This is an archive of past discussions with User:Figureskatingfan. 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.
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Christine. I saw you recently reviewed and failed Chris Kempling for GA status, yet it is still listed as a good article nominee here and here. Additionally, you have not notified the nominator, Trystan of the review. Please address these issues for this and future reviews. Thanks, Airplaneman ✈11:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
A, I have now addressed the above issues. I really need to do more GA reviews! Thanks for the friendly reminder, and I'll do better next time. Christine (talk) 11:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On August 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Heart of a Woman, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Mmm, another awesome FA.. Yes, congratulations indeed! I've been so out of it that I didn't even notice that it got promoted. Well done! (We get so much egoboo when our first FAs go through, and it can be anticlimactic when the fifth passes to little fanfare.) Have a donut. Scartol • Tok00:33, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Ah, thanks pal. Yes, I'm particularly proud of this one, so nobody noticing didn't matter. My second Maya Angelou FA, my first four award. It has given me new inspiration to move further along in my Wiki-goals. I think that setting up that MA-FT may be closer than I initially thought, but it takes creating stub articles to get rid of all those redlinks in her bibliography. I'll probably start doing that once I'm finished combing through Children and Television, one of my new DYKs. It's been a very productive summer, WP wise. Christine (talk) 11:52, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
"Season 41 will debut in September 27, 2010"
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Figureskatingfan,
I just noticed that you undid my alteration under 'Sesame Street' of..."Season 41 will debut in September 27, 2010" to "Season 42 will debut on September 27, 2010."
My alteration is correct, that 2010 will be the beginning of Season 42, and not Season 41. Yes, it will be 41 years since the show's 1969 debut, but that would mean it's the start of the 42nd year (Just as 'Sesame Street' wasn't 1 year old when Season 1 began.)
Think of a baby. When a baby turns one year old, it's beginning Year 2. Likewise, when a TV show turns one year old, it's beginning Season 2. When a TV show turns ten years old, it's beginning Season 11. So...when a TV show turns 41 years old, it's beginning Season 42.
Please consider: We agree that 1969 brought Season 1, right? And therefore 1970 brought Season 2. That can only mean that any year ending with a 9 would bring a Season ending with a 1 (if 1969 was Season 1, 1979 brought Season 11, 1989 brought Season 21, 1999 brought Season 31, 2009 brought Season 41)...and any year ending with a 0 brought a Season ending with a 2 (1970: Season 2...1980: Season 12...1990: Season 22...2000: Season 32...2010: Season 42.)
If you're still not sure you agree with me, one thing you can do is this: Make a list of the numbers 1-42...Then, next to those numbers, put '1969' next to 1 (representing that Season 1 was 1969), '1970' next to 2, '1971' next to 3, and keep going down the list...and you will find that 42, not 41, will come in next to 2010.
Pardon my obsessiveness on this, which I admit to. But I wouldn't have taken the time to explain this if you hadn't unfairly referred to my post as "vandalism." Please. That was grossly unfair. If I can't convince you that 2010 brings Season 42 and not Season 41, I hope I can at least convince you that I'm not a vandal.
But please know I don't mean any of this in anything other than friendly conversational explanation of why I believe my change was correct and why it should be changed back to the way I amended the page.
Thanks for reading. I did go on a bit, and I'm sorry. :>
Michael, my apologies for insulting you by calling your edit "vandalism". I was reverting a group of edits, and I included yours. I have to admit that I'm suspicious of edits made by an anonymous IP, especially for this particular article. It would help your credibility if you signed in.
I'm also sorry that you wasted all the time you spent above on your faulty logic! Here's where it breaks down. First off, Sesame Workshop has stated in all their promotional materials that the 40th season of The Show began on November 10, 2009. Muppet Wiki says the same. If you had done some research, you would've found that not all seasons spanned two years; for example, Season 31 began on January 3, 2000. I have no idea why they chose to do that, but I suspect it was because they were producing fewer episodes by that time. You'll also notice that they returned to the old practice of spanning the season over two consecutive years in 2009; again, I can't tell you the exact reason, but I'd bet good money it was because they wanted the premiere to coincide on their anniversary in November. See, I answered your question without rambling and without coming across as condescending. I will re-revert you, sir or madame, and again, thanks for playing. Christine (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Imperial Triple Crown
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Re your message: You're welcome. =) The edit was kind of your run-of-the-mill kid vandalism. The editor stuck his friend's name in there, copying the reference from one of the other entries. Due to the unfortunate stigma attached to the list, I decided that it would be best to revision delete the edit. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:24, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Those do not surprise me too much. Kid's TV shows, especially those for the younger kids, are often targets for the older kids. As for Maya Angelou, her article is a target because of what I like to call "homework vandalism". I can always tell when some historical topic (War of 1812 comes to mind) or notable figure is being taught in class because some kids in the class always seem to want to vandalize their homework subject. Boredom or picking on other classmates when you see "Mr. Smith says Wikipedia is not a reliable source" or "Joey, do your homework." -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I actually made up a vandalism term myself: "Steve Burns vandalism". It's related to the Paul is dead phenomenon and goes something like this. "Steve was fired from Blue's Clues because he died from an overdose and then he killed and molested Blue." The Angelou vandalism always disturbs me because it's often horribly racist, sexist, and disgusting. She was raped at a young age, and it strikes me as perpetuating the victimization. You're right--my articles tend to be vandalized in waves; they're on the increase at the beginning of each school year, school vacations, and the end of the year. Boredom has a lot to do with it. It makes me glad that WP has such strong anti-vandalism tools, and so many people to use them. Christine (talk) 11:50, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Maya: response
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
[from my talkpg. My 1st response 2 Spanglej is on his pg under maya(again), but u may have already read that.]
Tnx 4 generous comments, both of you. Will do mbest 2 help, as i can. Ltd time/resources. I've had a passion for MA since reading "Caged Bird" in early '70's. Saw her speak in Memphis. The more i learn of her early life, the more amazed i am that she never became bitter or otherwise.
