User talk:Tagishsimon

Hello sir. I know this boy Onkar and he is doing a lot of good work and can been seen in news media(independent sources) and got rejected. So what needs to be improved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.85.167 (talk) 19:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry? I just received a message about the post being a car crash? Is that how you speak to users? Figo7Costa10 (talk) 02:27, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jorden has also been on TSN radio, Podcasts on Apple & Spotify and has had several interviews in print media. I'm not quite sure what the issue is here? Figo7Costa10 (talk) 02:31, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 10

Hi, Tagishsimon. The Romans did not have a given name but praenomen. Read the documentation before making massive changes to Wikidata. Thank you. --Romulanus (talk) 10:32, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's January 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: "Prisoners" New: "Fashion designers" New: "Geofocus: Great Britain and Ireland" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello! An old dispute that you were involved in has been brought up again. Your opinion is greatly valued. Thank you! KevinNinja (talk) 00:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's February 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: "Black women" New: "Mathematicians and statisticians" New: "Geofocus: Island women" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons. Historically, our March event has been one of the biggest offerings of the year. This year, we are collaborating with two other wiki communities. Our article campaign is the official on-line/virtual node for Art+Feminism. Our image campaign supports the Whose Knowledge? initiative. Women's History Month 2018 Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

In Cathinka Buchwieser, we need to translate the caption and the title of the song, which is "Der zürnenden Diana", which means "To the ... Diana". Afaik, the old-fashioned "zürnen" is much more serious than "quarrel". I find "get angry", and also "rage against". "Zorn", from which it is derived, comes as anger, wrath, rage, fury ... - no quarrel. Perhaps "raging" comes closest, as "zürnen" is derived from a verb. "To the raging Diana"? - This has "To Diana in her wrath". - this doesn't translate the title, but describes her as a force of destruction. - All of which still doesn't cover the caption. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, at this distance, Gerda Arendt, where I picked up "quarrelsome" from. Thought it was the image's commons descripton, but no. I'm happy that the caption be improved and profess no competence whatsoever in the questions you're raising. That said, can I throw some questions back at you...

• Based on the commons file name, [1] and the existing caption, are we not looking at an image celebrating Schubert's treatment of Der Fischer (Goethe) and if so, is not the right-most person the mermaid, and is she not trying to pull the fisher-person into the water? If so, the caption might be altered to allude to this?
• If CB is the middle of the three people, the caption should say "Centre:" rather than "Left:" ... Schubert is on the left
• If she is Diana, then yes, wrathful probably much better than quarrelsome.

hth --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I confess that I'd love to learn more on that painting, which is from a tryptich, to make things worse. I agree with the mermaid as the right person, but don't think she needs to be mentioned on Buchwieser's article. Fischer seems to be the title of the right panel of three, - I wouldn't know where to find the others. The bow in "Diana's" hands points at the first line of the "zürnenden" poem, "Ja, spanne nur den Bogen, mich zu tödten" [2]. Seems more than one scene on that panel, and here's the left. Even if we agree that Diana is a reference to Buchwieser, it doesn't say she posed nude for it, or does it somewhere? I doubt it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So the right panel is a mash-up of CD as Diana replacing the fisherman in Der Fischer, seems to be the interim conclusion? Agree we do not need to mention the mermaid, but we should mention Der Fischer & Goethe? From where comes the knowledge that the centre person is CB ... I guess I should ask, though I take it on trust. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:18, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can't follow ;) - I see poor Schubert, in the centre, - killed by Diana and torn to the water by the nymph, - between two dangerous women. I guess I'll word the DYK without the nude. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'd read it completely differently, and wrongly. I had Schubert on the pedestal, but that's our CB as Diana. I had CB as the person in the middle, but that's Schubert. "CB as Diana adopts a pose, indifferent to Schubert being dragged to his death in a rendering of Goethe's Der Fischer. Perhaps she didn't like his music after all.". There. Fixed it for you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's April 2018 worldwide online editathons. Focus on: April+Further with Art+Feminism Archaeology Military history (contest) Geofocus: Indian subcontinent Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred --Rosiestep (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

I'm trying to take a Wikibreak, due to illness in the family. However, I have noticed that 86.183.83.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is making wholesale changes to cats: on War Memorial pages without reference or explanation. I've only had time to revert the Portland Cenotaph page, but thought you should be aware. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 11:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank David. Sorry about the illness :(

83.1 in the example you provide is moving the article from an 'in the UK' category to an 'in England' category ... there is such a category and it has 130ish entries ... is that a problem? --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2018 worldwide online editathons. File:Soraya Aghaee4.jpg New: "Women of the Sea" New: "Villains" New: "Women in Sports" New: "Central Eastern European women" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 02:10, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m willing to help with the Wikidata task you started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Inconsistency between redlists. I have a tech-ish background, and I learn fast, but I need some help learning how to edit the code. Would you be willing to teach me enough to get started on this? NotARabbit (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahah! Investigating your diff, I can see that the edit you made was not on Wikidata, but on the project list page. That should be easy enough to replicate; I’ll start at the other end of the alphabet for occupations. Please do check in on a couple of my edits and make sure I’m doing them right, though. NotARabbit (talk) 21:22, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) That would be great, NotARabbit, thank you. It's fairly easy: pick a redlist, edit it, check if it has the wrong statements in it, and if so, delete the statements and insert the right statement ... this diff shows it fairly well.

