User talk:OrenBochman/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

origyear

I am concerned about your edit here in it you changed a parameter origyear=2001 to year=2001, yet if you had looked at the next parameter you would have seen that it was year=2009. origyear means "orginal year" of publication eg first edition and is a legitimate parameter. Depending on the ordering of the parameters such a change could change the year displayed and break links form {{harv}} type templates.

1. Is this a change you have in a script or is it something built in to the version of AWB you are using.
2. Have you any idea how many other origyear variables you may have changed?

-- PBS (talk) 23:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up + explanation on the issue. The origyear change was done manually and only once so far in response to a red highlighted AWB error indication of a bad template parameter. I try to do these manual fixes which AWB only highlights. I'll go back do a recheck and notify the AWB developer about this if it is a false positive.

P.S. I put the source of my AWB modules under my user page. BO | Talk 00:09, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

☺ -- PBS (talk) 10:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Flower Mocher

My mother had a childhood friend with a brother named Angel. Flower might be used by the same or similar group of people. Might you be able to access more about Mocher's family? I've done my best with online sources. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi the tag I put on your article means that there are no other articles connecting to it. You need to improve the article some until it is mentioned elsewhere in Wikipedia - in a list or another article. (Like family member of Flower Mocher) I'd like to help but I think you need to consult with people who edit military history. Luckily they have project. BO | Talk 21:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Then you simply *missed* that it is linked to other articles. I thought you might be able to provide non-military history.Eddaido (talk) 21:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Like I said I am not a historian and the info in the article does not indicate he was notable for anything else. Also the (soldier) in the title needs to be removed BO | Talk 21:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I think I will just let the matters you have raised rest. Eddaido (talk) 02:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Yoga

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Yoga, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi I've already indicated in it's talk page that the renaming is fine by me. Be bold and do it if you think it is necessary BO | Talk 10:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Minimal pair

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Minimal pair. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Many thanks for your help and advice. Much appreciated Dangerousrave (talk) 11:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar - and you can contact me if you have questions in the future BO | Talk 16:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Joke?

Is this a joke or so? The Banner talk 01:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Jokes aside - the way the article is currently written is practically WP:NOT. I think it needs to be improved - and I'd appreciate some sort of translation of the foreign language citations. (This is the English Wikipedia) BO | Talk 01:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Request

Could you please stop with your damaging action on restaurant articles? Your edit on Hostellerie du Château was rather silly, as the source your were requesting, was at the end of the same sentence. And your edit on La Rive was also a rather superfluous move against a proper layout. What are you up to? The Banner talk 20:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not intend to damage an articles or cause you stress—just the opposite−more eyes on an article is the best way to improve quality. Also I cannot promise not to edit articles on restaurants - I have taken time out to look at some of the other stubs in the restaurant project to better understand the norms and I've noticed stylistic, grammatical and omission errors in a few of the articles as well as a major CPVIO (Not your work) - so far I only have had time to CE a couple of minor issues - I usually work on Yoga and help out with anti-vandalism, various patrols, adoption and AFC.

• Re: the change of list format - manual of style is very verbose about different lists but it does require bulleted list in wikisytax for this type of embedded list. If you disagree send a link to the manual of style you were using for the list/layout − I promise to read it thoroughly.
• The tag - is not a request for another reference only a request for more precise language in this case for the date of the change in management at La Rive. I did look at the reference but it is a picture of the newspaper and the text is not in English so I could not translate it. So this is not a silly request - why make such assumption ?

As you can see I am ready to discuss my work - I only ask you extend me the same courtesy and the same level of civility.

From our discussion yesterday and above I get a feeling you are unfamiliar with some key policies, which can help anyone avoid unnecessary conflict and stress. I humbly request you consider these points even though they do contain some big words.

