User talk:Levalley

Welcome
Hello, Levalley, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --A NobodyMy talk 18:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

How to link a page
You stick the title of the page inside double-brackets, like so: Purple makes a link: Purple

If you want to have a different link appearance, use the color between red and blue which makes: the color between red and blue.

Be careful with these, because people frown on using easter egg -style links, but using it to link "Scottish" to "Scotland", for example, is fine.

If you need any more help, just ask. ~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 15:49, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 15:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Anthropology related articles
I appreciate your comments on incest taboo and on cultural anthropology. I made one change to incest taboo you suggested. If you are new here I can understand your hesitation to edit articles. My advice is to read over these core policies carefully: WP:NPOV WP:V [WP:NOR]]. As soon as you are sure you understand these three policies - just go ahead and edit! Any edit you make that is relevant and complies with these three policies will likely be welcomed!

I wrote most of the article on cultural anthropology - many years ago, when most Wikipedia articles were very short. Since then, some other people have edited it, and I cannot be held responsible for every word or sentence! But if your main criticism is: it is too short, I agree completely. The problem is, no one person should be responsible for an entire article; Wikipedia ought to be collaborative, articles written by many well-informed editors. Sadly, there are not many people here who know much about anthropology.

Please look at the Culture article. Whether you like it or not, I hope you will agre with me that it is far better than the version of the article that existed in December 2008 (if you hit the "history" tb you can recover older drafts and see for yourself). I invited other editors to help out, so far no one really has responded. Read over the entire discussion on the talk page - you will see a few people who really disagreed with my changes. Welcome to Wikipedia!!

I think the idea of an article on "taboo" is a great idea. Just write it! Good luck, Slrubenstein  |  Talk 23:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I deletedt your comment on my page because you clearly ignored instructions. I really do encourage your particpation at Wikipedia but if you do not read the instructions on a page and respect them you will not go very far.

I urge you to read the 5 pillars, especially those core policies, as guidelines. You shouldn't edit unless you eel you really understand those policies.

Also, you need to understand that this is an open, anyone can edit project. You have refered to "author" but at Wikipedia no article has and author since (1) they are product of edits by multiple editors and (2) edits by one person may be based on conversations and interactions with multiple people. In short (1) you have to get over this isea that one person wrote any given article and (2) understand that no one person is supposed to "get it right," we all do partial jobs because we expect other editors to come along and fix mistakes and fill in gaps.

Speciically, some of he passages you reject as false may well have poblems, but may be there for a reason - maybe a few editors complained about something and it was added to clarigy things for the. Yearsw later, we can see that the "patch" went overboard or made new mistakes. But ALL wikipedia articles ARE WORKS IN ROGRESS. Grasp this point and you will do well.

You feel awkward jumping in ... okay, like i saidk take some time reading and rereading NPOV, V, and NOR. Track down "featured articles," the ones we are most proud of - and read the talk page carefully to learn about HOW people worked collabortively to create a great article. Pick some very contrversial articls (Jesus and Race for example) and read over the talk pages to get a sese of how things work here Do these things and then - you should feel very cofortavle! But slow down and take time o learn the uls. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 02:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

You are not an idiot. You are just enthusiastic and writing faster than you have time to read. Bring the two in balance and you will be fine. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 12:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. Wikipedia editors often disagree - it is important for people to WP:AGF even when disagreeing. The three core content policies are meant to provide a framework FOR people who disagree to work together and many conflicts can be resolved just by a committment to these three policies. But there is also common sense too and a general sense of what an encyclopedia article is (compared to say a peer-reviewed journal article, or book chapter). You seem generally well-informed and boy, we need more editors who care about anthropology and care about doing good research, so I sure am glad to see you learning the ropes. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 20:40, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