We remove ?sitelink schema:about ?item . (but only where it is on its own. It if is in the form OPTIONAL { ?sitelink schema:about ?item . } we leave it alone because it is being used to count sitelinks,

We remove FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?wfr schema:about ?item . ?wfr schema:inLanguage "en" } (and note that the variable name may be different - not ?wfr but ?wen or ?somethingelse ... doesn't matter).

we insert < FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?wen schema:about ?item; schema:isPartOf <https://en.wikipedia.org/> . }

save, then hit the "Automatically update the list now " link ... Listeria will do its stuff.

If it doesn't work (i.e. the SPARQL is incorrect), there'll probably be no change in the page; or else the page will have zero rows. You can revert the edit.

I normally check the history to see that listeria has written a new page, which has more bytes in it, so, this sort of thing

ping me as you need. I will check your edits (though I have to attack some plaster with steam and menaces ... DIY time :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC) --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I pinged you on the project page instead of here. Sorry to scatter this! Anyway, I’ve only made two edits so far, and both of them increased the page by a whole lot: [3] and [4]. Both had that SERVICE command that I mentioned on the project page, which I didn’t touch.

”Menaces”?! Are you threatening your walls? :-D In about 45 minutes, I’ll be starting my own DIY job—trying to clean out my patio. Good luck on whatever you’re doing, and thanks for your help! NotARabbit (talk) 22:18, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I’m stopping now, because when I ran the bot after editing on the journalists list, the list decreased by 484,179 bytes. I think that was because there was a typo in the original code (?wwiki instead of ?wiki). Which brings me to a serious conundrum: is okay to interchange ?wiki, ?wfr, and ?wer? I was copying the text of your edit on mathematicians, and now realize that I’ve been replacing everything willy-nilly as I go. I don’t want to compound the error, if it is an error, so I’ll go do my chores now. Back later. NotARabbit (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NotARabbit: Checking ... footballers=good. Poets - you left the ?sitelink schema:about ?item . in ... needs to be removed (I've done). Playrights - ditto, needed to remove ?sitelink schema:about ?item . (done). Novelists - ditto - done. Journalists - yes, you're right, the SPARQL as you found it was wrong. You were correct to make both variable names the same ... doesn't matter what the name is, does matter that it is the same. It's saying "there's a value which is a sitelink, and the same value is a member of en.wiki." If you use different variables names, then it reads 'there is a value which is a site link, and there is a different value which is part of en.wiki.'. So there are two errors we're trying to correct ... footballers you corrected both. The others you corrected one out of the two, which is why the row lengths increased; but I fixed the other, which is why they increased again. And you fixed the Journalists error just for the hell of it. Journalists dropped by a large amount because it has been broken since October 2017, and in that time has had the limit lowered from 5000 to 2000. So. All good; thanks for doing those, and I hope SPARQL is becoming a little clearer. It's great stuff.

In my 1880's Victorian flat, a previous occupant did the equivalent of this, but using some sort of plaster over intricately detailed ceiling mouldings. What were roses, leaves, stems, etc, became blobs. I've done a couple of metres. I think I have about 30 metres to go. Painstaking & filthy ... blast with steam, peel away the paint layer, get the plaster wet, poke with plastic things, and repeat. What's emering is gorgeous. I hope your patio is now a delight :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:18, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, those are variables! Now it makes sense that they’re different! I’m sorry about missing the ?sitelink schema:about ?item ., and thank you for cleaning those up.

