This is an archive of past discussions. 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 5 |
Hey, thanks for putting in all the good effort on that article. It could use the attention. (The US same-sex marriage articles tend to be rather hectic these days, and the tribal jurisdiction tends to get the short end of the stick, particularly given the lack of media coverage.) Keep it up! -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 03:58, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Nat Gertler ( talk) 06:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
If you are editing text and want to add a note....just as I am doing as I wrote this...I see above the space where I am typing a bar with several options: [B] [I] (some symbols) Advanced Special Options Help Cite. Click "Cite". Another row appears and there's the option Templates. Pull down the menu and make a choice, normally "news" for anything like a newspaper or a news website, otherwise "web" for an online collection like a legal code. After you choose, a popup box appears. Do the best to complete it. You'll never use all the fields. But for a news source like this:
You'll have today's date, the date of the story, its url, title, and the work (name of publication). If the publication isn't something you'd normally italicize, like the name of a radio station, put that in the publisher box instead of in the work box. Also the authors first and last name if available. The agency field is for something like Associated Press or Reuters. You can check your work by hitting Preview at the bottom of the form, and then "parsed preview" to see what the footnote will actually look like. Good luck! Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 21:22, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I am going to make a couple of edits to your drafts. See the changes I made and feel free to reply here if you have any questions about what I did. The main thing is to look to see if you did any copy and pasting or close paraphrasing, as that would case a copyright violation problem (<--- read linked article) WP is quite fussy about that. The Kansas Act article read a little wonky to me (in that there may have been some close paraphrasing from source material) and so I did some copyediting to address that issue. Feel free to review further. Montanabw (talk) 23:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
The above box is one way to "ping" people that you've replied to a message left on their talk page. I have no problem if you want to continue chatting here on your page, I will watchlist the page and stop by from time to time. Montanabw (talk) 20:24, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, SusunW I just wanted to drop by and tell you that I have been noticing your work, and that I think it is really good. It is great that someone is working on these topics, which otherwise tend to be neglected. So thanks, and keep up the good work. Following up on your conversation with Montanabw, you are certainly also more than welcome to approach me, either by pinging me or by visiting my talkpage if you need any help, advice or encouragement. All the best. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I may leave further article-specific messages on the talk pages of the new articles you have created that I moved into mainspace. Incidentally, if you want to create new articles that bypass the AfC process (where article drafts go to die, I swear...) You can do it one of two ways. One is to create a sandbox in your own userspace by creating a link with your Username and the name of the sandbox (i.e. User:SusunW/Sandbox) which will be a redlink until you edit the page, or just create a redlink (like Henry Roan Horse) and click on it to create an article directly on wikipedia (riskier, as there are people who are very impatient with drafting in userspace and not kind about it... :-P ).
I have done this every which way. For example, I have several "recyclable" sandboxes where I move stuff into and out of Article space by cut and paste. (see, User:Montanabw/Sandbox_4 which currently contains totally random nothing, versus User:Montanabw/Sandbox_3 where I cut and pasted in an article I eventually want to completely rewrite..) I also have created sandboxes with the proposed article title (such as one I'm working on now, User:Montanabw/Kenneth and Sarah Ramsey) where I just use the "move" command to move the whole article into user space (thus preserving the article history) and then the blanked subpage can be deleted. If you want to look at the history of articles I created right in mainspace and watch my editing process (which isn't always pretty!), see, e.g. Blueskin (horse) or Hindgut fermentation (now that was a scintillating subject....) So if you ever want to just goof around with stuff, let me know and I can set up some things where you can practice. Montanabw (talk) 21:52, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Heh, as you know, real word processors use ctrl-i or Command-i for italics, while on wiki we use two apostrophes to make italics. But when I'm doing word processing, I often forget and use wiki markup instead; so it's all a matter of what you get used to. LOL! However, you may find this video and the ones with it, as well as others linked at my alt account, User:MontOther#Training to be helpful to you! Montanabw (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you can tag your own articles for a wikiproject. Unless I am really confident of the general state or articles in a given wikiproject, I generally am cautious in assessing my own work, (rating it a C even if I think it's a B, and so on...) so that people don't think I have a big head, but it is a great help if you do add your own wikiproject tagging. Montanabw (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
