User talk:Nikkimaria/Archive 33

Thank you, and Merry Christmas

Tim Riley just pinged me that the Andrew Sledd article has been promoted to Feature Article. It was a much improved article for your efforts, and I look forward to our next collaboration in the new year. Best wishes for a Merry Christmas. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Dirtlawyer1! Nikkimaria (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 December 2015

• In focus: Drone photography: New possibilities and new challenges

• In the media: Wales in China; #Edit2015

• Arbitration report: GMO case decided

• Featured content: An unusually slow week

• WikiProject report: Women in Red—using teamwork and partnerships to elevate online and offline collaborations

• Traffic report: A feast of Spam

• Gallery: WikiConference USA 2015: images, slide decks, and videos

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Balinese traditional house reredux

Nikkimaria, it looks like the editor not only fixed the place you gave as an example of close paraphrasing, but also a few other places. When you get a chance, please take another look. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:28, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Hex Enduction Hour

Hi. I am literally out of my debt here wrt to you comments on the fac, unable to fix. Can you give more guidance pls; I don't mind if it means loosing files. Ceoil (talk) 03:56, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ceoil. Basically the issue is that we're supposed to use minimal non-free content, and each use must be carefully justified as benefiting the reader in a way that cannot be done with just prose. So you have the album artwork in the infobox, which is okay because it serves as an identifying image - but then you've got the very similar promotional artwork later, and its fair-use rationale says that it is the identifying image in the infobox. Clearly it isn't, so the rationale needs to be edited, and if you're going to keep both images there needs to be a very clear reason why both are needed. Personally I would suggest removing the promotional artwork.

As to the audio files, they all currently have the exact same rationale, so there's not a compelling case to use them. I recommend first ensuring that they all follow the guidance of WP:SAMPLE, and then expanding the rationale to clearly indicate why you chose these particular samples to include. What benefit does the reader gain from each that cannot be fulfilled just be reading explanatory text? Why is this sample particularly relevant to the points you make in the article? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Nikki, that's very clear. I've removed the promo art work and think I can justify two of the samples - they each contain specific snippets which Smith discusses in quoted interviews as emblematic of what he was trying to achieve. I think that might be good enough. Merry christmas bty, and thanks for all your work during the year, a huge help as always. Ceoil (talk) 14:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikiclaus' cheer !

		Wikiclaus greetings
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you the happiest of Wikiclaus' Wikipedian good cheer. This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages us all to spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing others a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirits from Wikiclaus !

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 12:56, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It's that season again...

		Happy Saturnalia
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Same to you, Ealdgyth! Nikkimaria (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year 2015

		The Bronze Wiki
		For "contributions right across the Project via your diligent and highly clueful work reviewing images used in articles at FAC/FLC and ACR/ALR in particular," I have the honor of awarding you this Bronze Wiki for coming in third place in this year's Military Historian of the Year vote. Congratulations! For the Military history WikiProject, TomStar81 (Talk) 02:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Well done, Nikki! Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 02:19, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Cheers both! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:24, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations, Nikki. Thanks for all that you do for the project. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Wishing you all the best . . .

May your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:24, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Cheers again, Dirtlawyer1. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

FAC of Murder of Dwayne Jones - lead image?

Hello Nikkimaria, could you have a look at File:Dwayne_Jones,_Jamaican_murder_victim.jpg please? WP:NFC#UUI #7 flatly states "no AP images". However AP themselves state, that the image was provided by someone else, and it's not entirely clear who is the current copyright owner to begin with. Are the copyrights for all AP photos always transferred to AP? If yes, we'd have to reject and delete that image. Best regards, and Merry Christmas to you and your family. GermanJoe (talk) 07:30, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello GermanJoe. The copy of the image we have has (c)AP on the bottom - do we know who added that? I see that the source link does not include that notation on the photo. Usually, the opposite is true: the assigned photos contract explicitly states that copyright remains with the photographer, although exclusive distribution rights are granted to AP. Of course it's hard to say whether that happened in this case.

More broadly, I usually argue against the use of the "unique historic image" tag for photos of people. While there are a few cases where it makes sense (eg. Tank Man), {{non-free biog-pic}} is almost always a better choice. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I have posted a question about the "(c)AP" at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Murder_of_Dwayne_Jones/archive3. It would be great, if you could keep an eye on that FAC (my knowledge in such borderline cases is limited). Thank you for your advice. GermanJoe (talk) 15:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

OUP registration step completed

Just completed OUP library registration step through email as suggested.

Thanks and Regards

Mahitgar (talk) 08:28, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the German retreat from France in 1944 Op-ed: TomStar81 on empires of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Corruption in Sudan

Nikkimaria, I believe you pulled this one from prep due to close paraphrasing issues. The nominator has posted that the issue has been addressed; I imagine you will want to check to make sure this is indeed the case. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:07, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Edits to a number of sections have been made since you pointed out further close paraphrasing; with any luck these will take care of the issues, but I'm not making any predictions one way or the other. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:18, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

	Wishing you a Charlie Brown Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄
	Best wishes for your Christmas Is all you get from me 'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus Don't own no Christmas tree. But if wishes was health and money I'd fill your buck-skin poke Your doctor would go hungry An' you never would be broke." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914. Montanabw(talk)

Neat poem. Merry Christmas! Nikkimaria (talk) 04:50, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Solstice & Season's greetings

	Merry Christmas and happy New Year
	Thanks for making Wikipedia A better encyclopedia. Best wishes to you and your family. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC) |}

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 04:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Warmest Wishes for Health, Wealth and Wisdom through the Holidays and the Coming Year! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 01:12, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Lingzhi! Nikkimaria (talk) 04:45, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Nikkimaria, I hope you have a Merry Christmas and hope your day is full of the true spirit of the day. Plus, good food, good family and good times. :) Have a Great Day! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:00, 25 December 2015 (UTC) Spread the joy of Christmas by adding {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/MerryChristmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 12:44, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2016 will be successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 13:16, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 22:13, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Balinese traditional house rereredux

Nikkimaria, I'm running out of dux (or, more likely, re), but it looks like Rochelimit has done a significant rewrite of portions of the article. Whether this has finally addressed all of the close paraphrasing I couldn't say, but I thought I should let you know that it seems ready for you to check. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:16, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Real ear measurement redux

Nikkimaria, I'm so sorry to be bombarding you with these (third one in the last few minutes!), but we have another close paraphrasing case where the nominator has come through with a fix. In this case, if there is no more close paraphrasing, then the nomination can go forward; if there is more, then we're going to close the nomination as unsuccessful since the original nominator seems to be on an extended (if unannounced) wikibreak. Thank you for your patience, and get to these when you have the time. I hope you're having an excellent holiday season. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:32, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jean-François Verdier

The article Jean-François Verdier has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability and fails WP:MUSIC, consulted the page on French wikipedia, but this was deleted in 2011.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Karst (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Shooting of Jamar Clark

Nikkimaria, if you get the chance after looking at the three ones I posted on Christmas, I was hoping you could take a look at this one. There were enough instances of close paraphrasing, even though the ones brought to light so far have been fixed by the nominator, that I thought it advisable to ask someone clearly better at it than I am to take a look. Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:31, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Bara Gumbad

Nikkimaria, this is our oldest nomination currently, but has been fairly problematic. I figure you'll end up checking it anyway, so I was hoping you could make a check on whether any significant close paraphrasing remains. It was just given an AGF tick, so if you can take a look prior to promotion, that would be great. Many thanks, and I hope that we get fewer of these soon; it seems like I've been practically inundating you with requests after a fairly dry period. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:07, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Again, thanks for the check and for posting your findings. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:02, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

There has been quick action and quite a few edits throughout the article with the intention of removing all close paraphrasing. Can you please check again and see whether the latest edits have done the trick? Many thanks. (It would be great to get this one done before the end of the year.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 December 2015

• News and notes: WMF Board dismisses community-elected trustee

• Arbitration report: Second Arbitration Enforcement case concludes as another case is suspended

• Featured content: The post-Christmas edition

• Traffic report: The Force we expected

• Year in review: The top ten Wikipedia stories of 2015

• In the media: Wikipedia plagued by a "Basket of Deception"

• Gallery: It's that time of year again

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

2016 year of the reader and peace

2016

peace bell

Thank you for inspiration and support, including consistent quality check of DYK articles and spontaneous filling of red links, - thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Gerda. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:06, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Mining industry of Cyprus

Nikkimaria, while the reviewer of this nomination seems to have placed too great a trust in a high-90s percentage number returned by the Copyvio detector (one that didn't show up when I ran the tool), the 14.5% and 9.9% results I got back for two of the sources—I stopped my spot-check at that point—seemed nevertheless to evidence some close paraphrasing to me when comparing text, but I'd like your take on the matter, since you don't always agree as to the severity. (Then again, sometimes you find quite a bit more than I did.) Of course, there may be some additional issues in the sources that Copyvio didn't check. When you get the chance, please take a look and see what you find. Many thanks, and I hope you are having a very happy New Year. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Nikkimaria

Pratyya ^(Hello!) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2016. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2016 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2016 go well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 17:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Account wanted

Sir, I transcribe below my reply to your recent question:

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2015 (UTC) Ping. Please respond in the next week if you still wish to have an account. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:39, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes sir, I do want to have an account. Thanks & Happy New Year.

Neuralia (talk) 21:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Shooting of Jamar Clark redux

Nikkimaria, you were just pinged from this nomination page, but since you usually aren't notified when you're pinged from templates, I thought I should give you a heads up. Thanks for your work on this nomination; I always appreciate it when you respond to my requests for aid. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:16, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including Martin Behm, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:00, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 4 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Billy McColl (actor) page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

This cookie for you to cheer you up! Eat it up! 黄天使魚類❤ (blub o0O) 07:26, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 January 2016

• News and notes: The WMF's age of discontent

• In the media: Impenetrable science; Jimmy Wales back in the UAE

• Arbitration report: Catflap08 and Hijiri88 case been decided

• Featured content: Featured menagerie

• Recent research: Teaching Wikipedia, Does advertising the gender gap help or hurt Wikipedia?