Your project sounds grueling but immensely rewarding. It reminds me of a time when I was little and my dad bought us an old upright piano. The previous owners had painted it, thickly and badly. He spent months stripping and refinishing it; it turned out to be beautiful rosewood underneath. Unfortunately, my patio will never be anything other than utilitarian, but thank you for your good wishes. I’ll get back to editing now. NotARabbit (talk) 01:58, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a chance, could you take a look at the list of scientists? I’m afraid I missed a bracket or something. (I reverted myself.) NotARabbit (talk) 02:55, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out that the list of feminists has been broken for a while. I finally got it to run after 3 tries, and it went from 3 entries (none of whom were necessarily feminists, and one that already has an article on en.wiki) to 372! You might want to check to see that the rest of the code is all right. NotARabbit (talk) 04:59, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same for cartoonists. That one hasn’t run for more than a year. NotARabbit (talk) 07:24, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The two of you are doing a great job here. I hope you can keep it up and eliminate all the errors. Would it be useful to draw up guidelines for WIR showing how to compile a new red list based for example on an occupation (with just one query) and another based on an occupation comprising two or more variants (i.e. several profession queries)? This would allow other editors to add new lists as needed. In addition (or alternatively), you could provide us with examples of what you consider to be good examples of red link lists of these two types.--Ipigott (talk) 09:03, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NotARabbit: Afternoon. Good job on the Feminists; very satisfying to see broken redlists discovered and fixed. I've had a look at the three above and tweaked where necessary. Scientists, if I remember, had a filter written as FILTER(NOT EXISTS {some stuff})} where normally we expect FILTER NOT EXISTS {some stuff} ... i.e. it used parenthesis, and also included the } which terminates the query rather than having it on the line below. I'll join you later in fixing some more. And yes, there was an Abigail's Party period in the UK where mouldings, fireplaces & wood panel doors were covered up; tiling removed or painted over, and woodwork - your piano - painted in jaunty colours. Unimaginable now, but I guess it made sense then. (Just noticed - good grief, you've finished By Occupation. I feel ashamed of my sloth ... well done; very good work.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:12, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality - the queries there seem to be missing a ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5 ... i.e. they're not checking the item is a human, but assuming that a female with an occupation is a human. I've not corrected this in the By Nationality - A; might go back and do so later. The most harm the omission will do, is to include some fictional characters in the lists ... and very few of them. Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Afghanistan varies from the others - it's looking at several different properties in an item, for country=Afghanistan .. such as 'Country for Sport'. I need some time to convince myself of its approach before I apply it more widely; and right now I've run out of time. this diff shows what I did for Afghanistan ... mainly fixed the normal error; made it neater by inserting line breaks, and added in the P31 doodab. Have fun. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott: I'll write a wee guide and do some commenting of model queries and ping you when that's ready. I kinda defected to wikidata a year or so ago, and have been geeking over SPARQL ever since, although I remain a novice. Talk to me about long lists ... do we split them, e.g. long_list A-M, long_list N-Z? Do we want 15 or so redlist pages for actresses, of whom there are 39k? And if so, split by what? First letter of the name? Time period? Country? What are your thoughts? --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:12, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too keen on further splits. The actresses are a special case and attract huge Wikipedia coverage with or without red lists. Those interested in working specifically on actresses, can find useful listings by simply using the appropriate nationality-based lists. Same applies to models. So I would just leave things as they are.--Ipigott (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My SPARQL skills are still extremely rudimentary; I can “read” much better than I can “write” in the language. But I keep lurching along.

Your WQS report is dismaying! Not for the numbers in various occupations, but for the list of occupations themselves. There are 39,911 Q33999 (actor), but that number is incomplete unless you include Q15290732 (Actress), of which there are 5. There are acrobatic gymnasts and acrobatic gymnastics, archaeologists and archaeologists of the Roman provinces, acting and acting coaches, action films and activism, accompaniments and accompanists, agricultural scientists, agriculture, and agronomists. And that’s just dipping into the A’s.

It makes me want to dive in and start merging and correcting all that mess. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that Wikidata is just as allovertheplace as all the other projects! I think I was misled by the work “structured” in “structured data” — I thought that meant it would be orderly. Instead, it’s just as rambunctious and disordered as other human endeavors!

I’ll stop ranting on your talk page now. NotARabbit (talk) 02:40, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NotARabbit: It is a bit messy around the edges, yes. All the mistakes you could hope to see made, made. But oftimes when you dive into the detail it comes down to language issues and bad labelling ... I looked at a couple of forester occupations, where it looks like one is your average tree-chopper, and the other a more professional role - German, I think - which we might term an aborioculturalist. As to various degrees of archeologists ... it may be that (should be) that we can have families of occupations, where one - archaeologists of the Roman provinces - are a subclass of another - archaeologists.

All of that is not to say that it's not a great big - but glorious - mess. Dig in :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I discovered that {{Wikidata list}} has a lovely little built-in parameter that we can take advantage of for our redlists: links. If you set it to links=red_only, it removes “entries for which there exists a local article”. Very handy, and it works. Simplifies the SPARQL query. Cheers! NotARabbit (talk) 23:31, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NotARabbit: Good spot, NotARabbit. I'm guessing Listeria takes our query, and makes it part of a nested query in which Listeria does things like make the results distinct; gets labels; and with your new parameter, does the FILTER NOT EXISTS trick. I'm probably not going to rush to implement it, though, mainly for the reasons that there are advantages in being able to move the list query into WDS to play with it there; and advantages for anyone who reads the code but is unaware (like me up to 2 mins ago) that the template will do the removal trick. We should give the autolist parameter a spin sometime, see what it does. In the lists I did today (and thank you for your kind words) I'll direct your attention to the Rest of world list, wherein a series of MINUS {?item wdt:P27 wd:Q183 .} statements remove items which appear in the other country lists. There is a task to be done of looking through the Rest of World lists for country values that could be added to a country list (and deducted from the Rest of World with an additional MINUS statement). And in the Writers - Russia list we see the handling for multiple countries - another VALUES statement. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I like the MINUS statements, especially where you used [] to stand in for an object of “any value”. I’ve been using it to find just how many geologists we’ve been missing because no one specified their gender. (Most of them are difficult to figure out unless you know their native language, but I’ve found a few Georges, Borises, and Neldas.) And while adding some explanatory comments to the list of scientists, I realized that NO earth scientists were included (humph!), so there’s not much overlap with the list I made. :-) NotARabbit (talk) 04:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NotARabbit: Yup, I think you've wrung out as many females as are identifiable by eye in that list. A few tempting but possible false positives left. Do you fancy looking again at the occupations you've excluded ... some look earth sciency to me, but I know nothing of that discipline: I bunked out of geography classes in school and took metalwork instead. Handy with a lathe or molten aluminium; less useful with a rock hammer. And there might be others that could be folded into the geologists list? We could do with an accessible index of occupations mapped to redlists ... I might have a play with that later. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Welcome to Women in Red's June 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: WiR Loves Pride New: Singers and Songwriters New: Women in GLAM New: Geofocus: Russia/USSR Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