Developing a passion 4 WP in general, as well. It's addictive! Have 2 take some time out to pay the rent, etc. tho. Cheers!
Ragityman (talk) 23:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
GOCE newsletter
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive!GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
Participation report — We have 71 participants in the September drive. 95 people signed up for the July drive, and in May we had 36.
Progress report — We have been making solid progress in eliminating the 2008 articles from the backlog so far. If we continue to focus our firepower we can completely wipe out 2008 from the queue. Overall volumes are lower than expected though, with nearly a thousand articles yet to be done if we are to meet our overall target. If you have not yet participated in the drive, we recommend you do so. If each person who signed up edits one article per day from now till the end of the month we can eliminate another 1,065 articles from the backlog. All contributions are appreciated.
Announcement: credit for 10k+ articles — Participants editing a 10k word article may claim credit for two 5k+ articles on the leaderboard. Those that edit a 15k word article may claim credit for three. Regardless, the article is still counted as a single article in the tallies.
Reminder — Articles from the Requests page can be included in your tally, even if they do not have a copy edit tag. This is a great place to go if you are interested in finding a higher quality article to work on.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, I have completed a general cleanup of the adopter information page for the adopt-a-user project, located here. During my cleanup, I have removed several inactive and retired users. In order to provide interested adoptees with an easy location to find adopters, it is essential that the page be up-to-date with the latest information possible. Thus:
If you are no longer interested in being an adopter, please remove yourself from the list.
If you are still interested, please check the list to see if any information needs to be updated or added - especially your availability. Thank you.
You are receiving this message because you are listed as an adopter here.
Latest comment: 14 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
I see my misunderstood comment is still adorning your user page. My insomniac self thinks anyone that wakes up to do anything that doesn't pay is a little odd, but I wasn't really directing that at you. Or, let's put it this way, you're no weirder than any of the rest of us who thought writing an encyclopaedia sounded like fun. ;) Courcelles03:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Courcelles, now you misunderstand me! I actually thought that your comment was a compliment! I understood its context fully--that you were poking fun at yourself and everyone else addicted to writing for this project. Plus, it was funny, too funny not to focus attention on, even if it was on my rarely-read userpage. That's my favorite kind of humor--self-disparaging and complimentary in a back-handed kind of way. In some ways, I feel honored that you would call me "weird", so I just had to put it there. If you like, I'll remove it. ;) Christine (talk) 11:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
And I just had to tease you some more. (As long as no one thinks I go around calling random editors "wierdos", I find it kind of charming being there) We're all a little strange around here, aren't we? That you don't seem to attract any attention, well, let my sleep=addled brain just say that is a good example of what is dead wrong with RFA. Courcelles07:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Ah, such truth in what you say. Another way that I'm weird is that I love attention, but feel really uncomfortable when I get it. Well, I think what I really need is to feel appreciated, which is true about pretty much everyone, I've found. And I certainly don't need glory in Wikipedia. I really have no desire to be an administrator; it wouldn't make a huge difference in my behavior here, anyway. The editors I associate with here know me and know that I do good stuff, and that's enough. As much as I love and admire User:Moni3, for example, I wouldn't want the attention she gets because it's all so controversial. That's because of the articles she chooses to edit, I believe. I also avoid conflict like the plague, and the last thing I want is to get into it with someone over Sesame Street or Maya Angelou. And I certainly don't want to have to compromise over my pet articles. So I'm content in my little corner of this huge pond, making my small contribution to it. That's pretty much the way I am in real life, too, with a few exceptions. Christine (talk) 18:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, Moni attracts a ton of attention for some reason or another. I notice I only get noticed on days when I mash my delete button a lot. (I understand not wanting to be an admin, and having admins you can bug when you need something is almost as good as having the buttons yourself.) The articles you are involved in is almost always a determination of how much conflict you get into. If there is ever a Sesame Street arbitration case, we know we might as well shut the place down, we will have so far lost our way. Oh, and if I ever get around to doing something about the embarrassing state of World Figure Skating Championships or European Figure Skating Championships, you'll be on my list to call ;) Courcelles04:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Possible match
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi there! A user that wishes to be adopted has indicated an interest in a subject area that you are interested in. When you have time, please review User:Netalarm/Survey#kenriolover789 and see if you would like to adopt this user. I'm aware you already have an adoptee, so feel free to focus on him - I can look for more matches. Thank you! Netalarmtalk06:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
Greetings from the Guild of Copy EditorsSeptember 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks to all who participated! Several of our top editors were called away to real life concerns during the month (be careful out there, people!). This meant that once again, we did not meet all our lofty targets, but we did come close.
Stats
Out of 76 registered editors, 45 actively participated.
We nearly wiped out the 2008 articles from the backlog—there were only 13 remaining when the drive closed.
We reduced the backlog by 725 articles (11.5%), so it was another successful drive.
A total of 59 barnstars will be awarded to 40 editors—well done, and congratulations to all.
Barnstars
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you edited in the July 2010 GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive, you may have earned rollover words, which counted towards this month's barnstars (except for the leaderboard awards). Any unused word credits will be held over for the next drive, as long as you participated in the September drive. Over the course of the next week or two, we will be handing out the barnstars. Click here to see a list of barnstar winners.
We will be holding our next drive in November. You can sign up here.
A huge "thank you" to all editors who helped clear the backlog and to others who helped out behind-the-scenes. See you at the next drive, and until then, please continue to help us work through the backlog. Happy editing!
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi there Figureskatingfan! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the alarm this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog myself through a matching program, but I need your help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.
On the list of adopters, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.
Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at the survey, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.
Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.
Greetings, the Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invites you to participate in the November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 November at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 November at 23:59 (UTC). The goal for this drive is to reduce the backlog by 10% (approximately 500 articles). We hope to focus our efforts on the oldest three months (January, February, and March 2009) and the newest three months (September, October, and November 2010) of articles in the queue.
