User talk:Smmurphy/Archive5

User:Smmurphy: Talk • Contributions • About me • In progress • Scribbles • Heroes • Stream of conscious'

I prefer not breaking up conversations. If you leave a message for me here, I will respond here.If I have started a conversation on your talk page, feel free to respond there, unless I forget, in which case you may feel free to ignore this message.

DYK for Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising

On 5 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1887 book Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising presents 177 biographies of African American men, many of whom were born as slaves? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Men of Mark: Eminent, Progressive and Rising), 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.

Mifter (talk) 00:04, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shah Aqeeq Baba

Hello User:Smmurphy please vote me on my page Shah Aqeeq Baba because this page is necessary for Pakistanis I'll pray for you and hope for the best and waiting for your reply thank you Hammadsaeed (talk) 05:54, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed this comment due to formatting issues. I've moved it to the bottom and given it a heading. Today the page on Shah Aqeeq was deleted because, in my opinion, continued vandalism and disruptive edits of the page have persuaded editors that keeping the page was not conducive to building an encyclopedia. That is what we are volunteering to do. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 19:51, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Q

Hi--I saw you wrote up Jim Williams (civil rights activist)--thanks. My question for you is whether on Wikipedia we consider any victim of lynching automatically notable. It seems likely that many of them won't pass the GNG; at the same time, lynching victims, though there were many, were not so numerous that it would be an impossible large group. My personal feeling is that the crime is so horrible, and the event so momentous in American history, that lynching victims should be notable--but that's just me. Anyway, I am looking around for some guidance because by change I ran into this. Thanks, Dr Aaij (talk) 03:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Aaij: Thanks for your question. In my opinion, most or all lynchings themselves are probably notable, but not always in the same way. Sometimes the lynching is notable, sometimes the lynched, sometimes a contemporaneous riot, sometimes some political activity going on about that time. Looking through sources, I don't see that Sam Owensby or Brooks Lane are clearly notable. An argument could be made that at least one sheriff involved, Lee Taylor, is notable, as he was also involved in a dual, but that case would be pretty weak. The lynching itself was in a small town and doesn't seem to continue to be brought up. I'm not sure how many people would agree with me that most or all lynchings are notable. Booker T. Washington wrote an article at the end of 1913 recording 51 lynchings that occurred in the US that year, including Owensby's. 51 seems to be the standard number, although I wouldn't be surprised if one or two could be found that Washington didn't tabulate. That number is similar to the number of murders per year in Pittsburgh over the past few years and to the number of people killed by capital punishment in Georgia since 1976 (see List of people executed in Georgia (U.S. state)). It is down from over 80 lynchings in 1903 and over 100 in 1893.

Some thoughts about other pages on lynchings: Emmett Till is notable as a victim of a lynching, and has a page. Jim Williams is less notable as a victim, but had a semi-public career before being killed and his death had a significant impact, and thus is more or less also a suitable individual for a page. In both of those cases, there is no separate page on the lynching. In other cases, we have pages on lynchings such as Peoples Grocery and Lynching of Julia and Frazier Baker, but not on the individual victims. Sometimes pages for victims of lynchings redirect to the page on the lynching, for instance Willy Brown which redirects to Omaha race riot of 1919. In at least one case, we have an article on a Supreme Court case that stemmed from a near-lynching, Franklin v. South Carolina. I don't think wikipedia has a list of lynchings in the United States, just Template:Lynching in the United States and Category:Lynching deaths in the United States, and I am interested in better organizing wikipedia's content on the subject.

I'm relatively active at WP:AfD. The best way to get an article past a deletion discussion is to avoid the discussion - deal with prods and notability tags thoroughly so anyone watching the article does not feel it needs to be sent to AfD and avoid putting marginal articles in the mainspace if they are still under construction. I don't think that the heinousness of lynching would prevent an article from being brought to AfD if the article did not have a good claim at GNG/NCRIME/NBIO. As I'm sure you are aware, WP:NCRIME falls under Wikipedia:Notability (events), which is a more specific policy related to your question. For an event to be notable, continued coverage or lasting effect is often seen to be important, I'm not sure if Owensby received this to the degree editors active at AfD generally like to see.

With all of this in mind, I'd be willing to help create a page on the lynching of Sam Owensby, especially if there is more that can be said about Owensby, Brooks, and/or the case, but I would recommend putting effort elsewhere instead. By effort elsewhere, I mean, it is better to create more clearly notable articles than one marginal article and have it go to AfD and put in effort trying to save it ending up with a chance at having it deleted anyway. I would be even more happy to take part if you were interested in an effort to improve wikipedia's coverage of lynchings in the US more generally, and would be happy to talk to you about what that could mean. Smmurphy^(Talk) 16:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Easy Company

I just put Peacock up for deletion. Please add your two cents worth (or more!). If you have time and are interested in a "mystery" of sorts, when I was working on Norman Dike, I kept picking up items on his father, also Norman Dike, and was wondering if he rated a page based on being a New York State supreme court judge (NY supreme courts are like appeals courts elsewhere). Ultimately, I decided Dike the elder probably didn't rate page, although it's out of my area of expertise. I did pick up a hint that the elder was somehow involved in court with Lewis Nixon's father or family business. The news may have been on a NYT page that I couldn't get to. The Dikes were big on the NY social scene and there's a lot of trivial stuff. Thanks for your support. Regards, Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 00:57, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: Thanks for the note. I've commented at the AfD. I will generally see E-Company notices, so don't feel obliged to notify me of them here. As for the elder Norman Dike, looking on newspapers.com, there seems to be plenty about him for an article, although I'm not inclined to write one right now. If you would like me to add a picture of him to the page on his son, I can clip one from a pre-1923 publication (therefore public domain). There is a good picture of him from 1902, and a less good picture of him from his 1918 campaign (1918 being the year of his son's birth). Having said I'm not inclined to do it, I'd be happy to write an article on the elder Dike if asked. I'm personally fascinated by pre-WWII minor American individuals, and most of my content creation involves such work. Smmurphy^(Talk) 19:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll think again about a page on the elder Dike; the worst that can happen is that I get AfDd. <grin> Please do add the photo to the son's page at your convenience.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 21:01, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: Here is an obit on the elder Dike: Norman S. Dike, Retired Justice, Dies; Onetime Sheriff 25 Years on Bench, The Brooklyn Daily Eagle (Brooklyn, New York) April 16, 1952, page 13, accessed April 3, 2017 at https://www.newspapers.com/clip/10023295/. If you don't do it first, I'll create an article on him (tomorrow?) based on this and a few other newspaper clippings. Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:44, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I "resurrected" the project on my sandbox page and added this.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 22:02, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: You probably noticed, but I've added a page for Norman Staunton Dike Sr. Enjoy! Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:59, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice. I added it to my watchlist.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 22:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about uploading images.

Hello! i just uploaded this phorograph here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Captain_Hollywood_Project_(Official_Photo).jpg

the photographer wants to know what needs to be done to keep the picture in the wikipedia database.

we plan to upload it as a profile image. what must i do to submit it properly?

does photographer need to email permissions@wikimedia.org in order to verify that he wants this picture on wikipedia?

maxxmusicfan (talk)

@Maxxmusicfan: Thank you for your question. I'm not an expert, and you will probably get a better answer if you ask it at Wikipedia:Teahouse or bring it to the attention of Commons:OTRS. Basically, I think if the owner of the copyright for an image releases the image into the public domain, or gives it a creative commons license, then you can go through the steps at [1]. Feel free to let me know if I can be of any more assistance! Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:35, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smmurphy - thanks for the information. maxxmusicfan (talk)

Books and Bytes - Issue 21

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

#1lib1ref 2017
Wikipedia Library User Group
Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
Spotlight: Library Card Platform

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegrin–Albanian conflicts

Obviously, the discussion is now closed... but I thought you might be interested in this: http://iipccl.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/196-199.pdf

Excerpting from the abstract: "the congress of Berlin to the Balkan wars [was] a very intense period for relations between the two countries" but Edith Durham was apparently more impressed by "the relationship of cooperation and friendship between Montenegro and Albania". Srnec (talk) 01:34, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the article, it was an interesting read. I'm not particularly interested in the Balkans and am unlikely to make such an effort on my own, but the offer stands if you want to collaborate on an article about bilateral relations between the countries. Smmurphy^(Talk) 02:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attention: WikiProject African diaspora participants

Hello fellow project participants. Not sure how many users are still active as normal Wikipedia editors but felt the need to attempt to get a gauge on who can be called on for help with articles falling under the umbrella of the African diaspora project. According to the project's article table there are over six thousand articles related to the African diaspora; there's not a hundred at FA/GA grade and there's over twelve hundred that are unassessed. With Wikipedia being one of the major information reference points in the world today we should consider this unacceptable. Much work needs to be done on the rating of the importance of articles as well. With more communication amongst participants and a dedication to addressing the articles on the to-do list I believe we can make this WikiProject one of the most well organized and thorough on the site. If you are interested in collaborative work with some of your fellow project members, have certain expertise on any particular subjects, ideals on/about the WikiProject, etc. simply drop your name under the "Project revision" section I've created on the project's talk page and state your intentions and main points of interest in our WikiProject and we can attempt to move forward from there. Hoping to hear from everyone soon! WikiGuy86 (talk) 04:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover granted

Hello, Smmurphy. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

Wikipedia:Requested moves
Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign Affairs

On 1st April, I received an email from Wikipedia Library Card Platform, saying that my request for access to the Foreign Affairs magazine has been approved. It also said that I would be provided further details in a week or two. It has been more than a month since then and I have not received any intimation so far. Is there anything you can do to help me out of this predicament. Jupitus Smart 18:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jupitus Smart: Thank you for the notice, I appear to have overlooked your application, although I officially started before April 3, I did not have the ability to review applications until April 3, so your application was reviewed by someone else and I didn't notice that the process had not been completed. I am sorry for the delay. I've sent you an email, hopefully everything will work smoothly. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:56, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot @Smmurphy:. I have acted on your instructions and will let you after I receive another mail from them. Jupitus Smart 03:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did not want to bother you again, but the problem persists even after another month has gone by. I acted on your instructions last time, though I did not get any further intimation from the magazine. It would be really nice if you could look into it. Jupitus Smart 14:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jupitus Smart: Thank you for following up, it is no bother at all. Did you get the email that was sent on May 3? In that email there was a link, the instructions at that link should be all you need. I will resend the email with the link now. Feel free to follow up through email and we'll see what we can do. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:09, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I got the same email that you sent yesterday on May 3 and had acted as per the instructions then. At the end of the process, I was told by the website that I would get another mail in a week with the details for starting the subscription. It has been a month and nothing came from them. Probably they rejected my application at this stage, but it would be nice to confirm that. Jupitus Smart 01:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm not sure. I don't know that they would have rejected your application once you've sent in your information. I will look into the situation. In the meantime, have you resubmited your information at the link I emailed to you? Have you done so more than once? Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:06, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I did it twice. Once when you sent me, and one around 10-15 days ago, after I received no response.Jupitus Smart 13:16, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Smmurphy. I got the confirmation mail today and the subscription was activated. Jupitus Smart 12:20, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Sorry for the delay. Smmurphy^(Talk) 16:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Dike (both)