• WikiProject report: Try-ing to become informed - WikiProject Rugby League

• Technology report: Tech news in brief

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review Request

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Jonathan_Mitchell/archive1

Thank you very much Ylevental (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

No reason to say thanks.

Their is no need to say thanks mister, my comment on the Mary Elizabeth McGlynn page was saying "This is on you Nikkimaria" stating it's your fault for removing most of the info and I reverted the page because I am not going to have to deal with your bickering and reporting me for edit warring!!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 23:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello AnimeDisneylover95! You should read through our policy on biographies of living people - if you can provide reliable sources for the information you want to include, then you can re-add it. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

HNY, and a plea for help again!

Hi Nikkimaria, Happy new year to you, and I hope all is well. Tim riley and I have recently been working on the Albert Ketèlbey article. This is now at FAC and I wonder if I could impose on you for a source review, if you have some availability? Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 17:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Oct - Dec 15 Quarterly Article Reviews

		The WikiChevrons
		On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of an incredible 31 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your efforts! AustralianRupert (talk) 02:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Balinese traditional house final redux

Nikkimaria, the article has once again had a section (or more?) rewritten per your most recent comment. I'll let you determine whether the new wording adequately addresses the problem, and if not, whether you want to close the nomination or go another round. Thanks for your patience. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images

Hi: I reverted your recent change to the Corn stew article, because as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images and WP:MOSIM, lead images can be up to 300px in size. Please consider not changing all lead images in articles to thumbnail size as a default, because sometimes an enlarged image serves to bring out detail that would otherwise go unnoticed. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:38, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, lead images that are larger than the standard thumb size can serve improve the introduction section of articles, providing a visual overview of topics, particularly when high-resolution/high quality images are used. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi North America. What those pages say is that lead images can be scaled up to 1.35; MOS/Images notes that sizes should not be fixed generally, and not at a size greater than default. If there is detail in the image to bring out, this can be accomplished by scaling - though in this case I wouldn't agree that that's necessary. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images states, "Lead images should usually be no wider than "upright=1.35" (displays at 300px based on the default thumbnail width of 220px, but may appear larger or smaller based on settings in preferences)," so the notion you state above "...and not at a size greater than default" does not pertain to lead images as a firm rule. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

The passage you quote refers to scaled sizes, whereas the one I mention is fixed sizes. You can scale a lead image to a size larger than default; you should not fix it at such a size, as was the case at Corn stew prior to my edit. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:55, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Mayabazar

Mayabazar turns a FA! Thanks for your contribution as a source reviewer. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Congrats! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/2015 Xi Jinping United States visit

Nikkimaria, this nomination has had both close paraphrasing and source misrepresentation concerns noted on its review. Yoninah just posted on my talk page that the latter are the real concerns, but that a source check is not feasible at the present time. I was wondering, since you've been doing spotchecks on the Shooting of Jamar Clark nomination, if it would be possible to do that level of check on this nomination. I suppose we could also request Zanhe to check the Chinese sources, to see whether the problems with the English ones carried over there. Please let me know. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Mail

You *should* have email, but my account has been playing up, so though it is telling me that it has sent, I don't entirely believe it! Harrias ^talk 17:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@Harrias: I've got mail, so have they, and now you (hopefully) do too! Nikkimaria (talk) 20:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: December 2015

This Month in GLAM – Volume V, Issue XII, December 2015 Headlines Argentina report: Edit-a-thons and Editing Challenges Basque Country report: Local Library weaves a community at Iurretapedia Bulgaria report: Archives Challenge; 100 ancient coins from Philippopolis Germany report: Wallraf Art and Focus on Zeiss Italy report: Fondazione Giorgio Cini donation and a new education project Macedonia report: Physics experiments in glorious HD! Netherlands report: Donation of videos; about Wikimedia during 3 conferences; image donation from Dutch Parliament; workshop at City Archive Rotterdam Spain report: GLAMing Madrid and Wiki Loves contests Sweden report: Riksutställningar UK report: National Library of Wales; Bodleian Libraries of Oxford Open Access report: Open Access stats; recent uploads Wikipedia Library report: Books & Bytes Wikidata report: Wikidata this month Calendar: January's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 17:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Gale account

Do you know how long it should take to receive notification that our Gale accounts have been activated? I used the web link that you sent and did the initial step the same day that I received your email. I haven't had any notification from Gale that the account is available. I don't want to be a pest, but I'm wondering if I missed some communication from them. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:22, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Teblick: Form responses were sent to them Jan 4 - I will follow up with them to see if they have a timeline on login creation. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate your help, and I'm looking forward to using the account. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I received the access information this morning and have logged in successfully. Thanks again! Eddie Blick (talk) 15:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Help decide the future of Wikimania

The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).

After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.

In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 23:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Corruption in Sudan redux

DaltonCastle did a series of edits on January 11 to take care of the close paraphrasing issues you identified in the article; I'll leave it to you to judge whether this effort was successful. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Yet another begging request!

Hi Nikkimaria, I've dropped Isabella Beeton at FAC for comments and thoughts. If you have time for a source review I'd be very much obliged. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 14:51, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 January 2016

• In the media: War and peace; WMF board changes; Arabic and Hebrew Wikipedias

• Community view: Battle for the soul of the WMF

• Editorial: We need a culture of verification

• In focus: The Crisis at New Montgomery Street

• Op-ed: Transparency

• Traffic report: Pattern recognition: Third annual Traffic Report

• Special report: Wikipedia community celebrates Public Domain Day 2016

• News and notes: Community objections to new Board trustee

• Blog: Inside the game of sports vandalism on Wikipedia

• Featured content: This Week's Featured Content

• Arbitration report: Interview: outgoing and incumbent arbitrators 2016

• Technology report: Tech news in brief

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes

There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes concerning what What should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:18, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Mining industry of Cyprus redux

Nikkimaria, did SusunW actually do a fix to the remaining issue you mentioned, or not. Regardless of whether she's frustrated, it's frankly not our job to go fixing DYK submissions with this kind of serious persistent problem; there have been quite a few problems with Nvvchar's nominations lately, which is distressing when you consider that he's had well over a thousand of them hit the main page. It's an old nomination, one of the few left over from November, so I'd like to get it closed one way or the other in the next week or two. Thanks for your help, and sorry you got bit. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:37, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi BlueMoonset, she made a slight change to the sentence at issue, but I think it'd be best if someone else judged whether that was sufficient, and whether there are other problems remaining. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

FAC@Norodom Ranariddh

Hi Nikkimaria, I have noted that you often pop-by FA candidate pages to do image reviews. As this FAC above is in need of an image and source spotcheck, would you be interested to pop by and take a look? You're the most welcome if you would like to drop by, but please don't feel pressured or obliged if you are unable to do so. Thanks and hope to see you! Mr Tan (talk) 10:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Sir Thomas White.jpg

Hi Nikki, before I take the relevant article to GAN, can I get your opinion on this image from Commons? The only dating seems to be "1940s", which could of course mean after 1945, the cutoff for an Australian image to qualify for PD-1996 (which hasn't in any case been included in the Commons page). I like the shot and would prefer to keep it but not if it doesn't meet the criteria. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ian, if we don't have more information about the image, we'd have to assume it doesn't qualify for PD-1996, unless of course there is another reason it might be PD. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Tks Nikki. The source page at NLA specifically says they're unable to confirm date or copyright status so I think I'll have to replace it. This one OTOH looks clear, date-wise and per the info provided by the source library. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:10, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 January 2016

• News and notes: Vote of no confidence; WMF trustee speaks out

• Op-ed: Not a pretty picture: Thoughts on the "monkey selfie" debacle

• In the media: 15th anniversary news round-up

• Traffic report: Danse Macabre

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Blog: Fifteen years ago, Wikipedia was a very different place

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Jefferson Davis; Hawkeye7 on Australia's war in Vietnam Op-ed: TomStar81 discusses British World War I conscription Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2016

• Op-ed: Lila Tretikov: the WMF needs your input in developing our strategy

• News and notes: Geshuri steps down from the Board

• In the media: Media coverage of the Arnnon Geshuri no-confidence vote

• Recent research: Bursty edits; how politics beat religion but then lost to sports; notability as a glass ceiling

• Traffic report: Death and taxes

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:24, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Help with copyright concerns

Nikkimaria, a while back I noticed you commented about copyright violations related in an article here [1]. I have basically no copyright experience so I was hoping you might suggest ways that I can check an article for potential copyright/cut and paste issues. My concern have been added to the article talk page here [2]. By chance I found one clear cut copy-paste example. Another editor found three close paraphrasing examples. Is there a tool that can be used to check the article in greater detail? Springee (talk) 16:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Springee. The go-to tools in this area are usually Duplication Detector for a known-source comparison and Earwig's Copyvio Detector for unknown source. However, automated tools generally do a poor job of finding close paraphrasing as opposed to copy-paste - I always recommend manual spotchecks as well. See also User:Nikkimaria/How to spotcheck and User:Tony1/Plagiarism and close paraphrasing: tips for reviewers. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Springee (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

O-Bahn Busway FAR

This has been dragging on and it does not seem there are any issues left. Could it be closed please.--Grahame (talk) 22:26, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Grahame, have the comments from The Drover's Wife been addressed? I realize that a couple of the other reviewers have gone inactive. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I believe I addressed the concerns from The Drover's Wife - the lead is longer now, and the Adelaide-end extension that only had two sentences in June has a section of its own as there has been progress on actually making it happen.

Unfortunately, that section says "anticipated to start in late 2015", but so does the primary reference from the government department responsible, and I have not heard of any actual site works in the news or daily traffic reports. --Scott Davis ^Talk 22:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Noted. I will take a look by the end of the week with an eye to closing out the review. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:52, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks.--Grahame (talk) 00:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

OK to use Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License?