How Wikipedia works
There are many policies, but you can save yourself a lot of trouble and focus on the "five pillars" and of those NPOV, V, and NOR cover 90% of th content-related issues. As to words - the reason I shy from "author" is that it implies for many authority and ownership. If you were to propose deleting an article it would be a courtesy to let the editor who wrote the first version know. The point is: no one owns an article, all articles are best viewed as th result of multiple collaborations, no article is ever "finished" because anyone can edit at any time. Now, this system works great when an article attracts a relatively large number of well-informed editors over a long period of time. this being a computer, you should not be surprised that most science articles reach a high-quality and stable form quickly and, as Wikipedia policies change, are updated as needed immediately. As you have discovered, this is not th case with anthropology and a host of other articles in the humanities and social sciences. These usually attract three kinds of editors: a very knowledgble person who does not care about Wikipedia (but figures out the core policies quickly) because she probably is more focused on her job (e.g. a university professor) than this hobby; a very knowledgable dillettante whose knowledge is the kind Alexander Pope warned us about, someone who knows lots of facts but not the contexts that make them meaningful or their meaning up for debate - this person doesn't care about Wikipedia policy because she just wants to push some point of view (I'll try to find some examples for you); the third is someone who just took a 100 level course in anthropology (or marketing or whatever) and heard the professor define "culture" and rushed to her computer to find the article on culture and just adds the definition she just learned (or it could be from a textbook). Now imagine that there is just ONE editor of the first type; over time a handfull of editors of the second type who come and thankfully usually go fairly soon, and dozens of the third kind. This explains the state of most articles in the humanities or social sciences.

The key thing to remember is that even of the first kind of editor, you can have serious conflicts. Rushton has a PhD and teaches in a reputable university; wikipedia policy makes it hard to keep his views out of an article on race and intelligence. If you want real education spend a month reading over the talk history since 2004 for the article Race and intelligence which was worked on by people who probably have graduate degrees in anthropology, others in psychology (and who inevitably come into conflict) and then editors who are dilettantes or autodidacts and if they can find an article on the web saying intelligence varies significantly by race, they will add it to the article and insist that NPOV and V permit them to do so. The current article is relatively stable but various verions of it over the past five years have swung from "races are scientific facts" to "any claim about race and IQ is scientific racism."

In this context, we still try to write articles that will appear accurate to experts and intelligible to high school students. I think some decent examples of articles on controversial topics that acknowledge highly divergent views are Jesus and Race. Here is where Wikipedia is at its best, because no single person could have written either article because any single person would have failed to do justice to some other point of view. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 23:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Another controversial artical: look at this which is from 2002, and then look at the current version of the article. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 23:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd say from whatr I have seen so far that you are doing fine. My point about working on articles where there are no other well-informed capable editors is that they are much harder to edit because you are kind of out on your own, unsure ... when you are working with several equally capable editors, you don't mind compromising because you have faith in th other editors, and yoiu always have feedback on your ideas. Anyway, I do hope that you will look at the article on culture. You may wish to read the talk page - all of it - to mull over the issues before editing. You should look at th version in December because i think it is unfair to judge any of my edits except in comarison to th article as it was. I organized it thematically and left room for a section on culture and language which I just rain out of steam on and never got around to writing but a "complete" article needs it. The section on "culture" in the 19th century has sections on English and German Romanticism ... there ought to be a section on French Romanticism to carry people from Rousseau to Durkheim ... there are many such gaps. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome
I get the feeling that you're one of the most qualified people editing on the articles you've commented on. See the current versions as works in progress, and the current editors as groups of enthusiastic but sometimes misguided workers - much like undergraduates! Making specific and constructive suggestions is a very valuable way of contributing, although you are of course free to edit articles yourself. If I can help out with anything biological/biochemical drop me a note on my talkpage. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 00:34, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd like to second that!! Slrubenstein  |  Talk 18:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Sangre de cristo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Sangre de cristo.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, this photo also needs to be used in at least one article. Non-free images that are unused are deleted quite quickly. To see how to lay out a rationale, take a look at File:Carl Neuberg.jpg. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 22:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality question
Did you get that sorted? Do you want me to take a look? Dougweller (talk) 05:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed
What you do in such cases it place a fact tag with the month it was placed (which lets people know if it's old or new) -- I've done that for you here. Dougweller (talk) 07:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Your comment on the archived AfD
Hi. I moved your comment off the archived page and onto its associated Talk page. Though Wikipedia sometimes moves in mysterious ways, there is usually some measure of method to the madness to complement the madness of the method. If you're interested, there are a couple of in-depth policy/guideline pages that go over the policy and practice of consensus and deletion, respectively: Consensus & Deletion policy. --Dynaflow  babble  06:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Userboxes
Hi Levalley,

Glad you like it! I don't really remember what all the different templates are for, but this page explains everything: WP:USERBOX. Feel free to copy and paste markup from User:XDanielx/Userboxes if it makes things easier.

