User talk:TJMSmith/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:TJMSmith. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Your GA nomination of Nancy Marcus
The article Nancy Marcus you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Nancy Marcus for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MX -- MX (talk) 15:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's a process that is sometimes really flawed. I've added a bit to address the concern expressed by Noswall59, but quite frankly I was completely blindsided by the comment. Usually, they are a much more collaborative editor. Feel free to change or alter anything and please don't get discouraged. SusunW (talk) 19:31, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Thsmi002 Hi, I just wanted to apologise if my comment was discouraging or upsetting in any way. It was not principally addressed to you, but to the reviewer who I thought should have recommended you include some summaries of her academic output and critical engagement with it, before passing it. Again, don't be discouraged! The article is in really good shape: clear writing, good source material, a thorough summary of her institutional career trajectory, and now, with SusunW's help, includes a good summary of her research and its impact. Best of luck for the future, and happy editing. —Noswall59 (talk) 20:50, 23 November 2018 (UTC).
- Noswall59 Hello, I appreciate your insights and thank you for helping in the review of this article. It helped yield a more robust article which will better represent the subject and help readers. Thsmi002 (talk) 14:21, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- SusunW Thank you for helping to add the final touch to her research career and for your earlier guidance. I look forward to helping to create future articles. Thsmi002 (talk) 14:21, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
December 2018 at Women in Red
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
December 2018 at Women in Red
Continuing: | ||
|
Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
Removal of BLP Sources from Betsy Beutler
Hello! I saw the BLP Sources tag to the article. I've since added three additional sources that I believe can be considered reliable, and would like to therefore have the BLP tag removed. I believe I can do this myself but perhaps that would be a COI? Would you be wiling to review/remove if that seems appropriate? Thank you! 3shoggoth (talk) 02:55, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- @3shoggoth:Hello, thanks for the message. I removed the unreliable sources from the article and added a more specific tag to improve sources in the filmography portion of the article which is still largely unsourced. I also cleaned up some of the formatting. Thanks for adding your sources, they are helping to improve the article! Keep up the good work. Thsmi002 (talk) 03:28, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Thsmi002:Oh okay perfect thank you very much! For reference is Rotten Tomatoes not considered reliable as a reference? As RT is not user-editable like IMDB I would think references there would carry more weight? 3shoggoth (talk) 16:10, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Thsmi002:Pinging on this. Thanks! 3shoggoth (talk) 16:19, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
The article Vicki Huff has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Cannot find independent sources to verify notability.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Natureium (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
The article Julie Auger has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Cannot find independent sources to verify notability.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Natureium (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Julie Auger for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Julie Auger 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/Julie Auger until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Natureium (talk) 20:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Vicki Huff for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vicki Huff 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/Vicki Huff until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Natureium (talk) 20:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Robert T. Clubb for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert T. Clubb 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/Robert T. Clubb until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Natureium (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
A page you started (I. Jonathan Amster) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating I. Jonathan Amster.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.
Please expand. A sentence or two describing what someone is known for aside from mere existing will stave off notability questions and deletion discussions, and improve the quality of this encyclopedia. I know if I were marginally notable, I'd rather have no article at all than a scant, bare-bones one indistinguishable from a staff directory blurb.
To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
--Animalparty! (talk) 20:06, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of I. Jonathan Amster for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I. Jonathan Amster 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/I. Jonathan Amster until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Natureium (talk) 18:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Jennifer R. Mandel for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jennifer R. Mandel 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/Jennifer R. Mandel until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Natureium (talk) 18:16, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Edward Rebar for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edward Rebar 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/Edward Rebar until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Natureium (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018
Hello TJMSmith,
- Reviewer of the Year
This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.
- Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.
See also the list of top 100 reviewers.
- Less good news, and an appeal for some help
The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.
- Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019
At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.
- Training video
Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
thanks!