Hey Nikkimaria, sorry to bother you. Isn't there a list somewhere of OK licenses? I have a file I want to use for the Oceanides that in FAC; the file is licensed with Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Tks! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 08:49, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

• Update someone showed me this, and the license is OK. Tks! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 09:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Would you care to train someone to do image licensing checks? I'd be happy to learn & then help at FAC (unless you enjoy the checks so much that you don't want/need help)... on a related note, Sgvrfjs & I have agreed that we specifically wish to rescue the Moran and the Gallen-Kallela. Is there any hope for either? Moran died in 1926; Gallen-Kallela in 1931. I found a quote (alas, in Finnish) in Google books (alas, an incomplete snippet) that appears (via Google translate) to say that the Gallen-Kallela was in an exhibition the same year it was painted, but I admit that evidence has those two major flaws.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
    • Sure, I'd be happy to work with you on licensing checks.
    • With regards to the Moran, there might be, actually, but you'd still need to verify first publication. This might help, if you can get it. If you find that it was not published or exhibited before the Brooklyn Museum put it online in 2006, then per this we can use it under a different tag. If you find that it was exhibited or published before 1923, conversely, we can use it under the current tag.
    • With regards to the Gallen-Kallela...if you can verify that finding, great, it's in. If not, it's unlikely. The artist died in 1931, meaning the work is definitely now PD in Finland, but only became so in 2002; under US law, anything not PD in Finland in 1996 had its copyright restored. See WP:NUSC. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:38, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
• I'm looking at recent FACs. I haven't commented, but have a question: if someone states that their image was first published before 1923 in some obscure, unobtainable local US journal, do you just WP:AGF and say "nothing to see here, move along"? As a side-issue, I'm waiting on Sgvrfjs to contact/hear from his/her image sources re publication date. From my repeated personal experience, such email contacts are almost always happy to reply once, but then ignore follow-up emails, so the wait may be long.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

• I try to find confirmation but that isn't always possible, in which case yes, AGF is what we're left with - much as if the article cites some obscure unobtainable source. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:45, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for the response!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 13:21, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

• Got Finnish translation & verified the painting was publicly displayed (in Finland Paris) in 1909 see this thread. Does the fact that it wasn't displayed in the US kill the deal? And if not, will I need to add some sort of note on the image?documentation? Thanks!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 16:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

• @Lingzhi: Great, that means it would be PD in the US - {{PD-US-1923-abroad}}. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

• • Thanks for all your help!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

&ndash

Hi. Why is it better to type in '&ndash' than '-'?Zigzig20s (talk) 17:11, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Zigzig20s, the two have different purposes: the hyphen (-) is used for conjunction (like in compound words or modifiers), while the ndash (–) is used for punctuation, range, or union. Take a look at MOS:HYPHEN and MOS:DASH. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Hope you liked the article I created.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/2015 Zaria Shia Massacre

Nikkimaria, I happened to notice that this nomination, in its original review, didn't mention the DYK "within policy" checks. While neutrality was sort of addressed with regard to the hooks, close paraphrasing/copyvio wasn't, so I plugged the article name into Earwig's just to see if anything came up. (First I had to find the real name of the article, which is now 2015 Zaria massacre, but Earwig helped with that a bit.)

The results were actually rather scary. Two at over 75%, with whole paragraphs (and sometimes a few in a row) copied, and while the footnote gave the source, it didn't include any quote characters beyond what appeared in the original: no outer quote to indicate that it was copied material. There also seems to be excessively long quotes from statements, but it's the copyvio that concerns me, so much so that I gave the article a DYKno icon (the "X"). Under the circumstances, I thought I should ask you to look at it to see whether any further steps should be taken. I haven't searched to see who introduced what copied material when.

Thanks for anything you can do here. I'm in over my head (and it's also past my bedtime), so I'm going to leave it to you. If you think it appropriate, you can add a comment to the nomination template as a follow-up. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi BlueMoonset, very nice catch - 95% of the article was copied or closely paraphrased (or in one case overquoted) from the sources. I've cut it down to about 1000 prose characters, from over 18,000. As to who added the problematic content, that's interesting: 3 different named accounts, 2 IPs. I'm checking their editing histories to see if any further action needs to be taken. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:29, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Holy cow! I never expected it to be that bad—95%! I'm very glad I asked you to take a look at it, not least because you can figure out whether that further action is necessary. I have reiterated my original closure; it's the oldest extant DYK, and it had its chance. Thank you so much for taking care of this one. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:19, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Towards a New Wikimania results

Last December, I invited you to share your views on the value of Wikimedia conferences and the planning process of Wikimania. We have completed analysis of these results and have prepared this report summarizing your feedback and important changes for Wikimania starting in 2018 as an experiment. Feedback and comments are welcome at the discussion page. Thank you so much for your participation. I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, 22:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 February 2016

• From the editors: Help wanted

• Special report: Board chair and new trustee speak with the Signpost

• In focus: The Knight Foundation grant: a timeline and an email to the board

• Op-ed: So, what’s a knowledge engine anyway?

• News and notes: Harassment survey 2015; Luis Villa to leave WMF; knowledge engine background

• Arbitration report: Catching up on arbitration

• Traffic report: Bowled

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: January 2016

This Month in GLAM – Volume VI, Issue I, January 2016 Headlines Africa report: #OpenAfrica15 Argentina report: New Editing Challenges and Design the guidelines for cultural institutions Australia and New Zealand report: WiR at State Library of Queensland Belgium report: Heroines Wikipedia workshop addressing the Gender Bias; Public Domain Day Celebration; Wikidata meeting & workshop; FOSDEM: MediaWiki, Wikidata and more France report: New year, new start Germany report: GLAM on Tour at Technische Sammlungen & Verkehrsmuseum Dresden Italy report: BEIC Library Project goes on, and Wikipedia for Press and Media Freedom in Europe Macedonia report: Wikipedia 15 Netherlands report: Wiki loves artists - We need your help; Two Wikipedia edit-a-thons Spain report: GLAMing Madrid, Wiki Loves Folk & Gobernantes de Chile Sweden report: New year, new projects UK report: Audio-describing London Landmarks, celebrating Wikipedia 15 Special story: Pre-production starts for Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons tutorial videos Open Access report: Open Access stats; data citation, dino jaw, dozens of beetles Wikidata report: Wikidata this month Calendar: February's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 08:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Spot check

Hello Nikkimaria, nice to meet ya. If you have time, can you do spot check on this FAC? -- Frankie _talk 21:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Nikkimaria. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

{{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: replied already. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 01:47, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

References

Hi I am wondering how we are to post references. I have written papers in university and college but it seems that footnotes and references are done differently in here... I have checked out the examples but can't figure out how to type them in. If you can send me info so that I can do them the next time I want to reference n article on one of the pages as it seems complicated to me as of now and I myself have not done one on here Wifey93 (talk) 01:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wifey93, are you using the VisualEditor or wiki markup? If the former, this guide will show you how to do it; if the latter, try this one instead. Let me know if either of those need more explanation. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 February 2016

• Special report: New internal documents raise questions about the origins of the Knowledge Engine

• In focus: An in-depth look at the special report's newly revealed documents

• News and notes: Another WMF departure

• In the media: Jeb Bush swings at Wikipedia and connects

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Traffic report: A river of revilement

• Blog: Wikimedia Foundation removes The Diary of Anne Frank due to copyright law requirements

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Sarah J Maas

I added extra writing written by Sarah J Maas this afternoon as part of a college assignment. I have never edited Wikipedia before, I was wondering why you removed my edit. ( I do know it was correct she has written several other pieces that were not on her page) Tiggy513 (talk) 02:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tiggy513, your edit was cited to a user-generated site, which we don't consider to be a reliable source. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

ok thanks for letting me know, I will try to find it from a more reliable source and edit it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiggy513 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hordern

Hi Nikki, thanks very much for pitching up with the image review on Hordern's FAC. Is there any chance I can milk your kindness by asking you to conduct a source review? I'd be much obliged, but will understand if you can't. Cassianto^Talk 10:22, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare

Nikkimaria, I asked you to comment a couple of weeks ago on the talk page of the article being nominated, and the article was subsequently given a significant revision, which among other things removed the section of quotes.

At the moment, the DYK review is wrestling over the same issue in the revised version—whether the level of quoting, even decreased as it has been, is still too much, or if it's at an acceptable level. Since you're the usual go-to person on such issues, I was hoping you could take a look at what is being said and give your opinion as to whether the article does or does not need further reduction is quoted material, and which of the cited quotes should be paraphrased, if any.

While you do, could you please take a look at the Pillar paragraph? That was the first one being objected to, and since I'd been responsible for adding a couple of quoted sections, I took it upon myself to paraphrase them, and then ended up mostly paraphrasing the whole paragraph. Please be sure I haven't closely paraphrased the original review, or (just as bad) not adequately represented Pillar's views. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey BlueMoonset, I responded there on the quotes point - it's now not so much an NFC/NPOV problem as a stylistic issue, so while my preference would be to reword further, it's not required. Your rewrite of that paragraph looks good. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:49, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much for checking, both for the original problem, and for my rewrite. With any luck, this nomination will finally be put to bed in the next day or so. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, needed your help

Hello Nikkimaria, I am a relatively new editor here. I saw you active on the FA pages commenting on media copyrights, so thought I will ask you for help. For a few days, I have posted a query on the Media Copyright noticeboard, but nobody has answered. Would it be possible for you to take a look at the question and comment if possible? I will be at ease if you could. Thank you. Xender Lourdes (talk) 11:40, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Xender, looks like you've now gotten a response - do you need any more information? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi again. I don't see any response to my query. Do give your guidance if possible. Xender Lourdes (talk) 13:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Got a quick, good lesson on copyrights from you. See you around and thanks again. Xender Lourdes (talk) 13:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 15

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 15, December-January 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Ships, medical resources, plus Arabic and Farsi resources
• #1lib1ref campaign summary and highlights
• New branches and coordinators

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Question about references

Hi Nikkimaria! Thank you for your recent edits to my article Jerome Coopersmith. I will start by saying that I am fairly new at this so I greatly appreciate all efforts to improve my article and Wikipedia as a whole.

I wanted to ask if you could explain the reasoning for the removal of the 2 cites... both are to the same source, so I am guessing that perhaps it is not considered an acceptable source because it is another wiki? I am still learning so any insight you can share would be helpful for me.

Also, I am under the impression that I need to cite every section of content, so now one of my sections is without a source. Do I need to find an alternate source for that section?