Cheers, — xDanielx T/C\R 04:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 23:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome
 Welcome! Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add User WikiProject Films to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:
 * Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].


 * The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for March has been published.  April's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
 * Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia.  Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 18:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Anthropology
I do not understand this edit. The paragraph is about a conflict between those who think Western anthropologists conduct research in exotic places (primitive people, third world) versus those who think anthropologists can conduct research close to home.


 * If that's what it is about, it's not clear. Indeed, the entire article jumps from point to point without much logic - who are "those who think Western anthropologists conduct research in exotic places"?  Well - most of the reading public, right?  Who is in the second group (those who think...close to home)?  Virtually no laypeople.  But - the article just jumped from talking about what anthropology is to what "people think anthropology is."  Two different things, no warning.  BTW, both should be addressed.  If I were writing this article from scratch, I'd put "What many people think anthropology is" at the top of the article - however, one would have to find a source for that statement (and as it stands right now -there aren't enough sources for either of the statements you just said the paragraph was about.
 * I agree with everything you say, except that it was clear to me that the paragraph was about the belief that anthropologists work in third world countries when more and more are working "at home" (which I consider poorly presented). Slrubenstein  |  Talk 00:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Your edit introduces a theoretical/methodological point about emic and etic.


 * Which, unless the paragraph has a better topic sentence, could easily be seen as the subject of the paragraph. However, I will take the statement out, myself, as soon as I get a chance to - but I'll add a topic sentence (based on what you just wrote here) and put this dialogue on talk page for the article (where it belongs).

I do not object to your adding material on this distinction, but it seems like a separate point. I can see how they are related but they are still separate issues - one is "where do anthropologists work" and the other is "how do anthropologists work."


 * Which, would you say, is actually the topic of the paragraph? Above, you indicate that the paragraph is about "where" they work (and yet, the distinction isn't geographical, it's about "exotic and faraway," two empty terms.  If you really think you can parse "how" and "where" properly, fine - but "faraway" and "exotic" are going to be heard by most people as being about place, not method.
 * Yeah, I think whoever wrote it was trying to talk about where anthropologists work. In fact, I think a lot of people think anthropologists work in "exotic" or primitive places so it is a good idea to have a paragraph addressing this. Don't you? Slrubenstein   |  Talk 00:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't they be separate paragraphs or sections? By the way, what is your cource for, "The term used by many anthropologists for an objective study (or attempted objective study) of a culture not own's own is etic?" This strikes me as wrong. I do not see any reason why an anthropologist cannot produce an etic account of her own culture. Surely an English-speaking linguist can descrobe English phonetics. Why can't an English anthropologist provide an etic account of English culture or some portion of it?


 * I'll get the sources together - I'd begin with almost any introductory textbook in anthropology, but in particular Womack's Being Human comes to mind. She is citing someone else, though, so I'll find the original sources.  I linked to the sources on the discussion between Marvin Harris and the others who invented the term on the page on etic and emic - you might want to check out Headlandt's article, the link is on the etic/emic page (where it belongs).  It's not about phonetics.  So you think "etic" means "inside one's own culture"?  Where, may I ask,  are you getting that view?  Would it be rude for me to ask what your background in anthropology is, at this point?