I watched it. It is pretty much exactly what I do, but I almost always put everything under citeweb, and use the pull down for extra stuff. BUT, the add for a listed ref always has about 10 others, why is that? Every single time I change the page number it makes a new input o.O. SusunW ( talk) 03:52, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
It works better to put the sources (like books) where you use a bunch of different pages into a separate "bibliography" or "sources" section, and then in the text, just do <ref>Smith, p. 77</ref> or whatever. For an example see the "footnotes" and "references" sections of Appaloosa - we used several books and a couple of long peer-reviewed journal articles there. Does that help? Montanabw (talk) 05:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
For the Minnie Evans page, I suggest that when you move it into mainspace, do it with a copy and paste. There are two ways to do the title, and simple is best. One would be to use her Potawatomi name, Ke-waht-no-quah Wish-Ken-O, though if she wasn't notable under that name, I wouldn't. I would suggest using the title Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader). Then do a disambiguation at the top of the other Minnie Evans page that looks like this: {{for|the Potawatomi leader|Minnie Evans (Potawatomi)}} Which will render as For the Potawatomi leader, see Minnie Evans (Potawatomi) -- with the article linked. That way, anyone searching for her article and finding the other can just click a link and go there. A third way is to put both of them on a separate disambigution page, but where there are only two people with the same name, the hatnote usually will do. If there are three or more people, then I usually do suggest a dab page, but not for this one. Montanabw (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I thought I gave you the link, but in any case, I put it in the talk page on the page. But here it is: Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Minnie Evans. No point in repeating what I know, since it is there.
It is nothing to worry about, it just means that no registered user has reviewed the page you created. When it is reviewed by a registered user it will be marked as patrolled and if they find anything that needs fixing they may tag it with a note for others to do that work. (for example if it has no sources etc.) User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 03:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Andy Mabbett has sorted out both the known_for and the language issues - see new improved Bill Osceola and Billy Osceola and note new parameter mother_tongue. He seems to be on the trail of a solution to the multipe infobox question. In short, it should be possible to create a single inforbox out of a selection of infoboxes covering the range of ... things ... which a person is. Right now the Native American infobox template is not playing nicely. If & when that's sorted, we may be able to come back with some better advice. thx -- Tagishsimon (talk) 17:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
|known_for=
, by using fields such as |office=
, |term_start=
& |term-end=
. That means that his Tribal Presidency now appears with start & end dates at the top of the infobox. Any issues? Are we likely to need more than one such entry? |known_for=
is still available. (Again, all
Andy Mabbett's work.) --
Tagishsimon
(talk)
17:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, SusunW. Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader), an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated for Did you know consideration to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 06:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC) |
For an appearence on Did you know?. Nomination is here: Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Minnie_Evans_(Potawatomi_leader). I'll watch it for a reviewer and you can watchlist it to answer any content or technical questions. Should go through, though a reviewer might ask for some minor tweaks. Nothing like seeing an article you've worked on hit the main page! ;-) Montanabw (talk) 19:17, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Wow! Thank you. I just feel like some of these folks from the controversial termination era have not been given their historical due. :) SusunW ( talk) 19:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I fixed it. See my talk page. Montanabw (talk) 01:35, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Really enjoyed reading the Viola Hatch article. There are lots of hook opportunities as she's lived such a full life. Here are some editing suggestions:
Hopefully, these suggestions make sense. Feel free to ignore them if you wish. :) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 03:29, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Or this one?
