User talk:Neonorange/Archive 5
 | 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 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Viking age
Hi, thx for attempts to enlighten! I'm the T of The IP who has been traipsing around in the Viking Age article. Looking at that Legacy section, I was gripped by horror vacui, and have been hauling paragraphs from other, Norse related pages to bolster the new addition. In fact, the next place I planned to rob was "Mercantilism", looking for something on trade, on routes and practices that owe their existence to ... etc., you get it. The overall plan was to perhaps lure some more editors into getting involved in expanding the article. Now it appears that this approach is perhaps not the best. If I understand you correctly, the issue is mainly a formal one, citing proper refs the proper way, etc. ...? I.e., is the type of material, the direction of the edits, uncontroversial? Thx agn :) T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 12:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the appreciation! I really do try to use edit summaries that are useful. Sometimes I succeed! Large, complex encyclopedia articles like Viking Age can make learning to edit Wikipedia a real chore. For me, making small changes to shorter, simpler articles speeds up the learning process. There are so many policies and formatting rules that quick turn-around edits let me make mistakes and then fix those mistakes rapidly. Otherwise, I don't use my new editing skills often enough to remember them long term.
- Though this method makes learning faster, it has drawbacks. Editing Wikipedia is a collaborative process—at times dozens of editors may be at work on the same article. This can result in articles with uneven tone and style—choppy and disorganized. Viking Age is not a contentious subject, but its scope is large and thus requires tight organization. If you had an account name, I could check your other work and get an idea of the subjects that interest you and how much experience you have on Wikipedia. I don't want to tell you stuff you already know. I have very little experience writing for print media. Most of my experience has been for film documentaries and television news. That's very unlike encyclopedia articles—much less formal, and with a wider bandwidth by inclusion of audio and images. It did, however, give me an idea of how important fact checking, clarity of expression, concision, and precision are (and avoiding being boring.)
- To throw a few things out. Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for the purposes of writing an article in Wikipedia. The kind of sources needed are books published with professional editorial control and fact-checking. We are all volunteers here, and very few of us are professional writers or editors. Wikipedia depends on reputable publishing houses, journalism, and scholarly journals. In-line citations are necessary to verify the content here and to allow users to do additional research on subjects of interest. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have, or at least to point out more capable editors than I.
- If I remember correctly, I did not register an account for the first two or so years here. I recommend you pick a simple account name that other editors can easily remember. That result in talk page comments that are more like a conversation while concealing your identity. I am not so concerned with hiding my name (I do use my real given name. By using Neonorange (Phil) editors can remember me without, for example, knowing where I live or work. Also, I can easily find my comments on a long talk age. Avoid complex usernames like RKE1967 (which are hard for other folks to remember). Also, if you have a registered account, you will be able to edit some articles that are semi-protected (ten total edits plus three day existence), or extended protected (500 edits plus 30 days existence). Protection like this is usually applied to articles that attract vandalism or that are contentious subjects (John Steinbeck—about the time of year his books are studied in high school, or almost any article covering recent U.S. politics).
- Having access to a good research library is a huge help—but many editors here don't have such access. Wikipedia can help with this. Hope I can help you — Neonorange (Phil) 21:10, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, thx for taking all the trouble :) Wrt. my presence, I gave a short summary of my experience and approach on the "user page" for my present IP; I've been around since 2013 or -14 or so. Wrt. Wiki as a source for Wiki: That was precisely the reason for quoting the source text, not the article text. It was more of an attempt to scavenge sources than text. Not to argue with you, just to explain my thinking. Books and libraries are in no short supply, but as it happens, I live in Norway, and much of the source texts here are, well, in Norwegian; perhaps not surprising, given the subject. I have taken the time and trouble to read WIKI:Verifiability and the policies arising from it (RS, OR,SYNTH and a handful more), have peeked at ArbCom discussions to see what sort of things they come down on, I'm an avid reader of talk pages ... so I've done a little homework, at least. And usually I make only small edits, and I always precede it with a talk page presentation of what I propose to do; then I leave it for days, weeks ... and if there is no discussion, I go WIKI:Bold, and amend the article. I did that in "Viking Age", too, and there was no controversy wrt. content (although, admittedly, my presentation was shorter than usual ... got carried away ...), nay, there was hardly even a comment or reply. So I thought I was on the safe side. But I intend to learn! From my mistakes! And I shall become mightily learned, given their number! Have a nice day :) T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. Good to hear from Norway. I have had the good fortune to work in over forty countries, but never in Norway. Of the forty, Poland is the closest to Norway. (At the time I worked for two winter weeks or so in Poland, I was living in Chicago, so, not so different—weather almost identical, and Polish is spoken a lot in Chicago. We lived in Logan Square, a Polish-Puerto Rican neighborhood.