...you found it propagating in another spot! Thanks for the fix. NotARabbit (talk) 05:06, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Librarians and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Curators may benefit from your helping hand.--Ipigott (talk) 07:26, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actresses, painters, politicians, writers[edit]

I appreciate all the work you have been doing on the Wikidata lists and the templates but I've just been trying to access Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Actresses from the Redlist index and found it was no longer there, having been replaced by Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Redlist_index#actresses which points to lists by country. I see the same process has been implemented for painters, politicians and writers. I think it is rather unfortunate that the main lists have disappeared as I frequently make use of them to search, for instance, for actresses who died many years ago (wherever they came from) or for those who were both actresses and singers, etc., etc. I know you have been concerned that these general lists have not been able to display all the potential names but those already listed can be very useful when we are searching for pertinent articles which comply with specific criteria. Would it not be possible to include the longer lists before each item (actresses, painters, politicians, writers) on the "Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Redlist_index#actresses" listing, possibly with a word of explanation? Rather than simply being bold and reinserting them myself, it would be useful to have reactions from SusunW and Megalibrarygirl.--Ipigott (talk) 10:58, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am just grateful to have lists. For me it makes no difference how many there are, or how they are sorted, because I always sort the list by death date, try to find a dearly departed with sources and if not then look at the BLPs. If I don't find one there, that floats my boat, I look for another list. SusunW (talk) 14:02, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ipigott: If you are finding the lists useful, odds are you aren't alone and it would be good to have more lists like you specify available. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:20, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SusunW and Megalibrarygirl:: Thanks for these comments. I've tried to include them as discreetly as possible for those of us who find them useful. I also see that following my earlier suggestion, Headbomb has gone ahead and created the following categores: Category:Women in Red redlink lists (by dictionary), Category:Women in Red redlink lists (by nationality), Category:Women in Red redlink lists (by occupation) and Category:Women in Red redlink lists (by time period). Not only do these categories provide an alternative method of finding pertinent lists, they help to ensure that any which happen to be missing from other listings can be identified through their categories. I see that appropriate headers, etc., have also been added, even to the most recent ones. Great work, Headbomb!--Ipigott (talk) 06:22, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Back from holiday in the US and wanted to thank you for your contributions to the Women's Classical Committee discussion page. So, here's a virtual brownie from my hols.

Claire 75 (talk) 11:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Claire 75: thank you. Ping me if you want anything vaguely technical doing with with any of the redlist, the talk page banner, the alerts page or the quality assessment stuff. Hope your time across the pond was excellent. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We are preparing a list of tools and technical support for Women in Red. I have tentatively added your name as you have provided assistance in connection with our redlink listings and on templates. Please let me know whether you agree to be listed. You are of course welcome to make any additions or corrections.--Ipigott (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tagishsimon,

I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join New Page Patrol, and from your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; we could use some additional help from an experienced user like yourself.

Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR.

Cheers, and hope to see you around, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 21:20, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Hello again from Women in Red! July 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: Sub-Saharan Africa Film + stage 20th-century Women Rock Continuing: Notable women, broadly-construed! Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Are we losing momentum? London calling (the Mayor of London!) Publication about Wikipedia's coverage of women mathematicians Women in Red is featured in Toolhub
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

		An exciting new month for Women in Red! August 2018 worldwide online editathons: New: Indigenous women Women of marginalized populations Women writers Geofocus: Bottom 10 Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative Notable women, broadly-construed! For the first time, this month we are trying out our Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in August. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

		September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons! New: Women currently in academics Women + Law Geofocus: Hispanic countries Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative Check it out: Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#The Endless Night of Wikipedia’s Notable Woman Problem (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Angelab vertical mirror.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October! New: Clubs Science fiction + fantasy STEM The Mediterranean Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

		Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives New: Religion Deceased politicians Asia Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): WikiProject AfroCine launches (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hi Tagishmon. It looks like you accepted Carol Howe via AfC, but you didn't create the corresponding article talk page. I'm not exactly sure which template AfC reviewers use when they accept drafts, so I was wondering if you could add that to the talk page. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:17, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not much inclined to get involved in AfC tomfoolery, so, no. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 17 – 29 October 2018 The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer. Back numbers are here. Wikidata imaged Around 2.7 million Wikidata items have an illustrative image. These files, you might say, are Wikimedia's stock images, and if the number is large, it is still only 5% or so of items that have one. All such images are taken from Wikimedia Commons, which has 50 million media files. One key issue is how to expand the stock. Indeed, there is a tool. WD-FIST exploits the fact that each Wikipedia is differently illustrated, mostly with images from Commons but also with fair use images. An item that has sitelinks but no illustrative image can be tested to see if the linked wikis have a suitable one. This works well for a volunteer who wants to add images at a reasonable scale, and a small amount of SPARQL knowledge goes a long way in producing checklists. It should be noted, though, that there are currently 53 Wikidata properties that link to Commons, of which P18 for the basic image is just one. WD-FIST prompts the user to add signatures, plaques, pictures of graves and so on. There are a couple of hundred monograms, mostly of historical figures, and this query allows you to view all of them. commons:Category:Monograms and its subcategories provide rich scope for adding more. And so it is generally. The list of properties linking to Commons does contain a few that concern video and audio files, and rather more for maps. But it contains gems such as P3451 for "nighttime view". Over 1000 of those on Wikidata, but as for so much else, there could be yet more. Go on. Today is Wikidata's birthday. An illustrative image is always an acceptable gift, so why not add one? You can follow these easy steps: (i) log in at https://tools.wmflabs.org/widar/, (ii) paste the Petscan ID 6263583 into https://tools.wmflabs.org/fist/wdfist/ and click run, and (iii) just add cake. Links Now Wikidata is six, Signpost Special Report Find out how @TheContentMine are attempting to mine scientific and medical literature to improve the accuracy of Wikipedia., Wikimedia UK tweet and video ScienceSource and the Semantic Web sciencesource-pmc-licenses tool by Oravrattas to extract Creative Commons license information from PubMed Central pages, created at the Cambridge Wikidata Workshop Whizzy use of SPARQL to map the London Underground system, whizzed past on Twitter. Wikidata birthday events mapped by SPARQL, too d:Wikidata:Sixth Birthday/Message from dev team If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:01, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your support! Srsval (talk) 09:59, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel the need to complain about the stupidity of others, then at least make sure that you know the difference between a speedy and a prod. Furthermore, Sebastiana de Jesus Salcedo is unknown as such (no Google books hits at all for that name). You may see some obvious reason why that prod was extremely stupid, bubt the least you could have done was to improve the article to remove the reason for the prod. Otherwise you are just throwing around empty insults, which is not really useful. Fram (talk) 16:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious reasons why the prod was stupid were a) you argued that the subject was largely forgotten. That's a stupid reason for deleting an article. Most of the subjects of our articles are lagely forgotten. You argued that the references were not independent of the subject; yet there was no obvious connection between the five dead-tree refs, and the iirc C17 subject; nor is there much likelihood that you reviewed the content of the refs, since they were no online. No gbooks ghits != lack of notability. I'm not clear, given the foregoing, what you anticipate I might have done. Take out an full page advert in the WaPo to publicise her? hth --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:57, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sources were not independent, she was (according to the deleted article) a Dominican nun, and we got sources like the "Dominican Provincial Chapter" (a source which is completely unverifiable) or a source from the "Congregation of the Dominican Sisters", two other sources written by Dominicans, and a source by the "Mother Francisca Commission", which again is a Dominican organisation. So all sources in the article were by Dominicans, about a Dominican sister. That's a rather obvious and clear connection. An organisation writing about their own history is not an independent source. So what you might have done, instead of simply removing the prod with an insulting message, was checking whether any independent sources for this person were available, and then either improving the article with them, or endorsing the prod. Fram (talk) 07:36, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's better now. Wen I created the article, I was in a hurry so I didn't modify it, but then I checked it and I corrected some problems. Thanks for the notice. Greetings. Tajotep (talk) 22:33, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for the Speedy Delete. Honestly, this user has recreated this page under so many different names (eg. Berry IIT was SALT'd) since October that I have reported them to AIV. They are ignoring our warnings and this is becoming disruptive. They are so clearly WP:NOTHERE. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 09:12, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Annoying. Always worth dropping a warning on their talk page - admins tend to block people faster if we can point to them having been properly warned. I've done that. I like your salt template - wasn't aware of that. Good that there are more of us than him/her. Illegitimi non carborundum. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, you are right. While I did informally warn them just yesterday about this, per their message on Talk:BERRY IIT they still aren't getting it. Also the use of "us" is concerning. Sigh HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 09:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: They're now blocked. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the Wikidata link for the stub article on Alice Cooper Bailey.

TeriEmbrey (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just a quick note that you should always consider alternatives to deletion before tagging an article for (speedy) deletion. In this case (Mary marquardt), a redirect to Ford's article was obviously the better alternative to deletion and you could have done so yourself. Regards SoWhy 11:06, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you let me know when you have finished messing with this. I was in the middle of merging the text when you swooped in and started redirecting when I was in mid-edit. Please note Use Australian English, Use DMY dates. Please use Queensland Globe for the geography as that is the authoritative source. Kerry (talk) 01:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kerry Raymond: All done now.