1. removing a recent tag such as {{when}} or a NPOV banner which you don't fully understand is against WP:Consensus#Reaching consensus through discussion. The recommended practice is to discuss before removing it or to just ignore since the alternative (reversion) can quickly escalate to an an edit war and the article/the reverting editor and both editors can get blocked.
2. asking another editor to keep away from your articles is also out of line. The recommended practice is to discuss things in a brotherly spirit.
3. Communications containing name calling - (one example stricken out above) or which seem threatening (second stricken out example) are usually deleted from this page - for pedagogical reasons I made an exception and merely stricken out what I found offensive. And to preempt any misconceptions — I am not joking this time since ignoring this stuff is the main reason people get blocked.

Anyhow I'm glad Aan de Poel is shaping up! BO | Talk 04:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Underlinked and deadend excessive

Please don't add both to articles. If it has no links, that makes it underlinked. Just add deadend. Example. It would also take you the same amount of time to link the article and be more useful to readers.

--150.135.114.58 (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi anonymous user.

Thanks for contacting me with this issue. I apologize if this kind of edit seems out of place. The edit was part of an AWB run on about 3000 recent graduates from AFC. The background for which is that during the drives which started Dec 1st and Jan 1st many articles graduated - many perhaps prematurely. I have inspected a few and found that some outrages claims have not been checked by the leaders of the AFC drive. I think that by running AWB and adding these notices you saw I am helping the organic development of the articles in a number of ways.

• Newbie AFC editors will learn about improving their articles.
• Other followup drives (Like wikification, and later disambiguation)) can prioritize their work based on tags dates provided.
• Only adding a dead-end - once the article gets a wikilink it will in many cases require adding Underlinked at later dates.
• Start to immunize the articles from speedy deletion by RPP by signialing that work is continuing. (but only if it is)

I agree that I could add links - but IMO it does require much more attention and I still want to have time to do other task like creating articles myself and respond to enquirers. So I prefer to leave it to the wikification drive which also checks for CPVIOs and corrects other issues. I am pretty sure AWB only each tag based on different criteria. The first you have pointed out, the second is based on some link to sentence ratio and the two are not mutually exclusive.

P.S. looking at the subsequent work following that diff I have a couple of comments - you did some good wikification - but some of the links you added are of high entropy and against the recommendations of the MOS. (three links in a single sentence) which actually overload the reader with information/options. I think wetlands was a great choice - the other two are distractions - but those were the first two you added. My point is not to tell you off but only to explain why I consider wikification a task requiring serious attention.

P.S.S I have worked out algorithms for a bot that formalize what I sketched above and hopefully provide informaticaly optimal solutions to under-linking, over-linking, orphans and dead-end issues (semi)-automatically. But until it is coded I'll be glad to get your input - which I can pass on to the head-developer of AWB. BO | Talk 01:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

This set of templates comes with specific instructions about using only one of them, not both. If you disagree with the community guidelines for these templates, you can bring the issue up on the talk page of the templates or at the Community Pump, and try to change them. But, for the time being, please put only the most appropriate of these two tags on the page, not both, according to the community guidelines:

About template Dead End:

"This template should be added to articles which have no internal links.[1] Articles which have some internal links, but are in need of more, should be tagged with instead."

I bolded portion for emphasizing the point, that only one of the two templates belons the article, because they are mutually exclusive. If you looked at the text generated on the article by the templates, you might have caught this without reading the guidelines for the templates. Almost all of the common Wikipedia templates have useful guidelines on them, though, to explain when and when not to use them.

If this makes the AWB too difficult, you can optionally just use "underlinked" and not "dead end" at all.

It's easy to remove links, and I probably won't get past the first paragraph or so of these articles, as the one is especially poorly written. The drive would have been more useful linking, rather than tagging redundantly, imo.

Using AWB requires that you abide by Wikipedia policies and guidelines; as always, you are free to try to change the guidelines that you disagree with. But I do request that you not continue to add both templates to articles, just one.

Thanks, --150.135.114.145 (talk) 09:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi anonymous. Are you the same user as before ?

FYI: chat page protocol is to prefix your response with one more ':' to visually indent your comment more than the comment you respond to.