This has the specifics of Dike Sr.'s divorce from Evelyn. Also available is Dike Jr.'s divorce from first wife Barbara (paper dated June 22, 1946). I can't get into either to read the full text. I don't think I need access to newspaperarchive right now. --Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 01:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: Thanks for the note. I don't think I have access to newspaperarchive.org, but if I get it, I'll check that out. Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:26, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kittens of appreciation

Hi Smmurphy, was going to give you a single kitten but i think your improvements of Conquest of the Nanda Empire deserve more than one. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Coolabahapple: Thank you so much for your gift. Also thank you for your feedback. I enjoy being a part of the AfD process and working to improve struggling articles, especially on history, and your recognition is very kind. Thank you for your help in the process. Your AfD sorting (and the sorting done by others) makes it much easier and faster for me to do what I like to do, and I wouldn't be nearly as effective in finding AfDs I am interested in getting involved with, if I were able to do it at all. I don't really know how to express my appreciation, but a lot of my work is due to sorters like you, User:Lepricavark, User:Gene93k, User:Shawn in Montreal, User:CAPTAIN RAJU, User:PaleoNeonate, User:Northamerica1000, User:NewYorkActuary, User:K.e.coffman, and others. Smmurphy^(Talk) 14:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conquest of the Nanda Empire

Hi, you have just improved the Conquest of the Nanda Empire and your efforts are appreciated. I would like to suggest merging the same to Chandragupta Maurya so that both the topics could get a facelift. Would you like to support in that? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 02:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. As you know, I've taken part in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conquest of the Nanda Empire, where I've suggested that after my improvements, I feel the subject is itself notable and suitable for inclusion in wikipedia. I think that there is a lot of improvements that are possibly in the Chandragupta article without merging. In fact, I prefer multiple smaller articles in this case, as the information is a bit confusing and as separate articles it might be easier to keep things clear. Another point, the correct place to have this conversation is in the talk page of the article (with pings to involved editors), so if you are interested in implementing this sort of change in the future, feel free to add a merge template to the pages and discuss the issue there. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:06, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Edisto Island during the Civil War

Hello! Your submission of Edisto Island during the Civil War at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SL93 (talk) 13:32, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Edisto Island during the American Civil War

On 24 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Edisto Island during the American Civil War, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that thousands of escaped slaves created a free colony on Edisto Island, South Carolina, during the American Civil War? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Edisto Island during the American Civil War), 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.

Mifter (talk) 00:02, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi Smmurphy,

I received a notification that you sent me an email, presumably about my Project MUSE application, but I don't seem to have received anything in my inbox or junk folders. Not sure if it takes a while to arrive, but will post here if it eventually comes. Would you mind resending the message in the meantime?

Thank you very much, Ry's the Guy ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:08, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please disregard the above message as I've just received the message. Thanks again, Ry's the Guy ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:22, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I'm glad. Let me know if you have any questions. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:27, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Sabzar Bhat find.

Thanks for that ProQuest bit of information you added for Sabzar Bhat. (I tried Googling as much as I could, but somehow didn't stumble across that). That article is currently nominated for deletion, so feel free to chime in here if you'd like it preserved. Thanks! PvOberstein (talk) 21:15, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add my !vote in a few minutes. I just wanted to look for sources myself before !voting, and when I found some things, I added them to the article. Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this is a bit OR? I know the Sabzar Ahmad Bhat too is from Ratshuna of Tral. But isn't this OR to connect him with an old case 6 years ago? There could be another Sabzar Ahmad Bhat. But still we should avoid even the slightest self-interpretation. 61.1.57.242 (talk) 00:27, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I've removed that sentence (removed quickly to avoid citogenisis). The material connecting him to the August 2015 incident seems more clear. Smmurphy^(Talk) 01:11, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific work on Hannah Logasa!

You are an Ace, and I hope we can collaborate again sometime! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Grand'mere Eugene: I hope so as well. Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:32:30, 8 June 2017 review of submission by Wharvey7291

Wharvey7291 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Overpopulation and Arable Land Loss (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I do not understand the criticisms. All of the statements in my article are quotes or paraphrases of published comments that are cited from well known experts. Regarding the format; is it a mistake to have so many sections each started with bold print? I was an editor of the Journal of Experimental Biology for 17 years; perhaps that is a problem because the Wikipedia format is quite different. My topic is quite important because continued loss of arable land would have dire consequences. Would you please provide more details regarding my format

@Wharvey7291: Absolutely. To start with, I've formatted Draft:Overpopulation and Arable Land Loss a tiny bit, and might do more (when you publish on wikipedia, you release rights to your work, so anyone may edit it). In the text editor, we almost never start a line with a space or tab, and sections are created using == text ==, === text ==, etc, as you can see when you look at the code. Also, we like to wikilink stuff, by using square brackets ([[text]]). Following that, you can ensure that your article format better fits the wikipedia style. These formatting issues are just the start, at this point wikipedia is rather strict in enforcing a number of issues, and new articles that do not conform have a hard time surviving procedures such as Wikipedia:Articles for creation and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion - one of the most important criteria for an article to be accepted at Articles for creation is that the editor believes the article would not be deleted after discussion at Articles for deletion.