Thanks in advance!

gggoodgggirlGggoodgggirl (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Gggoodgggirl, you're right - the citation I removed is to a user-generated source, which does not meet our standard for reliability. It would be best to find an alternate source. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 February 2016

• Special report: Search and destroy: the Knowledge Engine and the undoing of Lila Tretikov

• Op-ed: Shit I cannot believe we had to fucking write this month

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Traffic report: Super Bowling

• Technology report: Tech news in brief

• Blog: Antonin Scalia and the editor tracking his legacy

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

References

Not sure which I'm using as it just comes up as en.m.wikipedia.org so not sure the differences between each Wifey93 (talk) 01:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, there's a lot of ways to access mobile... when you edit an article, does it look the same as when you edit this page, or are the two quite different? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Another grovelling request for a source review...

Hi Nikkimaria, I've just opened up the Siege of Sidney Street at FAC Would you be able to work your usual magic spotting the errors in the sources? Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 16:58, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

FOLD 3

Signed up today; sorry for my delay and thanks for your work on this.Parkwells (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 February 2016

• Special report: WMF in limbo as decision on Tretikov nears

• Op-ed: Backward the Foundation

• Traffic report: Of Dead Pools and Dead Judges

• Blog: Wiki Loves Africa brings the continent’s fashion to the world

• Arbitration report: Arbitration motion regarding CheckUser & Oversight inactivity

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Technology report: Tech news in brief

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on nuclear weapons in Britain and Nick-D on Australia's war in the Pacific Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the Kamurun Campaign of 1914–16 Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Dibatag/GA1

Nikkimaria, the nominator here has responded to your comments on the close paraphrasing, but forgot to ping you. Do you think you could stop by again and see whether the issue has been addressed? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Passenger pigeon FAC

Nikki, would you mind giving this one a quick scan source-wise (formatting/reliability)? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:34, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

BWV 4

Please let me know what's missing for the Easter cantata FAC, - Easter is soon. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: There's an unanswered question about the transcription and the Boulanger image still needs to be sorted. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:52, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I am unable to answer the question and would not know what to do about the Boulanger image. Should I remove the two images although they are helpful illustrations? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I can't tell you the best solution, unfortunately, it's up to you if/how you want to pursue these. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:16, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Yes, removing them solves the problem; no, removing them is not the only possible resolution. Does that help? I know there was discussion of an alternative for Boulanger, and I know before you got the transcription uploader to answer. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I removed them. The Boulanger alternatives were not good enough for a FA. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Precious again, your detailed constructive comments which helped to improve Christ lag in Todes Banden, BWV 4 to FA!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Adding thanks for improving BWV 196, now a GA, thanks to your efforts, - how beautiful, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

... and today's Winnipeg, and your work on BWV 150, before and recently, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:23, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

References

It appears it's different trying to do them mobile as they never quite work for me.

Can you also look at this page for me? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_NHL_captains_and_alternate_captains#/editor/3

I am trying to line up the table but the Chicago and Carolina keep getting tangled and I checked the formatting and I can't figure out why it's off centre

Thanks Wifey93 (talk) 00:58, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wifey93, I think I've fixed it, but please check that the right players are matched with the right teams. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:17, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bob Dotson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Sulzberger. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Nikolaus Harnoncourt

What do you think of an image of Nikolaus Harnoncourt in BWV 4, to replace Boulanger? He is mentioned in the recording text, and did a lot for understanding the piece. I watched him conduct several times, especially Monteverdi's Ulisse and Poppea, but never met him in person. RIP. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:18, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure, if you can find a photo that is appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:26, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I thought of the one in the infobox. It looks licensed to me, but I am never sure. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that would work, but it looks like the source has a different license (BY 4.0) than that given in the image description (BY-SA 3.0) - that should be fixed. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:01, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

References

The table looks great. I fixed the titles in the captain tables as they made no sense without references but now GoodDay is reverting my edits when more explain is needed since there were broken references before that Wifey93 (talk) 22:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

GoodDay, care to weigh in? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:52, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand this broken reference thing. I just put in Vacant, because it's all that's required as a descriptive. However, if that's causing some kinda linkage problem? then by all means, restore Wifey93's additions. GoodDay (talk) 03:20, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Doris Sands Johnson page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

YGM

You've got mail. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:15, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

About Fauré's images

Hi Nikkimaria. I've seen that you solved some doubts about Fauré's images in Tim riley's page. By that, I'd like to ask you about other Fauré's images in en:wiki that could be transferred to Commons if copyright is compliant. Images are following ones:

• File:Faure-middle-years.jpg
• File:Faure1907.jpg
• File:Fauré-ecole-group-.jpg
• File:Marie-and-Gabriel-Fauré.jpg

Could you help me, please? Your help on this must be appreciated. Thanks and kind regards --Obelix83 (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Obelix83, unfortunately the answer to all four is, we don't have enough information to tell. French copyright is primarily based on the author's lifetime, and in three of the above cases the author is not identified (and the fourth, the author's date of death is 20th century but unknown). If the author was never identified they could be transferred, but you'd need to do a bit more investigating to see if that was the case. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your help. Kind regards --Obelix83 (talk) 19:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 March 2016

• News and notes: Tretikov resigns, WMF in transition

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Traffic report: Brawling

• Recent research: Wikipedia and paid labour; Swedish gender gap; how verifiable is "verifiable"?

• Blog: Wikimedia Foundation details requests to alter or remove content in new transparency report

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: February 2016

This Month in GLAM – Volume VI, Issue II, February 2016 Headlines Australia and New Zealand report: Wikidata Tour Down Under Austria report: GLAM activities for libraries and archives in the DACH region Belgium report: Gender Redirect Wikipedia workshop addressing the Gender Bias; Open Belgium 2016 France report: Getting technical...! Germany report: 30 GLAM volunteers in museums and libraries Italy report: Four new Wikipedians in Residence, and Food! Macedonia report: Theatre actors of Macedonia Mexico report: Towards to our first Art and Feminism 2016 Netherlands report: Naturalis' Wikipedia project; Open Culture Data Spain report: Free pictures, classical music & libraries Sweden report: Maps, planes and metadata on artists UK report: Wales Report; Wikidata Tour Down Under; Museums Galleries Scotland report; Oxford USA report: One month, dozens of events: Black History Month, Art+Feminism and more Special story: Lightning talk overview of upcoming video series Open Access report: Gravitational wave detection; viral biomechanics, anglerfish, smart dining table Wikipedia Library report: Books & Bytes: A Wikipedia Library Newsletter Wikidata report: Wikidata Tour Down Under Calendar: March's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 21:05, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Winterpeg

Hi Nikki, how's it going? A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. (Hey, I remember this one.) The summary mostly follows the lead section; how does it look? - Dank (push to talk) 23:03, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Dan, thanks. Two quick thoughts:

• The etymology sentence in the lead was added post-FAC, and to my understanding that explanation isn't correct - the version in the article body is the one given by most sources (eg. Canadian Encyclopedia), or I've also seen an Ojibwe derivation (eg. in etymonline).
  • Not sure I follow. Could you correct the TFA text? - Dank (push to talk) 03:52, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
    • Wait, now I get it. Better? - Dank (push to talk) 04:37, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
      • Yes, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
• What do you think about a different image? While the pictured building is in Winnipeg, it's actually a provincial rather than municipal legislature, and the most iconic portion (the Golden Boy) isn't really visible in the current image. File:Lesislaturemb.jpg would be a better choice IMO if you want to stick with that building, or possibly something like File:Esplanderiel.jpg or File:CMHR_and_Winnipeg_Downtown.png. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Pinging Chris. - Dank (push to talk) 03:52, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
    • I'm good with the latter two suggestions. Both'll draw eyes. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:19, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
      • Feel free to pick whichever you like best out of the two - probably the last would make the most sense? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

hi

I posted a request at Wikipedia:Elsevier_ScienceDirect as did another editor but there hasn't been a response( I did leave a note at [3] however no response either) what should I do?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:28, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I suggest being a bit patient, and in the interim requesting any specific sources you need at WP:RX. I'm sure TLSuda will respond in due course. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:32, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Texarkana, Texas (rm unsourced)

Greetings, Nikkimaria.

I noticed several deletions that you made to the Article: Texarkana, Texas, here, and here. For the most part, it is my opinion that these deletions were unnecessary, and they did not add anything to the Article substance. While you noted both edits as (rm unsourced), it appears more likely that the deletions simply removed information that was not formatted to suite a personal preference. My reasoning is based here, and here. I do not wish to be overbearing in my position on this matter, but I'd like to make the point that it is not always necessary to delete content. Instead, one might provide their expertise in properly formatting and correctly citing the information. Even a small amount of this sort of editing would be far more useful than taking the short route to deletion. I'm reasonably sure that you can appreciate the efforts that other editors put forth, so please forgive me if I seem abrupt or unpleasantly forceful. I simply do not see the logic for deletions of work that, with a bit of editing, would help to provide an interesting and enhanced Article. I have not reverted your edits, but because these deletions appear to be a bit short sited, I moved them to the Articles Talk Page. If you'd like to help in properly formatting and citing this information, your efforts would, of course, be greatly appreciated. Respectfully. Curley Wolf (talk) 01:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Curley Wolf, I'm not sure what you mean by "not formatted to suite a personal preference" - the removals were, as indicated, because the material lacked reliable secondary sourcing rather than because of how they were formatted. You're welcome to restore them once that issue has been addressed. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 01:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello @Nikkimaria: When I mentioned "formatting" I was thinking of WP:DISCRIMINATE, because you deleted the entire ==In popular culture== section. I actually have two thoughts on this.

First, I would have thought that at least some of the mentions within this section are 'common knowledge'. Anyone who has seen Smokey and the Bandit, for example, should know that their 'mission' was to deliver a truckload of Coors Beer from Texarkana, because it was not available (at that time) in the eastern U.S. [See: Plot.] Similarly, the song 'Cotton Fields, with the lines "...It was down in Louisiana, just about a mile from Texarkana...", might be considered almost universally known. Perhaps not. But even so, these examples were wikilinked in case a user desired more information. Since the linked Articles provide citations, providing those same citations everywhere the subject is mentioned seems redundant and unnecessary.