I agree that AWB operators have a greater than normal responsibility to abide by WP policies with a risk of being blocked. I am a AWB newbie but I have edited fro some years including some template work too.

Template documentation is just a primarily technical document written by the template developers and until it is elevated to a behavioral policy through a community wide consensus, it is improper to cite it as a pretext for a cease and desist admonition. Requesting to reform a non-policy is a post hoc fallacy, one which can coerce the dialogue to a Wiki-Cops and Robbers mode which is not our beloved WP:Consensus.

As far as I can see this is just a situation where we are separated by a different point of view. Regarding these templates - their language does not command, it merely informs. My reading of their combined documentation including the emboldened portion is that dead-end articles are a subset of under-linked articles. I agree that there is a case of both being redundant - this is the special case of a single sentence stub. I think that your suggestion of deferring to under-linked is a tacit agreement with this point of view.

Tagging can be automated more easily than wikification.

To sum up: you have not made a compelling argument why {{underlinked}} excludes {{dead end}} in general nor addressed the bold concerns specific to AFC graduate article listed above. So I must respectfully decline your request. BO | Talk 14:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

American notation

Could you please stop adding the American notation of dates? It is written in the proper English way. The Banner talk 14:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Certainly - just specify which page you are referring to. BO | Talk 14:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

All articles I have been writing. The Banner talk 18:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll do my best! Just to be sure - what is do you mean by the proper English way ? BO | Talk 22:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Orwells, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elmhurst (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Michael Szilágyi

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Michael Szilágyi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Pronunciation

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Pronunciation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mordechai Oren, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Galicia and SIS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved and ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

• • Then go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
  • Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
  • Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
  • You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (Your account is now active for 1 year!).
• If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelpcengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
• Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
• Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 18:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Questia email failure: Will resend codes

Sorry for the disruption but apparently the email bot failed. We'll resend the codes this week. (note: If you were notified directly that your email preferences were not enabled, you still need to contact Ocaasi). Cheers, User:Ocaasi 21:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Your RfA

I just wanted to let you know that there's a deletion discussion going on about your RfA at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Abandoned_RFAs and you're encouraged to comment. —Soap— 16:49, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Much obliged! BO | Talk 17:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Please read my nomination statement — the point of the nomination was to get rid of ones that had no chance of being used; abandoned ones not included in the nomination will be deleted, and non-abandoned ones included in the nomination will not be deleted. I had no intention of attempting to have RFAs deleted when their creators hadn't abandoned them, and since you've obviously demonstrated that yours is not abandoned, it won't be deleted. Nyttend (talk) 21:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Questia email success: Codes resent

Check your email. Enjoy! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 21:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Pensativa CPVIO; Whoops

Hey, Oren. Thanks for the heads up on that. I guess that's the default stance on such submissions. But can that be overridden with the appropriate permissions, or would that involve an overwhelming mass of red tape?

I actually acquired my copy of the lyrics from Fischer's friend and colleague, cellist Cecilia Tsan, almost exactly a year ago - expressly for the purpose of honoring Clare's wishes by at least displaying his little known & rarely performed original lyrics on Youtube along w/ the video I'd just done for one of his many recordings of the song, in which I'd written & superimposed my own lyrics B4 learning of the existence of Clare's.

In addition, I've spoken & corresponded intermittently on various matters over the past 14 months w/ Clare's son Brent, and once w/ his wife Donna (or widow, I should say; I'm sorry, just in case you're not aware, Clare died exactly one year ago, this past Saturday). In any event, judging from my handful or so of interactions w/ Brent (who is, btw, a composer/arranger in his own right, & who was his father's right-hand man for over 20 years - at first assisting in, then collaborating on, & eventually inheriting his father's arranging & band-leading workload - & would know better than anyone his father's inclinations), I can't imagine them having a problem with reproducing any one of the of lyrics Clare wrote for a handful of his songs. In fact, quite the contrary; my impression from both Brent & Clare (gleaned from more than one interview) is that one thing that particularly pissed off Clare was seeing a popular artist write his/her own lyrics to Clare's composition, which would then become, in effect, THE lyrics, while Clare's own original words were relegated to oblivion.