Tagishsimon, please remember to follow appropriate attribution guidelines when merging content from one page to another page (see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia). I performed a "history merge" to preserve attribution, but in general a page cannot be deleted once content from the page has been merged elsewhere. Let me know if you have any questions about this. Cheers, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 03:26, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dont delete this bit liliys wikipedia's post Bmmbb (talk) 02:31, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please have some evidence that the subject was made up by the creator or someone the creator knows; this isn't "db-neo" – that is, it isn't meant to apply to "anything that will obviously fail WP:NEO". Case in point: The_Traveling_"THE" appears to not have been made up by the creator. I have managed to find other problems with it, though... ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 19:44, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am new and unclear on how to add this page so it doesn't get deleted. It is a user page for the WikiProject Paleontology (it's the page that opened when I clicked on the red link). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurornisxui (talk • contribs) 21:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anthonyz17 (talk) 23:23, 26 November 2018 (UTC)I'm wondering if you can point out specific sections that made you delete my page?[reply]

@Anthonyz17: If you write an article that looks like an advert, it will be deleted as if it were an advert. If you cannot tell the difference between 'looks like an advert' and 'a wikipedia article', then writing on wikipedia is probably not for you. hth --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MMI have removed all persuasive language before publishing so it is merely a company page. And also have reference pages like Binance, Uber. Simply including historical and neutral language about a company does not constitute has an advertisement — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthonyz17 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I refer you to my answer above. You tried. It got deleted. Move on. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: Photography Laureates Countries beginning with 'I' Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): BBC 100 Women 2018 (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 13:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for fixing the Women in Science prize table! Tarselli (talk) 16:30, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarselli: Thank you; very kind. Sadly the GSA website was down last night, which is why things peter out towards the end of the list ... I wasn't keen on using CVs as a source. I live in hope we can complete the table eventually. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: Photography Laureates Countries beginning with 'I' Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): BBC 100 Women 2018 (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lost in America (upcoming film). Since you had some involvement with the Lost in America (upcoming film) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 19:59, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The numbers in the box refer to the ranking of the winning team at the time in the AP Poll, I could add a footnote or something maybe pointing this out but I wouldn't be exactly sure where in the article to point it out. Best, User talk:RichieNebraska —Preceding undated comment added 22:40, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 18 – 30 November 2018 The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer. Back numbers are here. WikiCite issue GLAM ♥ data — what is a gallery, library, archive or museum without a catalogue? It follows that Wikidata must love librarians. Bibliography supports students and researchers in any topic, but open and machine-readable bibliographic data even more so, outside the silo. Cue the WikiCite initiative, which was meeting in conference this week, in the Bay Area of California. In fact there is a broad scope: "Open Knowledge Maps via SPARQL" and the "Sum of All Welsh Literature", identification of research outputs, Library.Link Network and Bibframe 2.0, OSCAR and LUCINDA (who they?), OCLC and Scholia, all these co-exist on the agenda. Certainly more library science is coming Wikidata's way. That poses the question about the other direction: is more Wikimedia technology advancing on libraries? Good point. Wikimedians generally are not aware of the tech background that can be assumed, unless they are close to current training for librarians. A baseline definition is useful here: "bash, git and OpenRefine". Compare and contrast with pywikibot, GitHub and mix'n'match. Translation: scripting for automation, version control, data set matching and wrangling in the large, are on the agenda also for contemporary library work. Certainly there is some possible common ground here. Time to understand rather more about the motivations that operate in the library sector. Links Wikidata and Libraries: Facilitating Open Knowledge, book chapter by Mairelys Lemus-Rojas, metadata librarian and Lydia Pintscher, Wikidata Product Manager, from Leveraging Wikipedia: Connecting Communities of Knowledge (2018) LD4P and WikiCite: Opportunities for collaboration, WikiCite 2018 program abstract, Christine Fernsebner Eslao of Harvard Library Information and Technical Services and Michelle Futornick, Linked Data for Production Program Manager at Stanford University Shell Lessons for Librarians, Library Carpentry lesson At-risk content on Flickr, blogpost 3 November 2018, Andrew Gray Toward an Abstract Wikipedia, recent white paper by Wikidata founder Denny Vrandečić (Google) Account creation is now open on the ScienceSource wiki, where you can see SPARQL visualisations of text mining. If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:20, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As is probably painfully obvious, I'm not a Wikipedia user but I appreciate your support against that VintageFeminist lady. I came in with good intentions but I'm finding myself repeatedly attacked by her. I assume it's because I'm "attacking" the arguments put forward by Rachel parent and her anti-GMO pro-organic website and entire narrative. I've confirmed that the website was set up by Wayne Parent of Nutrition House (as others had already noted) but apparently that's not enough either. I sense an air of misandry about this and it's making me uncomfortable. Wikipedia isn't really my thing as should be obvious from my mea culpas. I have nothing against Rachel, but her message isn't just wrong, it's deliberately deceitful. Any simple fact checking on the site shows a typical anti-science bent and a deep connection to a web of the usual suspects like Vandana Shiva and Jeffery Smith. I have other questions I need to ask them but, coming from traditional media as I do, you won't accept my word unless I have citations on "reputable" site. It's a circular problem to a degree. Sorry for moaning but I'm getting discouraged from trying to help. Smidoid (talk) 23:55, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Smidoid: Wikipedia and wikipedians can be a bit of a steamroller, I'm afraid, Smidoid. I'm not entirely sure where VintageFeminist is coming from; and from long experience here, I'm not going to spend any time wondering about that element. It's generally best for all concerned that we assume good faith in our fellow editors - and assume the same good faith in those less familiar with Wikipedia, such as youself. I don't think the response to your intervention was handled well, and I've said my piece on that elsewhere. I'm sorry - and unsurprised - that you find it depressing & discouraging.

