User talk:Triplingual

Switchboard operator article

Hello, I'm Prhartcom. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Switchboard operator without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry. Please consider restoring the deleted content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Prhartcom (talk) 20:15, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Triplingual! I saw your message on my talk page and decided to answer you here. You are right, sorry, you didn't delete anything. It was someone without a Wikipedia account that edited right before you; somehow I lumped their change into yours. What do you think of their edit? The diff is here. Do you think they should or should not have deleted the content? I can't decide. Their edit summary suggests the deleted content was not WP:NPOV. It was sourced content, which is normally not a good idea to delete, but perhaps it was POV and needed to be removed. Would you like to look at it and decide if it should partially or fully go back in, or leave it out? I have really no experience on this subject and hopefully you do. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 17:03, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem at all. While I don't have experience on the subject of Switchboard Operators, I have gained some experience with gender history and think that the essence of the deleted material should stay in. That is, if the occupation has traditionally been gendered female, that's meaningful information. If hiring practices were biased in appearance-connected ways, that also seems meaningful. It would be nice, I suppose, to contextualize both of those, of course, so if there are Wikipedia articles on gender and labor practices (Occupational segregation, for one), or information on whether telephone operators skew female globally or just in certain countries, it seems good practice to connect to them as support for why the edits should be left in. Additionally, my thought as a n00b Wikipedia contributor is that as the deletion is the only edit made from that IP, it's a little suspect itself. (I realize that there are perfectly good reasons why an edit might come from an IP rather than a user, but I would hope that a proficient user would immediately recognize the issue and return to sign a minor change just for form.) Is this an incorrect assumption in Wikipedia-land? Being in the middle of writing a paper at the moment (changes in urban women's employment in technology in USA in WWII and immediately after) I cannot take the time to make the edits, but I'll somehow mark the article as one to come back to. Triplingual (talk) 17:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean about suspecting IP edits, especially if they make big changes. I appreciate your gender history knowledge; and I foresee fascinating Wikipedia articles from you in the near future, starting with an improvement of this one, when you have time of course (the time constraints are the same with me for similar reasons). I have reverted the IP's edits, and then later you can come back and make your gender improvements. Good luck on your paper. Prhartcom (talk) 18:01, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Triplingual, just stopping by to acknowledge your experience with gender history (and to make sure I had spelled the subject correctly, and I had not!) It sounds interesting like an interesting subject. Looks like you're fitting in here at Wikipedia nicely; my advice is to read plenty of your favourite source material in order to cite it in your favourite articles, and to read some of the links below. Enjoy working with other editors here ... a fascinating culture of (usually) smart people (all of whom have somehow agreed to always WP:AGF to each other! I suppose it's a lesson of life.) Feel free to ask me any questions on my talk page anytime, and the talk page of any article is a good place to start also. Good luck and have fun! Prhartcom (talk) 02:36, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Triplingual, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Prhartcom (talk) 02:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Haven wiki meet up/ edit a thon?

I am baby wikipedia editor, only six months old. I saw that you had be involved/ or attended/ or organized a Wiki meet ups and/or Editathons. I will be spending a week in Wallingford (New Haven) Is there a library meeting in the near future that i could attend? Toandanel49 (talk) 21:47, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]