Second, there appears to be some difference of opinion within WP:BURDEN. The policy suggests:

"Some editors object to others making chronic, frequent, and large-scale deletions of unsourced information, especially if unaccompanied by other efforts to improve the material. ... For all of these reasons, it is advisable to communicate clearly that you have a considered reason to believe that the material in question cannot be verified. If you think the material is verifiable, you are encouraged to provide an inline citation yourself before considering whether to remove or tag it."

This brings me back to my original thought, in which I speculated that the deletion was (at least in part) due to a personal preference in formatting the ==In popular culture== section. If I'm wrong about that, then please take no offense. I would very much appreciate your help in developing this section properly.

Finally, beyond the dry details of (this town has roads and buildings and people), the ==In popular culture== and ==Places of interest== sections are often the most interesting and enlightening. Thank you for your consideration. Curley Wolf (talk) 14:26, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Ah, okay. That's not "formatting", but it does impact referencing requirements: "in popular culture" entries require reliable secondary sources to support their significance to a topic. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad we worked out the "formatting" question. Would you mind providing an example citation for any of the deleted items? Curley Wolf (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Er...if I had such a citation, I would have added it to the article in the first place. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Are you aware of any citation, anywhere on Wikipedia, that meets these requirements? Curley Wolf (talk) 01:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Certainly. See for example Reception_history_of_Jane_Austen#Modern_popular_culture or Amazing_Grace#In_popular_culture, each of which has several. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

These are good examples, and I appreciate your effort, but I should have been more specific. What I need is an example within an Article about Cities/Settlements. Are you aware of any citations for Cities or Settlements that meet these requirements? Curley Wolf (talk) 02:49, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure, examples include RAF_Northolt#In_popular_culture or Cleveland#Film_and_television. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! That gives me a few ideas. Cheers! Curley Wolf (talk) 05:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

You helped me understand image copyright issues and I don't think I would have understood it better from anyone else. I also noticed you help so many editors on the FAR, guiding them on image issues with consistently high inputs. I don't have even a bit of the experience you have, but I have some sense to understand the superlative work you're doing out here. Thank you for your efforts in such a critical area of copyrights. Xender Lourdes (talk) 03:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 03:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 March 2016

• News and notes: Katherine Maher named interim head of WMF; Wales email re-sparks Heilman controversy; draft WMF strategy posted

• In the media: Wikipedian is break-out star of International Women's Day; dinosaur art; Wikipedia's new iOS app and its fight for market share

• Op-ed: A modest proposal for Wikimedia’s future

• Featured content: Five articles, four lists, a topic, and five images were promoted this week.

• Technology report: Wikimedia wikis will temporarily go into read-only mode on several occasions in the coming weeks

• WikiCup report: First round of the WikiCup finishes

• Blog: The new alchemy: turning online harassment into Wikipedia articles on women scientists

• Systemic bias: Revenge of "I can’t believe we didn’t have an article on ..."

• Traffic report: All business like show business

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Google Survey needs updating

Hi Nikki. I was poking around and found this link to a Google Doc that is basically broken: Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Processes/Check ins#Sample survey.

Also, I cannot pull up those preliminary links you gave me to start getting up to speed. What I mean is I cannot find them again in my Gmail queue. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:32, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Checkingfax, I've fixed that, thanks. The preliminary link is here. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Images

Hi Nikki, if the subject of an article was to allow me to use a donated photograph of theirs, what is the procedure I need to walk them though so that all rights are disclaimed etc. Have tried a few times with them saying basically "you can do what you want with it", but with deletion at the end. Thanks for any help. Ceoil (talk) 11:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Ceoil, take a look at WP:DCM. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 March 2016

• News and notes: Wikipedia Zero: Orange mobile partnership in Africa ends; the evolution of privacy loss in Wikipedia

• In the media: Wales at SXSW; lawsuit over Wikipedia PR editing

• Op-ed: Hard work needed to address Wikimedia’s leadership challenges

• Discussion report: Is an interim WMF executive director inherently notable?

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Technology report: Watchlists, watchlists, watchlists!

• Traffic report: Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States

• Wikipedia Weekly: Podcast #119: The Foundation and the departure of Lila Tretikov

• Blog: It “revolutionized the way German-speaking people inform themselves about the world”: Fifteen years of the German Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you for giving me access to Baylor library. Regards, Prof TPMS (talk) 02:01, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Commons pictures with doubtful credentials

Thank you for your sage counsel on Shaw's FAC page. I've replaced the one questionable image and removed the other. Ought I to be doing anything about alerting the authorities in Commons to the dubiety of the copyright status? I don't dabble in Commons much and would be glad of your advice when you have a moment. Tim riley talk 13:09, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

You can if you want to - they have a similar speedy-prod-discussion system for deleting files there as we do for articles here. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:17, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I'll put it on my to-do list. Tim riley talk 13:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

That stupid revert...

...was a mis-click. My apologies. Yash! 20:21, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

No worries. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:23, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Talk page length

Your talk page, at 241,671 bytes as I type, is one of the longest on Wikipedia. Its length will make it difficult for some to read or edit. Please archive most of it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Done. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Jain monasticism/GA1

Nikkimaria, thanks for stopping by there. I'm guessing that as you didn't make any edits to the underlying article, I'd managed to find all of the copyvio and eliminate it. Good catch on the copying from within Wikipedia, which I didn't notice.

Did you also check the rest of User:Bhavin169's edits, to see whether he introduced copyvios along with them as well? There are 17 edits that don't involve this article. If you don't have time, should we report it to the copyvio pages? For that matter, the extensive copyvios in this article were there for four years. Is there anything we need to have done? Should those versions be made unviewable or something? Again, thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi BlueMoonset, I did check his other edits - most of them were already reverted because of NPOV issues, so there isn't much of substance left, and of what is I didn't find any clear sources for copying. For this article, you can request revision deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:55, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Nikkimaria. I just asked Moonriddengirl if she would do whatever is necessary. (You may have gotten a ping from that.) BlueMoonset (talk) 01:54, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive3

I am taking one last run at getting Emily Ratajkowski promoted to WP:FA in time for a 25th birthday WP:TFA on June 7th. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive3 needs discussants. Since you were a Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive2 participant (images only), I am hoping you might give some comments (at least on the images).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Mail

I'm sorry: I don't seem to be able to locate the email that you sent me. Could you resend it, please? Dschslava (talk) 01:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Dschslava, I've re-sent it. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

JSTOR

Hello Nikkimaria! Kinda curious, how long does it usually take till someone receives his JSTOR account? I wrote my username and email in that Google form yesterday, but accidently did it two times, so I was wondering if I messed something up when I did it two times? --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:45, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi HistoryofIran, it usually takes a couple of weeks, as JSTOR has to take the form responses and use them to generate logins. It's not a big problem that you're in there twice so long as both are the same - they'll just remove the duplicate. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:50, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikkimaria, My request for JSTOR use was put at Pending week or two ago, the understandable reason being no email address. I have since given, as far as I am aware, my email address, but the status is still Pending. I wonder if has been received? Now, seeing what you explained to your user above, I shall be patient and wait and see. Thank you. P0mbal (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi P0mbal, when I try to email you, I get a message that you have chosen not to receive email; thus, I cannot send you any information about how to get access. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikkimaria, thank you very much for that useful information. I have now reviewed my preferences page as you suggest, and it will be a big advance for me to be able to access JSTOR.P0mbal (talk) 09:13, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikkimaria, I am looking forward to receiving information telling that I can open a JSTOR account. I waited a month and hope I have not missed an email from you about this. Thank you P0mbal (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

I've sent an email to JSTOR about this and hopefully we will hear back shortly. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:07, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you P0mbal (talk) 21:23, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

librarian

Hey Nikki, the Visiting Scholar thing we discussed a while back fell through for copyright ownership reasons (oddly). Meanwhile Too many databases still seem to have no librarian...I can do that if there's no set time requirements  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 00:35, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Lingzhi, you mean account coordinator? Sure, let's chat via email. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 discusses a Panzer general and a "mercenary mum" Op-ed: TomStar81 on the terrible battles of 1916 Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Manhattan Project

Hi Nikkimaria. I reverted your second edit to remove flag icons on the Manhattan Project article. I am confused by your edits. The WP:INFOBOXFLAG states, "Examples of acceptable exceptions include military conflict infobox templates and infoboxes that include international competitions."

The article topic is a military project and military weapon. The categories for the article have numerous military categories. It's also part of the WikiProject Military history. The article was also promoted to Wikipedia:Featured articles status timestamped 23:43, 21 August 2011 with flag icons. Please see "Article milestones" on talk page for further details. I hope this resolves the confusion. Mitchumch (talk) 03:20, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mitchumch, unfortunately that doesn't resolve the confusion at all. I know what the article topic is; I also know that it is not a military conflict, and that the exception does not apply to non-conflict military topics. I know that the article is an FA; I also know that that has no impact on the matter under discussion, as FAs are edited and changed all the time. The one thing that still confuses me though is why you are reverting my edits. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 March 2016

• Interview: Exclusive: interview with interim ED Katherine Maher

• News and notes: Lila Tretikov a Young Global Leader; Wikipediocracy blog post sparks indefinite blocks

• In the media: Angolan file sharers cause trouble for Wikipedia Zero; the 3D printer edit war; a culture based on change and turmoil

• Traffic report: Be weary on the Ides of March

• Editorial: "God damn it, you've got to be kind."

• Featured content: Watch out! A slave trader, a live mascot and a crested serpent awaits!

• Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel article 3 case amended

• Wikipedia Weekly: Podcast #120: Status of Wikimania 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:25, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

IR

Do you have time to do an image review of Huguenot-Walloon half dollar? It should not be complex. Many thanks,--Wehwalt (talk) 11:11, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Kamal Foroughi

Nikkimaria, I was wondering whether you could check this nomination to see whether the close paraphrasing issues noted by an earlier reviewer have been adequately addressed. Many thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi BlueMoonset, there's not much in the way of creative prose left, not seeing any paraphrasing issues there. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Nikkimaria. I'll call for a new reviewer then to finish up. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:02, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Befreit

Nikkimaria, can you please look this over for the quoting? I'm most concerned about the poem/lyric translation, which seems to be from a 1970s source; the original poem would be in the public domain by now, though I'm less sure about the Strauss song and whether the original poem gets new coverage for a song. Probably only the music and how it is set, though if Strauss made any adjustments to the poem (something I imagine Dehmel would have complained about and the article would have mentioned), those portions of the lyrics might be covered, since he didn't die until 1949.