As to the article itself, it is a great problem that we have a plethora of completely uncritical 'reliable sources' charting her ascent to some minor notability, and iirc only the HuffPo article with which to rebut her questionable argument. That said, I think GreenMeansGo has done a very good job in reshaping the article and introducing the Criticism section. The artice has a much better balance; it sets out in neutral terms the basics of her story and press reaction to it; lends no support to her views; and provides a rebuttal of her views in no uncertain terms. The critical reader should come away with an understanding that her platform is found to be questionable. Of course, the uncritical reader will leave the article with whatever view they had when they entered it. Anti-GMO folk will dismiss the criticism; Anti-anti-GMO folk will nod in understanding of the criticism and sigh.

I'm sorry that - and again, I understand why - the whole reliable sources business is getting you down. Sometimes the best that can be done is the sort of thing that GMG has done. Of course, if you can turn anything else up, that would be great; but it probably won't change the price of bread. Her story will remain the same. Uncritical press coverage of her will remain. Wikipedia will be honour bound to report those things in neutral terms. It's very unlikely that anything we find will alter much the section of the article above the criticism section. We might find more sources for the criticism, but tbh the views reported there are sufficiently unequivocal that adding more of the same will not actually add significantly to readers' understanding. And of course, I accept the nexus of Parent, her parents, and fringe views such as Shiva and Smith which, unfortunatly, have currency in this wretched anti-expert society we find ourselves in.

There you go. Not sure if any of that helps. But always happy to talk about it, and to lend support to the aim of improving the quality of the article if that can be done. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That's very supportive. My only other experience of any rate, is over the Hedy Lamarr/FHSS invention claim - and has been similarly drowned out. This is an area of my own expertise and I've done a considerable amount of on and off Internet digging to get to the truth. The results were not dissimilar in that case. I found myself attacked over original research because the entire narrative has been captured by those who believe the story promulgated by her fanbase. It all stems from a poorly checked patent and one of Hedy's fans. I've expanded on Dr. Tony Rothman's work and managed to join the dots to discover the ID third person (alluded to by Lamar in a press clipping but never named). This was the man (and there lies a major issue, he's man and Lamar has become a feminist icon) who actually designed the electronics aided by Hedy's friend, George Antheil. He is not named on the patent of course. However, in any case the technology was invented by the Germans in WW1 and before that (in a very crude form) by Nikola Tesla at the back end of the 19th century. Lamarr did some good things for the war effort but a lot of what she says (including a claim of rape - a charge quickly dropped and that resulted in a civil case that she subsequently lost) are fictions. The entire story which spans far more than has ever been covered by Wikipedia (or, to my knowledge, any other writer) spans decades and even connects loosely to the capture of the Enigima machine from the "U571". It's claimed that the FHSS tech was ignored by the US Navy but the reality is, it solved a problem that it didn't have. The torpedoes were "missing" not because US Sub commanders couldn't shoot straight - but rather that explosive charge weight slightly more than the dummy warheads used in testing with the result that the projectile sank well below its target over the 1-2km firing range and failed to detonate. As you might guess, there's a lot more behind this but I tire of fighting on the Internet and I'll have to try and find a publisher brave enough to face off against the likely pushback. Lamarr has been inducted into the American Inventors Hall of Fame for something that, the secret history shows, she had very little do with. Smidoid (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Smidoid: Well there's a very remarkable coincidence. I used to correspond with someone - now dead - who knew Hedy Lamarr, holidayed with her, etc, and who scorned the Hedy patent story. We discussed the truth versus received wisdom of that case. Small world. Presuming you have set up email options in your wikipedia preferences, you could use this link to drop me an email, and I'll share some of what I was told. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:40, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

that IS interesting. I've dropped you an internal PM with my private email so we can discuss. You might have better luck than I did overturning this story on Wikipedia anyway- a lot of people stand to lose a lot of face over this. There are books dedicated to it and even one that claims FHSS was used to help defuse the Bay of Pigs. A lot of the stuff is still highly classified of course so I can only piece together the stuff that's in the public archives but this is another piece of propaganda that really needs to be overturned. There are far more inspiring women who are frequently overlooked or sidelined: Rosalind Franklin, "Amazing" Grace and so on. Hedy was popular because of that that infernal Halo Effect. Same reason (I expect) that Vani Hari and Rachel Parent also got/get so much unchecked coverage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smidoid (talk • contribs) 18:05, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Smidoid: Yup, that worked. You have email. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:23, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Barnstar of Diligence