A second issue is images, you seemed to have attempted to copy and paste images from elsewhere on the internet into wikipedia. Please look over Wikipedia:Images for more, but the short version is that wikipedia follows a much stricter reading of copyright law than sometimes apparent in blogs, academic journal articles, or newspapers.

A third issue is tone. Your article is factual, but its tone is more prescriptive than is usual for an encyclopedia. Further, this is a global encyclopedia, and the article is generally (though not always) US-centric. Further, using Sax as the foundation of the article makes some sense, but seems a bit outdated. Consider two articles on similar topics, Human overpopulation and Human impact on the environment. In those articles, generally, there is less of a language of moralizing the problem. Where moral statements are made, they are not in the voice of wikipedia, but rather are in the voice of some expert. Compare from your article, "With moral methods at an impasse, overpopulation is Syria is being reduced by what Sax (1955) called the ancient destroyers – pestilence, famine and war." to "As well as the cost to human life and society, there is a significant environmental impact of war." from Human impact on the environment, referencing, Gledistch, Nils (1997). Conflict and the Environment. Kluwer Academic Publishers (although perhaps this, too, is a rather old source).

A fourth issue is that there is a lot of overlap between your article and the two existing articles I referred earlier, Human overpopulation and Human impact on the environment (especially Human impact on the environment#Agricultural land loss and soil erosion), as well as others such as Desertification. It is preferred that very similar articles be merged, with differing view points given appropriate weight based on editorial consensus. If your subject is clearly distinct from the subjects which currently have articles, it might help in your introductory paragraphs (we don't call it an abstract, but it is similar) to define the coverage of your article and how it is distinct from the coverage of existing articles. Also, I know that those three articles are themselves not perfect, but they might give you an indication of the tone, style, format, and coverage that might be expected of an article like yours.

I can see that you put in a lot of work writing and editing your article, but note that those three articles have existed since 2003, 2007, and 2005 respectively, and have been intensely edited thousands of times since then by many editors, including some experts in the field (for example, see: User:Anlace). For an article like yours to be accepted, it won't take a decade of work, but it may take a lot. I am happy to help you if you are interested in contributing to wikipedia. You can continue a discussion here, or feel free to email me (if you use Special:EmailUser/Smmurphy, I will respond by email and we can go from there).

DYK for Babette Hughes

On 11 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Babette Hughes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a play by Babette Hughes was performed in 1938 by six blind actresses? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Babette Hughes. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Babette Hughes), 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.

Mifter 00:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

New and expanded research accounts
Global branches update
Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

De Warenne family

When you created De Warenne family in January and February, you seem to have inadvertently created a content fork of House of Warren (which is a poor-quality article I seem to have just wasted significant time starting to clean up before finding yours). A merge is definitely in order. Agricolae (talk) 22:53, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message (and hard work). You are right (and I hadn't seen the House of Warren article until now). I think the merge is uncontroversial, but I'm not sure which title should hold the article, "House of X" or "X family", and which spelling of Warenne; I chose "de Warenne" based on Farrer and Clay and because that is the common spelling in wikipedia. I chose "X family" because I wasn't sure that "House of X" is accurate; my understanding is that in this case "house" means something specific, perhaps "dynasty" or something, and I am not sure when that term is appropriate. Speaking of, House of Warren is a duplicate of Earl of Surrey, as that is the only part of the family that is covered. When I made the article, De Warenne family, I tried to make it as distinct as possible from Earl of Surrey. I think the appropriate step is to redirect House of Warren to De Warenne Family, as anyone searching for or linking to House of Warren is more likely to want that page than the page only for the Earls. Smmurphy^(Talk) 19:02, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of the name, Warenne is preferable to Warren. The use of the Warren spelling seems largely restricted to low-quality, dated attempts to trace later Irish and English families named Warren from the Earls, while I have never seen a historian of the Earls and their immediate kin use the Warren spelling. I was going to rename House of Warren to Warenne before I saw your page. As to whether it is 'House of' or 'family', I don't think that is an important distinction, and there seems no general style or consensus. With redirects, the precise name is of lesser importance than the content, and since yours is clearly the better-quality page, I think the way to go is to execute the redirect to your existing namespace and then if the name is an issue, that can be a later discussion - the same would apply to whether or not to use 'de'. In terms of Earls of Surrey, if any of the content of House of Warren is worth saving (which I doubt, it all being rather pedestrian) that might go to the Earls of Surrey page, but the namespace should redirect to De Warenne family. Agricolae (talk) 20:35, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks again for your work. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:48, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 23

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017

Library card
User Group update
Global branches update
Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
Bytes in brief

Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Investment

Hey there! I just re-launched the WikiProject Investment.

The site has been fully revamped and updated and I would like to invite you the project.

Feel free to check out the project and ping me if you have any questions.