Thanks for adding the note about the inclusion in women-related AfD, I was trying to figure out exactly how to do that! valereee (talk) 23:40, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
January 2019 at Women in Red
 January events:
|
newspapers.com clipping link
Hi, Thsmi002! I saw that you did some sort of magic at Joan Steinbrenner which I didn't understand -- there's a way to be able to show people the articles, even if they don't have a newspapers.com account? valereee (talk) 20:06, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Valereee: Yes! When you are looking at the article, inbetween the icons "find" and "Print/save" there is an option with scissors called "clip." This lets you take a snapshot of the article. You can click view your clippings to see all of them and copy the URL of the clipping. This allows people who do not have a newspapers.com account to view the snapshot/clip. There is a brief explanation at Wikipedia:Newspapers.com. Thanks for helping to improve articles! Thsmi002 (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
- That is awesome! I am so going to try to remember that one, lol. I have created two or three other articles recently that rely heavily on newspapers.com! valereee (talk) 17:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Sangamo Therapeutics for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sangamo Therapeutics 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/Sangamo Therapeutics until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. UninvitedCompany 21:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:08, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:08, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Ray Nazarro
Hello! I undid your edit to the List of American artists that added Ray Nazzaro. He is a director rather than a visual artist. There are no other film directors on that page. I've added him to List of film and television directors. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:46, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
- I fixed it. You meant Ray Navarro, not the Ray Nazarro that you added. Who would have thought there would be two directors with such similar names!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
- @ThatMontrealIP: Thank you for catching that! Maybe I should add a disambiguation link to the pages to avoid similar mistakes. Thsmi002 (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
- It's the gosh-darned autocomplete, I would imagine! A disambig hatnote would be a good idea. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:56, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
- @ThatMontrealIP: Thank you for catching that! Maybe I should add a disambiguation link to the pages to avoid similar mistakes. Thsmi002 (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
- I fixed it. You meant Ray Navarro, not the Ray Nazarro that you added. Who would have thought there would be two directors with such similar names!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Ways to improve Ben J. Pierce
Hello, Thsmi002,
Thanks for creating Ben J. Pierce! I edit here too, under the username Newslinger and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Please take some time to replace the unreliable sources with more reliable ones. Thanks for contributing this article to Wikipedia!
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Newslinger}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
— Newslinger talk 14:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 | Hello, TJMSmith. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Ray Navarro at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! PopularOutcasttalk2me! 23:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC) |
Thanks for introducing me to this remarkable person.
- @PopularOutcast: Many thanks for your thorough review! I will try to incorporate your changes in future articles moving forward :) Thsmi002 (talk) 00:21, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thsmi002, you are quite welcome! I like to put the explanations in because people don't often know those guidelines even exist and since they are in the history, everyone can learn from them. I guess I both like to learn and educate. :) Good luck.
- @PopularOutcast: Many thanks for your thorough review! I will try to incorporate your changes in future articles moving forward :) Thsmi002 (talk) 00:21, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Nina West
Turns out Nina West, who we saw in Columbus, will be on the upcoming season of RuPaul's Drag Race! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Another Believer: that's awesome! I need to catch up on this season of All Stars...I've fallen behind! Thsmi002 (talk) 01:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
February 2019 at Women in Red
 February events:
|
WP:PROf
I very much appreciate your work in adding articles on potentially notable women nutritionists, as I have form any years tried to get great recognition from WP for fields in which women were historically predominant. However, in order to do this effectively, it's necessary at least as a start to work with the ones who are most clearly notable by conventional standards. The ones who will unquestionably be notable under the relevant standard, WP:PROF, are those who have held a named chair at a major univiersity, or won a major national level prize, or been president of the leading national society in their field. For everyone else, it is necessary to show it by publications: eithe major widely adopted textbooks, or several books from major academic publishers with independent 3rd party reviews, or a high level of citations (in the biological sciences, we normally need a Google Scholar record of at least 1 publication with over 100 citations, or a h index of over 30 or 40. Asarough guide, this normally corresponds to the position of full professor at a research university.
Associate professors rarely meet the publication standard, , and Chairmen or Deans of departments or colleges within a university are not considered to hold a major academic administrative position. In my personal opinion perhaps all of these ought to, but my experience with defending perhaps five thousand academic AfD discussions over the last 12 years has shown the community will ot usually accept this. As we both know, there unfortunately remains in Wikipedia a degree of bias against women and the professions in which they are prominent. The most effective way of combatting this is to make sure that the articles submitted for these people very clearly meet the conventional standards. That way, if people who still do not understand the importance of these professions object, their objections will not be sustained, and they will soon learn to apply standards in a more equitable fashion.
As a hint, everyone who has been the president of a national association back to the beginning is notable , even if information is relatively sparers, and it would be very useful to construct articles of earlier people as a framework that can be filled in later. This is especially important for the earlier years, when people did not publish as much as they do now,..