There may be issues with one or two blockquote sizes, or perhaps not. I'm not the best judge of these, so I thought I'd pass the buck to you. Thanks as always for your help. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:42, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Another source image review?

Hi Nikkimaria, Can I ask for yet another source review favour? I have recently been working on the Senghenydd colliery disaster, which is now at FAC. I think I have everything covered, but I've never managed to get a clean report from you yet: this may (finally) be the time! Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 12:03, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review: much appreciated. Would you be able to have a look at the images too? Crisco gave them a once over for the PR and I tweaked accordingly, so they should all be in good standing. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:55, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Question Regarding CopyVios

Hi Nikkimaria,

Hope all has been well since the last time that we talked. Wanted to see if you could help once more with figuring out how to remove the copyvios tag from the page for Civility. I have gone through with all the tools you had mentioned before to update the page, and have made several updates since the last time we talked. Do you feel that this page my be a candidate yet to have that message removed?

Thanks! Blippincott (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Blippincott, I did some spotchecking and couldn't find additional issues, so I think you should be able to remove the tag. However, there was quite a bit of material I couldn't check, either because it wasn't sourced or because the source was dead, so I'd strongly suggest you work on addressing that next. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikkimaria, thanks for taking another look! Can I personally remove the CopyVios Tag? If so, is there anything else I need to do when I do that? I will work on the other references, and make sure any additional content is cited next too. Really appreciate all your help! Blippincott (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Blippincott, yes, you can remove it yourself, with an edit summary noting that the issue has been resolved. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikkimaria ~ thank you very much for all your assistance. I will remove it and mark the issue as be resolved. Have a great day!! Blippincott (talk) 03:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

• News and notes: Trump/Wales 2016

• In the media: Saskatoon police delete Wikipedia content about police brutality

• WikiProject report: Why should the Devil have all the good music? An interview with WikiProject Christian music

• Traffic report: Donald v Daredevil

• Featured content: A slow, slow week

• Technology report: Browse Wikipedia in safety? Use Telnet!

• Recent research: "Employing Wikipedia for good not evil" in education; using eyetracking to find out how readers read articles

• Wikipedia Weekly: Podcast #121: How April Fools went down

• Blog: Growing hashtags: Expanding outreach on Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Saskatchewan Page Edits

Although I appreciate your edit citing lack of citation. You should notice that I did put a reference to the Cree page on Wikipedia where it clearly says under Official Status that Saskatchewan recognizes Cree as an official minority language. Thank you.

Hi Tony, Wikipedia is not a reliable source - see WP:CIRCULAR. The article you cite does not include any citation for that information. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I see now. Ok I'll adjust its ref. thx!

Infobox person/Wikidata

You have twice replaced the template 'Infobox person/Wikidata' with 'Infobox person/' on Mai Sukhan - is this template deprecated or something? Thanks, Batternut (talk) 12:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Batternut, no, but I think in this case the local version provides more appropriate output - with the spouse in the same form as he appears in the article, and using |known_for= instead of |occupation=. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I think correcting wikidata if it is wrong would be better than breaking the link. In any case, you have misunderstand the spouse's name - he is mentioned as Sardar Gulab Singh Bhangi which is the same as the wikidata except for 'Sardar' which is his title, rather like Sir Paul McCartney. And the article does describe Mai Sukhan as Sikh ruler, as well as the military leadership for which she is known. Perhaps wikidata needs a 'known-for' property? Batternut (talk) 13:28, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No, I understood that, but I think it's valuable to include the title (perhaps with a link to clarify?). Nikkimaria (talk) 13:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

It is possible to add 'Sardar Gulab Singh Bhangi' as an alias for Gulab Singh Bhangi, and I have done that. However the link from Mai Sukhan always points to his canonical name Sardar Gulab Singh Bhangi. (Is 'canonical' the right term, I doubt it...). I'll make Sardar a link in the article, which might help. But I maintain that Infobox person/Wikidata is better than Infobox person in terms of being more connected, and shall update the article accordingly unless you have further objections? Batternut (talk) 14:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I do - I see no advantage to "being more connected" in this case, and maintain that the local flexibility is preferable. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Astonishing that you wish to use such flexibility to impose the use of a person title where it seems wikipedia normally doesn't use one. Keeping with the McCartney example, would you wish to have the Beatles, Wings, etc articles refer to him as Sir Paul McCartney? Seems a bit fastidious to me! But anyway, this can still be achieved with the Infobox person/Wikidata template. More interestingly, do you perhaps share Ealdgyth's objections to Wikidata? (See below) Batternut (talk) 21:23, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata and Wikipedia both have their problems, certainly, in ways much broader than demonstrated by this discussion. But in this particular case, what is achieved by using the /Wikidata template that cannot be achieved by using the local one? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

What is achieved, to my mind, is a better relationship between en.wikipedia and wikidata. I see a similarity with MOS:LINK, which promotes the use of "internal links are used to bind the project" - and I would include wikidata and the other language wikis in my interpretation of "the project". Furthermore, I see that you have removed the 'Infobox person/Wikidata' template from several articles, which I shall comment upon shortly. Please check my latest edit to Mai Sukhan which reinstates the 'Infobox person/Wikidata' template, but otherwise keeps the resultant infobox contents largely as you wish. Batternut (talk) 22:22, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Your interpretation of "the project" is not generally consistent with policy, which sees Wikipedia and Wikidata as sister but independent projects. I'm not going to revert your edit to Sukhan, but I still don't agree that it is a particularly useful change. More below. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

And this neatly sums up my main objection to Wikidata. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@Ealdgyth: Your objection to Wikidata is interesting. Indeed I have my own reservations about it. Have you mentioned your objection elsewhere? (This talk page doesn't seem the place to discuss it). Batternut (talk) 21:23, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I note that you have removed the 'Infobox person/Wikidata' template from at least 6 articles over the last 2 weeks (Ali Aaltonen, Ivan Alekseevich Dwigubski, Yurii Nesterov, Alexandra Adler, Albert Schwartz (zoologist), John Gutfreund). Bearing also in mind the above discussion, it looks a bit like a campaign - would you like to explain please? Batternut (talk) 22:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

The template is unfortunately often used in a careless manner, producing errors or inconsistencies, or where there's simply a better template option. If you have a specific objection to a removal/conversion, I'm happy to discuss my reasoning in more detail. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

In all 6 pages I mentioned above you simply replaced 'Infobox person/Wikidata' with 'Infobox person' and left the infobox displaying less or much less information. The few inconsistencies between en.wiki and wikidata that were shown have just been masked by your edits. I don't see that any errors were ever produced. Batternut (talk) 22:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I did forget one reason: where information is autofilled that is sourced neither here nor on Wikidata (not counting Wikipedias which are not RS by our standards). That was the problem with Dwigubski, Nesterov, and Schwartz. For Aaltonen: the template was creating an error because of inconsistent specificity between what was known and what the template produced - see discussion at Template talk:Infobox person (heading Specificity problem). For Adler, there is some other output error - the /Wikidata template displays two different dates on the same line next to birthdate. As for Gutfreund, there were inconsistencies between information presented in the box and the article - for example, the box called him a "private sector banker", whereas the article described how he actually turned the bank public. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for demonstrating the problem with the box! Yes, on Aaltonen it does add places, but it also adds an error, so I've undone that. It would be great if you could figure out how to make the template produce the correct information there, but failing that you can simply add the places manually. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hmmm, yes, there's a kind of shared ownership of wikidata between the other wikipedias, and the variable sourcing standards could be trouble. Wikidata had better stick to non-contentious stuff, and should try to have the highest standards of sourcing... Batternut (talk) 01:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Four years ago ...

consistent quality control
... you were recipient no. 82 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:11, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Coimbatore

Nikkimaria, I was wondering whether you could check this DYK nomination for close paraphrasing, and whether the Earwig concerns are from the article copying the sources or vice versa? It's a large GA, so I'm not asking for a full source check, but I'm concerned by the mention of former sources showing up as possible sources of copying, and figure you're the one person who's most likely to identify what's a problem and what isn't. Thanks as always for your help. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

The nominator has posted that corrections to the problems you found have been completed. When you get a chance, can you please confirm this, or point out any remaining issues? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Pink slime page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Are you active right now?

--Floquenbeam (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, what's up? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:54, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm looking for a guinea pig. You just got the extendedconfirmed right automatically. I'd like to take it away for a minute, see if you can edit my sandbox, then give it back. Do you mind? --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:55, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I've removed the right. You got it automatically when you recently edited, because you've been here longer than 30 days and made more than 500 edits. Please post something here on this page; it shouldn't automatically give you the right back if an admin has removed it. When I see your post here, I'll restore the right. Thank you! --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:04, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Cheers. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Cheers back at you. Thanks much. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

"Women are everywhere"

Hi Nikkimaria. I'm an editor (not very active till now) of the Italian Wikipedia, where the gender gap is a real issue. I'm trying to participate to an IEG with the project "Women are everywhere". You will find the draft at this link https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_are_everywhere It would be great if you could have a look at it. I need any kind of suggestion or advice to improve it. Support or endorsement would be fantastic. Many thanks, --Kenzia (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: March 2016

This Month in GLAM – Volume VI, Issue III, March 2016 Headlines Argentina report: Edit-a-thons in Buenos Aires Asia report: Wikidata tour visits Jakarta Belgium report: Just For The Record: March France report: Zoology, feminism and contemporary art Germany report: Wiki loves librarians Greece report: Edit-a-thon in Athens Italy report: Biggest donation of photos from an Italian institution Latvia report: Edit-a-thon in Riga Macedonia report: Editing competition about the villages in Aegean Macedonia Netherlands report: Open Culture Data Lab Republic of Srpska report: First GLAM project in the Republic of Srpska Serbia report: GLAMers opened their doors to Wikimedia Serbia Spain report: Libraries, free pictures and audios & new partners UK report: GLAM Marches on in the UK Open Access report: BartBotje; Rats as dino models; Auditory illusion; Crab-hunting octopus Wikipedia Library report: Hashtags, Campaigns and New Access donations Wikidata report: A really busy month all round Calendar: April's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 12:31, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

• Op-ed: Should prison inmates be permitted to edit Wikipedia?