- If I decide to edit a Norway or Viking related article, I shall seek help from you. I do not know if the following applies to Norway, but in the U.S., many public and university libraries are reducing their holdings of printed books (an effect of Wikipedia and the Internet, I suppose). Last year I became interested in editing Ernest Hemingway and was able to buy six hard-backed biographical volumes on Hemingway through Amazon for less than fifty U.S. dollars (and no delivery fee since I have Amazon Prime).
- One of the big advantages in editing Wikipedia is the relatively quick turn-around. Before I retired from working at a TV network news organization, I worked on independent documentaries with my wife. Seeing your work broadcast the next or even the same day really helped in learning from mistakes. A big improvement from the months-long or years-long cycles in documentary—and the pay is much better!
- I am impressed with your written English. When I was in high school, I only studied Latin—a help for romance languages, and for English (since it is such an amalgam). Consequently, I have very limited skill in languages other than English. Sixty years ago, growing up on a farm in Georgia, I had seen a person speaking Spanish. Now, the block on which I live has residents with three different mother tongues (Aramaic, Spanish, English) and five birth countries. — Neonorange (Phil) 07:15, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, thx for the handsome compliment :) I grew up in more of a crossroads, I guess: Europe is such a colourful ragrug - you can imagine if in Maine they spoke Manish and in Vermont Vermontese, and so on throughout New England, that you needn't go far to find a foreign tongue. Hence, EN is my fifth language after the other Scandinavian ones and German, and there are some other ones, too - but such is fate and necessity when you speak the language of a nation whose population would barely a suburb in Bristol make. ... Half my house is full of books, so don't tempt me ... but we are going against the trend, having just spent some of our ever increasing oil riches on a gigantic new library smack in the middle of Oslo (and a day off for school kids making a "book chain" across town to transfer the stocks and stores from the old one to the new one; quite charming). ... What an interesting career to have (and well matched in years to my own, it seems), involving so much travel (but perhaps toilsome, too, at times ...?). I - naturally - ended up a translator, a fairly stationary labour, but privately I've visited perhaps around 30 countries, also working on some occasions, which is the most rewarding, as you can catch glimpses behind the facade which you rarely get as a mere traveler. ... Anyhow, nice to meet you! Feel free to inquire after Nordic subjects, I'd be honoured, for sure. Good days to you and all you hold dear! :) T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 06:22, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, thx for taking all the trouble :) Wrt. my presence, I gave a short summary of my experience and approach on the "user page" for my present IP; I've been around since 2013 or -14 or so. Wrt. Wiki as a source for Wiki: That was precisely the reason for quoting the source text, not the article text. It was more of an attempt to scavenge sources than text. Not to argue with you, just to explain my thinking. Books and libraries are in no short supply, but as it happens, I live in Norway, and much of the source texts here are, well, in Norwegian; perhaps not surprising, given the subject. I have taken the time and trouble to read WIKI:Verifiability and the policies arising from it (RS, OR,SYNTH and a handful more), have peeked at ArbCom discussions to see what sort of things they come down on, I'm an avid reader of talk pages ... so I've done a little homework, at least. And usually I make only small edits, and I always precede it with a talk page presentation of what I propose to do; then I leave it for days, weeks ... and if there is no discussion, I go WIKI:Bold, and amend the article. I did that in "Viking Age", too, and there was no controversy wrt. content (although, admittedly, my presentation was shorter than usual ... got carried away ...), nay, there was hardly even a comment or reply. So I thought I was on the safe side. But I intend to learn! From my mistakes! And I shall become mightily learned, given their number! Have a nice day :) T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Editing news 2020 #1 – Discussion tools
Read this in another language • Subscription list
The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. The goal of the talk pages project is to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. This project is the result of the Talk pages consultation 2019.