If you have any problems with the notable individuals, let me know on my user talk; but you might correspondingly want to withdraw or move to user space the ones that do not meet the current standards until you cna find more information about them. . DGG ( talk ) 10:04, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- @DGG: Thank you for the thorough message! The articles I recently wrote all meet WP:PROF with some individuals meeting several criteria. Before starting the bios, I search to see if they are fellows, named chairs, and also on Google Scholar to check if their publications are highly cited as is the case with all of my recent articles: Jamie Stang, Lauren Wise, Irem Y. Tumer, Lisa Bodnar, Anna Maria Siega-Riz, and Linda Bullock. Where possible, I included the GS profile in the external links. I started these quick bios with the hope to come back to expand them in the future. Hopefully others may join in the effort also :) Thsmi002 (talk) 14:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- Actually, is was Jamie Stang that I noticed as a potential problem. The material you entered did not show notability. The citations to her publications do, but you had not entered them. I've entered as many as I usually do, plus her PhD thesis. This also serves to document the fields in which she is actually an expert, if someone challenges for a third party source. The source you used was her official page at the department, but not her CV, which is more authoritative (The department pages are often written by PR staff "assisting" the faculty) . I don't think it a good idea to leave so much for others, or the future. I used to leave a great many unfinished bios for the future myself, and there are about 1000 of them that got deleted from draft and 100 or so from mainspace that I need to find again and rescue. I'm an optimist: if I do 2 a week, the odds are I will probably manage to live long enough,. DGG ( talk ) 21:22, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
The article Rejji Kuruvilla has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ... discospinster talk 00:49, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Chicken Girls: The Movie for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chicken Girls: The Movie 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/Chicken Girls: The Movie until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Andise1 (talk) 00:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Christopher Emery
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Christopher Emery has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
As you likely know, generally only one credible source is require to cite facts in WP articles. In a number of cases in this article I believe multiple citations have been used to support the same statement. You might want to check the article and verify this is the case. If so, you might wish to remove one or more of the "weaker" ones.
Best of luck with the GAN.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:50, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
A page you started (Aurelie Thiele) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Aurelie Thiele.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
I am borderline as to whether the cite-counts are sufficient for NPROF.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Winged Blades of Godric}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
∯WBGconverse 18:23, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
I'd say this article has come pretty far in the past year, hasn't it? Wikieditor19920 (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Wikieditor19920: I was just thinking that the other day when I saw you nominated it for GA. It looks phenomenal thanks to all of your efforts. Hopefully the review doesn't take too long. Thsmi002 (talk) 02:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
- Here's hoping! Wikieditor19920 (talk) 05:32, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Kalief Browder
| Hello, TJMSmith. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Kalief Browder at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Baffle☿gab 23:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC) |
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
A page you started (Bonnie Mathieson) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Bonnie Mathieson.
I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Nice work on your new articles, but be careful of simply cutting and pasting information from other sources onto WP. Please read WP:COPYVIO.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Onel5969 TT me 15:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Hi Onel5969, it looks like the source in question is actually public domain, and is attributed at the bottom of the page (This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the National Institutes of Health), so it doesn't appear to be a copyvio or plagiarism. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:22, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Dang. I missed that SkyGazer 512 - thanks for catching. Will remove template and undo my mistaken "cleansing". Onel5969 TT me 15:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: No problem, mistakes happen. Thanks for fixing. (although I'm in no way involved with this article, I just happened to be stalking this talk page
)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: No worries, thank you for reviewing my pages! Thanks SkyGazer for catching that :) Thsmi002 (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the understanding. And keep up the good work on article creation.Onel5969 TT me 15:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: No worries, thank you for reviewing my pages! Thanks SkyGazer for catching that :) Thsmi002 (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: No problem, mistakes happen. Thanks for fixing. (although I'm in no way involved with this article, I just happened to be stalking this talk page
- Dang. I missed that SkyGazer 512 - thanks for catching. Will remove template and undo my mistaken "cleansing". Onel5969 TT me 15:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Thsmi002, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:34, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Amorymeltzer! Thsmi002 (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
March 2019 at Women in Red
   Please join us for these virtual events:
| ||
|
|
Creig Northrop
What makes Creig Northrop notable by Wikipedia standards? -- Pemilligan (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Pemilligan: Thanks for the message. Northrop meets WP:BASIC based on the "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Here are some of the sources included in the article: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Thsmi002 (talk) 19:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Freddie Oversteegen
FYI I cropped and uploaded the image you had added to Freddie Oversteegen. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
NPR Newsletter No.17
Hello TJMSmith,
- News
- The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.
- Discussions of interest
- Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
- {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
- A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
- There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.