 * Come again? Where did I write "etic" means "inside one's own culture"? I'd rather you not ask what my background in anthropology is because our personal background is irrelevant.  But you are quite within your rights to ask where I get my view from.  I read Kenneth Pike, Ward Goodenough, and Marvin Harris because those seem to me to be the most commonly cited sources.  Am I wrong? Slrubenstein   |  Talk 00:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I also must point out that "Still, it seems to be a valid generalization that anthropology from its beginnings in the late 19th century until the late 1960s, focused primarily on etic analysis (or thought it did). In 1970, at the annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association, a keynote address focused on just this shift, as it was pointed out that hunter-gatherers were in effect, extinct and unavailable for study, and small groups with unusual languages were regularly becoming extinct" violates NPOV. It is not for any editor to suggest what may or may not be a valid generalization or a valid anything. If you have a significant view from a reliable and verifiable source that forwards this generalization, we can put it in with the proper citation. Moreover, you need to provide a verifiable source for the claim that a keynote address claimed thatr hunter-gatherers are extinct. My library doesn't have "Proceedings of the Annual Meetng 1970" - can you provide a proper citation so I can order it through inter-library loan? Also, it is not clear to me hoe the existence or extinction of hunter-gatherers bears on etic analysis. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 15:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll find the citation - and until then, I'll take it out. However, I have to say it's a pretty well known address ( I should know the name of the speaker, but I'm bad with names and good with dates).  I will revert my edits, paste this dialogue onto the talk page there.  It's not a book - you probably won't be able to get it through interlibrary loan.  The AAA has a newsletter in which it publishes the proceedings of the meetings, as do nearly all academic associations.  I don't know the date of the newsletter, but it is cited in (once again) many introductory textbooks.  since you are apparently a stickler for immediate citations (rather than immediate article improvement), I'll remember that.  I work in a different manner and would prefer the article make sense first.  Trust me, the citatations are available - but it's the kind of scutwork I don't have time to do.  So, it's an issue of (once again), Wikification managing to bore and/or annoy away potential editors.Levalley (talk) 00:20, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter whether it is a well-known address or not - my point is (1) our policy, the source has to be verifiable, if it is not we cannot use it. Does the newsletter publish the contents of the address?  From what you say, we just cannot use this source as it does not meet wikipedia policy.  I don't mean to bore you, but we have policies for a reason.  Be that as it may, you still haven't explained to me how the extinction of hunter-gatherers by the 1970s means that anthropology from the 19th century to the 1960s focused primarily on etic analysis, or thouht it did.  Does the keynote address say that anthropologists from the 19th century thought they were doing etic analysis?  I just do not follow the logic.  Sorry to bore you, I really want to understand. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 00:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Clips from a discussion on another talk page; Anthropology, cultural anthropology; emic etic
On Emic/Etic:

Decided to break these terms, to show you the general notions on which I based on my edits. I do not think all these citations are needed in the article to support the simple changes I made, but here are some lecture notes/contemporary statements about the distinction (note that I didn't include phonetic/phonemic references, as it is generally understood that while Pike borrowed the terms from linguistics, he didn't keep to traditional linguistic usage, although attempts have been made to reconcile him and terms with linguistic use). Also note that since Pike coined the terms, they have acquired different usage than what he originally intended. My view on the terms is that they should be discussed on Wikipedia as they are actually used in anthropology today:

http://www.sil.org/klp/karlintv.htm (especially the second half, where it discusses how current usage branches from Pike's usage)

http://www2.eou.edu/~kdahl/emicdef.html (some has randomly lifted a definition from a cultural anthropology textbook - but note that this is a typical basic attempt at defining these words - you can find dozens and dozens of similar entries in people's anthropology pages, lecture notes, etc.)

http://www.bookrags.com/tandf/etic-vs-emic-analysis-tf/ (another online encyclopedia's attempt)

Prof. James Lett has surveyed the conflicting literature on the terms and come up with these statements on general usage:


 * Emic constructs are accounts, descriptions, and analyses expressed in terms of the conceptual schemes and categories that are regarded as meaningful and appropriate by the members of the culture under study. Am emic construct is correctly termed “emic” if and only if it is in accord with the perceptions and understandings deemed appropriate by the insider’s culture.  The validation of emic knowledge thus be- comes a matter of consensus--namely, the consensus of native informants, who must agree that the construct matches the shared perceptions that are characteristic of their culture.  Note that the particular research technique used in acquiring anthropological knowledge has nothing to do with the nature of that knowledge.  Emic knowledge can be obtained either through elicitation or through observation, because it is sometimes possible that objective ob- servers can infer native perceptions.


 * Etic constructs are accounts, descriptions, and analyses expressed in terms of the conceptual schemes and categories that are regarded as meaningful and appropriate by the community of scientific observers. An etic construct is correctly termed “etic” if and only if it is in accord with the epistemological principles deemed appropriate by science (i.e., etic constructs must be precise, logical, comprehensive, replicable, falsifiable, and observer independent).  The validation of etic knowledge thus becomes a matter of logical and empirical analysis--in particular, the logical analysis of whether the construct meets the standards of falsifiability, comprehensiveness, and logical consistency, and then the empirical analysis of whether or not the concept has been falsified and/or replicated.  Again, the particular research technique that is used in the acquisition of anthropological knowledge has no bearing on the nature of that knowledge.  Etic knowledge may be obtained at times through elicitation as well as observation, because it is entirely possible that native informants could possess scientifically valid knowledge.