The team is building a new tool for replying to comments now. This early version can sign and indent comments automatically. Please test the new Reply tool.
- On 31 March 2020, the new reply tool was offered as a Beta Feature editors at four Wikipedias: Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian. If your community also wants early access to the new tool, contact User:Whatamidoing (WMF).
- The team is planning some upcoming changes. Please review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page. The team will test features such as:
- an easy way to mention another editor ("pinging"),
- a rich-text visual editing option, and
- other features identified through user testing or recommended by editors.
To hear more about Editing Team updates, please add your name to the "Get involved" section of the project page. You can also watch 
these pages: the main project page, Updates, Replying, and User testing.
– PPelberg (WMF) (talk) & Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Issue 38, January – April 2020
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020
- New partnership
- Global roundup
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the copy edit, very helpful and very much appreciated. Ceoil (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Very gracious, Ceoil. I appreciate your thanks. I found the article fascinating. I grew up in the rural South, on a farm, with a small burial ground (not of my family), with antebellum dating (pre American Civil War) and grave elaboration of varying style and cost, from shell covered tabby to modest plinths and stele.
- I'm not skilled at copy editing-most of my writing experience has been related to oral delivery—my punctuation use shows that influence. I struggle with spelling. But I can trim, rephrase, and tighten. I am happy to finally have a Wiki-conversation after often seeing your sig on Victoria's page.
- — stay safe in this plagued year — Neonorange (Phil) 08:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
- Yes I know you from Victoria's page, which is why I was so delighted to see your edits, have long seen you are much better at this whole writing thing! No not a good time on planet earth, its both dangerous and boring as hell. Lets hope calm heads will prevail and we dont get sucked into easy solutions. Be safe and well, and talk later. Ceoil (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020
- Library Card Platform
- New partnerships
- ProQuest
- Springer Nature
- BioOne
- CEEOL
- IWA Publishing
- ICE Publishing
- Bytes in brief
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Editing news 2020 #2 – Quick updates
Read this in another language • Subscription list
This edition of the Editing newsletter includes information the Wikipedia:Talk pages project, an effort to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. The central project page is on MediaWiki.org.
- Reply tool: This is available as a Beta Feature at the four partner wikis (Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian Wikipedias). The Beta Feature will get new features soon. The new features include writing comments in a new visual editing mode and pinging other users by typing
@. You can test the new features on the Beta Cluster. Some other wikis will have a chance to try the Beta Feature in the coming months. - New requirements for user signatures: Soon, users will not be able to save invalid custom signatures in Special:Preferences. This will reduce signature spoofing, prevent page corruption, and make new talk page tools more reliable. Most editors will not be affected.
- New discussion tool: The Editing team is beginning work on a simpler process for starting new discussions. You can see the initial design on the project page.
- Research on the use of talk pages: The Editing team worked with the Wikimedia research team to study how talk pages help editors improve articles. We learned that new editors who use talk pages make more edits to the main namespace than new editors who don't use talk pages.
– Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Editing news 2020 #3
Seven years ago this week, the Editing team made the visual editor available by default to all logged-in editors using the desktop site at the English Wikipedia. Here's what happened since its introduction:
- The 50 millionth edit using the visual editor on desktop was made this year. More than 10 million edits have been made here at the English Wikipedia.
- More than 2 million new articles have been created in the visual editor. More than 600,000 of these new articles were created during 2019.
- Almost 5 million edits on the mobile site have been made with the visual editor. Most of these edits have been made since the Editing team started improving the mobile visual editor in 2018.
- The proportion of all edits made using the visual editor has been increasing every year.
- Editors have made more than 7 million edits in the 2017 wikitext editor, including starting 600,000 new articles in it. The 2017 wikitext editor is VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode. You can enable it in your preferences.
- On 17 November 2019, the first edit from outer space was made in the mobile visual editor.
- In 2019, 35% of the edits by newcomers, and half of their first edits, were made using the visual editor. This percentage has been increasing every year since the tool became available.
Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:06, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Editing news 2020 #4
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter
Reply tool
The Reply tool has been available as a Beta Feature at the Arabic, Dutch, French and Hungarian Wikipedias since 31 March 2020. The first analysis showed positive results.
- More than 300 editors used the Reply tool at these four Wikipedias. They posted more than 7,400 replies during the study period.
- Of the people who posted a comment with the Reply tool, about 70% of them used the tool multiple times. About 60% of them used it on multiple days.
- Comments from Wikipedia editors are positive. One said, أعتقد أن الأداة تقدم فائدة ملحوظة؛ فهي تختصر الوقت لتقديم رد بدلًا من التنقل بالفأرة إلى وصلة تعديل القسم أو الصفحة، التي تكون بعيدة عن التعليق الأخير في الغالب، ويصل المساهم لصندوق التعديل بسرعة باستخدام الأداة. ("I think the tool has a significant impact; it saves time to reply while the classic way is to move with a mouse to the Edit link to edit the section or the page which is generally far away from the comment. And the user reaches to the edit box so quickly to use the Reply tool.")[1]
The Editing team released the Reply tool as a Beta Feature at eight other Wikipedias in early August. Those Wikipedias are in the Chinese, Czech, Georgian, Serbian, Sorani Kurdish, Swedish, Catalan, and Korean languages. If you would like to use the Reply tool at your wiki, please tell User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF).
The Reply tool is still in active development. Per request from the Dutch Wikipedia and other editors, you will be able to customize the edit summary. (The default edit summary is "Reply".) A "ping" feature is available in the Reply tool's visual editing mode. This feature searches for usernames. Per request from the Arabic Wikipedia, each wiki will be able to set its own preferred symbol for pinging editors. Per request from editors at the Japanese and Hungarian Wikipedias, each wiki can define a preferred signature prefix in the page MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix. For example, some languages omit spaces before signatures. Other communities want to add a dash or a non-breaking space.
New requirements for user signatures
- The new requirements for custom user signatures began on 6 July 2020. If you try to create a custom signature that does not meet the requirements, you will get an error message.
- Existing custom signatures that do not meet the new requirements will be unaffected temporarily. Eventually, all custom signatures will need to meet the new requirements. You can check your signature and see lists of active editors whose custom signatures need to be corrected. Volunteers have been contacting editors who need to change their custom signatures. If you need to change your custom signature, then please read the help page.
Next: New discussion tool
Next, the team will be working on a tool for quickly and easily starting a new discussion section to a talk page. To follow the development of this new tool, please put the New Discussion Tool project page on your watchlist.
Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:48, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 40
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
- New partnerships
- Al Manhal
- Ancestry
- RILM
- #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
- AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 41
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
- New partnership: Taxmann
- WikiCite
- 1Lib1Ref 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Editing news 2021 #1
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter
Reply tool
The Reply tool is available at most other Wikipedias.
- The Reply tool has been deployed as an opt-out preference to all editors at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
- It is also available as a Beta Feature at almost all Wikipedias except for the English, Russian, and German-language Wikipedias. If it is not available at your wiki, you can request it by following these simple instructions.
Research notes:
- As of January 2021, more than 3,500 editors have used the Reply tool to post about 70,000 comments.
- There is preliminary data from the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedia on the Reply tool. Junior Contributors who use the Reply tool are more likely to publish the comments that they start writing than those who use full-page wikitext editing.[2]
- The Editing and Parsing teams have significantly reduced the number of edits that affect other parts of the page. About 0.3% of edits did this during the last month.[3] Some of the remaining changes are automatic corrections for Special:LintErrors.
A large A/B test will start soon.[4] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.
New discussion tool
The new tool for starting new discussions (new sections) will join the Discussion tools in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures at the end of January. You can try the tool for yourself.[5] You can leave feedback in this thread or on the talk page.
Next: Notifications
During Talk pages consultation 2019, editors said that it should be easier to know about new activity in conversations they are interested in. The Notifications project is just beginning. What would help you become aware of new comments? What's working with the current system? Which pages at your wiki should the team look at? Please post your advice at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications.