Okay, we'll see what happens. I took it live and did the nomination. Figured out the technical glitches, but I must say, I am truly frustrated by all the tedious programming that is required for writers to know. Had to edit the template to get it to save properly and then had to exit and re-enter my nomination because apparently someone else did it simultaneously. SusunW ( talk) 23:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Montanabw: You made Viola's footnotes show up in 3 columns instead of one long list. Much easier on the viewer. SusunW ( talk) 03:09, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm gone for 12 hours and everything gets sorted out! Lol! Glad you chose that particular hook as it says a lot in <200 characters. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 03:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
strong women from neglected minorities
Thank you, Susun, for quality articles such as Mexican Kickapoo, Minnie Evans and Tillie Hardwick, introducing strong women from neglected minorities who change politics, for overcoming the "frustrating and cumbersome" part of programming gracefully: "Every little bit helps", - it's people like you who close a gender gap here that others only complain about! - You are an awesome Wikipedian from the start!
Thanks. I truly love learning. I learn as much from researching these people (sometimes more) than an article could ever impart. The world is full of Sheroes to discover. SusunW ( talk) 20:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
On 6 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Minnie Evans, chair of the Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, prevented termination of her tribe and won reparations for her people from the Indian Claims Commission? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Oak Hill Industrial Academy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! czar ⨹ 01:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
My proposed Wikimania talk "How To Pick Up More Women" is here. I was hoping that you might give this some thought as I suspect you have views here? No rush ... no ideas? Thanks for listening. Cheers Victuallers ( talk)
I read your proposal and I agree that women are under-represented and specifically think that applies to women of color and diverse ethnicities. In part, that is because it is Wikipedia in English, but in part that is because women in general were "property" for millennia and anyone who was not of the "ruling" classes was unworthy of being written about. The problem with avoiding English-speaking white women entirely is that you then have no coverage of those women most familiar in popular culture. I have never worked on an edithon and the wikiprojects I am involved in do not direct work of editors, but I could be wrong about that. Basically it seems to be "do what you want to do," which works well for creativity but may not increase coverage. Events are likely to increase coverage for the short term, but not have long term effect. The big question is how do you increase coverage and sustain that growth in articles? Maybe quarterly or semi-annual mini-edithons? I think that like in newspapers the "you also might find this interesting" might be a ploy that would work, i.e. if you ware writing an article on a woman who say worked on atomic bombs, go to that main page for bombs and in the for further reading link to your woman's page. Just articles aren't enough, IMHO, because women aren't associated with the topics. For example, did anyone really know, or even hear until the most recent decade, that the Nobel Prize for isolating DNA was based upon the work of a woman? SusunW ( talk) 20:34, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Be careful about overstating your case at DYK. You are fine so far, but all they really want are footnotes. You did well to explain notability (some editors who think everything exists online are often guilty of recentism and have more systemic bias than they may realize). If you go into too much detail, some idiot will start accusing you of "original research" (see WP:NOR) so just focus on the source material. Montanabw (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Montanabw: Is DYK more stringent in its requirements than Wikipedia itself? Am I truly required to find a source that specifically states that Oak Hill was in Indian Territory? I am confused as it seems self-evident given the time frame and location. SusunW ( talk) 14:23, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Veronica Sanchez is a great topic for DYK. Political controversy is not a problem there if the article is well sourced and the hook doesn't get too in your face on the main page. Montanabw (talk) 23:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
On 19 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oak Hill Industrial Academy, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Oak Hill Industrial Academy was a school in Indian Territory for the children of Choctaw freedmen? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oak Hill Industrial Academy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salvador Alvarado, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mérida, Chihuahua and Luis Cabrera. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:17, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. FYI, there's an interesting Buzzfeed article out today that you might find useful when editing Recognition of same-sex unions in Mexico, especially in the lead and in general comments about the pace of change. I left a link on the talk page.
