian archives as well. Also worth keeping in mind, some parks may have public art, host events, have community centers, etc, so there may be more than expected or seen at a glance. Personally, I like getting the ball rolling, and I think there are bigger concerns than purging articles about parks. But you can always note your concerns their respective talk pages. BTW, thanks for fixing the caption on the Mock's Bottom article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 29, 2019)
 Legal status of cannabis possession for non-medical use (2018)
See also countries that have legalized medical use of cannabis. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Decriminalization of marijuana Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Sadomasochism • Bedrock Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
|---|
Kylie and Garibay (EP)
Extended content
|
|---|
|
Hey there! I'm in the process of copy editing Kylie and Garibay (EP) and already finished copy editing the first half of the article. I've run into some IRL issues, so I will finish the other half later (hopefully by end of day today). I have a question regarding the second sentence of the article:
If my intuition is correct, "their" is supposed to refer to Kylie and Garibay. However, grammatically, "their" here refers to Parlaphone and Warner Bros. Records. Furthermore, I noticed that the tenses in this sentence are inconsistent (i.e. "was" and "serves") and that the previous sentence uses present tense. Given these combined reasons, I moved the second half of the sentence to be a part of the first one. (Just explaining my rationale here. It was an edit made in good faith.) In your edit you noted that you want to "say date of release before the date of their previous release". I'm perfectly okay with this. However, as a copy editor, I want to make sure it flows well grammatically and stylistically. Currently, "their" is ambiguous, the tenses are inconsistent, and the second clause should either be a phrase without the comma or an independent clause. What do you think of the following variations to this sentence?
Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thanks. —Bobbychan193 (talk) 21:48, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
|
This week's article for improvement (week 30, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Help improving the Fund for the Public Interest page
Hello Another Believer. My name is Elizabeth and I do work for several nonprofits, including Environment America and the Fund for the Public Interest. I want to make some improvements to the Fund for the Public Interest page, but since I am in a conflict of interest when doing so, I wonder if you have time to help me in the next few weeks? If so, how would you like to me to proceed? I can share my proposed edits with you. CleanWater17 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:18, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- CleanWater17, Possibly, but your best bet is to post suggested updates/improvements to the article's talk page. There's also the request edit template if you want to throw your requests into a queue for editors familiar with this process to review. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:23, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response. I've now read about the request edit template and have a question. The guidelines say to post proposed changes on the talk page and obtain consensus before using the edit request template. I assume this means reach consensus with other people who have edited the page. The page I'd like to edit, however, doesn't have many active editors. How long should I wait for a discussion and consensus on the page before using the edit request template? CleanWater17 (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
- CleanWater17, Hmm, I see people use this template often when requesting straightforward requests, such as fixing inaccuracies, adding updates, etc, without seeking consensus first. However, if you're planning to propose major overhauls, you may want to reach out to specific editors who are willing to review proposed language and sourcing in detail. I've noticed those who reply to the request edit template often prefer smaller changes. Note: Using the request edit template is not required, but I wanted to make this option known. Your best bet is to find interested editors or ask for help at select WikiProjects. Starting with an outline of your proposed changes on the article's talk page is the best start, so you can at least see if any page watchers reply in any way before going out of the way for assistance. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:57, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response. I've now read about the request edit template and have a question. The guidelines say to post proposed changes on the talk page and obtain consensus before using the edit request template. I assume this means reach consensus with other people who have edited the page. The page I'd like to edit, however, doesn't have many active editors. How long should I wait for a discussion and consensus on the page before using the edit request template? CleanWater17 (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Minister for Loneliness
ResolvedExtended content
|
|---|
 Hello, Another Believer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Minister for Loneliness". In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC) |
Robert E. Lee on Traveller
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Robert E. Lee on Traveller has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:09, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 31, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
You're Invited!
 |
Hello Another Believer/Archive 28! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject Women music, an outreach effort which aims at improving articles about women music on Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thank you! |
August 2019 at Women in Red
Extended content
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
The Signpost: 31 July 2019
- In the media: Politics starts getting rough
- Discussion report: New proposals in aftermath of Fram ban
- Arbitration report: A month of reintegration
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Community view: Video based summaries of Wikipedia articles. How and why?