• News and notes: Denny Vrandečić resigns from Wikimedia Foundation board

• In the media: Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright case; Tex Watson; AI assistants; David Jolly biography

• Featured content: This week's featured content

• Traffic report: A welcome return to pop culture and death

• Arbitration report: The first case of 2016—Wikicology

• Gallery: A history lesson

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Burnley F.C. wikipedia article

Dear Nikkimaria,

I see you keep removing my additions to the Burnley F.C. Wikipedia page. I don't understand it: the added additions are linked to approved and reliable websites and books about Burnley F.C., for example "Never Had it So Good: Burnley's Incredible 1959/60 League Title Triumph" and "The Burnley FC Miscellany", where they are describing most of the content of the "trivia" part in their books.

With kind regards, Welovevenkys

14 April 2016 13:20 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Welovevenkys (talk • contribs)

Hi Welovevenkys, I didn't remove most of your additions - I simply incorporated them into the rest of the article so they fit in with the narrative, as opposed to existing in their own standalone section. See also the discussion I started on the talk page. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:47, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Nikkimaria,

My bad, I did not read the whole of your correction in the first place. Apologies.

Have a nice day,

Welovevenkys

14:09, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

A protected edit request has appeared

A protected edit request has appeared here, Template_talk:Infobox_writer#Please_make_active_the_following_fields. Can you facilitate its review? Thank you in advance for any effort. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Leprof 7272, your request was denied because of lack of demonstrated consensus. You have two options. You can simply suggest that the parameters be added, and invite opinions from others (without adding an edit-request template); then, if after a few days no one has objected, you can re-add the edit request. Alternatively, if there are objections or if you'd like a stronger demonstration of consensus, you can open a formal RFC. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 16

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

• New donations - science, humanities, and video resources
• Using hashtags in edit summaries - a great way to track a project
• A new cite archive template, a new coordinator, plus conference and Visiting Scholar updates
• Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Genres

In a longish list of compositions, not (initially) sorted by genre, I would like to see at a glance what the main genres are, such as for Ferruccio Busoni works. Some do operas, others don't, for example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Some of the things listed aren't genres and others overlap (vocal music and opera, for example) - this could and should be better represented in the article, but there isn't room in the infobox to expand (as even the unclear list takes up a lot of space with each entry on its own line). Nikkimaria (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

You could fix the genres, - sorry if I was too sloppy. We have the space for a new line, for transparency, - six lines are not "a lot", imo. His website has different categories than Wikipedia "genres". What do you think of

Dramatic works (Operas and ballets)

Symphonies

Concertos

Chamber music?

At least until more works of other genres are added? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Six lines are a lot in the case you refer to, when the template is followed by a table, as it creates a large amount of white space on the page. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Your page. I suggested four now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:28, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Not my page, the article - I don't have a table on my page.

Four is better but doesn't solve the whitespace problem. Nor does it solve the other problem of trying to represent multiple, independent works in a template designed for one - it's never going to fit nicely. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Any TOC would create more whitespace. No, I won't go and add a line of header ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting adding a line of header or a TOC. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Stop

Stop removing non-controversial sections of articles which you have suddenly deemed reasonable to excise because they happen to be sourced to IMDB, for instance. Please, worst case, tag them with something so that people can actually help improve things, which you are abundantly not doing. I do not want to but I will undo each of these destructive edits until you stop: you are not actually improving Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi The Rambling Man, I disagree, but perhaps we can discuss the issue before editing past each other.

• IMDB is not a reliable source for most content, particularly in featured articles which are held to a higher sourcing standard.
• There was recently an RFC that found these article sections should be sourced, with reliable secondary sources. This was not previously explicitly required. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:29, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• I am fully aware of the project's opinion of IMDB, but that should not result in you summarily deleting material without first asking for better or more reliable sources to be provided. Stop removing sections without giving editors a chance to do something about it. I will undo every one of your censoring edits and add a tag if required, I had hoped you would know and do better. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:41, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• Hi The Rambling Man, I have already undone most of the edits and tagged the sections. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:43, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Another review request!

Hi Nikkimaria, I hope all is well with you. I have just taken From Russia, with Love through a re-write and PR, and it's now at FAC. Would you be able to work your magic on the sources? Could you also do an image review? There are only two images there, so it should be straightforward. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Ständchen (Strauss)

Nikkimaria, this nomination is stalled for other reasons, but I was looking at it and, like another recent nomination, it has an entire three-stanza lyric translated, and the translation is cited to a 1971 source. I don't think this is short enough to qualify for fair use, but again I'm not at my best in such areas. Can I ask you to opine here? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:30, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Your awesome! =

Thank you so much for your help on Let's Marry. Very kind and wonderful of you. Moscowamerican (talk) 05:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

January to March 2016 Quarterly Article Reviews

		The WikiChevrons
		On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 15 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period January to March 2016. Thank you for your efforts! Anotherclown (talk) 10:46, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Cheers! Nikkimaria (talk) 11:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:OUP

Hi Nikkimaria. Some weeks ago I applied for access to OUP's online resources but haven't heard back from anyone till now. I was wondering if the approval procedure is still active (noticed that the last approval was way back in January and at least all the latest requests were handled by you). As one of those who are very interested in OUP's resources, I would appreciate it if you could have a look at the pending requests. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Cheers, --Dada (talk) 18:05, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Dada, Harrias is handling applications now - hopefully he'll be able to catch up on the pending applications shortly. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, my apologies to all. Real life has... been interesting... recently and I've not had the time I'd like here at all. It hasn't really calmed down yet, but I have put aside some time tomorrow (Thursday) evening to start working through this backlog, and then some more time on Sunday, so I'd like to think that I can get pretty caught up with that. My apologies again. Harrias ^talk 16:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Page numbers

Hi Nikkimaria, I've restored the page number in the cite book template in the Peckham biography. As I mentioned in edit history, the 'page=' parameter is used for page reference. Since there is no dedicated parameter for total number of pages, it is often appended after the publisher's name, as this is information germane to the publication and publisher. Not sure why this is an issue for you, but total number of pages is common place in book listings, esp Google books, and helps the reader to see right off if the work is extensive (many pages) or is just an overview. Unless there is a pressing reason not to include this notation after the publication name, and there have never been any issues with the system or with editors because of this, would you please leave it, as this convention is used in a good number of historical biographies, and again, is helpful information commonly found in Google and Amazon book listings. Thanx. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Gwillhickers, in my more recent edit I retained the page number but moved it out of |publisher= to the end of the citation - can we use that notation instead? While the information may be germane to the publication, it is not itself part of the publisher name, so including it in that parameter doesn't make sense. And there is already information about the source outside of the citation template to begin with, so this wouldn't be novel. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I suppose it doesn't make much difference if we list page numbers inside the template or not. Either way the page number listing comes out the same. Again, this is a practice I've used for years (e.g. used in Featured and Good articles that were passed using this convention) with no issues anywhere, but if this is something really pressing for you, go ahead and revert my edit again. In any case, thanks for your concern and your efforts in the History project. Cheers! -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)For me the issue is that the page count is not generally included in the bibliography of books, but only in catalog-type stuff like OCLC and Google Books. So, while I understand why you're doing this, I place no value on that little tidbit of information as I really don't see that it's worthwhile.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I see it as worth while, since it informs the readers right off as to the size of a given publication. If I can see right off that a publication is only e.g. 100 pages vs one that has several hundred pages, I'll go with the latter first. Saves time for those who search through a lot of sources. Also, many bibliographies don't include location, isbn and oclc numbers either, but I'm not going to make an issue with an editor if he/she decides to make the extra effort and include this info. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Been busy in RL Comment Reply

Apologies, requested access to a number of resources through WP Library, have not responded or been active editing for some time. RL. - - MrBill3 (talk) 07:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Popular culture

Hi, Nikkimaria, I notice that you have been tagging some FAs with a popular culture trivia tag. It seems to me that a valid item in this category should

• Have an RS ref
• Refer to an aspect of the bird's appearance, behaviour or song, or a myth or legend, rather than just mention the name (and we do get examples of the "Falcon is a character in video game..." type)
• The referenced work should itself be notable

Is my understanding of the criteria correct?

I thought all the items for masked shrike and most for common blackbird met those criteria as I understand them, but I'm not going to edit war with such a respected editor.

I would prefer it if you just removed the items you think don't meet the criteria, rather than tag, otherwise I have to guess, and in the case of the shrike I just removed the section because I couldn't see what you were objecting to (the film item referenced the shrike's appearance and song)

Please let me know if you think I am wrong on what is acceptable, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:51, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jimfbleak, the entries now require a reliable secondary source that indicates their significance to the topic, per this RFC. As to simply removing the items that don't meet the criteria...I was doing that initially, but see a few sections up. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

List of Boy Meets World characters

I reverted the article to the version before excessive trivia and infoboxes with excessive detail were added. Feel free to re-add the tag if you think there are still issues. nyuszika7h (talk) 13:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 22 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the William J. Fallon (attorney) page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Malick Sidibé ‎

G'Day. Just wanted to get some pointers from you. I saw you made a few changes to the article. I understand most of them after following a few MOS links. Must say the cite work/newspaper/publisher fields aren't the most intuitive - but it is what it is. A few things I wanted to understand though are to do with the person infobox. I couldn't find any definitive information about how to use wikidata. I can see some areas prefer wikidata - e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Authority_control. Just wondering where I can get directions on using it on other pages? Seems that the more we use it - even though incomplete, the more chance there is of it being filled in? Is it something to do with the template I used? I can see it does say its a test template - maybe we need to wait until there is a fully complete template before using it? One other thing - the normal template has death_place and death_cause - just wondering why they aren't kept? The only think I can think of is verifiability? Cheers. SeanMack (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi SeanMack, you can start with WP:Wikidata, but there's a lot of background to the issue (for example) so I'm not sure I can point you to a single page that will have all the answers.

Part of the issue is differing practices between Wikipedias, which affects both what ends up in Wikidata (as a lot of data was automatically imported from various Wikipedias) and what comes out (eg. we might choose to exclude some of what they include). This results in inconsistencies between automatically imported content and manually added content - for example, the article text says he was born either 1935 or 1936 but the imported data said only 1935. It also results in output that is inconsistent with our normal practices - for example, whereas the imported data gives only city of birth, we prefer to include country also in most cases. As a consequence, we end up blanking/replacing more and more automatically imported parameters, which minimizes the value of using that template at all.

You'll note also that I made some changes to the manually added content. This was partially because of redundancy - we don't need to include both citizenship and nationality when they're the same; partially verifiability - place of death isn't mentioned in the article at all, never mind sourced; and partially, again, local practices - see for example this discussion about death_cause.

Does that answer your questions? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Yep that pretty much covers it. Thanks for the links. I might change that wikidata entry - didn't realise there was contention on the birthdate. The refs in wikidata both say 1935, but I can now see refs that have both. Interestingly there isn't a facility (that I can see) in wikidata to denote when there is potentially more than 1 version of a data element. Also didn't realise the specifics of the death data - ta. I noticed the place of death is actually sourced in wikidata though - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/arts/malick-sidibe-photographer-known-for-social-reportage-in-mali-dies-at-80.html?smid=pl-share.

I can see a lot of value in using wikidata - but - on one hand it's relatively fluid, and not particularly mature - on the other hand using it is the only way to improve it. I did notices some other language wikis use it a lot more.

Unfortunately that discussion you linked is pretty old - so I'll do a bit more digging. I had previously noted this Wikipedia:Wikidata#Inserting_Wikidata_values_into_Wikipedia_articles but it seems a bit unwieldy.

Cheers. SeanMack (talk) 02:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi SeanMack, thanks - I'd have no objection to adding the sourced death place to the article. I do think we shouldn't have it sourced only in Wikidata though, as it isn't clear to the casual reader that you can go there to find references for the content. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Agree with the wikidata reference point. Whats your take on the alma matter / education? Seems relevant for that person - but if I understand correctly the advice is that to use it might need talk page consensus? SeanMack (talk) 03:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Another interesting point. At the time of his education, he was attending the School of Sudanese Craftsmen; that school no longer exists under that name. So would you put that name in the template, or would you use what Wikidata uses? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:12, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I just found that Britannica has an entry http://www.britannica.com/biography/Malick-Sidibe - I note they show the date as c1935. (I noticed the birthdate in wikidata has to be an actual date so a circa type entry is out.) They describe the education as "École des Artisans Soudanais (now the Institut National des Arts)". Don't know what the policy is for infoboxes on organisations that have changed name over time. I'd have assumed we would use the current name? It does have a French entry that suggests only the name changed nothing more fundamental - https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_national_des_arts_de_Bamako. A red link might encourage an article - but whatever was used I guess a redirect would cover both? SeanMack (talk) 04:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

We could also do something like "School of Sudanese Craftsmen (now the Institut National des Arts)", although I would wonder why we might translate one of the names and not the other. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey. I thought I may as well give some context to the name thing by giving a place to link to, whatever name is used. Any thoughts?. Cheers SeanMack (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey SeanMack, where are you getting the previous name from? "Maison" means house, and the cited source only has the English translation. Other than that, it's a nice little article. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

You got me thinking... why *are* we using a translated name just because it's in an English language page describing a french named institution? So googling it - it has more name versions than Imelda Marcos has shoes, but I think I found a few refs that limit to recognised names, along with dates. Doesn't help that my French hasn't been exercised since school, I'm sure I'm probably missing subtleties of building moves or incorporations etc. Anyway - given that - I'd think the Malick Sidibé article should use the current name. Something like:

" ...selection for the School of Sudanese Craftsmen (now the Institut National des Arts)" -> " ...selection for the Institut National des Arts de Bamako." It seems that he went there in 1952 and various articles contradict each other on the name at the time. Ecole or Maison. Keep it simple on the alumni pages and let the debate and history be in the institute page...?

What d'you reckon? Cheers. SeanMack (talk) 07:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey SeanMack, that sounds like a good solution (with the caveat you shouldn't link to your page from an article until it's mainspaced). Nikkimaria (talk) 12:02, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

CUP

Hi, I got CUP access a couple of weeks ago, and the books is working fine, which is great, but not the journals. I got an email from CUP at the time explaining: "I'd like to apologise for any difficulty you may have experienced in accessing Cambridge Journals content since getting in touch yesterday. Books access appears to be working OK, but a couple of you have emailed to tell me you're still on the wrong side of the paywall. I've asked my colleagues on the software side to look into it, but one explanation I've been offered is that it may take a day or two for your access rights to filter through. If that's the case then you should hopefully find you'll be able to get to content very shortly. I'll be keeping an eye on this and will let you know as soon as I have news." (italics added) Should I hassle them, or just be patient, I wonder. zzz (talk) 06:36, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi zzz, feel free to let them know you're still having access issues. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2016

• News and notes: Lunar project; steering group formed to search for next executive director

• Op-ed: Knowledge Engine and the Wales–Heilman emails

• Special report: Update on EranBot, our new copyright violation detection bot

• Traffic report: Two for the price of one

• Featured content: The double-sized edition

• Arbitration report: Amendments made to the Race and intelligence case

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4

You were involved in one of the prior WP:FAC or WP:PR discussions about Emily Ratajkowski. The current discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4 needs more discussants. In my prior successful FACs, success has been largely based on guidance at FAC in reshaping the content that I have nominated. I would appreciate discussants interested in giving guidance such guidance.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Coimbatore redux

Nikkimaria, the nominator has made some edits and checked further after your last comment about remaining close paraphrasing. Can you please check to see whether it has all been found, or whether more exists that needs to be taken care of? Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:47, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by. The nominator has made edits in several places, including the one you cited, so when you get the chance, please see whether this is finally settled. (The copyvio detector can't ever be fully relied upon.) BlueMoonset (talk) 22:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Learned Hand may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |death_place = {{nowrap|[[New York City]], New York], U.S.}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Der Herr denket an uns, BWV 196

On 29 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Der Herr denket an uns, BWV 196, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bach's early cantata Der Herr denket an uns, BWV 196, was possibly composed for the wedding of the minister who performed Bach's first wedding in Dornheim? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Der Herr denket an uns, BWV 196. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Der Herr denket an uns, BWV 196), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 03:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Australian spies, Nick-D on the German Army Op-ed: TomStar81 on the 1916 Easter Rising Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Don't need jstor access anymore

Hi there, I was granted JSTOR access about a month ago, but I don't need it any more. My institution recently acquired JSTOR access so I can get academic papers at work. What's the easiest way to give my spot to someone else who would need it? thanks --LK (talk) 06:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll pass that message along. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:13, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2016

• News and notes: Wikimedia Switzerland's board and paid-editing firm; passing of Ed Dravecky

• In the media: Wikipedia Zero piracy in Bangladesh; bureaucracy; chilling effects; too few cooks; translation gaps

• Traffic report: Purple

• Featured content: The best ... from the past two weeks

• Arbitration report: Two editors unbanned; Wikicology case enters workshop phase; Gamaliel restricted from Gamergate at his own request

• Recent research: The eight roles of Wikipedians; do edit histories expose social relations among editors?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:10, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Copy violation software

Would you mind telling me what software you use to detect copy violations? I use Copyscape, but it is not really up to the job. For example, it didn't pick up remaining copy violations after I fixed ones it did detect on Kype (anatomy). --Epipelagic (talk) 08:28, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Epipelagic, I don't generally use software - it will catch word-for-word copying from some online sources but not all and not close paraphrasing. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Ständchen (Strauss) redux

Nikkimaria, can you please return and opine? I've expressed my opinion that even quoting a single stanza of the copyrighted translation (out of three) would be too much, but I'd rather have your take, since your experience is so much greater in this area. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Mahavira

Nikkimaria, this has been sitting for a while because of possible copyvio/close paraphrasing/plagiarism issues, which are discussed on the article's talk page, and would seem, in part, to involve PD sources. Can you please take a look at the article and see whether it meets Wikipedia's (and DYK's) standards, or if more work needs to be done? If the work would seem to be substantial, I'll let you decide whether we should give them more chances, or if the nomination should be closed. Thank you as always for your excellent help. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Ellen Pao page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Any possibility for another source review?

Hi Nikkimaria, I've been working on Walt Disney recently, and just taken him through a very positive PR. The article is now at FAC and I wonder if I could tempt you into undertaking a source review for me? Many thanks – and please let me know if I am ever able to help you out on anything. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 07:54, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Matt Bergeron"

Matt Bergeron, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how they are important or significant, and thus why they should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for biographies in particular..

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. David.moreno72 (talk) 08:31, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

I didn't create it - you might want to talk to the person who did. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:21, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: April 2016

This Month in GLAM – Volume VI, Issue IV, April 2016 Headlines Africa report: Wiki Loves Women in Africa Argentina report: Edit-a-thons in Buenos Aires Belgium report: Writing weeks in and about Brussels Bulgaria report: Meeting lots of museum directors Germany report: Learning in the GLAM field & how to edit the GND Italy report: MUSE Edit-a-thon and Backstage pass and Small Museums in Italy Macedonia report: ArchiWiki edit-a-thon; Wikimedian-in-residence Netherlands report: Edit-a-thon Attic Nights Norway report: Photographic portraits Poland report: Faras discoveries, Carpathian ethnography, and a spreadsheet-based uploader Spain report: Free pictures, edit-a-thons and new partners Sweden report: Connected Open Heritage; Offentligkonst.se; Digkult; ArbetSams museidagar; VISS; Museernas vårmöte; GLAM/ED collaboration UK report: GLAMwiki work in Yorkshire; Mitchell Arts Centre Special story: Halfway point of the Europeana Art History Challenge Open Access report: Hypercycle; Wikipedia Year of Science; Snake envenomings Wikidata report: Wikimedia Commons gets arbitrary access Calendar: May's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 12:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)