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 16:05, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Muslim feminists

Hi Smmurphy, I got your idea about the list of Muslim feminists you mentioned here. I've quickly made an article, and I just wanted to hear your opinion. Do you think it will get a pass? Thanks in advance. JahlilMA (talk) 02:23, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work. I am glad to see the page and I hope it does well. I'll look it over and try to contribute if I can. By pass, I am guessing you mean be nominated to Articles for Discussion, and possibly deleted. I think I am more supportive of lists than the average participant in AfDs, but my guess is that a list of Muslim feminists would not be deleted. The relevant policy is Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Non-encyclopedic_cross-categorizations, and the relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists. In particular, the standard seems to me to be: "Cross-categories like these are not considered sufficient basis to create an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon." I think liberal Islam is multiple different culturally significant phenomenon, and if lists are made which keep them someone distinct, then those are great candidates for inclusion in the encyclopedia. I think Muslim feminists is a good example! Smmurphy^(Talk) 12:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. Somebody just reviewed the article and gave a green light, as you said. If you have any additions, it's totally welcome! JahlilMA (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JahlilMA: No problem. Having a page reviewed is no guarantee that another user won't nominate it for deletion, but it is a good sign. I still haven't gotten to contributing to the list myself, but will give it some thought soon, I hope.I think you've been welcomed by others, but I am glad to see you here and want to welcome you as well. We used to have a larger community of editors editing about Muslim and South Asian topics (and I used to spend more time myself in those areas), but there is still a good community at Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam (and smaller communities at country specific projects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh). If you ever have a question, feel free to bring it to me here or to those talk pages. Smmurphy^(Talk) 03:11, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your warm welcome. Yes I kind of noticed that. Even WP Islam seems inactive as a collective, and instead people who interested in these topics are working individually more or less. Kind of intriguing why the size of community shrunk. Oh well, I guess we need to do our best while filling the time, until hopefully we see the revival of the community. JahlilMA (talk) 18:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hi there, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh 666 22:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

15:13:03, 27 September 2017 review of submission by 2405:205:3394:FA1E:A41F:4A27:CE9D:B7C4

2405:205:3394:FA1E:A41F:4A27:CE9D:B7C4 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Rajeshwar Rana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please Check The Article Again and Confirm more About Rajeshwar Rana (Google it)

@2405:205:3394:fa1e:a41f:4a27:ce9d:b7c4:, thank you for your message, and welcome to wikipedia. Editing here can be rough at first, I recommend you start slowly. If you really want to create a new article, please take a good look at Your first article, and follow the instructions carefully. The biggest issue with the page on Rana is that it does not use reliable sources, which are sources that are created with editorial oversight. Anything that is online on a site which allows unedited submissions is almost never considered reliable. This includes saavn.com, hungama.com, google play, and wynk.in. In fact, generally links to an musician's playlists are removed, as such links are more suited to the purpose of advertising for the artist rather than providing encyclopedic coverage. If you are interested in improving the page, I would recommend not using those sorts of citations, and rather focusing on published sources such as those described in the guideline, Identifying reliable sources. Let me know if you have any questions. Good luck, Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reapplied in error

I just reapplied a bit ago-finally found the July 2017 e-mail where my subscription has been renewed. Can you cancel the re-application? Thanks, We hope (talk) 14:34, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I don't see a way to cancel your application. I don't think it is a big deal, but with the new system, I am not sure if I should change your status to something in this case. Pinging @Nikkimaria: and @Samwalton9 (WMF):, is there an optimum action in this case? Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smmurphy: Best course of action is just to decline the duplicate. I filed a task (phab:T175249) just last month to add an 'invalid' style option for duplicates, but it's a fairly low priority right now. Nothing will break if you go with declined :) Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 19:00, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! (pinging @We hope:). Smmurphy^(Talk) 19:36, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both-sorry to have caused this!.We hope (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 24

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 24, August-September 2017

User Group update
Global branches update
- Star Coordinator Award - last quarter's star coordinator: User:Csisc
Wikimania Birds of a Feather session roundup
Spotlight: Wiki Loves Archives
Bytes in brief

Arabic, Kiswahili and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hello, Smmurphy. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:20, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Northamerica1000: - Thanks, I am moving the page to draft space Draft:William Smith (registrar) and will submit it to AfC soon! Smmurphy^(Talk) 05:27, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Smith (registrar) (October 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Shadowowl was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Even if this is not a living person, you still need references for the lead.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:William Smith (registrar) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

» Shadowowl | talk 06:50, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Smmurphy, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! » Shadowowl | talk 06:50, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed draft for Liwonde National Park

See Talk:Liwonde National Park

Hello, Smmurphy. On behalf of the nonprofit organization African Parks via the Wyss Foundation, and as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I've submitted an expanded and updated draft of the Liwonde National Park article for consideration at Talk:Liwonde National Park. I am looking for someone to review this draft for accuracy and neutrality, and to copy over content appropriately as a replacement of the current article, which is almost entirely unsourced.

Since you're a recent member of WikiProject Africa, I thought I'd reach out to see if you are interested in taking a look at the proposed draft. My requests for help at several WikiProjects have gone unanswered for a while now. Might you be willing to take a look at the draft?

Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:51, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Inkian Jason:. Thank you for your message. I would be happy to help. Do you know if there is a process for external review of WP:PAID edits along the lines you are asking? Giving your draft a quick review, I don't see many problems. As I know there may be some COI, I did notice the tourism section included a promotional statement by the Scotsman. It is common to see statements like that one on many wikipedia pages, but I would not use it and it does not pass the guideline, WP:NPOV. Promotional statements that I would find less problematic would be citations of the destinations place on reliable best of or top-10 type guides, relative prices, or relative tourist population. Also, per Wikipedia:DAILYMAIL, The Daily Mail is not considered a a reliable source and should probably not be used. In my opinion, if you made those changes, you could go ahead and copy-paste it with clear COI mention in the edit summary. Smmurphy^(Talk) 19:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. This link, which appears in the edit request template at Talk:Liwonde National Park, may be helpful: Template:Request_edit/Instructions#For_reviewers. I don't edit articles directly because of my conflict of interest, so I am looking for a volunteer to copy over the markup appropriately. I've removed uses of Daily Mail, as well as the Scotsman quote. If you're satisfied with the remainder of the draft, are you willing to replace the existing article's markup with the draft's markup? Inkian Jason (talk) 21:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Inkian Jason:. It looks ok to me, although I think you should replace the material, so that authorship is clear. Do you mind if we move the above material (my response and your response to me?) to the talk page of the article in main space and continue the conversation there? That way it is easier for future editors of the page to find our discussion. If it is ok, go ahead and copy-paste both our comments and ping me. Then I'll look it over one more time. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem! Feel free to adjust as needed, but I will collapse this section here and copy the discussion over to the article's talk page. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan B. Forrest