- News from the WMF: Designing ethically with AI: How Wikimedia can harness machine learning in a responsible and human-centered way
- Recent research: Most influential medical journals; detecting pages to protect
- Special report: Administrator cadre continues to contract
- Traffic report: World cups, presidential candidates, and stranger things
Naming statue articles
Ther is a lot of conversation going on about the naming of statues. I have avoided bringing this into the conversation, but perhaps we could chat about it? I think at least they should all have the sculpture's name instead of the "(sculpture)" that a few of them have. But should they all be "Statue of........." ? Carptrash (talk) 21:11, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- Carptrash, Funny you mention, User:Ham II is working on this in their draft space: User:Ham II/Sandpit G. Amidst all the naming discussions, we still need to decide about what to do when there are multiples of the same statue. Many of the statues in the National Statuary Hall Collection have duplicates installed at state capitol buildings, or elsewhere. Not all, but some. TBD: Do we go with "Statue of XXX", "Statues of XXX", or even have separate articles if there's enough content about the works in their respective locations? So much to figure out, but I'm looking forward to setting some standards so we can be more consistent moving forward. Glad you see the NSHC on your mind as well. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:00, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Guy Walks Into a Bar...
There is an ellipsis in the title. I don't know what you linked your redirect Guy Walks into a Bar (album) on Mini Mansions for, whether you were intending to start the article or have somebody do it for you by linking a redirect you created, but I've started the article at the correct place (Guy Walks Into a Bar..., with ellipsis intact) to dissuade others from making it elsewhere. If you intend to contribute to the topic, please do so there. Thank you. Ss112 04:25, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ss112, I was just creating redirects based on other possible search terms. I'm not sure an ellipsis serves as a disambiguation, and I thought "into" should be lower case, but I don't feel strongly about either. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:18, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2019
Extended content
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
|
This week's article for improvement (week 32, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Hey!
Hey there! I see your helping me out with the Game of Thrones episodes. Cheers. The Optimistic One (talk) 03:53, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- The Optimistic One, Some of them, yes. Good luck with these noms! ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! I've reverted nearly all my nominations. Could you help me with "The Dragon and the Wolf"? The Optimistic One (talk) 15:39, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: July 2019
Extended content
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Photos of art
Hi Another Believer. Please provide a license for your photos of artwork. You may use {{Photo of art|{{PD-self|dw=yes}}|Another Believer|{{Non-free 3D art|image has rationale=yes}}}}, replacing PD-self with the compatible free license of your choice. Thanks. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:24, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- JJMC89, I received a bot notification below wth specific links, which I've tried to address (hopefully correctly). Not sure why this isn't taken care of during the upload process. I didn't think I overlooked any fields. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:06, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I've added
|dw=yesand|image has rationale=yesand removed the deletion notices. In upload wizard step 3: ChoosingThis is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use
thendepiction of a copyrighted three-dimensional work or building
should allow you to fill in the license for the photograph in the box afterThe author of the image has released the photographic work under a free license, or it is in the public domain
. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:14, 14 August 2019 (UTC)- JJMC89, Thanks so much for your help. I'll pay closer attention next time. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:17, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I've added
This week's article for improvement (week 33, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Requested copy edit of United Nations Plaza (San Francisco)
| Hello, Another Believer. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for United Nations Plaza (San Francisco) at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Dhtwiki (talk) 04:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC) |
File copyright problem with File:Air Force Monument by Leonard McMurry, Oklahoma City.jpg
ResolvedExtended content
|
|---|
 Thank you for uploading File:Air Force Monument by Leonard McMurry, Oklahoma City.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Also:
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC) |
"I Pour Down" listed at Redirects for discussion
ResolvedAn editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect I Pour Down. Since you had some involvement with the I Pour Down redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Richhoncho (talk) 09:36, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Sydney Ember
Resolvedthen nominate for deletion
I did. What, exactly. was unclear about the phrase "proposal for deletion"? --Calton | Talk 22:42, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- Calton, I meant AfD. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:41, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 34, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Woodstock 50
| Hello, Another Believer. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Woodstock 50 at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:25, 20 August 2019 (UTC)) |
- Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:25, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Nice userpage!