- Reminders
- NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
- NPP Tools Report
- Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
- copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
- The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| "this user makes women blue" | |
|---|---|
| ... you were recipient no. 1884 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
April 2019
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)
Drag
RE Yuhua Hamasaki, Soju (drag queen) I didn't place them in Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women since while the stage persona of a Drag queen is female, the gender and sexual identity of the actor is not defined by the role - some identify as male. Neither bio was clear as to the preferred gender IDs of the actors (to the point there was mixed pronoun use). Icewhiz (talk) 12:28, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Icewhiz: I wasn't sure either, but decided to err on the side of inclusion because of some of the pronouns used in the articles. Thsmi002 (talk) 12:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Re: Indiana Massara
Hi, I would like to know what has to be cited in order to sustain the page of [Indiana Massara]. She is not someone random (1 million followers on Instagram, 265k on YouTube, plus verified by Instagram), she has multiple articles that quoted her, and has featured article as well. I don't know what else she would be needed. Please advise! Thank you in advance! Harrytsang (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I have reviewed the earliest version of [Annie LeBlanc] (Co-star of Chicken Girls) Wikipedia Pages, I have cited much more legitimate sources on [Indiana Massara] than that page. Harrytsang (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Hattie Alexander.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hattie Alexander.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Franziska Grieder
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Franziska Grieder has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:46, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you
Dear Thsmi002, thank you for creating the page Murder_of_Nusrat_Jahan_Rafi. Someone needed to, and that someone is you. Thank you, dear human. Curdigirl (talk) 16:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
May you join this month's editathons from WiR!
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Speedy deletion nomination of Leigh Riddick
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Leigh Riddick requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:36, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Leigh Riddick for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Leigh Riddick 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/Leigh Riddick until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:39, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
May 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Your article.
Hey, just wanted to say that I appreciate the attempt at the article. I don't see how she meets the requirements though. The one source provided is not a 3rd party source and while she appears to be quite competent but not notable enough to have a stand alone article. Am I missing something that qualifies her to WP:PROF? You cited it in your first edit summary but the reason escapes me. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
- Hi. In my opinion, she clears WP:PROF#1 by having three papers with over 100 citations. Thsmi002 (talk)
- That seems like a low bar of notability, is that a normal thresh-hold or is it a subjective judgement? I'm open to the possibility I'm wrong that's why I'm asking. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:01, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Hu Jinqing
On 15 May 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Hu Jinqing, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
Stephen 00:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
NPR Newsletter No.18
Hello TJMSmith,
- WMF at work on NPP Improvements
Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:
- Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
- Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.
- Reliable Sources for NPP
Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.
- Backlog drive coming soon
Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.
- News
- Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.
- Discussions of interest
- A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
- There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
- What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Creating articles
Thank you for making the article for Lauv's song "Drugs & the Internet", but the correct capitalisation is with a lower-case t. Please see MOS:CT and WP:NCMDAB. Your article has been moved to the correct place. Thank you. Ss112 14:58, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Ss112: Thanks for your help! Thsmi002 (talk) 02:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Leirion Gaylor Baird not exactly an Academic of Oxford
I've got a COI with Leirion Gaylor Baird, so I'm not going to edit more than what I considered bare factual stuff. However, I wanted to suggest to you a change from Academics of the University of Oxford to Alumni of the University of Oxford. The former is more people who are faculty at Oxford or alumni who are in academic careers, while the latter is just the bucket of everyone with a degree. Gaylor Baird is not a professor or professional academic, whether at Oxford or no. Triplingual (talk) 02:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Triplingual: Good catch, I made the switch! Thanks, Thsmi002 (talk) 02:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Austin Eubanks
On 21 May 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Austin Eubanks, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
Stephen 23:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
June events with WIR
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
AfC review request
Hi, mind reviewing the draft I'm working on and which I've submitted yesterday? 137.74.150.79 (talk) 05:13, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Linda Collins-Smith
On 8 June 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Linda Collins-Smith, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:25, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Nechama Rivlin
On 8 June 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Nechama Rivlin, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:36, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Brossard image
Thanks for your edits on the Emma Brossard biography. The image you selected is from her wedding newspaper article, I think. There is perhaps a better one in the article NWF - it got clipped off from the citation URL. Perhaps use that one instead? (images and fair use are all confusion to me...) Thx, Bdushaw (talk) 00:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
- I proceeded and uploaded the more uptodate image - shakily following the fair use rationale given in the image you uploaded. I hope that's ok! Thx, Bdushaw (talk) 02:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Bdushaw: Totally fine! Thanks for writing the article, it is an interesting read. Thsmi002 (talk) 02:30, 12 June 2019 (UTC)