User talk:Knope7/Archive 2

Autopatrolled granted
Hi Knope7, I just wanted to let you know that I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&page=User%3AKnope7 added] the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing!  Schwede 66  02:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ha, was just about to make this suggestion! Glad to hear 's ahead of me. Thank you both for your great work! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Nah, I'm not ahead of you,, but Knope7 asked for it. I've never given out this permission without it not having been requested through WP:RFP/A. Keep up your good work scanning for trustworthy and clueful editors.  Schwede 66  09:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the GAN

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:04, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you ! I appreciate your improvements to the article. Knope7 (talk) 00:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

GA Review
I started the GA review for Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Seraphim System ( talk ) 01:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ruth Bader Ginsburg you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seraphim System -- Seraphim System (talk) 02:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
The article Ruth Bader Ginsburg you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ruth Bader Ginsburg for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seraphim System -- Seraphim System (talk) 21:01, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you, and  for being thoughtful and patient reviewers! Knope7 (talk) 22:28, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Penny Pritzker
Hello, Knope7 - You'll have seen that I have completed the copy-edit you requested for Penny Pritzker. It was quite well written; most of my edits were small things. I have a few questions for you:

1) Right in the first paragraph of the article, I noticed (in edit mode) that you have named a reference "Easton, Nina, The facinating lie" even though the title of the work is The fascinating life of Penny Pritzker (so far). Did you really want the ref name to be "a fascinating lie" and not "a fascinating life"?

2) The last sentence of the article is:


 * Although her relationship with her brothers became strained following the family business restructuring, Penny expressed support for the idea of younger brother J.B. running for office in 2017.

I was wondering whether "following" should not be "during" since, according to Penny Pritzker, the restructuring took around a decade, and the brothers had joined in one of the lawsuits that seemed to have been initiated soon after Jay Pritzker's death in 1999. It's not a big deal, or a big difference, but "following" seems to suggest the strained relationship began after everything was over. I'll let you decide which word you prefer.

That's all. Best regards, – Corinne (talk) 17:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

One other thing:

3) I notice that you have a lot of references in the form of hidden notes to editors (they appear highlighted in salmon, or light orange, when WikEd is enabled). I wonder why you have done this. I have edited hundreds of articles and don't recall seeing this before. You might want to check with a more experienced editor to see if this is all right. – Corinne (talk) 17:42, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, for the copy edit. I'll respond to your points.

1) Someone attempted to correct the spelling for that ref name the other day, but they only did it one time the ref name was used and therefore displayed an error message. Undoing the edit was a quicker fix than changing the ref name in all instances. I have no objection to correcting the spelling in all instances but I also don't see it as necessary since it doesn't show in the article. If someone would like to make the correction throughout the article, I have no objection.

2) I think following is the more accurate term. The business restructure is when Penny became one of three family members running the Pritzker businesses. She was already established as being one of the business leaders when the family drama began. I will think this over though to see if I can clarify further.

3) I don't see the problem with hidden notes. I didn't invent using hidden notes for references so I don't know why I would need to seek permission. I think the hidden notes solve a problem, that is some editors remove repetitive citations for consecutive sentences, but without repetitive citations it can be unclear what information is actually supported by the source and what has been added later or is completely unsourced. I have had editors remove consecutive citations to avoid clutter but usually editors find citations in hidden notes fine.

Thanks again for your effort. Knope7 (talk) 18:18, 4 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your replies. I don't mind changing "lie" to "life" in the ref names throughout the article. Is that all I do, or is there something special I have to do? Re "following" vs. "during", of course I defer to you since you know the subject matter better, and the sentence may not need revising at all. Re the hidden notes citations, I actually agree with you that they're a good idea, to avoid too many visible citations. – Corinne (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * sorry I wasn't on much this last week. I made the change myself. Thanks again for your help. Knope7 (talk) 21:31, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Help wanted
Hi Knope! If you have the opportunity to do so, I'd appreciate it if you could help out at Draft :Participation of women in the Olympics. I hadn't worked on it for a while but I restarted work on it today. Any input on it's current state, parts to add/remove or any other contributions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jith12 (talk) 23:08, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 August 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Saguaro National Park review
Hi Knope7. I'm concerned that your review of Saguaro National Park might have gone off the rails somehow. I'm eager to respond to any more suggestions for improvement that you might have. Finetooth (talk) 21:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message, ! My sincere apologies for the delay. I should have my final suggestions for you very shortly, nothing major. Knope7 (talk) 00:16, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Finetooth (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