|
The Excellent Userpage Award | |
| Over the years I've borrowed elements from various user pages to create my own... and it wasn't until you complimented mine that I visited yours and realized I must have stolen from yours substantially in the past! lol Anyway, nice user page! :D — Hunter Kahn 17:19, 20 August 2019 (UTC) |
- @Hunter Kahn: Hey, thanks! Your page looks great, and no doubt I took the design template from someone else. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Well we both have good taste then. lol — Hunter Kahn 17:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 35, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Hello!
Extended content
|
|---|
|
Hi! Sorry to bother you. I'm currently nominating an article of mine for GA status; after some observations, I've found that you're a frequent GA promoter, and a really active editor on Wikipedia. If you have time, could you review the article if nobody has done it yet? (I'm messaging several other users, just in case)
|
Nomination of Kevin Cavenaugh for deletion
ResolvedA discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kevin Cavenaugh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Cavenaugh until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Meeanaya (talk) 04:46, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
A question about "park" articles
Hi Another Believer,
I mentioned in a previous post that I read the articles that appear on the 50,000 challenge list. I know that you write articles on statues, local landmarks, history, people and parks of Portland, along with those really great articles (I'm a big fan), like the 'Women's March', 'March for our Lives', etc. I am living in a new town, Oak Park, Illinois, and its a town with interesting history and landmarks, and few wikipedia articles. I have a few ideas — Hemingway's birthplace, I'm working on that now. The town has many lovely parks, statues, interesting Mob history, other landmarks, etc.. There are also neighborhoods outside Oak Park that have interesting civil rights history--riots, marches, murders, etc.
I would like to begin with articles on local parks, but am concerned that the articles will be will not be considered "notable" and be deleted eventually. Do you have any problems with notability with the park articles you have written in the past? thanks MauraWen (talk) 12:01, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- MauraWen, Thanks for reaching out. I've been following some of your work as well. Hard to say without knowing more about the specific topics you're considering, but I would certainly start with the most notable, and perhaps start with notable neighborhoods/areas and landmarks before tackling some of the smaller parks. I don't know if this is unique to Portland or not, but many of the parks here were acquired many decades ago and host events, community centers, public art, etc. Parks and recreation are very much part of the culture here, so there may be more coverage of local parks here than in some other parts of the U.S. You might poke around Category:Parks in Portland, Oregon to do some quick article assessments. To answer your question, I've not had a big problem with park articles getting deleted, but I certainly don't want to suggest most public parks are notable. But, be bold!, and see if you can get the ball rolling on some notable local landmarks and other sites. Also, consider starting List of parks in Oak Park, Illinois and List of public art in Oak Park, Illinois, if those help as starting places. I wish you luck and look forward to your contributions! ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:23, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- Another Believer Thanks! I will check out the Portland Parks Category and an Oak Park list of public art and parks is a great idea! MauraWen (talk) 22:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
September 2019 at Women in Red
Extended content
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
The Signpost: 30 August 2019
- News and notes: Documenting Wikimania and our beginnings
- In focus: Ryan Merkley joins WMF as Chief of Staff
- Discussion report: Meta proposals on partial bans and IP users
- Traffic report: Once upon a time in Greenland with Boris and cornflakes
- News from the WMF: Meet Emna Mizouni, the newly minted 2019 Wikimedian of the Year
- Recent research: Special issue on gender gap and gender bias research
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
Billie Eilish's awards and nominations
Extended content
|
|---|
|
Please read WP:SPLIT. This is in no way long enough to be split out yet. If you edit war over it, as you have done in the past, I will report this to an admin, so please do not do so. I don't know how you think that tiny not-even-a-decent-sized article was worth moving into a draft to claim as your own. If you were starting an article from scratch with content you had written originally and had worked on in a draft, that would be understandable. But copying content that you didn't even write from another article into a draft just to have moved it over a redirect another user made is not right. You basically didn't even do anything to it. You want article creation credit for moving a section that you didn't even have anything to do with. Ridiculous. Even admins acknowledge that when they are moving content they didn't originate, they don't need to erase redirects. I'll be asking an admin about this practice. @Sergecross73: Ss112 09:32, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
|
WikiCup 2019 September newsletter
Extended content
|
|---|
|
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round. Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed). If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC) |
This week's article for improvement (week 36, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Administrators' newsletter – September 2019
Extended content
|
|---|
|
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).