Hi - At your earliest convenience, kindly explain your reason(s) for deleting the picture & citations for Louis Napoleon Nelson. Earlier, two of my references to Forrest having 47 black confederates under his command were deleted. Washington Post Tampa Bay Times Azarbarzin (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Azarbarzin: Thanks for your comment! I'll reply at Forrests talk page. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Nathan B. Forrest and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azarbarzin (talk • contribs) 21:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Azarbarzin: Hi Azarbarzin. I'm sorry if I have acted inappropriately. I moved your comment from my talk page archive to my talk page here and attempted to reply. I had a typo in my ping to my reply, which I have fixed. Feel free to send me messages here or to discuss content issues on the relevant article talk pages. I've tried to add some diffs to the RfA you've created. I'm not quite sure what issue you are asking to be arbitrated (a content dispute on Forrests page or my behavior [again, sorry] in my talk pages), so I haven't given my thoughts on any particular issue there. I'll keep an eye on that page as well, and will try to address any issues as I can. Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:11, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smmurphy:I'm grateful for your response. I assure you that I was not seeking an apology. I was merely inquiring into your reasoning for deletion. The first & second colleagues, deleted my additions with a brief reason and I cordially abided by their logic. I did not & would not venture into an edit war. I'm not a newbie here (signature issue aside). I could be wrong, but I felt that if the reference to N. Nelson found it's way to reputable publications like Washington Post and others, it deserves a pithy mention in Forrest's page. Alas, it could be "irrelevant" if an ocean of accusations (i.e. bigotry) was not directed at the Southern confederates soldiers. -- I almost forgot to sign Azarbarzin (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the reason, I've given some justification in the talk page and I agree with Drmies that there isn't much of a reason to include an image of an individual whose connection to Forrest was that he was a servant (or possibly a private) in a company which was part of a division(corps?) under Forrest's command. Further, the image itself is likely to be deleted or at least greatly modified because of copyright issues: the underlying image is unlikely to be your creation and I don't see any evidence that it is in the public domain (images taken before 1927 but not published until after 1927 or at all are not by default PD). Further, a heavenly edited image (as yours is with its border) is not encyclopedic and often is not an appropriate illustration for an article on a historical subject. Finally, your edit is meant to imply that Forrest had African American soldiers under his command, a statement that you are aware is highly questionable and that most historians believe is likely untrue (Washington Post and Tampa Bay Times are hardly the most informed sources that have weighed in on the issue). Given these issues, I thought it was not really necessary to give a full justification and only gave a summary of my edit. As all that is usually asked for in an edit summary is such a summary, I think this was entirely appropriate. Again, I apologize for not correctly pinging you when I moved your comment. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 23:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Smith (registrar) has been accepted

William Smith (registrar), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 04:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Silas X. Floyd (November 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kiteinthewind was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Silas X. Floyd and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 07:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fold3

Is it worth applying for a Fold3 account? Or is it the same information you can get at Familysearch in the draft registrations? --RAN (talk) 16:37, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've used Fold3 directly at least four times (an image of a signature, File:Robert Harlan Signature 1857.jpg, at Robert James Harlan, and for facts on the pages of Richard E. S. Toomey, William B. Derrick, and Inman E. Page). I don't currently have access to Fold3 (but reapplied last month) and I don't seem to have created a clipping for that signature. The clippings for the other three uses don't seem to be working, but I think the citation is complete. If you look at the citation, you can asses if that info is available at familysearch. I don't think it is. If you look at the facts, you can get some idea what Fold3 is useful for. In Harlan's case, I knew he interacted with the military as a militia officer who had charge of an armory, but in this case I didn't get any information from fold3 about that, only a passport application. Perhaps I could have used the application for some details about Harlan's appearance, but I am not sure and in any case I didn't. In Toomey's case, I used it for detail about his civil war military ranks. That information could have been available at ancestry.com or familysearch, especially as records for USCT soldiers are more often included. For Derrick, I use naval enlistments for information about his appearance and I don't think that information is available elsewhere. For Page, I use it to explain his behavior at and after emancipation and the civil war. This information is mentioned in other sources on Page, but it is covered with little clarity, so I used the primary source because it seemed clearer and allowed me to provide a clipping (which now doesn't work) so my reader can see where I got the information. In the later three cases, I use Fold3 for primary sources, which, needless to say, should be done with care. I think access improved the article in all four.

I've used Fold3 indirectly many times. Usually, I may have an inkling that an individual served in the military so I look on Fold3 for the individual, and if/when I find where he served, enlisted, etc. I can then use that information to better search google or whatever and find a secondary source about the service. I did this for Victor B. Walker, who was a buffalo soldier serving after the civil war. In his case, I learned some of the places he was stationed, and I think I may have used that information to help trace the different places he lived, although I am not sure I used that information directly or to find other sources used in the article (I don't currently have access to the newspaper archives I used for that article). I can't think of other examples, but I know I did it other times in similar ways.

Another example has to do with Robert Smalls, who claimed to have been commissioned an officer during the civil war. I found a lot of information on Fold3, but most of it was repeated on google books as it was recorded in congressional records or other sources. I didn't end up using any of it, because secondary sources had everything I could find that passed WP:V, although I was able to add detail about what exactly Smalls claimed regarding his commission using newspapers.com.

Overall, if you are primarily looking for information about a soldier's service to use directly, you are better off using secondary sources anyway. For instance, if you can only find information about where an individual is stationed on use military returns, it is very OR to use that info, but can be used in some cases. Certainly, if you want a signature or details about an individual's appearance, Fold3 is great. But I think it is very valuable when you know the unit an individual served, and you use it to trace backwards to where he was stationed and/or enlisted. Finally, there are secondary (and primary) sources Fold3 hosts that may be difficult to find elsewhere. For example, there is some interesting regiment level detail I've looked up about WWII regiments. Some of this is primary and some secondary, but I think it is more or less reliable. I once used this to trace my grandparents' movements, and I'd perhaps someday like more details on those units to Wikipedia, although I'm not sure if I would use the sources on Fold3 directly, but I know that having the Fold3 sources would make it easier to search for secondary. Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As an FYI

...you've been mentioned on the ARBCOM page in the section Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Nathan_B._Forrest, however the filing party apparently didn't bother to notify the people in the statement section, hence the message. If you'd like you are welcome to leave your two cents on the page, otherwise feel free to disregard this post. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:06, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TomStar81: Thanks. Actually, I was notified (diff [2]), although perhaps not quite correctly. I did provide some diffs to the RfAr, but don't really have any comment as I'm not sure Azarbarzin meant to start a RfAr and the discussion is ongoing at the talk page of the Forrest article. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then you were notified correctly, however the guy/girl filing the request declined to provide the diff certifying that you had been notified. Therefore, the only surefire way for me to ensure that you got the message was to leave you a message so I could leave the mandatory diff notice. Sorry for the inconvenience. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:30, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. Thanks! Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A case in which you had been involved was declined

Dear Smmurphy, on behalf of the Arbitration Committee, I would like to inform you that Nathan B. Forrest case, in which you had been listed as involved party, has been declined as premature. The committee concluded that other WP:Dispute resolution methods, such as RfC, should be followed first. Please feel free to contact me or an arbitrator if you have any questions.
Best regards, Kostas20142 (talk) 12:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:DreamsCloud

Hi. Would you mind taking some time to review Draft:DreamsCloud? It would be much appreciated as the AfC process is highly backlogged at the moment. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 15:46, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Davykamanzi, I will of course leave it up to Smmurphy as to whether they review the draft, but generally speaking it's bad form to ask for a review five days after you've submitted it. What makes your draft more important than the other 1900 waiting? Primefac (talk) 16:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

@Primefac: Sorry, I didn't mean for my request to come off that way. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 16:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davykamanzi: Thanks for the message (and thanks Prinefac for keeping an eye on things). Depending on my time constraints, I am often very selective on the AFC articles I review. Right now and for the foreseeable future I am very busy, and if I review anything, I will probably only review articles I am interested in and that I have experience with (basically, biographies of dead people). Your article looks good to me, but I am not familiar enough with business articles to review your article quickly and I don't have the time/interest to give it the time/effort it deserves, so I do not expect that I will review the article. Sorry and good luck. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Smmurphy.

I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 18:09, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

DYK for Liwonde National Park

On 29 November 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Liwonde National Park, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Liwonde National Park has a population of approximately 12,000 large mammals (elephants pictured) and more than 380 recorded bird species? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Liwonde National Park. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Liwonde National Park), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one! Your articles are very welcome at Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:17, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Dr. Blofeld: As you can kind of see, most of the update for this article was done by User:Inkian Jason on behalf and paid by African Parks. I usually edit about African-American topics these days - I wish I had time to edit more and on more topics. I've worked on one other African subject in the last two months, William Smith (registrar), and I'll add both of these two the list. Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve

If I help Inkian Jason with his new article, is it better to move it into mainspace (copy and paste) or is it best to work on it in user space? It is currently a bit heavy on African Parks involvement and light on other content such as the park's history and the flora and fauna. Looking at Liwonde National Park, you seem to have merged his draft with the pre-existing article and then done a lot of work on it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwmhiraeth: Following Template:Request edit/Instructions#For reviewers, I copied Jason's text over the original article, crediting him in the edit summary and linking to his page (so authorship is clear). That way all of my edits were in the mainspace (I felt better about doing it that way). I agree with your points. I posted my initial thoughts about his draft for this page at User talk:Inkian Jason#Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve, as I told him I'd be interested in doing it but am not likely to have the time/interest for the next month or so. If you take it on, though, I'll follow along, if you don't mind. Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:31, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WW I Army stevedores