Sign-up has already begun at the November drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants, some of which are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Cultural references to The Wiggles, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention)20:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, that turned out to be more complicated than I expected (the multiple calls to different chapters of a single book are always complicated to deal with in this kind of system if one wants to avoid tedious repetitions). I've done a preliminary whack at it, but it's far from ideal, I'll admit. I'm starting to think it might require an unorthodox approach to preserve those (no doubt painstakingly collected) precise page references (quite a few of them can afford to be combined, though. That will help.), so I'll come back to it tomorrow after a good night's sleep. Circéus (talk) 06:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Um, if I knew that's what you were thinking of, I'm not so sure I would've accepted the offer. On the one hand, it's "Fisch", and on the second hand, listing the chapters of a book with separate authors like I did is common practice in academic writing. Yes, it's bulky, but it prevents undue repetition in the "Notes" section, and gives each author appropriate credit for their articles. The "G is for Growing" book is kinda like a journal with numerous authors' articles in them, with separate studies and research connected by the same subject material. The editors simply collected the major studies conducted by the CTW in one place--again, like a journal. I'm sorry that you went through all that trouble, and stayed up so late doing it, but could we revert it back, please? Christine (talk) 12:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
I think I can "unbulky" it without having full entries for each chapters. Gimme a chance to work further on it first, please? I did not originally intend to do that note-editing stuff (except to add years so as to differentiate the two Cooney refs), and if you really don't like the final result, I'll revert (except for a few places where separate notes are simply not needed) and convert the refs as they were originally, okay? Circéus (talk) 17:57, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Done, and much tidier than my sorry intermediate attempt. The "sub-list" of chapters is a bit unusual, but I think overall it works well to avoid the clunkiness. I actually had to re-add a few chapters from the book who were cited in the notes, but not listed in the references. I also combined a couple notes that overlapped and separated out the citations from the content notes. Circéus (talk) 19:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, that looks very nice! What a nice, elegant solution to the clunkiness! It looks pretty, which is very important to me in my articles. ;) Could you do that same in the other SS articles I've worked on: Sesame Street, History of Sesame Street, International co-productions of Sesame Street? There are others, but those are the main ones made clunky by Fisch and Truglio. I'm only slightly kidding; it would help out so much and make them all prettier! See, this is why WP:AGF is so valuable. I doubted you, Circeus, and gave you a chance to make things better, and that's exactly what you did. Very excellent. Christine (talk) 21:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
If it weren't for the page numbers, I would have lumped all the reference to single chapters together (as is a pretty common practice, particularly in medicine and taxo-biology), but I know from experience how frustrating it is to hunt the specific source element inside a chapter, much less a whole book! I'll see what I can do with those other articles. Circéus (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Dude, you rock so hard! Word of advice: wait on the parent article. Yes, it will be a nightmare. I'm still working on it, and I'm requesting that other editors take a look at it and make suggestions about splitting off sections to new articles. If that happens, the sources will go away, and all your beautiful work will be for nil. Let me tell you, though, that Sesame Street is in much better shape than it was just a few months ago. About a year ago, it was actually delisted as an FA, so it was in horrible shape and full of nonsense. It's much improved, but it still has a long way to go, but I'm proud of the work. Thanks for your help! Christine (talk) 03:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
(de-indent) Two pieces of advices I might make to you, though: consider using more "global" ref names. "pageXX" is not very intuitive (hence why I renamed those that I merged), y'see... And maybe consider having the refs in order of refname instead of order that they appear in the article (easier to locate them). I use TextPad to sort them, but there are plenty options (WikEd has a line-sorting function too, but I've never tried it.). Circéus (talk) 06:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
I see your point. I've used the non-global ref names because there are times when the same ref is used multiple times, and it seems silly to me to name a ref based on content. I suppose a solution would be to follow your example and use the author's name and page number together. I'll think about changing that practice. If you do things your way, then it makes sense to organize them by refname. I've just always used the "find" function to locate them. That's one of the drawbacks of the practice of the reflist format, but I still find it less clunky and easier to create. It makes managing them afterwards difficult, but I still like it better--I think. This is all busywork, which to be honest, I hate. I'd much prefer spending my time actually writing and improving. I know it's necessary, though. Christine (talk) 12:01, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
re: ref names, don't worry about changing existing articles, it was just a suggestion for future ones ^__^. Both aspects of reflists have advantages, though I must say I'm not used to listed refs for "short forms", but ultimately I guess it does make things easier once you get used to it. Circéus (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Sesame Street research
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 4 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sesame Street research, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks for your message to me. Just so you know, comments (such as yours, for example) in a consensus discussion carry weight in determining consensus, even if it's simply "I agree with ..." or "I disagree with ...". I'm not trying to sway your opinion one way or the other, just letting you know that even a word or two can make a difference. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 00:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
I certainly know the feeling of being disgusted with the level of ignorance that dominates some articles. It's even worse in some areas, such as science and medical related articles, which I sometimes take an extended break from. And it's more than ignorance; it's bull-headed, I'll-write-what-I-want ignorance. Sometimes I have to focus on fluff articles, such as pop-culture movie stars (where there's lots of silly fancruft to argue about). But I do occasionally drop in on the serious articles, which is how I got into the current battle. Anyway, thanks for your response, and my best wishes. Cresix (talk) 18:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
My solution is the middle ground. I'm sure there are loads of people who disagree with me, but I don't think that Sesame Street is fluff. It's not rocket science, but it is an important part of our culture and deserves high-quality articles about it. Maya Angelou is also important, but not at all controversial. I've found that the articles we're most attracted to fit our personalities. For example, I hate confrontation and will avoid it all cost, so I tend to gravitate towards articles that have very little controversy. That way, when there is controversy, I care enough about them that I'm willing to participate in some drama. Christine (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
(I posted this on Cresix's page and wanted you to see as well). Hello. I would first like to say that I have enjoyed this discussion. Reading the comments you and Christine have made on each others pages and things that were said in the discussion of the SL page, I hope to clarify some things. I hope that what I say in the following lines can lead to more productive conversations with "the opposition" (which I hope you mean to be those unfamiliar with linguistics) if you partake in these conversations in the future, which I hope you do. Unlike what Christine says about "It's like the person who insists that the sky is red even when everyone else in the world knows differently," this was my first time to have the distinction between "use of words" and "use of language" be made, along with it being my first time to read about the requirements of language to have grammar and syntax. Based on not being familiar with the linguist's definition of language which is what you were using, (i was defining it to mean communication) of course we were arriving at disagreement. This distinction is one that I believe the majority of the population does not make because the majority of the population is not familiar with linguistics. Cresix, you were the first person I had ever met that claimed nhps don't use Sign Language. Therefore, when you alone claim it is not true and don't provide a reliable source, i was not immediately convinced. Had you in the beginning provided a link to the transcript of the AOL discussion with Koko, papers showing flaws in the research and their methods, I think I would have come to agree with you sooner. I think making comments such as "Animals do NOT use language, regardless of what a source might say" and "Please familiarize yourself with the linguistics of sign language (start by reading every article related to American Sign Language) before adding outrageous information about animals using sign language" are not helpful in furthering the education of people on this subject. I urge you both to not become discouraged if a person does not agree with you immediately, it may be that you are introducing them to a new perspective and therefore it takes time for a person to change their mind. I feel saying "And it's more than ignorance; it's bull-headed, I'll-write-what-I-want ignorance," is not fair. Two (2) out of three (3) times I reverted, I modified what I had written to try and incorporate what the person who made the delete was saying. In the first revert I included sources (although not good ones) because that is what the person wanted. The third time I deleted some of the stuff I had written based on points Cresix was making. While I admit my edits were not satisfactory, I feel it would have been more productive for those more knowledgeable on the subject to incorporate their knowledge/expertise to the information I was trying to include along with deleting, rather than only deleting. So I'm sorry you felt that it was "bull headed, i'll write what i want ignorance". I did try take what those who deleted my edits were saying into consideration, not just reverting without making any revisions whatsoever. Additionally, while I agree with requesting research that has been peer reviewed in linguistic journals, unfortunately, in our society, finding peer reviewed journals that are free and easily accessible (i.e. online) are hard to come by. I think if you provide sources for your position with research from the journals you have at the beginning of the discussion, rather than only when someone asks for it, it will help those who want to learn about the topic, such as myself. Unfortunately I do not have the means to access the journals you have but I would very much like to. Asking me to provide information from such journals is, unfortunately, beyond my means. While although I am less educated on this topic, I do know there remains a lot of inequality and oppression towards those who are deaf, mute and these communities. I stand in solidarity with you in the fight for equality and against this oppression. While we may still have disagreement (as Cresix pointed out, "I mean no personal offense, but it is clear that you know little or nothing about the linguistics of sign language") I hope there is a place for me to help contribute to this topic. Please understand that I am trying to learn and am taking what you say into consideration. I hope that my future edits to the topic will help to improve the page, making it easier for those not familiar with this subject to become familiar. And I hope you can help me in this process. Thank you for taking the time to have this discussion. I believe it has been valuable.Jessicanr (talk) 17:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
My response to Jessicanr -- feel free to delete
"Had you in the beginning provided a link to the transcript of the AOL discussion with Koko, papers showing flaws in the research and their methods, I think I would have come to agree with you sooner.": I understand your concern, but you also bear some responsibility. When something is challenged, you don't continue to revert; you discuss on the talk page. You did not do that until I forced the issue by starting the talk page discussion myself. Secondly, you might benefit from reading WP:BURDEN; it is not my responsibility to teach you the details about a topic that you don't understand. I don't edit some articles because I know little about the topic; I don't assume I understand enough simply because I read something or saw a video on the internet. I'm sorry that you had to learn to deal with that reality of editing, but we all learn from experience.
"This distinction is one that I believe the majority of the population does not make because the majority of the population is not familiar with linguistics.": Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Accuracy is more important than placing misinformation in an article simply because "the majority of the population" doesn't understand something.
""Animals do NOT use language, regardless of what a source might say" and "Please familiarize yourself with the linguistics of sign language (start by reading every article related to American Sign Language) before adding outrageous information about animals using sign language" are not helpful in furthering the education of people on this subject. I urge you both to not become discouraged if a person does not agree with you immediately, it may be that you are introducing them to a new perspective and therefore it takes time for a person to change their mind": That comment from me was not made "immediately"; only after you continued to revert instead of discussing on the talk page.
"I feel it would have been more productive for those more knowledgeable on the subject to incorporate their knowledge/expertise to the information I was trying to include along with deleting, rather than only deleting.": That is excactly what happened on the talk page after I began the discussion. It wasn't simply a matter of deleting. I began discussion. There is nothing wrong with deleting inaccurate information, and I did not "only delete". I started the discussion after you reverted more than once.
"unfortunately, in our society, finding peer reviewed journals that are free and easily accessible (i.e. online) are hard to come by. I think if you provide sources for your position with research from the journals you have at the beginning of the discussion, rather than only when someone asks for it, it will help those who want to learn about the topic, such as myself.": I agree online access is not always possible, but that does not justify reverting to inaccurate information. And once again, read WP:BURDEN: the burden of sourcing is on the editor who wishes to add or restore information. I eventually provided it, but don't think I didn't have to go to some trouble to get it simply because I did so. Please don't chastise me because you did not, could not, or would not find information that was your responsibility to find.
"I hope there is a place for me to help contribute to this topic": There is almost always a place for anyone to edit on Wikipedia. But I ask you to edit on topics with which you have some knowledge beyond the superifical level. As I have said, I never edit some article because I know nothing about the topic. That does not mean you cannot be involved in deaf-related topics. But work collaborately with editors who have the expertise, rather than assuming something is accurate simply because you read it on the internet.