So, long story short, I believe the Fischer family preference in this matter (which I should be able to confirm easily enough via either phone or email) - i.e. a WP article on one of Clare's songs - would be emphatically to display - and thus assert the exclusive legitimacy of - the original lyrics.

Of course, if all this - i.e. the family's preference - is irrelevant, and, instead, the issue is with the publisher, then WHOOPS again, and my bad. In any case, please let me know, and I'll be happy to set the wheels in motion to secure any necessary consent.DavidESpeed (talk) 19:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC) So, long st

I got interested in Clare Fischer's work during a time when I was composing Jazz music some years back, I am sad to hear he passed away. I have stopped editing Jazz since all my books are still abroad in Europe. I notice that you are closely involved with the CF and his family. If a person is closely linked with a subject it is frowned upon that he edit it. You seem to know your way around Wikipedia at least on the technical level - but looking at your edit and the warning on your talk page you would benefit by learning about a number of WP policies (I have a Mentoring units on WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:CPVIO) and knowing these would enable you to avoid getting your worked reverted.

Let us say for now, that I am glad you are contributing and though I have noticed that there are some problems in how/what you are writing. If you wish I could either try to fix these issues or try to point out how to avoid them. (I have some experience in this myself).

About your question, unfortunately CPVIO is one of the few thing that can get people banned in Wikipedia, so I removed the lyrics to protect you. - If you have the cooperation of the owner of the Copyright for getting permission to use the lyrics on Wikipedia - I will explain how to:

1. demonstrate that you have permission to the Wikipedia organ dealing with this
2. and then we can consider how to certify it in Wikipedia
3. how to notify editors that the lyrics are legitimate .BO | Talk 01:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi again. Thanks so much for taking the time. I greatly appreciate your help, and I have no problem either way, whether you want to give me some pointers or simply go ahead and do some re-edits. Or both. But B4 I go on, let me make one thing clear.

I'm sorry if I gave you the wrong impression, but one thing I definitely am NOT is 'closely involved with the CF and his family.' I never met nor communicated w/ Clare, much to my sorrow; for that matter, I never met any of the Fischers. What I AM - and I'm not quite clear on how this would disqualify me from editing - is hugely enamored of the man's music, as I have been for several decades, during which i did a lot of listening and a bit of research.

In early 2011, I started doing videos at Youtube for some of of my less well known favorite composers, chief among them Fischer and Jerry Fielding. My Fischer stuff was mostly confined to his for-hire work, thus giving rise to frequent questions as to exactly who did what on which track, especially during the ongoing late-80's - early-90's Robert Palmer collaboration. Most of my aforementioned handful of communications w/ Brent - initially contacted through ClareFischer.com - centered around these questions.

Not an easy man to get a hold of, 2B sure; emails and phone messages may go unattended for anywhere from a couple of days to a week or more. But whenever we've finally hooked up, Brent's always been gracious and down to earth, and very forthcoming. And, whenever the subject came up, quite clear re Clare's desire, however infrequently realized, to "dis-establish' newly ascendant alternate lyrics, as was Clare himself, almost 15 years ago. And, come to think of it, as I review my Facebook correspondence, this excerpt from Ms. Tsan's 2/9/12 message (the one that brought me the "Pensativa" lyric) leaves little doubt as to Mrs. Fischer's inclination:

February 9, 2012

8:17pm

Cecilia Tsan

Here are the beautiful words: I also posted them on my wall, since Clare's wife encouraged me to do so:

8:18pm

Cecilia Tsan

PENSATIVA (Pensive Woman)

Music and Lyrics by Clare Fischer

As with each new dawn

etc.