I don't know if your interest in Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora would include the stevedore regiments but here goes. While working on the article about Frederick E. Toy, an NCO who was awarded the Medal of Honor for Wounded Knee, I didn't get why, since he retired as an ordnance sergeant, his grave marker read "Captain." It turns out that he was recalled during WWI, commissioned and assigned to the 303rd Stevedore Regiment. There were something between four and eight of these things, depending on the source (that rattling you hear is me trying to clear my head). I discussed the regiments with AustralianRupert at milhist and he agreed that regiments get pages. I began, but stevedore regiments rapidly turned Services of Supply, American Expeditionary Forces. I'm still trying to come up with enough to produce pages about the regiments that will be more than just permanent stubs. Newspapers has been helpful, but there's a lot of repetition. and a lot of articles about enlistment a deaths. One source suggested that the units were slave labor battalions. I'm not completely sure that's true but I'm also not completely sure it's not true. I think the units say a lot about how we used Colored/Negro soldiers in the War to End All Wars. In the near term, I probably going to create a page about stevedore operations to get what I do have off the SoS page because SoS did so many other things like running an American railroad in France. Comments welcome.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 01:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: Thanks for the message. I'm certainly interested in stevedore regiments - although I hadn't heard of them, or at least by that name. In my personal research, I've had a hard time finding out much about non-combatant soldiers (or servicepeople in any branch), and in this case I am not successful. From what I can see, they seem to be called "Labor Battalion" as well as "Stevedore Regiment", but I'm not 100% sure. Conrad Hilton was a Lieutenent in the 304th (according to google books search) or 305th (looking at one of his service records on ancestry.com) Labor Battalion, I think. Kelly Miller (scientist) has a p-d book about black soldiers in the war [3] that discusses the stevedores (and gives a p-d version of a nice the picture of members of the 301st stevedore regiment). Also, there is one good book on project Muse, Torchbearers for Democracy, covering the subject [4] with long stretches discussing the stevedores/labor battalions. If you don't have access to project muse, I highly recommend it. It covers a subset of academic books available on google books, but offers full access. Applications are free and easy at Wikipedia:Project MUSE. I'm mentioning these links first as suggestions for you, as I have been pretty limited in my editing recently. But at your happy suggestion, in the new year I'll try to take a look at the SoS and possible stevedore pages and a second plus for adding these links is to give me a pointer where to start if I see opportunities to add more. Smmurphy^(Talk) 07:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Smmurphy. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and voting

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 25

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017

OAWiki & #1Lib1Ref
User Group update
Global branches update
Spotlight: Research libraries and Wikimedia
Bytes in brief

Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Newspapers.com

What am I missing? Walter B. Russell Jr. (brother-in-law to Joseph Clemons) really was a member of the Georgia House of Representatives for three terms (1970 - 1976, I think), so he gets a page. Why doesn't he show up anywhere in the Atlanta Journal/Constitution? I don't have Publisher Extra, although I asked to be upgraded.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 22:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: Thanks for your question. For Russell, I find 13 articles of varying usefulness (chronologically):

I found many more that were duplicates or had no real information. I can guess that you found at least one of them, as I see a clipping by a username that seems likely to be you. I found a few articles about him being a groomsman for someone elses wedding. One of those I've included above because he was a groomsman for the son of a notable college football player, Lou Louisell (note: any article where an individual is mentioned in passing, I usually quickly google the most important people in that article to see if there are any interesting connections, I do not have an encyclopedia of Auburn football in my head). You are right, though, I also don't find much about him in Georgia papers.

I've had similar difficulty finding information about state reps from other states, so this isn't too surprising. Most states publish some version of a official summary of state congressmen. In Georgia, I find this information on the Georgia Governmetn Publications website (http://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/ggp/?Welcome&Welcome). The "Picture Book" has images of reps. In the one for 1971, I find a picture of Russell, his address, and his job (retired Army officer). I'm not sure if the link will work, but here it is: http://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/cgi/ggpd?userid=public;dbs=ggpd;ini=ggpd.ini;action=retrieve;format=.;grid=;rset=001;recno=59. That same site also hosts the Georgia Official and Statistical Register. I find Russell in the 1971-1972 one, here: http://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/statreg-images/pdfs/1971.pdf (note this is a very large pdf, but using ctrl+f for "walter b. russell" or "walter brown russell" I find him on page 519. I imagine you'll find more about him on other pages. I also find a group of documents called, Journal of the House of Representatives of the State of Georgia (link: http://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/cgi/ggpd?userid=public&dbs=ggpd&action=results&rset=007&recno=1&numrecs=100), but these don't seem to be working. Anyway, the Georgia Official and Statistical Register is the best document, I'd consider looking for the version from each of Russell's years to see if there is any variation (I didn't look at any other years), but the one I linked plus the newspaper articles you and I have found could make a pretty good article. Let me know how I can help! Smmurphy^(Talk) 02:28, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll have to swing by my local library next week and get the current GALILEO password; they won't give it out over the phone. At least one of the newspapers links gave me that ugly Publisher Extra message. I dropped a note on Cameron asking what had happened to my request. Thanks again.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 02:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: I don't get any request for a password on the galileo.usg.edu sites, are you sure you need one? Also, I'm happy to make clippings of the papers that don't work for you. I'd have made clippings of all of them, but I'm just busy enough this evening that I couldn't really justify putting in the extra time to do it. If you would like, just send me the urls that don't work, either here or by email, and I'll send you links to clippings. Smmurphy^(Talk) 03:03, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logging in is not required but I think you get to see more if you do log in. Then again, the rules may have changed and I didn't notice. I did find out last evening that my Project Muse account is still active; that'll get me into the stevedore content (earlier conversation).--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 15:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gaarmyvet: Sounds good. I've updated the article using the "Georgia Official and Statistical Register" and, in my opinion, the best newspapers.com clippings you missed from the list above. I'm sure you will, but please feel free to look over and correct my contributions. Smmurphy^(Talk) 23:04, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smmurphy:, thanks. I also found the 1973 edition of the register. It (maybe both) say more about his military awards.

User group for Military Historians

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]