I continue to say I mean no personal offense to you. I want an accurate encyclopedia, and I do not hesitate to remove or change something that I know to be inaccurate. If you had acknoweldged your limited knowledge on my talk page and asked for help rather than continuing to revert, or if you had raised the issue on the article's talk page instead of continuing to revert, I would have gladly discussed with you. Thank you for your message. Cresix (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
List of Sesame street characters
Latest comment: 14 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
No reason at all. I'm removing them, not because I doubt the good faith of those who added them, but simply because they have no sources. In some cases, the entries have been lifted from other websites such as Muppet Wiki. The goal in this list should be the same as other high-quality lists on WP, which means that it should be well-sourced, with reliable, third-party references. Notice that I've added all the entries I've deleted to Talk:List of characters in Sesame Street, so that they can be added back when and/or if reliable sources can be found for them. Also notice that the entries listed in "External links" are to Muppet Wiki and Sesame Street.org. People can go there if they want more "complete" entries. This list needs to be more than simply a expurgation of other lists, or a place where any editor can add a character simply because they remember it when they watched The Show when they were four years old. If you can find reliable sources for the entries I've deleted, feel free to add them back yourself. Christine (talk) 05:30, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Well, this is a wiki, so (unless BLP, or the like, is involved) we presume good faith that what is added can be verified, and merely hope that someone will come along and help, and add the refs as they find them.
hence my concern that, by removing them, you remove that opportunity.
So thank you for at least placing them on the talk page to keep the possibility alive.
Also, We shouldn't care care if something is available on some other site, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia itself, and as noted on one of the mission statement pages, we include information that is cyclopedic. And that would include information on Sesame Street and the muppets : )
Anyway, thanks for the due diligence, maybe with your efforts this may become a featured list : ) - jc3706:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, this is a wiki, but it's a different sort of wiki. You've guessed that I'd like this list to be featured someday, so it needs to be well-sourced. This list needs a good lead, one that gives an general overview about The Show's characters, and I may do that in the coming week or so. Another thing that would improve the situation, as well as having good and accurate information about the Muppets is a revamping of some other existing articles, most of which I would access as disappointing. There are lots of them, and the subject is so huge, so it can be daunting. I hope I'm done my part to make a dent in it, at least in a little way. One of the biggest issues is that it seems that I'm the only one who's taken it on. I don't mind, because it means that I have complete control over the product, but there's only so much one person can do. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Christine (talk) 12:57, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
I've thought about starting a Muppet WikiProject for some time now (I was rather surprised that one did not exist).
And I do help out, though not as much recently as once upon a time (which is part of why I had that page on my watchlist : )
One thing to note is that primary sources are fine. (as long as we don't start making interpretive claims) So we can say: <muppet character> appeared in a specific skit during a specific season.
(Since skits are often re-packaged into various episodes, i don't think we could narrow it down more than that. A "debut" of the skit would be nice, but shouldn't be mandatory, since at, we're just noting whether the character ever existed.
Maybe we should start one. I'm not sure how to go about it, but I'm sure it requires more than one person. Maybe I'll look into that. There's already a place that does exactly what you suggest: Muppet Wiki. They do an excellent job of recording episodes and the characters that appear in each, and it's a great resource. I don't think we should emulate their efforts here. That (and sites like Muppet Central) are fan sites. Many of the current WP articles on the Muppets have denigrated into that, and I'd like to see that change. I can envision WP being a place for Muppet/Sesame Street scholarship.
I need to invest in Old School. I think that it can be an excellent source, as long as it doesn't end up being OR. See, I don't think seeing a character you've seen on an episode, DVD, or YouTube clip should constitute inclusion in this list. If the DVD (like Old School) has some information on it, though, we can and should include it. The DVD versions of The Muppet Show, for example, has all those neat pop-ups, and those are fair game. I haven't seen Old School, so I can't say anything about it. (Hmm, perhaps a gift to ask Santa for Christmas, eh?) Christine (talk) 23:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
The trick is to not make any interpretations and merely report what has been seen.
So you can say "Grover appeared in episode x", and merely cite the episode. Or you can say that "Ernie appeared in the skit z". You can even say that "a shadow shaped like Bert appeared in the room with Ernie in skit y". But what you can't say is that the shadow was Bert, unless that was explicitly shown. to do so would call for "interpretation". and that is what we are to avoid when using primary sources.
That's part of why I was dismayed to see the removals, since many of them actually cited the skit that they appeared in.
As for Old School, it shows the first episode from several seasons, and has "extras" of a LOT of the skits from over those years (I would guess that they went the excerpt route, since there is so much duplication between episodes.) there's also a nice booklet with it as well. I see that there is a second volume out now, I may need to invest in that myself : ) - jc3701:59, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
You mean I hafta do research by watching SS/Muppet clips? Oh, darn! Well, I suppose if I must, I must! ;) I think the way to go with this is to look for primary sources first, and then go look for them in secondary sources like DVDs, YouTube, Sesame Street.com, and press release, and in that order. I'll continue doing what I'm doing for now, and then add from the other sources later on. And invest in those DVDs! Christine (talk) 05:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Discussions are underway to elect our inaugural group of GOCE Coordinators. Guild members and Drive participants are invited to have a look at the Coordinators page and join the discussion on its associated talk page.
Participation report — The November drive has 53 participants at this point. We had 77 participants in the September drive. In July, 95 people signed up for the drive, and in May we had 36. If you are not participating, it is not too late to join!
Progress report — The drive is quite successful so far, as we have already almost reached our target of a 10% reduction in the number of articles in the backlog. We are doing very well at keeping our Requests page clear, as those articles count double for word count for this drive.
Please keep in mind the possibility of removing other tags when you are finished with an article. If the article no longer needs {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, or other similar maintenance tags, please remove them, as this will make the tasks of other WikiProjects easier to complete. Thanks very much for participating in the Drive, and see you at the finish line!