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

Article on MSNBC President
Hi there,

I saw you contributed to the Rachel Maddow article and that you're interested in television figures.

The president of MSNBC isa guy named Phil Griffin - he hired Rachael Maddow and most of the people on MSNBC. Right now, the article about him is only a stun. I'm a consultant to NBC, and a frequent Wikipedia editor, so I wrote a new article for him.

I wonder if you might review it? It's at Talk:Phil Griffin.I have a conflict of interest, so can only make proposals through Talk, not do direct edits. That's the policy, as is looking for editors on related articles to help out. I've done my best to be neutral, source everything and abide by WP:BLP. It's a lot better than the stub that's there now.

Thanks for considering this request,

Ed BC1278 (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)BC1278

Dwts
Well that's what it saids. Eric Sharkey 21:12, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This should be discussed on the article talk page. There have been several cast members reported by People, Entertainment Tonight, Us Weekly, and E!, but if this information is added to the article the sourcing should be made clear. If those names are added should be done in a manner consistent with Wikipedia policies and not haphazardly. I would welcome this discussion on the article talk page as it is the proper place for it.

The Signpost: 6 September 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

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

Angela Merkel
Hey there. I noticed you removed my recent edit on the Angela Merkel article. I have removed the unnecessary full quote and have just simply tweaked it whilst including the vital information that should be included in the article. Do you have any problem with this edit? Many thanks.--9000Richard9000 (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

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

The Signpost: 23 October 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Penny Pritzker
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Penny Pritzker you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Slightlymad -- Slightlymad (talk) 05:40, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Penny Pritzker
The article Penny Pritzker you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Penny Pritzker for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Slightlymad -- Slightlymad (talk) 06:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Natalie Charlesworth
A nice start to the article on Natalie Charlesworth - it now looks like Berna Collier and Debra Mortimer are the only Federal Court judges who are still women in red. I am keen to help out the Women in Red project, but not to fussed about the contest, so if you need assistance with sources, let me know - I have access to subscription journals as well as some very good law libraries. That said I haven't seen much on Charlesworth. Find bruce (talk) 00:49, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind message, . I very much appreciate the offer. I'm more familiar with American law and some terminology is similar but clearly not the same. I expanded Charlesworth's article today for the Women in Red contest. I was planning to do a few more Australian judges, but if you decide you would like to do one for the contest, I would have no problem taking a step back. I look forward to working with you in the future. Knope7 (talk) 03:23, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I am keen to see more articles on Australian women judges & am really pleased to see that between you, and myself there are lots more in blue. Still plenty to go around though, while we have almost completed the Federal Court judges, the state supreme court judges are less well covered. If you are familiar with American law you may now more about May Darlington Lahey, a Queenslander who became a judge in California in 1928. Find bruce (talk) 03:46, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi I went to create an article on Debra Mortimer, but I see you have already created a draft, so I have added my material to that draft. Like I said I am not fussed about the contest & I am happy for you to submit the article. Find bruce (talk) 03:54, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You did such excellent work! You deserve the credit. I didn't spend much time on it yet, so feel free to use it for the contest yourself, or we can just make it a collaboration. Knope7 (talk) 04:14, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Contest
Just to let you know that you're only 11 articles off second place for Oceania and $50.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:22, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 November 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 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 biography
Hi, Knope7! I saw you wrote a Canadian biography for the WIR Contest. If you'd like, you can also submit this to The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Please use this link for convenience. Thanks for all your work on the contest! – Reidgreg (talk) 11:52, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the message! I had been thinking about contributing to the Canada 10,000. I'm so glad you reminded me. Knope7 (talk) 03:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

An exceptional barnstar for you
I make it $26.50 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)
 * Thank you, ! I believe I won $26.50 overall: $16.50 for Oceania and $10 for Sports. Is that correct? Knope7 (talk) 03:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Corrected :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Contest Prize
Please email me and state your user name, email address and how much I owe you in your preferred currency.♦  Dr. Blofeld  17:01, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Did you want the prize in US or UK currency?♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:42, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * , U.S. currncy, please. Knope7 (talk) 15:50, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:28, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

My experience with Good Articles
I am writing this based on a conversation at Women in Green to share what it was like for me when I first started working on getting articles promoted to GA status. I feel slightly more comfortable sharing on my own talk page as I would like to emphasize that this is based on my own experiences and observations.

I started working on an article with the GA goal in mind around February 2016. I wanted to promote the article Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, following the death of one of her colleagues. I saw that a few of her peers had GA articles and I thought she should too. It's also a goal of WP:Women's History to have all 4 female U.S. Supreme Court justices reach GA status. I will say this was probably too big of an article for me to have taken on as a newbie. What helped immensely was that someone had nominated the article years before and there was an old GA review. That old review became my starting point. As I went on, I realized the article was a huge undertaking and so I eventually picked another article to focus on, Sally Jewell. Jewell was U.S. Secretary of the Interior. I figured she would be important enough to have been written by reliable sources, but she wasn't someone who was the center of much national attention so I wouldn't be overwhelmed with too much information. I started editing her page in October 2016 and her article was promoted in January 2017. That's definitely a lot shorter than my average length of time for improving articles.

Early on, I think I mostly tried to make improvements based on that old GA review of Ginsburg's article and just by reading lots of different things over at the project GA pages. I read the instructions, guidelines, and a lot of the guidance articles they listed. I also looked in on a lot of ongoing reviews to get a sense of what the process looked like as well as just looking at random nominees. Some nominees are excellent and wildly exceed the requirements for a GA article. Others meet the bare requirements, and that's not intended as a criticism. I also noticed that overall a lot of articles pass. That maybe a product of experienced nominators knowing what to nominate, but really the process is set up to try and give nominators feed back until the article can pass as long as the improvements can be made in a reasonable amount of time.

I would say that my main focuses when getting an article ready for nomination are citing all facts with reliable sources, making sure the article is comprehensive, and making the writing cohesive. I try to make sure the article hits all of the GA criteria before nominating, but those are the three big things I focus most of my time on. The prose quality doesn't have to be anything fancy. I mostly try to make sure I vary my sentence structure (like avoiding starting every sentence with "In 1991, she...") and avoid one sentence paragraphs or one paragraph sections where possible. I have found the Guild of Copy Editors to be a great resource too. They take about a month but they give the article a copy edit to smooth out some of the prose. That's the last step for me before nomination.

I've been fairly lucky with the review process. It's always hard to predict since every reviewer does things in a slightly different way. Some will check every source, others will not. Some make a lot of suggestions for changing word choices or meeting certain style guidelines. I have found most reviewers are receptive to discussing what needs done. So if I want to explain why I made a particular choice, that's usually not a problem.

, please let me know if there's anything you would like me to elaborate on or if you have questions I didn't touch upon yet. There's a lot more I can say but I don't want to make this too long without knowing what would be most helpful. Knope7 (talk) 03:01, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * That's really helpful - thank you! The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 02:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

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

Thank you
A belated thank you for your advice last summer on Saguaro National Park. After the GA, I used some of your suggestions to further improve the article and then nominated it for FA. It was promoted in November. Aside from parks and other geographic entities, I like to work on biographies of women. Some are stub or start class, but Louise Bryant is an FA, and I'm hoping to get Miriam Van Waters to FA stepwise by going through GA first. I haven't nominated it for GA yet, but the time is nigh. If you have any interest in commenting on the article formally at GA or informally at any time, your advice would be much appreciated. Whether you have time for Miriam Van Waters or not, I would be happy to review something for you if you need an outside eye. Finetooth (talk) 19:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on Saguaro National Park becoming a Featured Article! It is an exemplary article and the distinction is well deserved. I'm so glad to hear you also like to work on biographies of women. I have contributed to both WP:Women in Red and Women in Green. I mostly work on American women in government or athletes.  My time for editing Wikipedia over the next few weeks will be somewhat unpredictable, but I would be happy to look over Miriam Van Waters when I have a chance. I look forward to working with you. Knope7 (talk) 03:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 February 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Alexis Herman
Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Alexis Herman has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the GAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you ! I appreciate you taking the time to improve this article. Knope7 (talk) 02:34, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Knope7AbandonedGA1


Hello, Knope7. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Knope7AbandonedGA1".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 08:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 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) 08:44, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

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

Your draft article, Draft:Maria Hagias


Hello, Knope7. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Maria Hagias".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. » Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  18:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Mikie Sherrill
I reverted your edits. She does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOLITICIAN at this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , she does meet notability standards as she is the subject of significant press coverage and has been for the last year. I am still adding sources. She is now a major party nominee of one of the most closely watched house races in the country. If you don't think the page is up to snuff, please join me in improving it. Knope7 (talk) 02:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The "Wikipedia policy" you cite favors discussion over edit warring. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It also favors keeping content over deleting it. You deleted my content, which was sourced and in no way harmful to anyone, before giving me a chance to respond to any sort of discussion. Knope7 (talk) 02:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:BRD stands for "bold, revert, discuss". When you're reverted, you should not revert back. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * My reverting one time is not edit warring, . Google News has over 9,000 hits for "Mikie Sherrill" and the notability tag is not warranted. If you want to help me improve the article, great. Otherwise, I have said my piece and will focus on making improvements to this and other articles. Knope7 (talk) 03:07, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It's a slippery slope to an edit war that I'm not letting happen even though a couple of sources about her running for office is clearly against WP:NPOLITICIAN and is a pretty weak case for GNG. I want to keep Wikipedia from becoming overrun by articles of non-notable candidates, created with WP:RECENTISM the day they win a primary election. Everyone's in a rush these days. Read WP:GHITS. I don't think she's notable, which means the tag belongs on the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:12, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hazel R. O'Leary
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hazel R. O'Leary you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk) 15:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in study
Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the 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) 21:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexis Herman
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alexis Herman you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GreenMeansGo -- GreenMeansGo (talk) 13:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexis Herman
The article Alexis Herman you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Alexis Herman for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GreenMeansGo -- GreenMeansGo (talk) 13:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 June 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hazel R. O'Leary
The article Hazel R. O'Leary you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hazel R. O'Leary for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Barkeep49 -- Barkeep49 (talk) 16:41, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks so much, ! Knope7 (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexis Herman
The article Alexis Herman you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alexis Herman for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GreenMeansGo -- GreenMeansGo (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

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

The Signpost: 28 October 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Elena Kagan
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Elena Kagan has been completed.

One minor observation - a number of simple statements are often supported by two or more citations. While I doubt this will be an issue when the article is reviewed for Good Article status, you might want to have a look through it, keep the "stronger" citation and remove any that are "unnecessary".

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the GA Review.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 23:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, ! I appreciate you taking the time to lend your skill to the Kagan article. I will take a look at the citations again before I nominate it. Knope7 (talk) 03:51, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Mamie Shields Pyle at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elena Kagan
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Elena Kagan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 21:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Linda Sarsour
I know that you are interested in women's history. Would you like to review the article for Linda Sarsour, the controversial feminist activist?MagicatthemovieS (talk)MagicatthemovieS

Your GA nomination of Elena Kagan
The article Elena Kagan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Elena Kagan for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 02:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

American Politics editing
Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)