User talk:Alanna the Brave/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Alanna the Brave, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Ellen Cobb, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! /wiae /tlk  18:27, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Your submission at Articles for creation: Women Wage Peace has been accepted
 Women Wage Peace, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! North America1000 08:40, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Kirsti Andersen
So you found that Kirsti has not had book reviews or career description available in her article, and then tagged it as insufficiently sourced. Many living people have slight profile in literature beyond their own work, yet they are notable for that work. Hanging a tag on Kirsti's article, and demoting the status to "stub" is not appropriate. While the Project desires female notables to be better represented, hanging tags on articles as you go through them does not enhance the appearance of the notables. Please do research and collect sources to enhance the articles instead of expecting someone else to see your tags and do the work. — Rgdboer (talk) 21:10, 23 June 2017 (UTC) Check the History of her article and you will see the work flowing from here. Her sometime mentor Olaf Pedersen was just a gymnast back then, but there are several reviews of The First Universities that could be cited for him. Working on Kirsti’s article didn’t turn up commentary on her career or book reviews, but surely you see we want an article on her. Good to know the secondary, tertiary source policy of the Project, but this living person hasn’t much yet. You might read WP:DRIVEBY, since tagging seems to be your contribution. Just letting you know that much tagging is a characteristic of a WP:Troll. Your critique is welcome in WP:Talk, but articles should not be defaced. — Rgdboer (talk) 03:07, 24 June 2017 (UTC) (1) I agree that Kirsti Andersen seems worthy of having her own Wikipedia article. That's why I tagged it as needing improvement, instead of nominating it for deletion. (2) Currently, I am working on addressing the backlog of unassessed WikiProject Women articles (6,461 still to go). Assessment, not tagging, was my primary reason for visiting Kirsti Andersen's page. (3) Although I disagree with the way you responded to my tag, I realize that tags may not always be the best choice for every article, and may sometimes upset other editors such as yourself. I've been a Wiki editor for less than two months, and I'm still getting the feel for how everything works around here. In the future, I'll put more consideration into options besides tagging (such as Talk Page discussions). Peace, Alanna the Brave (talk) 13:33, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi : Are you a personal friend of Kirsti Andersen? I'm surprised at the tone of your comment. Alanna the Brave (talk) 21:40, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi :
 * That sounds very good. Sometimes when I work on an article for some time, an attachment grows, something like being a fan. Kirsti took on the job of closing the gap between art and geometry and has succeeding in giving the long history of the subject a proper structure. Hopefully one day a proper sketch of her career will be published that we can cite. On assessment, it seems very irregular and of little purpose beyond indication where volunteers are needed. Perhaps just jumping in on an obvious task or two would be more of a contribution than 100 assessments. — Rgdboer (talk) 21:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


 * When an article is deficient and you don't want to fix it yourself, tagging it is the most appropriate thing to do. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise.  Schwede 66  18:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Women Wage Peace
Hello! Your submission of Women Wage Peace at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 15:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Women Wage Peace
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:02, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Hi, I just wanted to say congratulations on your DYK and your new article! I am always glad to see other women helping to contribute to Wikipedia and writing about awesome organizations. I hope you've enjoyed your first few months here, and I can't wait to see what you do in the future!

Kmwebber (talk) 16:20, 18 July 2017 (UTC) 


 * : Thank you for the lovely kitten. ;-) It was neat to have an article appear on DYK, and I'm definitely looking forward to writing more on Wikipedia! Alanna the Brave (talk) 11:28, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

September 2017 at Women in Red
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Mihingarangi Forbes
Good work! That's a solid piece of work for a new editor. Don't forget to add  to biographies, though, as that ensures that the article is sorted under the surname in categories etc. Please see WP:SORTKEY for more details.  Schwede 66  18:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi : Thank you! I appreciate the tip -- I didn't know about the 'DEFAULTSORT' key. Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Edith Kawelohea McKinzie
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red October editathon invitation
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WPDOY and refs
Hi Alanna the Brave. Thanks for your prolific contributions to WP:WikiProject Days of the Year. You're adding quite a few entries. Would you mind adding sources as you do? Also, please consider joining the project by listing your participation on the wikiproject page. Best regards. Toddst1 (talk) 19:12, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * So, not trying to be too much of a stickler here but your edit summary and lack of source isn't good enough.  The recent changes in WikiProject Days of the year pretty much require sources to be added to the WPDOY list when you add the biography. Most of the biographical articles you've been adding to these WPDOY and  WikiProject Years lists have sources that should be propagated to the additions you're making.  It shouldn't be much extra work but if the sources don't exist, we shouldn't be adding them. Toddst1 (talk) 03:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