Hi tagishsimon, Thanks for all the input on my article! I'm travelling for work today and tomorrow so I may be a little tardy in following up as I doubt I'll get time to read all the guidelines you've pointed me towards until Wednesday at which point I will be able to get it all done. I trust that's fine with you. Really appreciate you helping me learn the ropes. I'm quite familiar with WordPress and a few other web publishing platforms but Wikipedia very much has a different interface and I can see I have plenty to learn. Speak more on Wednesday. Kind regards, Minxymoggy Minxymoggy (talk) 18:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Minxymoggy: I think the canonical set right now for you is WP:COI, WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:AfD. Enjoy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:43, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the cleanup. I'm not super well versed in architects but it had been bugging me that she didn't have a page when one was well deserved. Figured if I started, someone would come help. StarM 03:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi: No probs, and you're right, long overdue that she had an article; thanks for adding it. Wikipedia doesn't seem to do architects very well, women doubly so. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:09, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably raid w:es:Elizabeth_Diller sometime. Plenty to be stolen. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:33, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ooh thanks for that tip, hadn't found it. I do read Spanish so will see what I can bring over. StarM 19:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thx! I forgot to do that MauraWen (talk) 17:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MauraWen: Bit more work to do... - they're people who have an Award value for the RBP. :Tagishsimon (talk) 18:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagishsimon: Ok, but I am not exactly sure how much I need to do. I am guessing that I need to add the RB prize statement to all the award winners's wikidata pages. What about people who don't have a wikipedia profile? please advise.

I will put this on my list for tomorrow. thx MauraWen (talk) 18:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As much or little as you like. It never stops. I had a look just now; add award to those who already have a wikidata item; add wikidata items for those without; find some additional attributes for the added person, and add the award; realise the book or paper doesn't exists so add that; realise there are a bunch of papers which have an 'author name string' rather than an author value, so need changing. Fortunately none of us are under any obligation to complete all of that. I can see myself doing more tonight; I'll let you know how I got on at the end of the evening. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MauraWen: As it stands ... I've done them all, including new items for those previously without. We can probably forget all about this now :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagishsimon: Thanks for your help! You've been very busy. I am surprised that the list needs to go in order of oldest award at the top. I have been creating profiles of award winning poets, and I could swear many of the awards were listed with most recent date first. I guess that's wrong. Thx again. MauraWen (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MauraWen: Thanks! Yup, I was a bit dismayed by the list order thing. My preference is generally for most recent at the top; and the list is sortable on columns anyway. I more & more find wikipedia to be a bit old-school, having become part of the bright new wikidata borg. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your advice, Tagishsimon! I've checked the two misleading problems and have corrected both of them. Please check, and thank you again.Mike hangzhou (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Amitchell125/Archive5 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

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. Stefan2 (talk) 16:42, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you help with my article on Christine Allen!

Happy Panda 25 (talk) 18:45, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Tonyinman (talk) 15:41, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zzz. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you merge these: [5]? 78.54.28.6 (talk) 16:02, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done 3, Not convinced by http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q25391120 http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q54506661 - different dates of death. Are you sure? --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, including for being cautious! Someone else was sure. The death date 1833 was probably taken from the old BBLD ID [6], but 1833 not found anymore in the BBLD. So merge seems good. 89.12.179.248 (talk) 02:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

6 new duplicates. The export of BBLD IDs to Wikidata is paying off. 77.11.158.98 (talk) 21:06, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. You've dealt with them. Nothing showing on this report. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:33, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made a record [7] before asking you. Some user, which also did the 4th above which you left, cleaned 5 of the 6 after I posted. One more thing: 77 males at d:Wikidata:Database reports/Humans with missing claims/P2580 - all females and non-humans removed if I am not mistaken. Could you batch-male-fy them? 77.183.238.223 (talk) 23:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great! user:Arachn0 is helping adding new IDs reported via a ruwiki-page. But 57 new IDs during the last ~24 hours might be good for batch: ru:Википедия:Форум/Викиданные/BBLD_ID#BBLD_ID_-_new_IDs_-_2018-12-22 I would have done it directly, but Jura1 not only vandalized P2580 - removing valid IDs from 1000+ items, which Magnus Manske than run a batch to fix - insert fake constraints etc. (some of Baltic Historic Commission not happy about that), but also managed to prevent editing via IP of P2580 and the P2580 statements. So, all BBLD fixes that I find, I report somewhere else so that others can apply them ... What is achieved? More work for others, slower progress with Wikimedia projects. He also tried to intimidate other users, several times successful, but not e.g. with this very helpful user.

BTW, the BBLD has now 1380 IDs based on ISNI [8], but these are not necessarily the current preferred/primary ISNI, as those can change without notice. ISNI-IA is very bad WRT transparency and working error free. 77.191.114.98 (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]