BTW, I changed the map, because IMO individual cases in Mexico are not comparable to ones in the US, which the rings were created for. — kwami ( talk) 21:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
On 1 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Verónica Cruz Sánchez, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 2006 Verónica Cruz Sánchez became the first Mexican human rights activist to be awarded the Defender of Human Rights award from HRW? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Verónica Cruz Sánchez. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, good to know! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 00:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. 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 5 |
Hey, thanks for putting in all the good effort on that article. It could use the attention. (The US same-sex marriage articles tend to be rather hectic these days, and the tribal jurisdiction tends to get the short end of the stick, particularly given the lack of media coverage.) Keep it up! -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 03:58, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Nat Gertler ( talk) 06:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
If you are editing text and want to add a note....just as I am doing as I wrote this...I see above the space where I am typing a bar with several options: [B] [I] (some symbols) Advanced Special Options Help Cite. Click "Cite". Another row appears and there's the option Templates. Pull down the menu and make a choice, normally "news" for anything like a newspaper or a news website, otherwise "web" for an online collection like a legal code. After you choose, a popup box appears. Do the best to complete it. You'll never use all the fields. But for a news source like this:
You'll have today's date, the date of the story, its url, title, and the work (name of publication). If the publication isn't something you'd normally italicize, like the name of a radio station, put that in the publisher box instead of in the work box. Also the authors first and last name if available. The agency field is for something like Associated Press or Reuters. You can check your work by hitting Preview at the bottom of the form, and then "parsed preview" to see what the footnote will actually look like. Good luck! Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 21:22, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I am going to make a couple of edits to your drafts. See the changes I made and feel free to reply here if you have any questions about what I did. The main thing is to look to see if you did any copy and pasting or close paraphrasing, as that would case a copyright violation problem (<--- read linked article) WP is quite fussy about that. The Kansas Act article read a little wonky to me (in that there may have been some close paraphrasing from source material) and so I did some copyediting to address that issue. Feel free to review further. Montanabw (talk) 23:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
The above box is one way to "ping" people that you've replied to a message left on their talk page. I have no problem if you want to continue chatting here on your page, I will watchlist the page and stop by from time to time. Montanabw (talk) 20:24, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, SusunW I just wanted to drop by and tell you that I have been noticing your work, and that I think it is really good. It is great that someone is working on these topics, which otherwise tend to be neglected. So thanks, and keep up the good work. Following up on your conversation with Montanabw, you are certainly also more than welcome to approach me, either by pinging me or by visiting my talkpage if you need any help, advice or encouragement. All the best. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I may leave further article-specific messages on the talk pages of the new articles you have created that I moved into mainspace. Incidentally, if you want to create new articles that bypass the AfC process (where article drafts go to die, I swear...) You can do it one of two ways. One is to create a sandbox in your own userspace by creating a link with your Username and the name of the sandbox (i.e. User:SusunW/Sandbox) which will be a redlink until you edit the page, or just create a redlink (like Henry Roan Horse) and click on it to create an article directly on wikipedia (riskier, as there are people who are very impatient with drafting in userspace and not kind about it... :-P ).
I have done this every which way. For example, I have several "recyclable" sandboxes where I move stuff into and out of Article space by cut and paste. (see, User:Montanabw/Sandbox_4 which currently contains totally random nothing, versus User:Montanabw/Sandbox_3 where I cut and pasted in an article I eventually want to completely rewrite..) I also have created sandboxes with the proposed article title (such as one I'm working on now, User:Montanabw/Kenneth and Sarah Ramsey) where I just use the "move" command to move the whole article into user space (thus preserving the article history) and then the blanked subpage can be deleted. If you want to look at the history of articles I created right in mainspace and watch my editing process (which isn't always pretty!), see, e.g. Blueskin (horse) or Hindgut fermentation (now that was a scintillating subject....) So if you ever want to just goof around with stuff, let me know and I can set up some things where you can practice. Montanabw (talk) 21:52, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Heh, as you know, real word processors use ctrl-i or Command-i for italics, while on wiki we use two apostrophes to make italics. But when I'm doing word processing, I often forget and use wiki markup instead; so it's all a matter of what you get used to. LOL! However, you may find this video and the ones with it, as well as others linked at my alt account, User:MontOther#Training to be helpful to you! Montanabw (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you can tag your own articles for a wikiproject. Unless I am really confident of the general state or articles in a given wikiproject, I generally am cautious in assessing my own work, (rating it a C even if I think it's a B, and so on...) so that people don't think I have a big head, but it is a great help if you do add your own wikiproject tagging. Montanabw (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