–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes - Issue 42
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
- New EBSCO collections now available
- 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
- Library Card input requested
- Libraries love Wikimedia, too!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 45
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021
- Library design improvements continue
- New partnerships
- 1Lib1Ref update
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Public Investment Fund on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Julian Assange on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Indira Gandhi on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:31, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Akkawi on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:J. K. Rowling on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hemingway page edit
hi, I'm very new to Wikipedia and still trying to figure it out. I'm a history buff, not a computer code writer. So I apologize in advance. I don't think the issue is whether the letter is accurate in terms of specifics in Hemingway's wounds or the # of pieces of shrapnel taken from his leg. The writer isn't a journalist or medical professional, he's a soldier writing a letter to his wife during wartime. If he did not have the facts correct, as we understand them today, how does that take away from the fact that the letter adds to history. We now know that Hemingway served with a man named Walter Broadway. It would be very easy, I would imagine, for a journalist or historian to confirm that a Lt. Walter Broadway served with, or in near-enough proximity, to Hemingway, and that would establish the veracity of the letter. Wouldn't need a Hemingway scholar to ascertain that. I believe that the mention of the letter adds to the Wikipedia Hemingway biography.
https://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c8v40zm9/entire_text/
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Republican Party (United States) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Portal talk:Current events on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Brian Rose (podcaster) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Curtis Yarvin on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Addiction on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Eye strain page
May I know why there is a bias here? The eye strain page already has references mentioned from the blog pages of various clinics (which could very well have been written by non-medical outsourced writers) which is not acceptable under Wikipedia's guidelines. Muscle fatigue of voluntary muscles can be relieved with sleep and rest. This is a known fact, and undisputed in medical science. If you could help with providing a citation from a medical textbook please do. But please don't deny people the correct information just because a known fact does not have a citation. The Computer Vision Syndrome page on Wikipedia has information (especially the blue light information) that is false, outdated and a clear advertising ploy. Yet Wikipedia allows such content to remain? Is Wikipedia still a neutral encyclopedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navinwiki (talk • contribs) 12:56, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Please see MEDREF and RS. I suggest finding proper medical references with searches like this: digital eye strain. Pubmed.gov is a good search engine to find Wikipedia medical article sources.
- Please remember to sign talk page posts by adding four tildes at the end (~~~~). Neonorange (Phil) 13:33, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 42
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021
- New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
- 1Lib1Ref
- Library Card
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 43
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021
- New Library Card designs
- 1Lib1Ref May
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
The Endless River (Pink Floyd) - deletion of CD track listing
You deleted my addition of the CD track listing. Why?!? In your comments, you wrote: (Reverted 1 pending edit by 2607:FEA8:6000:8F00:7CCD:1929:6FED:B4F5 to revision 1017119102 by Enquire: seems to be OR and arugable; discuss on talk page) - but there is no mention of this in the talk page.
Enquire (talk) 18:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Enquire, I did not revert your edit; I reverted the IP editor (2067:FEA8:6000:8F00:7CCD:1929:6FED:B4F5) who reverted your edit, (that began with 'studio', 'studio', etc.) The IP then made an edit that changed yours to compilation, compilation, etc. with a revert. The article is Pending Changes protected, so the IP edit could not appear until reviewed. In this case, by me. I restored your edit for the reason I stated. Evidently there is some contention on this article, so an administrator placed it under Pending Changes protection. My review summary was aimed at the IP editor, and suggested the IP editor start a discussion on the article talk page. With 3,000+ edits, you could easily get Pending Changes reviewer rights, and then, as well as help Pending Changes work for everyone, situations like this would be less confusing since you would see the edit made by the IP—no one without the reviewer right (or administrators) ever sees reverted pending changes. I hope this explanation helps. In case I have missed your point, reply to this post and I will drink some coffee and try again. — Neonorange (Phil) 06:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
78rpm barnstar
|
Shellac Appreciation Award |
| Random appreciation for having a most awesome image at the top of your user page. Happy editing! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC) |
Editing news 2021 #2
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter
Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.
The key results were:
- Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
- The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.
These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.
Looking ahead
The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.
You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.
00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at User talk:Dušan Kreheľ/RfC:Merging simple identical references by bot (detail) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Martin Heidegger on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Military academies in Russia on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Iveco on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Main Page on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Freshpet on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Temple (LDS Church) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Azov Battalion on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 10 April 2022 (UTC)