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
... for the barnstar! You deserve one as much or more than I. There aren't many people with much knowledge of ASL around here, so I greatly value your presence, not only for your comments but for just being there when I feel overwhelmed. "True business!!" Cresix (talk) 17:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome--thanks thanks. Lean on me whenever. I just wish that I was able to contribute more; I just don't have access to any good info anymore. Living in semi-rural Northern Idaho (with almost no Deaf) makes it hard. Ah, I miss the days I could just walk across the hall for the most up-to-date research and info about Deafness and ASL. The only signing practice I get these days is on YouTube. Keep up the good work! Christine (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm also in a rural area. The last time I used anything close to ASL was for a few years about 25 years ago after finishing a graduate degree at Gallaudet; even then it was only through the accommodation of kind deaf people with good English skills that I was not frequently lost. It's been all down hill since then. I have a few (very few) deaf friends that I only see occasionally. It saddens me, but I don't have the time or flexibility that I had long ago. I've lost much of the language, but I still appreciate the culture. Cresix (talk) 23:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
How great it is that you're still giving back to the Deaf world via Wikipedia, though. Both my degrees are Deafness-related, my undergraduate from CSUN (Calif. State University Northridge for my few talk page stalkers). I love living here, and it's better for my family, but I miss it. It's only been a few years since the last time I signed to a real-live Deaf person, but I still think in ASL. YouTube helps a lot; I should go there for practice more. I have Deaf friends I could get on Skype with, too; I'm sure that they'd be more than happy to help me practice. I, like you, have found that most Deaf folks are wonderfully generous with any hearing person who wants to learn their language. Christine (talk) 12:48, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Sesame Street chopping
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 28 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Format of Sesame Street, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the format of the children's TV show Sesame Street was changed due to the success and popularity of the segment "Elmo's World"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Elections are currently underway for our inaugural Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, Friday 1 December – 23:59 UTC, Tuesday 14 December. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are six candidates vying for four positions. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.
We have reached the end of our fourth backlog elimination drive. Thanks to all who participated.
Stats
GOCE November 2010 backlog elimination drive graphs
58 people signed up for this drive. Of these, 48 people participated in the drive.
Although we did not eliminate the months we planned to (January, February, and March 2009; and August, September, and October 2010), we did reduce the backlog by 627 articles (11.2%), which was over our goal of 10%.
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you participated in the September 2010 backlog elimination drive, you may have earned roll-over words (more details can be found here). These roll-over words count as credit towards earning barnstars, except for leaderboard awards. We will be delivering these barnstars within the next couple of weeks.
Of course. Just one question before I begin though, and that is whether there is any particular time or date you need this looked at by. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 13:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
:::Excellent :) I have a question though and that is, do you use serial commas in the article? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC) Sorry, let me rephrase that. Would you mind if I took out the serial commas in the article? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 23:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Personally, I think that serial commas is a style thing. I also know that some reviewers don't like 'em. If you'd like to focus on them, knock yerself out, since it may or may not hinder an FAC. Christine (talk) 12:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Zanimum,
I've seen that you've contributed some to a few Sesame Street articles. I must tell you, I am shocked--shocked! I mean, I'm usually the only person in the whole of Wikipedia working on them, so to see someone actually start to do something substantial with them...well, I don't know what to think about that! ;)
I'm surprised that you put up Sesame Street research up for GA. I mean, I'm very proud of that article, but I get a little nervous about submitting "my" articles for GA and FA. The whole process can be somewhat painful, especially an FAC. I appreciate that you think well of it to nominate it, though. Sometimes I need a kick in the behind to go the next step in the improvement process. I also noticed that you made some additions to International co-productions of Sesame Street, which is probably my favorite SS article I've written. (Do you think it has the potential to move on from GA to an FAC?) None of your additions are supported by an outside source. Did you know that you can use episodes, DVDs, and even YouTube clips as sources? You just have to cite it. Where did you get the information you added? One thing I'm trying to avoid is for editors to add content from their memory, the whole "I saw that on Sesame Street when I was three!" kind of thing. That OR, and not allowed here, ya know.
Anyway, thanks for your input. I've felt kind of lonely in working on these articles, although I can attest that it's been loads of fun. See ya around! Christine (talk) 14:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Christine! Nice to be back in the fray, after a bit of a disconnect from Wikipedia for a while. I presume you realize from talk pages, but I was originally in your position with the Sesame Street articles, an essentially lone contributor! It's amazing the revisions that you've made, not only whipping the core articles into shape, but creating various new ones from scratch. Thumbs up.
As for the GA nomination, I know how you feel. The nomination processes for anything these days, articles and users, is quite intense. Personal aside... whereas to become an admin nowadays, you face the firing line, back in 2003 or so, I was like "hey, I've got free time during my first period spare at high school, and there's a lot of uncontrolled vandalism then, d'ya want help?" Back to the nomination, I'm behind you all the way during the review process, here to help where I can with revisions. (The amount you're being subject to for History of Sesame Street... yeesh.) There's a few things in the modern era that I'd like to discuss with you, as possibly worth mention, though possibly not, before you send the history to FAC, but that's any other discussion for a bit later.
I'll take tonight to review the international co-production article, see where revisions could be made. It's a tricky topic, as coverage isn't always even handed. In the mean time, I've cited the changes, albeit to articles partially behind paywalls. The free summaries include the relevant info, though, so that's a relief. (There used to be a brilliant, academic article about Sesame Park when I was volunteering for DMOZ, c. 2000 or 2001, but it's long gone. If I remember correctly, archive.org hadn't bothered to scoop it up.) I privately have the complete Sesame Park episode guide, but its source isn't fully publicly accessible, so...
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Elmosworld-room.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:28, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Just letting you know I am more than half way going through your article. I will let you know when the changes have been made so you can take a look at them :). --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 01:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, Christine. I chanced upon the Sesame Street history article via the current backlog drive and was curious as to why this article was singled out. I've carefully read more than half of it and found exceptionally few grammatical errors. (I'll point out one or two with a correction as soon as I post this.) I do have a few dozen stylistic changes worth making, but for the most part, these are minor, ones that could be made to any article. By and large, this is an exceptionally thorough and informative account. You should be proud of your efforts. If you will, please post a response on my talk page, so that I can get a better handle on what might be needed. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 20:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I wasn't thinking of FA, but based on the two I've been involved with, the Sesame Street article shouldn't face too many obstacles: it's well written, thorough and sufficiently sourced. I should mention that the FAR process can be a arduous, especially emotionally, but the good is that whatever criticisms are raised, they can only help improve things.
I do have a couple suggestions on style that I think would help. The first is basic wordsmithing: simple word substitutions and trimming. Many articles in Wikipedia require more intensive editing because of the way information is added, that is, somewhat randomly, and improving the style takes painful re-working to make the narrative flow. The out-of-the-blue mention of Big Bird's appearance on Flip Wilson would be an example. I could be wrong except given no other instance of this, only that would account for it.
The other issue is more difficult to explain than resolve: attributions such as "according to", "declared" and "reported". As best as I can put it, when the source's specific identity is not critical, the citation is sufficient to cover quoted or paraphrased information, and therefore the attribution can be dropped. In other cases, when the source's identity supports a personal view or insight, attributions such as "Lesser felt, thought, believed, wrote, etc." read better. "According to" is more appropriate to news reporting which doesn't have the luxury of footnotes and in formal writing when there's contention or uncertainty, such as "some players deal ten cards, but according to Hoyle..."
BTW, I was wrong about the grammaticals I mentioned originally; I mis-read the two phrases in question. I'm now about three-quarters of the way through a markup, and the only thing I've caught is an "an" preceding "US$1 million". I also found a bad edit on a citation. It's rare that there aren't more such things to do. I'll fix both of the errors and also make a few edits along the lines I've suggested. You can vet the results, and if everything suits, or even if you have some qualms, I'm willing to pitch in to help get this ready for FAR. Allreet? Allreet (talk) 03:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Reet, I've looked at your edits, and they look good. I don't think that the FAR process isn't worth the emotional trauma or I wouldn't let myself go through it. I just try and do as much as I can before submitting it. There are always unexpected things that come up, though. I think one of the most valuable things about FAR is that it gives the main editor the opportunity to give an article the arduous rewrite you mention. Regarding the attributions: see, my experience with FAR is exactly why I do it. Personally, I feel that there's too much attribution going on in WP articles, but in my experience of 5 FAs, that's what is called for. It's been a while since I've had an article there, so perhaps it's changed, but with the recent plagiarism scandal, I doubt it. Perhaps I've gone to the other extreme, as is my tendency. I'll go through it again, but I'm prone to see what happens at FAR. I'll also look at any more stand-alone phrases and sentences. Anyway, thanks for the help; I appreciate it. I always learn a lot during this process, and become a better writer as a result. Which is the point, right? Christine (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Influence of Sesame Street
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 22 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Influence of Sesame Street, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a survey conducted in 1993 on the influence of the children's television program Sesame Street found that by the age of three, 95% of all American children had watched the show? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi J, these images (and File:Jonstone.jpg) are from a promotional reel the Show's creators developed in 1968. They're screen captures I "stole" from Muppet Wiki [1]. The original copies of the reel are in the Sesame Workshop archives in NYC, but it was put in the DVD Old School: Vol. 1 (which I need to break down and purchase, adding to my already considerable SS collection), so I dunno if a copyright notice is on it. I' ve asked Danny Horn over at Muppet Wiki about it, though; if anyone knows, he will. How cool would it be if the images were in PD, though. ;) Christine (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
A lot of promo reels from that era are. Because of a weird little element in US copyright law, if something of that era came out without a copyright notice, it wasn't copyrighted. For instance, Night of the Living Dead is in the public domain in the United States. It's certainly worth looking into- it could potentially be an absolute gold mine of free media in the area of SS. J Milburn (talk) 15:39, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2010. Read all about these in the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report.
Highlights
Membership grows to 503 editors
2,589 articles removed through four Backlog elimination drives
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Joanganzoldschool.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles04:00, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Jonstone.jpg
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Jonstone.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles04:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Joanganzoldschool.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Jonstone.jpg
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Jonstone.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:03, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
GOCE drive news
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
GOCE January 2011 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
So far, 43 people have signed up for this drive. Of these, 25 have participated. If you signed up for the drive but haven't participated yet, it's not too late! Try to copy edit at least a few articles. Remember, if you have rollover words from the last drive, you will lose them if you do not participate in this drive. If you haven't signed up for the drive yet, you can sign up now.
Progress report
We have eliminated two months from the backlog – January and February 2009. One of our goals is to eliminate as many months as possible from the 2009 backlog. Please help us reduce the size of this part of the backlog if you haven't already. Another goal is to reduce the entire backlog by 10%, or by 515 articles. Currently, we have eliminated 375 articles from the queue, so if each participant copy edits four more articles, we will reach that goal.
Thank you for participating in the January 2011 drive. We anticipate it will be another big success!