I watched it. It is pretty much exactly what I do, but I almost always put everything under citeweb, and use the pull down for extra stuff. BUT, the add for a listed ref always has about 10 others, why is that? Every single time I change the page number it makes a new input o.O. SusunW ( talk) 03:52, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
It works better to put the sources (like books) where you use a bunch of different pages into a separate "bibliography" or "sources" section, and then in the text, just do <ref>Smith, p. 77</ref> or whatever. For an example see the "footnotes" and "references" sections of Appaloosa - we used several books and a couple of long peer-reviewed journal articles there. Does that help? Montanabw (talk) 05:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
For the Minnie Evans page, I suggest that when you move it into mainspace, do it with a copy and paste. There are two ways to do the title, and simple is best. One would be to use her Potawatomi name, Ke-waht-no-quah Wish-Ken-O, though if she wasn't notable under that name, I wouldn't. I would suggest using the title Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader). Then do a disambiguation at the top of the other Minnie Evans page that looks like this: {{for|the Potawatomi leader|Minnie Evans (Potawatomi)}} Which will render as For the Potawatomi leader, see Minnie Evans (Potawatomi) -- with the article linked. That way, anyone searching for her article and finding the other can just click a link and go there. A third way is to put both of them on a separate disambigution page, but where there are only two people with the same name, the hatnote usually will do. If there are three or more people, then I usually do suggest a dab page, but not for this one. Montanabw (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I thought I gave you the link, but in any case, I put it in the talk page on the page. But here it is: Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Minnie Evans. No point in repeating what I know, since it is there.
It is nothing to worry about, it just means that no registered user has reviewed the page you created. When it is reviewed by a registered user it will be marked as patrolled and if they find anything that needs fixing they may tag it with a note for others to do that work. (for example if it has no sources etc.) User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 03:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Andy Mabbett has sorted out both the known_for and the language issues - see new improved Bill Osceola and Billy Osceola and note new parameter mother_tongue. He seems to be on the trail of a solution to the multipe infobox question. In short, it should be possible to create a single inforbox out of a selection of infoboxes covering the range of ... things ... which a person is. Right now the Native American infobox template is not playing nicely. If & when that's sorted, we may be able to come back with some better advice. thx -- Tagishsimon (talk) 17:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
|known_for=
, by using fields such as |office=
, |term_start=
& |term-end=
. That means that his Tribal Presidency now appears with start & end dates at the top of the infobox. Any issues? Are we likely to need more than one such entry? |known_for=
is still available. (Again, all
Andy Mabbett's work.) --
Tagishsimon
(talk)
17:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, SusunW. Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader), an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated for Did you know consideration to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 06:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC) |
For an appearence on Did you know?. Nomination is here: Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Minnie_Evans_(Potawatomi_leader). I'll watch it for a reviewer and you can watchlist it to answer any content or technical questions. Should go through, though a reviewer might ask for some minor tweaks. Nothing like seeing an article you've worked on hit the main page! ;-) Montanabw (talk) 19:17, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Wow! Thank you. I just feel like some of these folks from the controversial termination era have not been given their historical due. :) SusunW ( talk) 19:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I fixed it. See my talk page. Montanabw (talk) 01:35, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Really enjoyed reading the Viola Hatch article. There are lots of hook opportunities as she's lived such a full life. Here are some editing suggestions:
Hopefully, these suggestions make sense. Feel free to ignore them if you wish. :) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 03:29, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Or this one?
Okay, we'll see what happens. I took it live and did the nomination. Figured out the technical glitches, but I must say, I am truly frustrated by all the tedious programming that is required for writers to know. Had to edit the template to get it to save properly and then had to exit and re-enter my nomination because apparently someone else did it simultaneously. SusunW ( talk) 23:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Montanabw: You made Viola's footnotes show up in 3 columns instead of one long list. Much easier on the viewer. SusunW ( talk) 03:09, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm gone for 12 hours and everything gets sorted out! Lol! Glad you chose that particular hook as it says a lot in <200 characters. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 03:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
strong women from neglected minorities
Thank you, Susun, for quality articles such as Mexican Kickapoo, Minnie Evans and Tillie Hardwick, introducing strong women from neglected minorities who change politics, for overcoming the "frustrating and cumbersome" part of programming gracefully: "Every little bit helps", - it's people like you who close a gender gap here that others only complain about! - You are an awesome Wikipedian from the start!
Thanks. I truly love learning. I learn as much from researching these people (sometimes more) than an article could ever impart. The world is full of Sheroes to discover. SusunW ( talk) 20:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
On 6 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Minnie Evans, chair of the Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, prevented termination of her tribe and won reparations for her people from the Indian Claims Commission? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Minnie Evans (Potawatomi leader). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:02, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Oak Hill Industrial Academy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! czar ⨹ 01:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
My proposed Wikimania talk "How To Pick Up More Women" is here. I was hoping that you might give this some thought as I suspect you have views here? No rush ... no ideas? Thanks for listening. Cheers Victuallers ( talk)
I read your proposal and I agree that women are under-represented and specifically think that applies to women of color and diverse ethnicities. In part, that is because it is Wikipedia in English, but in part that is because women in general were "property" for millennia and anyone who was not of the "ruling" classes was unworthy of being written about. The problem with avoiding English-speaking white women entirely is that you then have no coverage of those women most familiar in popular culture. I have never worked on an edithon and the wikiprojects I am involved in do not direct work of editors, but I could be wrong about that. Basically it seems to be "do what you want to do," which works well for creativity but may not increase coverage. Events are likely to increase coverage for the short term, but not have long term effect. The big question is how do you increase coverage and sustain that growth in articles? Maybe quarterly or semi-annual mini-edithons? I think that like in newspapers the "you also might find this interesting" might be a ploy that would work, i.e. if you ware writing an article on a woman who say worked on atomic bombs, go to that main page for bombs and in the for further reading link to your woman's page. Just articles aren't enough, IMHO, because women aren't associated with the topics. For example, did anyone really know, or even hear until the most recent decade, that the Nobel Prize for isolating DNA was based upon the work of a woman? SusunW ( talk) 20:34, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Be careful about overstating your case at DYK. You are fine so far, but all they really want are footnotes. You did well to explain notability (some editors who think everything exists online are often guilty of recentism and have more systemic bias than they may realize). If you go into too much detail, some idiot will start accusing you of "original research" (see WP:NOR) so just focus on the source material. Montanabw (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
@ Montanabw: Is DYK more stringent in its requirements than Wikipedia itself? Am I truly required to find a source that specifically states that Oak Hill was in Indian Territory? I am confused as it seems self-evident given the time frame and location. SusunW ( talk) 14:23, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Veronica Sanchez is a great topic for DYK. Political controversy is not a problem there if the article is well sourced and the hook doesn't get too in your face on the main page. Montanabw (talk) 23:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
On 19 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oak Hill Industrial Academy, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Oak Hill Industrial Academy was a school in Indian Territory for the children of Choctaw freedmen? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oak Hill Industrial Academy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salvador Alvarado, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mérida, Chihuahua and Luis Cabrera. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:17, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi. FYI, there's an interesting Buzzfeed article out today that you might find useful when editing Recognition of same-sex unions in Mexico, especially in the lead and in general comments about the pace of change. I left a link on the talk page.
BTW, I changed the map, because IMO individual cases in Mexico are not comparable to ones in the US, which the rings were created for. — kwami ( talk) 21:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
On 1 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Verónica Cruz Sánchez, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 2006 Verónica Cruz Sánchez became the first Mexican human rights activist to be awarded the Defender of Human Rights award from HRW? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Verónica Cruz Sánchez. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, good to know! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 00:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)