All of which brings me back to your response to my original question. Now let me get this clear. As a prerequisite to steps 1, 2 and 3, I should confirm with Brent that WP has permission to display the lyric. Correct? And if so, am I doing so solely for my own benefit, or should I provide some evidence 2U, e.g. forwarded email? If so, then I could probably do better than that. I should be able to have Brent email a copy of the "Pensativa" lyrics, as well as those for "Morning," Clare's other bona fide standard, affirming the authenticity of each, as well as WP's right to reproduce. At which point, you or any editor could contact me at dvdspd@yahoo.com, and I'd forward the email.

Anyway, let me know; given the aforementioned less-than-instantaneous nature of the DS-BF correspondence, it would be nice to get as much as possible - if not everything - done in one exchange.DavidESpeed (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:French novels

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:French novels. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Latest on Clare Fischer's lyrics? Good to Go

As per our earlier discussion, I've been in touch with Brent Fischer this weekend, and I just heard back from him. Fortunately for all concerned, I was not overly presumptuous in my edit. Brent holds the rights to the songs and is indeed ready & willing - and eager - to authorize us to display his father's lyrics; he asks only that I find out what's required of him to make it happen.DavidESpeed (talk) 01:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi I checked with some experts and what you need to do is this

1. Ask Bent to send an email to you with a copy to OTRS at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.
2. he has two options regarding the lyrics
   1. He can license the lyrics under CC by SA (Creative commons - Share alike) this is the preferred option or
   2. He can give permission to fully quote the lyrics on Wikipedia.

Note: Once OTRS is satisfied he owns the copyright they will record the email we get an ID and we can use it on the talk page to notify other editors not to delete the lyrics. BO | Talk 16:45, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wales. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

An Barnstar for You!

	The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
	Congratulations, OrenBochman! You're receiving a Brownie because you reviewed 30 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 14:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You!

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 14:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Traditional marriage

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Traditional marriage. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Traditional marriage

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Traditional marriage. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:16, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Dvora Bochman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dvora Bochman 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/Dvora Bochman 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 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. The Banner talk 23:54, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Spelling

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Spelling. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on File talk:Map on Dialects Of Punjabi Language.jpg

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:Map on Dialects Of Punjabi Language.jpg. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

George Alexander Baird - Mr Abington

Hello, I see you declined my article on the above and suggested edit and resubmit. No problem as I tried to put in as much as possible to avoid someone saying it was not sufficiently reference. Before pruning any chance of a few pointers on what should go and what should stay so that I do not waste effort?

Thanks

Sidpickle (talk) 12:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

see my response at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#Review_of_Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation.2FGeorge_Alexander_Baird_-_Mr_Abington

Happy Easter!!!

Happy Easter!

So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 00:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

12x12

This is a disambiguation page, so you should not have tagged it as {{orphan}} or {{stub}}, both of which are inappopriate to dab pages. Even if AWB suggests this (because it didn't recognise the specific kind of dab page template), it's your responsibility to watch what you're doing and get it right. PamD 16:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the heads-up. I usually do a second round of review once I finish a batch of cleanups.

Are you sure disambiguation can't be tagged as orphans? BO | Talk 17:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Daniel Lacerda

What can I do to ensure that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Daniel Lacerda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Daniel_Lacerda) does not get deleted. Also what suggestions do you have in order to strengthen the article. Any info would be most appreciated, thank you. PersonZ777 (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi PersonZ777 I'm glad to help you out.

The article Daniel Lacerda is not in the process of being deleted.

I am one of the coordinators of the Yoga projects and I can tell you that there is much you can do to improve the article. First of all remember that a yoga teacher is a guru and worthy of respect and not a sex object ;-) :This caught my eye:

• He has also been voted the #1 Hottest Bachelor on Virgin radio - this statement is an opinion and not a fact. Good Wikpedia articles should be made from 90% fact. When you provide opinions you will quickly create WP:Neutrality issues.