|
Midland–Odessa shooting
Extended content
|
|---|
|
Please could you look at this edit because it produced a template error. I can't fix this because it is too technical for me. Thanks.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
|
This week's article for improvement (week 37, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
ITN recognition for Karbala stampede
On 11 September 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Karbala stampede, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
SpencerT•C 04:28, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: August 2019
Extended content
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
DYK for Enter the Anime
On 11 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Enter the Anime, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the interviewer in the documentary Enter the Anime did not know anything about anime? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Enter the Anime. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Enter the Anime), 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.
valereee (talk) 12:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 38, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
Salute to America
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Salute to America has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best of luck with the GA nomination.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
- Twofingered Typist, Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:45, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
"Nina Chop" listed at Redirects for discussion
ResolvedAn editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Nina Chop. Since you had some involvement with the Nina Chop redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Richhoncho (talk) 16:19, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- Richhoncho, Thanks for the heads up. I've replied within the redirect discussion. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Kevin Cavenaugh moved to draftspace
ResolvedAn article you recently created, Kevin Cavenaugh, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
TFL notification
Hi, Another Believer. I'm just posting to let you know that Grammy Award for Best Rock Album – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for October 14. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 22:18, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 39, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
,_2019.jpg){kind=link}
Human Access Project
Howdy another believer - we corresponded 2-3 years ago on my edits to Poet’s Beach I think. Thanks for adding The Big Float and Audrey McCall Beach.
I seem to remember you may have said I could try drafting up something for Human Access Project with citations that you might look at? Now that there are three articles with reference to Human Access Project it seemed like maybe it’s time to add HAP.
I was not sure how to communicate with you so I apologize if this is not the best way.
I also could potentially add content with citations to TBF and AMB.
Also totally fine if you would rather I didn’t. Thanks again for building out TBF, AMB and Poets. Gangstaoflove (talk) 05:53, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- Gangstaoflove, Hello again, thanks for the note.
I'd suggest attempting to draft content at Draft:Human Access Project. You can click on the red link to create the new page, where you can start adding neutral text about the project, as well as citations. This will just be a draft page, until we're ready to move the entry into main space. Is this something you'd be interested in trying? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:26, 23 September 2019 (UTC)I've started something at Human Access Project, which remains a work in progress. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:53, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
October Events from Women in Red
Extended content
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:34, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
Don't request drafts be accepted at RM/TR
Extended content
|
|---|
|
A new week, another attempt by you to get a redirect of mine deleted for a stub article you've made in draftspace. I'm not surprised. Some admins and users will tell you drafts should be tagged with an AfC template if you want to start them as a draft. Could you imagine if every user who started a draft listed the article at RM/TR? It would be clogged and that's not what it's for. You know this. In future, please ask an admin directly. Ss112 19:40, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
|
September 2019 GOCE Newsletter
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC) |
Hi! Would you be willing to give me some feedback on Miss'd America, an article I've just created? It's the first non-biographical article I've written, and I'd appreciate thoughts from a second pair of eyes. I started the talk page but am not confident assessing its class/importance in the WikiProjects I've placed it in. Thanks if you can, and no worries if you can't! Armadillopteryxtalk 08:16, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Great work! Thanks for creating this new article. I went with C-class for now, but B-class might actually be more appropriate. I hope you'll consider a GOCE review and consider a Good article nomination for this one! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:25, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments and for assessing the article! Since I've just finished writing and will probably want to make more changes in the coming days, I'll hold off on nominating it for GA just yet. I also assume there will be more news coverage of the pageant in the near future, since this year's edition of the contest has just concluded. I'd like to incorporate that if/when it comes out. I'll nominate it after that :-) Armadillopteryxtalk 21:10, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Wonderful, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Oh, one other thing: while researching this article, I came across this source, which states Mimi Imfurst's legal name as Braden Maurer-Burns. In the Mimi Imfurst Wikipedia article, though, her legal name is recorded as Braden Chapman. There's no source for that in the article, as far as I can tell, though a quick Google search does produce more results supporting "Braden Chapman" than "Braden Maurer-Burns". There are plenty of sources for both, however. It appears that she may have undergone a name change or something, but how should we source and handle the name in the Mimi Imfurst article? Picking a random source for one name of the other doesn't seem like the best way to do it, though I couldn't find any source that explicitly mentions both names or a name change. Armadillopteryxtalk 22:44, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, I'd recommend adding both, each with their own inline citations, until sources clarify. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:53, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Oh, one other thing: while researching this article, I came across this source, which states Mimi Imfurst's legal name as Braden Maurer-Burns. In the Mimi Imfurst Wikipedia article, though, her legal name is recorded as Braden Chapman. There's no source for that in the article, as far as I can tell, though a quick Google search does produce more results supporting "Braden Chapman" than "Braden Maurer-Burns". There are plenty of sources for both, however. It appears that she may have undergone a name change or something, but how should we source and handle the name in the Mimi Imfurst article? Picking a random source for one name of the other doesn't seem like the best way to do it, though I couldn't find any source that explicitly mentions both names or a name change. Armadillopteryxtalk 22:44, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Wonderful, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments and for assessing the article! Since I've just finished writing and will probably want to make more changes in the coming days, I'll hold off on nominating it for GA just yet. I also assume there will be more news coverage of the pageant in the near future, since this year's edition of the contest has just concluded. I'd like to incorporate that if/when it comes out. I'll nominate it after that :-) Armadillopteryxtalk 21:10, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 25
ResolvedHi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Immortan Joe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:17, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
No Vacancy Lounge
Your GA nomination of No Vacancy Lounge
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article No Vacancy Lounge you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Harrias, Thanks! I've addressed your concerns, and happy to revisit as needed. If you're interested, I've also nominated Holocene (Portland, Oregon) (a similar article) for GA status. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of No Vacancy Lounge
The article No Vacancy Lounge you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:No Vacancy Lounge for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 06:41, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
- Harrias, Thanks again! ---Another Believer (Talk) 12:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 35, July – August 2019
Extended content
|
|---|
|
Books & Bytes
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC) |
Your GA nomination of Holocene (Portland, Oregon)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Holocene (Portland, Oregon) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 13:21, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 15
A final update, for now:
The third grant-funded round of WikiProject X has been completed. Unfortunately, while this round has not resulted in a deployed product, I am not planning to resume working on the project for the foreseeable future. Please see the final report for more information.
Regards,
-— Isarra ༆ 19:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 40, 2019)
Extended content
| |
|---|---|
|
The Signpost: 30 September 2019
- From the editors: Where do we go from here?
- Special report: Post-Framgate wrapup
- Traffic report: Varied and intriguing entries, less Luck, and some retreads
- News from the WMF: How the Wikimedia Foundation is making efforts to go green
- Recent research: Wikipedia's role in assessing credibility of news sources; using wikis against procrastination; OpenSym 2019 report
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
"Dundee"
Hey, do you know how to get the parenthetical "Succession" in the article title to present italicized? — Mainly 18:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
- MainlyTwelve, Done See top of markup. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:09, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! — Mainly 18:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
- No prob! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! — Mainly 18:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)