User talk:Auldhouse/Archive 2

A page you started (Instant book) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Instant book, Jaldous1!

Wikipedia editor Winged Blades of Godric just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"A good read!"

To reply, leave a comment on Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Winged Blades Godric 06:14, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Simon & has been nominated for discussion
Category:Simon &, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Phyllis E. Grann) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Phyllis E. Grann, Jaldous1!

Wikipedia editor Barkeep49 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Thanks for your work on this article and bringing her accomplishments to Wikipedia."

To reply, leave a comment on Barkeep49's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Susan Kamil) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Susan Kamil, Jaldous1!

Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"An interesting and worthwhile article."

To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in study
Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, I am working with Wikimedia’s Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 21:56, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Women in Red
Hi there, Auldhouse, and thanks for joining Women in Red. It's good to have someone interested in women in publishing. If you run into any problems or need any help, please let me know. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Creating a new list
I saw you're a member of WP:WPLISTS, and I was wondering if you had any time or interest in helping me create a list of Honeywell products and services. In the interest of transparency, I have a paid COI, but it was recommended to me by another user that a list article would be a better space for this content than the Honeywell article itself. I created a draft from the content I initially proposed for the article here. I previously reached out to another member of WP:LISTS who helped me refine it to this point. Do you have and advice or suggestions on how I could further improve it?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:26, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the note. Right now I'm focused on Publishing History. Curious--are those all current products? I see Wikipedia operating as a good way to list both past and current products.Auldhouse (talk) 15:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Right now it's a list of products that are either currently listed at Honeywell, or that have their own Wikipedia article. The intent is to spin the section out into its own article to reduce the length of Honeywell, and then use the new list article as a framework for any other potential additions. I know you said you're focused on publishing history, but do you have any time to spare to help me publish this?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 19:56, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I can take this on FacultiesIntact. Give me a few days as I have a full schedule. Auldhouse (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Please let me know if there's anything else I can do to help out.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:58, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * FacultiesIntact I've been thinking of the best way to tackle this. I have some experience with tracking individual products (books and online courses) for competitive research. My previous day job was a content analyst for Lynda.com/LinkedIn Learning looking for product gaps in our own online courseware products and comparing it against our competitors. I kept an ongoing list of thousands of Pluralsight courses to regularly compare to our own. I like the set-up you have started here are some questions...
 * 1. Can you point me to a list or spreadsheet of Honeywell products either on the Honeywell site or another place? I could use this as a starting ground to track the products off-line and then I can do the research to locate any that already have a page linked or find outside references, news articles, etc. And then add them to the list you have. I found this list: https://www.honeywellprocess.com/en-US/explore/products/pages/all-products.aspx
 * 2. Do you want me to work out of your sandbox, or go ahead and have you push the page live and we can add it there?
 * 3. I will need a bit of time to get up-to-speed understanding how Honeywell and then would like to check in to see if how deep you want this to go. If there are any pointers to Honeywell's most important or used products that might be useful.
 * 4. Damn. I knew Honeywell was big, but man they are into everything. :-)Auldhouse (talk) 23:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I do not. I do have this older version of my sandbox that was much more robust, but I faced pushback from some community members because they felt the individual products weren't notable enough. I disagreed, since it was my understanding that the content of the article isn't subject to the same notability guidelines, but I pared it down to only the products that have their own Wikipedia article as a result.
 * If you don't mind working out of my sandbox, I think that would be preferable. It seems easier to me that way so that we can track one version.
 * I don't think it needs to go much deeper at all, since it'd be nigh impossible to create a truly comprehensive list. I'm happy to help with research where you think there's room for expansion.
 * They really are! Thanks again for all the help!--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:26, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I took a look at your older version, and I actually like that. My view is Wikipedia is a historical record for future audiences so I would err more on the side of providing more information about products rather than less. I would perhaps stick to the organization of the new page--just have the four headers, but then include any of the products you have listed on the first draft. If you don't mind--I'd like to pull some of them over. Auldhouse (talk) 16:34, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If you think organizing solely by the four headers would be best, I trust your judgment. My initial thought is that having the subcategories organized by business group would help keep things organized, especially for potential additions in the future, but I can see how having it less rigid would make it easier to contribute information as well. Feel free to pull over/change/revert whatever you'd like. I'm curious to see what your vision looks like.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:58, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Take a look at what I've done so far. I have ported some items over from the older draft (still working on that). Then I'm also starting to add other products in. I'm starting with products that are either mentioned in the news, on twitter, bing or google news, etc. If I see something on Honeywell, I try to find a second source from outside. I like to work from the present and then go back and fill as I figure those are the products most people are interested in. FYI--on the divisions. I find it easier to have fewer rather than more. If Honeywell is like any of the corporations I work for--one reorg can undo all the headings and then you have to redo. I've noticed Honeywell is spinning off some of their businesses soon. I would suggest that after that happens anything on the list that follows is left there, but maybe a note that. Example: Honywell Product X (now part of Garret).Auldhouse (talk) 16:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I think this looks great! I can't thank you enough for all the hard work you're putting into this. I definitely see your point about how a more general organizational structure makes future maintenance easier, especially with continual corporate restructuring. Notes seem like an excellent way to help clarify that kind of information for unfamiliar readers.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 01:16, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You are welcome! I've been adding a few a day, so let me know when you go live with it.Auldhouse (talk) 21:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This is all so far beyond my expectations when I asked for you help, and I appreciate all the hard work you've put into this. I'm comfortable going live with it now. Would you mind moving it into mainspace? I'd prefer not to given my COI.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:59, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Ida Tarbell & Women in Green Goal Tracking
Hey Auldhouse, would you like to add Ida Tarbell to the Women in Green Goal Tracking page? I'm not sure if you knew, but WiG has a collective goal of nominating 25 articles for GA status during 2018 (so far, we've reached 17 nominations by participants). Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You bet Alanna the Brave! I've added it to the list. Auldhouse (talk) 19:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Awesome. :-) Best of luck with that article! It's looking good. Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:18, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Get ready for November with Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Discontinued Girl Scout Cookies
Hey there, hope you're doing well! Thanks again for your help with the Honeywell list. I wanted to seek your expertise on a new project I'm working on: Girl Scout Cookies. The entire article is in need of an overhaul, but in particular I'm wondering if the section on discontinued cookies would be better served as a separate list article. As it stands, the section takes up a big chunk of the article while providing only auxiliary information. Do you think it would function better as a standalone article, provided there are better sources for the information?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:18, 18 October 2018 (UTC)