November editathons from Women in Red: Join us!
-Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Please don't add citations to Wikipedia:WikiProject Days of the year pages
Hi Alanna the Brave, can you please stop adding references to these pages. The way they work is they have the Wikilink to the actual person or events Wikipedia article where the references will be anyway so are not needed on these pages. The only people or events that get removed are ones that don't have a Wikipedia article anyway. NZFC (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Confusion regarding changed guideline Days of the year pages
Hi Alanna, With mounting astonishment I read this dialogue. Apparently this guideline only applies to new entries since existing entries are not 'sourced'. Some time ago I also was warned on my Talk page which kicked off the mentioned 'gory discussion'. I noticed you now started [citing the DOY-entries] (and being reverted by others who don't know of the new guideline yet). Although this RFC is closed I wonder how the guideline will be enforced. I noticed that not all 'unsourced' new entries are reverted; only entries of editors who add a lot of them seem to be targeted currently. Anyway, I read that also your unsourced entries to Days of the year pages were reverted. That is strange because WP:DOY and WP:DAYS are indeed different domains with different guidelines; there is no need to add a citation to a new entry in a Year-page. As a result of this project I've added a lot of unsources entries to Birth- and Death sections of the years 500 AD-1700 AD. None of them have been reverted since there is no rule that disallows it. As you may have gathered, I'm struggling with this new WP:DOY-guideline. Apart from other reasons I feel it is inconsistent with other 'listing articles' like WP:DAYS, List_of_saints, Lists_of_battles etc. Regards, Mill 1 (talk) 21:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't only apply to new entries. Use common sense instead of trying to make a WP:POINT. Toddst1 (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Mill 1 - Thanks very much for all your comments. While I understand why referencing is an important part of Wikipedia, I've been quite frustrated by my experience with the newly altered WP DOY guidelines, and I have felt isolated/a little targeted in being told to cite my entries, since I'm not seeing any similar activity from other editors. I think there is a communications issue (the changed guidelines are not widely known or promoted), and a cohesion issue (the DOY community appears divided, and there is no plan for broad implementation). My primary goal at the beginning of all this was to decrease the gender gap on year pages (like "1900", which contained six times more men than women), and I've attempted to contribute to DOY pages alongside that, but it's been more complicated than I had anticipated. I think I'm going to connect with WP Years next, and try to separate their guidelines from WP DOY guidelines. After that, I may feel confident enough to continue my project in some form or other. All the best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 12:11, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

First of all: great initiative Alanna the Brave, that you're trying to decrease the gender gap. I've been adding thousands of entries to DOY (regarding biographies with a DoB < 1650 AD) and I'm afraid that the ratio men-women I encountered is even higher than six.. I too started a DOY-initiative: I noticed that (pre)medieval bio's were vastly underrepresented in DOY and decided to do something about it. You can read about it here. Anyway, it was out of the same frustration that I wrote the comment on your Talk page. I think it is a shame that we both decided to stop our DOY-initiatives because of the changed guideline. There are some other aspects too: First and foremost: I am not entirely sure about the status of the new guideline. I have been informed by Toddst1 that 'community consensus' was reached about it but as you can read I am not convinced of that. I am not alone on this. I will investigate this further. Moreover I don't see the community enforcing the new rule, apart from Toddst. As far as I can see in the logs only the two of us are being targeted by him. I perceive that as inconsistent and unfair. Furthermore I predict that it will be impossible to enforce this new guideline altogether. Explanation. Because of that I expect this guideline will be reverted back. This was the trigger to contact you: I noticed you were adding all these inline citation to entries in the Births-/Deaths-sections and it seems such a waste of time in my opinion because in all probability it will not be required anymore before long. For now I will also be concentrating my efforts on updating year pages and correcting bio's in the process. Lastly: Toddst believes in what he/she is doing. Since I'm sure that he's reading this too I hope I did not antagonize him/her more than I already did. He knows his way around Wikipedia far better than newbees like us and could make life difficult here. I would hate to (temporarily) give up yet another initiative. Back to work; all this is taking even more time.. Regards Mill 1 (talk) 13:52, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Chō Kōran
Hello! Your submission of Chō Kōran at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 13:39, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Chō Kōran
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Canadian biographies
Hi, Alanna the Brave! I saw you wrote nine Canadian biographies for the WIR Contest. If you'd like, you can also submit these to The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Please use this link for convenience. Thanks for all your amazing work on the contest! – Reidgreg (talk) 12:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I'll do that now. Alanna the Brave (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

An exceptional barnstar for you
I make it $10 that you've won. Please double check. If you would like to donate any of your winnings into the Women in Red Book Fund to raise money to buy books for editors of women topics who need them on demand please add your name and the amount you'd like to donate in the sub section below the prize winners on the main contest page.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Claire Wallace (broadcaster)
— Maile (talk) 00:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Arlinda Locklear
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

New Year's resolution: Write more articles for Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging