User talk:JSFarman/Archive 2

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you are not a native speaker of English, I apologize for writing in English. '''If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again.''' We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thank you!! --WMF Surveys (talk) 05:54, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I took it!!! JSFarman (talk) 06:36, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Mina Sundwall
Hello! You seem to be active on the Sundwall page. I want to ask about moving forward. The subject is undoubtedly notable enough for posting, her co-stars have less impressive credentials than her and have pages, and she is garnering more and more media coverage as the days pass. I am contacting you because I don't want to simply resubmit this without ensuring that this page can sufficiently meet Wikipedia standards. I know this draft deserves to be published, and I want a seasoned Wikipedian like yourself's help in making it possible. Thanks a lot! (Page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mina_Sundwall) WikiSniki (talk) 23:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi WikiSniki (talk). I left my comments on the draft when I declined it on April 8. She hasn't come closer to meeting the inclusion criteria since then.  I'll be happy to publish the draft when and if she does.   Thanks, JSFarman (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, JSFarman (talk). I totally get that, which is why I'm asking for your help in seeing what I cn do to make it work. I have a lot of belief in it, but I definitely agree with you that it isn't ready. I just want to know the steps I can make to make it suitable. (Edit*: Added links to two sources praising her acting. At least one of them looks relatively reputable. Geek.com and Romper.com) Thanks, WikiSniki (talk) 22:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi again, WikiSniki, I just did another search and didn't come up with additional sources, and for me, the only way that she'll meet the inclusion criteria, is, um, to meet it. As I said on my original review, it's early.  She's 16.  When the series airs I'm sure she'll get more press.
 * You do know that you can publish an article directly, correct? It doesn't need to go through AfC.  You can just move it from the draft space to the article space using the "move" option in the "more" menu. (I don't think it will survive if it's nominated for deletion, but you never know.)  Thanks, JSFarman (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

RCA
Hi Julie. How do you propose we deal with this? There are just far too many of (almost) the same photos. Perhaps a discussion on the article talk page?  Rob van  vee  10:43, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello  Rob  van  vee !  Sorry about the delay. I was avoiding WP because of this issue - it makes me disproportionately crazy when people revert changes without giving any thought to other editor's perspectives.  In this case, it's particularly frustrating since it's an anonymous (ahem) editor.  I suspect that he/she/they won't pay attention to consensus, but yes, maybe we should try the talk page? JSFarman (talk) 18:52, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree, this will most likely be a very frustrating exercise but I hate letting people like this go against community consensus with what appears to be a case of own. My first thought was to just wait and revert after the IP had lost interest but it would appear as if the they have some vested interest. I am not completely familiar with the protocal, is it a RFC?  Rob  van  vee  07:06, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Julie, I've realised I just don't have the energy for this right now as I actually have too much going on. I'll wait a while and revert when I feel the IP has lost interest and if that doesn't work I'll rethink my plan of action.  Rob van  vee  15:01, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, good morning, Rob  van,  Sorry for not responding to your last message.  I feel the same way.  When I attempt to address this kind of idiocy, I end up frustrated and edgy.  I think we will both have to keep an eye on the article and revert the edits, which are obviously made my a user who logged out to continue adding the redundant images. We can ask that the page be semi-protected, seek consensus, or at the most extreme, request a topic band for the user under their registered account name.  (I don't think it qualifies as sock puppeting, but I could be wrong.)
 * This really does drive me nuts, but there are so many other issues that make me equally crazy. Look at the talk page for List of best-selling music artists for a truly bizarre experience, and next time you see the random information that the subject of an article "was raised in a Jewish family," look at the editor and the source used.  These are just two examples!  Then there are the messages I get from people who are pissed off by my reviews.  See the message below (on Caracats) for a particularly passive/aggressive message..
 * OMG. I have to stop...even thinking about this puts me in a hideous mood.  I'm glad to meet you though!  We will sort out this RCA problem!  Julie JSFarman (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah this place can make me crazy too but it's also very rewarding! Glad to have met you too Julie, it's nice to have people you can bounce things off every now and again. Let's keep an eye on that as you say. Later.  Rob van  vee  16:00, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Rob van, OMG I cannot take it.  Every time RCA comes up on my watchlist, mostly with good edits, I look at the page, and my head explodes.  It's terrible. THERE ARE 11 IMAGES and nine of them are the same!  How about over the weekend you and I tag team it?  The "anonymous" editor can revert and revert but you and I can abide by 3R.  You in? JSFarman (talk) 06:40, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Julie, you bet! I should just mention that I am attending a conference this weekend and my wiki work will be sporadic but I will check in every now and again to see where i can assist. Just ping me when you need me. What is the plan of action? Revert the changes made by the IP and we take turns potentially reverting their reverts?  Rob van  vee  06:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Exactly, Rob !  (Is this collusion?  Are we allowed to do it?  Do we care?)  I'll hit it on Saturday sometime and ping you.  Have a good conference!  Julie JSFarman (talk) 06:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)  (PS,  don't know why your username keeps showing up shorter and shorter - not intentional!)
 * Cool! See you there. My name is Rob so that's perfect. Also, its not collusion if 2 editors enforce wp:mos imo.  Rob van  vee  06:59, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey J. On second thoughts perhaps collusion is not the wisest option. I'm not familiar enough with what the rules say regarding that. Maybe a photo album at the bottom of the article or a reduction of pics generally should be proposed on the talk page first? What do you think?  Rob van  vee  18:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Good morning Rob, yeah, you're probably right. I was so pissed off about this last night. I'm not familiar enough with the guidelines to know if it's ok or not to go with Plan A, but let's go with Plan B and create a gallery at the bottom of the page.  First though let's revert the images.  If they put the images back in, we can leave a message on their talk page (or the article talk page)  offering the gallery solution....?  JSFarman (talk) 19:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool let's start there.  Rob van  vee  19:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Julie. The deed is done! Now we wait. Let me know what you think.  Rob van  vee  17:14, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Rob ! It looks great.  I almost think that it won't be reverted.  Almost.  Thanks for doing the heavy lifting. JSFarman (talk) 17:19, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool! I wasn't happy to tag it but it seems there is a fair amount of unsourced info or there are additional footnotes needed. At a later stage... I'll bet you $10 (donated to Wikipedia) they revert :)  Rob van  vee  17:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank You!
Hi, Julie!

I just wanted to stop by and say thank you for helping review and contribute to ResistBot! Since I'm still a student, all your feedback is greatly appreciated.

Best, Sweet inaara (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Sweet inaara! It's a great article - you've done a fantastic job with it.  (I'm stoked that Wikipedia has an article on ResistBot, too.))  Thanks for your message!  JSFarman (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Jerry Lorenzo
No problem... would should there be an article regarding his brand, fear of god, or is it too young?
 * Hi StraightOuttaBoston. I was really just talking about the Jerry Lorenzo article. You could write about his early life, what inspired him to start the line, how quickly it developed, his faith - it's such a good story, seems like the kind of article that would be rewarding to write.  (They're the kind of articles I love to write. I  may be projecting!)  JSFarman (talk) 05:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Food
Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's  going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 08:05, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

17:47:26, 8 May 2018 review of submission by Msabaker
I included many more citations, including print and digital newspapers. I need to change the photograph but am not sure how to proceed at erasing this photograph and uploading one that has all the merits for creative common use. Msabaker (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Nelson Broms
Hi, Julie. Thanks for your guidance on the article about] Nelson Broms (and for taking your finger off the "delete" button!). I'm working on additional citations. Rathfulman (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

HiJulie, I added new citations to] Nelson Broms and deleted one statement I couldn't verify. Please take a look and, if you think the article now meets the guidelines, consider unflagging. Thanks. Rathfulman (talk) 22:55, 3 May 2

Hi Rathfulman (talk): In my opinion, based on the references used, he doesn't meet the inclusion criteria. He isn't mentioned in the The New York Times,CNN, or Washington Post references, and while the second NY Times ref  does mention him, it's one sentence in a column on executive changes. Bloomberg is a run-of-the-mill listing; Funding Univese is hardly a reliiable hardly a reliable source;  ASU is not independent, SEC is a press release; US News and World Report is about ASU;  Distinctive Schools, LEEP, and EdisonLearning are not indpendent. That leaves the Science Network and CSPAN, and CSPAN is coverage of a "forum to discuss the idea of an alliance between Jewish Americans and political conservatives." JSFarman (talk) 04:40, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the second look and the evaluation, Julie. I'll keep looking for independent citations to add. I continue to believe Broms is notable enough, and I don't understand why independent mentions of him proved so difficult to find. Rathfulman (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Julie, I found and included more independent citations, and deleted some of my assertions I found I couldn't verify. I would appreciate it if you would take a look when you have time, and let me know what you think. Best, Rathfulman (talk) 05:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

(Follow-up to the above) Julie, I need some guidance, please. Some of the citations I found for the Nelson Broms article are from microfiche archives and not available online. I posted PDFs of them, with attribution, to Wikisource, and linked to those. I thought that was one of the purposes of WS but an editor there said no; that they should be on WM Commons, and they might not comply with copyright guidelines. My question for you and your experience is, how can I use a citation that doesn't exist online, for which I have a PDF that can be found in the source's archives? Thank you again for the hand-holding. Rathfulman (talk) 15:51, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Rathfulman (talk), and thanks for adding the citations.
 * References don't need to be accessible online. Just use the usual format for referencing, and insert the name of the publication, the date of publication, the title of the article, and the article's author, as well as any other info (such as the page number) that might help a reader to locate the reference.  I haven't had a chance to look at the article yet - hoping to get to it this evening.  Thanks!  Julie JSFarman (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again, Julie. Very helpful. Don't bother looking tonight. I won't have the citations plugged in appropriately till tomorrow, and then you can see the (hopefully) finished product. Rathfulman (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Event coordinator
Hi, the English Wikipedia recently created a new user permission for editors involved in off-wiki outreach work, event coordinator. This new permission allows users to mark accounts for confirmed for up to 10 days, and also allows them to create accounts for events without rate limits without some of the features of the account creator right that aren't used at edit-a-thons and other events. I have added the event coordinator permission to your account and removed the account creator permission, as you appear to have been using it mainly for outreach work.This should have no noticeable impact on your ability to create accounts, and will give you the extra ability to temporarily confirm accounts if you need to. For more in formation, you can see the information page on the right, or you can ask me if you have any questions. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That's great. There's an edit-a-thon here in LA on Friday, and this will be incredibly helpful. Thank you, TonyBallioni! JSFarman (talk) 21:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:
 * WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags
 * Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:
 * A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons
 * There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy
 * Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English News Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.
 * Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
 * The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Women in Red June Editathons
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Building Helene Lerner's Wikipedia Page
Hello! I am an intern for Helene Lerner, working on building her Wikipedia page. I'm trying to upload a professional headshot of her that's she's given me permission to use, but the site won't allow it. Is there a way to get this approved? Or to have her reach out to you directly to give Wikipedia permission to include the photograph of her? Please let me know. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbamber (talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi . I just moved the article back to the draft space so that you can work on it there. (I will also leave this message on your talk page). There are many issues that you need to address:


 * The first is regarding notability - see WP:NPEOPLE. She would automatically be notable if she had won Emmy Awards, but regional Emmys don't go toward notability. (I edited the article last night, and noted that the Emmys were regional; I also added citations. You need to find independent references that provide extensive coverage specifically about Helene Lerner in reliable sources. The sources you've used aren't independent.
 * Verifiablility: See:  WP:VERIFY.  You need to be able to verify the assertions of the article, such as the Gracie Awards.  I can't find any confirmation via and independent, reliable source.
 * Neutral point of view: The article is very promotional.  See WP:NPOV.  Get rid of the adjectives and the superlatives!  A Wikipedia article should be just-the-facts.  Ask yourself if a statement is significant, or if it serves only to promote the subject.
 * Conflict of Interest: You have a conflict of interest, and you should note that you're an intern for Helene Lerner on your user page, and on the draft.  Because of your conflict, submit it through   AfC rather than publishing it yourself.  See WP:COI.


 * It looks like you participated in a Wikipedia course at Emory. Notability, verifiability, and neutrality are mandatory; do you have materials you can review?   I'm happy to help if you're in need of guidance.  Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive! Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
 * Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: NPPbarnstar SE.png. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: RR3217-0014 100 rubles USSR 1989 Gold avers.png, Swiss-Commemorative-Coin-1991-CHF-250-reverse.png, Coin of Kazakhstan 500Thinker averse.png, US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.jpg.
 * Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.