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi -- just a note to say that since I didn't complete the FAC review before the FAC was archived, I'd be glad to follow up with you and do a more thorough review before you take the article back to FAC, if you want me to. You've put a lot of work in and I'd be happy to do what I can to make the next FAC smoother. Just let me know when you are ready for me to take another look. Mike Christie (talk – library) 14:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Mike, that would be so cool if you did that. That way, we can spend the next two weeks ensuring, as you say, that its next FAC just sails through. I've already moved the comments you were able to make to the talk page, so you're more welcome to add to it, if you like. You can do it whenever it's convenient for you. And thanks! Christine (talk) 23:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Glad to help. I am trying to get my next article ready for FAC myself, but should have a bit of time these weekend to catch up on the comments, and will see what else I can comment on. I didn't grow up with the program myself, but my daughter did and I am very fond of it. Mike Christie (talk – library) 23:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Figureskatingfan. You have new messages at EyeSerene's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Indentations
Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, Christine, just doing my nightly few minutes over at History of Sesame Street, and I noticed you were indenting in a way that implied you hadn't been initiated into one of the secrets of wiki markup. (Geometry guy had to explain this to me, some time back.) In case you find it useful, here's the rule: if someone does some combination of colons and asterisks, and you want to indent from it, you repeat the whole sequence and add a colon; if you want a bullet, you repeat the whole sequence and add an asterisk. If you do anything else, the markup decides that you've given up on the previous indentation pattern and are starting over. A mistake a lot of people make is to follow a line like ":*" with "***" to get another bullet, but what that gives you is this:
Thanks, Mike. There are parts of wiki-markup that I have problems with, so I appreciate the tutorial. I also appreciate that you've been working so hard on this article! I do my editing in the early morning, so my plan is to plug away at your comments everyday, too. Plus, I'll have some extra time over the weekend, so I hope to get caught up by then. Christine (talk) 12:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh, you must be on the east coast, poor thing. Here in the inland Northwest, it's practically balmy. We even get to walk the kids to school! Not that I'm bragging, though. It's kinda normal, though, for the end of Jan. We get fooled into thinking spring's coming, and then we get slammed with the cold temps and snow in Feb. and March. Oh, and I lied before--I won't have extra time this weekend; Nationals are this week! Ah well, we have loads of time, and I'm sure they won't mind if I put off submitting this for FAC. Christine (talk) 16:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
GOCE January Backlog elimination drive conclusion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Greetings from the January 2011 Backlog elimination drive! We have reached the end of the month and the end of another successful drive; thanks to all who participated.
Statistics
54 people signed up for the year's first Backlog elimination drive. Of these, 40 participated.
One of our goals was to reduce the size of the backlog by at least 10%. We managed to reduce the backlog by 633 articles, or about 12%.
Another goal was to eliminate as many 2009 months as possible from the queue. We eliminated January, February, March, and April—4 out of 12 months is not bad! In addition, we eliminated 37% of all remaining 2009 articles from the queue.
Chaosdruid copy edited Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya for 32,711 words, which is the largest single article completed in one of our drives so far. This article counts as six 5000-K articles, and Chaosdruid wins the "most 5000-K articles" leaderboard category. Way to go! A complete list of individual results is here.
Barnstars
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you participated in the November 2010 Backlog elimination drive, you may have earned roll-over words (more details can be found here). These roll-over words count as credit towards earning barnstars, except for leaderboard awards. We will be delivering the barnstars within the next couple of weeks.
Thank you for participating in this year's first Backlog elimination drive! We hope to see you in March.
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:J commercial.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi,
I know you didn't nominate it, but on the talk page you seem to have taken an interest, so I just thought I'd let you know that I have reviewed Sesame Street research and placed the nomination on hold for seven days to allow you to address a few issues I raised. My comments can be found transcluded onto the talk page. Good luck.--KorruskiTalk14:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Just wanted to apologise for the delay in responding to your latest comments. I was away traveling at the end of last week, and all weekend. I fully intend to check all the comments today. Thanks for your patience.--KorruskiTalk09:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Abbycaddaby.jpg
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Abbycaddaby.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:02, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Alan sesamestreet.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:05, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Season40-titlecard.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Mrhooperspicture2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Nitya Vidyasagar.jpg
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Nitya Vidyasagar.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 07:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Figureskatingfan. You have new messages at Erianna's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
April 4th TFA
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You previously nominated the article Singin' and Swingin' and Gettin' Merry Like Christmas to appear on the main page on April 4th, but the nomination was removed because there were already 5 other nominations and there was confusion on how many points it should get (3 or -1 depending on if it's too similar to this article). I encourage you to nominate the article again now that there are open spots on the requests page. If this is the first time you're requesting to have one of the FAs you've worked on appear on the main page, you can add one point to the point total. --SkotyWATC16:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The word "dumb"
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Singin' and Swingin' and Gettin' Merry Like Christmas is the third book of Maya Angelou's six-volume autobiography series. Set between 1949 and 1955, the book largely spans Angelou's twenties. In this volume, Angelou describes her struggles to support her young son, form meaningful relationships and forge a successful career in the entertainment world. The work's 1976 publication was the first time an African American woman had expanded her life story into a third volume. Scholar Dolly McPherson called the book "a graphic portrait of the adult self in bloom", while critic Lyman B. Hagen called it "a journey of discovery and rebirth". In Swingin' and Singin, Angelou examines many of the same subjects and themes in her previous autobiographies, including travel, music, race, conflict, and motherhood. Angelou depicts the conflict she felt as a single mother, despite her success as a performer as she travels Europe with the musical Porgy and Bess. Her depictions of her travels, which take up 40 percent of the book, have roots in the African American slave narrative. (more...)
I originally scheduled William Henry Harrison for April 2 and Singin' and Swingin' and Gettin' Merry Like Christmas for April 4, but swapped them after someone asked me to. Can you weigh in here whether you object to this or not. Raul654 (talk) 03:00, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
JENA
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi Christine. The list nomination stalled, and it was no doubt due to our discussion over d/Deaf. So, I've restarted it as I think it stands a very good chance, just the existing comments had put a few people off commenting. Just wanted to let you know. I'll also let the other reviewers know. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your note. I'll get back to your list as soon as I can to provide a final review and an opinion. As I said, it was close and just needed some attention, folks get put off when a vaguely feisty dialogue goes on. I hope I didn't offend, I honestly had no idea whatsoever about the d/D thing, my fault, my ignorance, but despite that, I stand by my opinion. In any case, I look forward to the list getting on splendidly and hope that you'll be prepared to respond to any other concerns brought up in the FLC. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of The Heart of a Woman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! Yoninah (talk) 19:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey there Figureskatingfan, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Figureskatingfan/Sesame Street sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
Brambleclawx 00:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