Next I noticed this:

• is the founder and creator of the Mr. Yoga Brand, a holistic lifestyle company - since you start with this you are placing the focus of the article on his role as executive of a company. But you do not provide any sources that this is a well known company. Thus you need to add a lead paragraph/sentence and to organize the bio more logically

And later this:

• He has also been featured in top-selling publications like Men's Health Magazine - top selling is not a criteria for quality it is advertising and it is an opinion - we prefer peer reviewed journals. Also the article has WP:peacock terms another WP:neutrality issue. I might reword this by He has been features in the Turkish edition of Men's Health Magazine

Now what you need to do if you want this article to be approved is

1. Find a number of high quality independent sources that discuss Daniel Lacerda in detail. I suggest you look for 8+ good sources. Autobiographies like you provided are not considered independent or reliable.
2. Next expand this article focusing on facts and not opinions.
3. Balance information based on the sources in which it is available. One source = one sentence, 8 sources and you can write about it in great detail.
4. List his publications with proper citations but avoid self published materials and prefer articles in peer reviewed journals or in periodicals (papers/magazines).
5. Next write a lead.
6. Finaly since the is a Bio of a living person - anything you write in it should be source .

Look at:

• B._K._S._Iyengar is not a great article but you should try to improve to that level.
• Tirumalai Krishnamacharya is better.

Good luck!! BO | Talk 01:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

Would you mind commenting in regards to the results at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CPVIO? Thank you. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Rafael_Beyar

Could you please give a detailed explanation as to this consistent rejection of the page on Prof. Rafael Beyar? Why is the PUBLISHED page about him in Hebrew, citations from John's Hopkins, the Rambam Website, a list of publications, full reference to find publications in Pubmed, the Rambam Website. Why are these unreliable sources. I've read the instructions, and found biographies of other people with less substantiation than this page. I write academic level papers and have never had my work rejected for poorly cited content. Hence I am very suprised by this consistent rejection of this page in ENGLISH for a page already published on Wikipedia in Hebrew! Please be specific as to what you want and why you believe this information is unreliable.

Thank you 777desha777 (talk) 06:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Hi 777desha777,

Hi, Please don't be discouraged. I getting different rejections indicates some progress. I think you will get one more at the most.

1. Like you there is nothing that would please me more than to see this article in english Wikipedia. But wikipeias uses a different trust model from academical academical writing.
2. Unlike most academic paper a Wikipedia article get lots more publicity and a personal bio can damage the subject's reputation and lead to legal action.
3. Unlike a paper where the author puts his reputations on the line, this article is being edited anonymously and thus the article's authority is derived from peer review of the facts provided and the veracity of their sources.
4. Different language edition of Wikipedia's have differing standards and policies and these change over time (become stricter)
5. Wikipedia is realistic and does not consider itself a very reliable source.
6. You are probably right that there are other articles in Wikipedia which are not so well written. Some are old before current requirements were put into place. Others still are not about living people also it is quite possible that some might need to be deleted. This is why we always try to consider articles on an individual basis - just like in academic peer review.
7. What we do at AfC is try to help you write the article so they won't be deleted in parts or as a whole.
8. The paragraph Beyar has received prestigious prizes ... on Biomedical Sciences and Engineering. has no citations at all. But WP:BLP requires inline citations for every fact. The citation can be at the clause, sentence and paragraph level depending on the source.
9. A pubmed citations only supports the facts in the paper and that he was tha author and is no good to establish notability. These citations are WP:RS for discussing the content of the article but not the authors.
10. Now a the Rambam website is not an independent source if he works there. If he got an award and these are mentioned in a press release or by an award's organization web site you should look for that type of source and cite it.
11. Hebrew sources are allowed but english ones are preferred. If using Hebrew sources consider adding a laymen's summary which will help to build the trust in the article.
12. Also your article has stylistic issues too, the language. But these are less important now - consider breaking the article into smaller sections like in Hebrew.

1. I have checked with an Admin of the Hebrew Wikipedia and it looks like the Hebrew version is also in need of inline citations.
2. I hope you will succeed soon BO | Talk 15:15, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Per our email conversation, simply state below here that you will not open any AFDs with this or other accounts for at least a week, and I will life the block. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I will not open any AFDs with this or other accounts for at least a week BO | Talk 00:18, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I have lifted your block. I wish you many years and happy and drama-free editing. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)