I added the bolding. The article can be found here: http://faculty.ircc.edu/faculty/jlett/Article%20on%20Emics%20and%20Etics.htm

From a page on multicultural counseling, we have:


 * Etic perspective is defined as an external or outsider’s view on beliefs and customs. This can be similar to an analytical or anthropological perspective. In counseling terms it is thinking that clients are “culturally universal”. (Sue & Sue, 2003)


 * Emic perspective can be defined as an


 * insider’s view or the view from a native about their own customs and beliefs. This is when a member of a group has their own interpretation of their group opposed to an outsider’s interpretation (emic). In counseling terms it is thinking that clients are “culturally specific”. (Sue & Sue, 2003)

Sue & Sue refers to a book called "Counseling the Culturally Diverse."

From    Hahn, Christina. "Clear-Cut Concepts vs. Methodological Ritual: Etic and Emic Revisited" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Dresden International Congress Centre, Dresden, Germany, Jun 16, 2006.

The author notes that there has been confusion, especially when there are many different emic views and many different etic views. She offers the same simplification/clarification as Prof. Lett.

Thomas R. Lindlof in Blackwell's, says: "The terms also refer to distinctive research strategies, particularly in the context of ethnographic fieldwork (→ Field Research). " (http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=g9781405131995_chunk_g978140513199510_ss18-1)  I don't know if Blackwell's is considered an appropriate reference on Wikipedia, but it is widely available. Lindlof goes on to say (solving the problem of varying emic accounts):


 * Thus, the emic approach to research always starts from the “inside” of a culture. By studying the accounts, explanations, and social action that are meaningful to a group of people, researchers can better understand how symbolic communication varies from one situation to the next. A valid emic account is one that matches the consensus view of native informants....

The fact that there are varying emic OR etic accounts is today expected, and how to deal with them remains a topic of discussion - but that doesn't change the basic contemporary usage of those terms.

Lindlof's article is the International Encyclopedia of Communication, it was written in 2008.

Feel free to delete these comments from your talk page - I am keeping a copy on mine, and will put them on the relevant article pages when I get a chance.Levalley (talk) 19:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Etic analysis, hunter-gatherers and the history of anthropology

According to Marvin Harris, and other historians of anthropological theory (which give histories of data collection as well), the early history of anthropology was very much involved with the study of other cultures. By the 1930's, many anthropologists were engaged in salvage anthropology. The current article on Anthropology in Wikipedia simply assumes this to be true (note that the History of Anthropology section starts with pre-Enlightenment figures who "wrote about other cultures" as if this alone is enough to make something anthropology (many would say that it does, indeed, belong to anthropology - as etic anlaysis (study of a culture not one's own). It is almost a common sense perception that anthropology studies other cultures. Biological anthropologists go about the world collecting measurements and blood from distant peoples, etc. Most anthropologists, by the 1950's (when the first conference on Man the Hunter was held) assumed (and still assume - see Womack (Being Human), Heider (Seeing Anthropology), Ember and Ember (Cultural Anthropology, Harris's The Rise of Anthropological Theory as well as several other of his books, including Cultural Materialism and his introductory textbook, Cultural Anthropology) that hunter-gatherers are the most "different' or other-like cultures of all the types of society. Jared Diamond, for example (in an oft-quoted passage of Guns, Germas and Steel) mentions that farming was the biggest single transformation in human cultural form. The rush to study hunter-gatherers continued unabated until the 1970's (I am still looking for the citation to the Proceedings of the proper year - it might be 1971 or 1972 - and they are published in a variety of places, but I am finding them slowly on JSTOR) - prompting two more major conferences on Hunter-Gatherers, whether they still exist, etc. In the 1980's a number of revitalization movements (the Inuit come to mind first) involved former hunter-gatherers who had given up or forced to give up the lifestyle attempting to go back. I would have to find the citations on the Ju/'huansi, but they were still making attempts to hunt (called poaching by the South African government) as late as the 1990's. So, after the AAA meetings in the early 1970's, a handful of anthropologists were able to observe some (disrupted) forms of hunting and gathering in various places. But it is certainly the case that it is virtually impossible to find hunter-gatherers in the numbers that Boas was able to locate them ( a series of societies in the Pacific Northwest were all available to him for study, he actually did quite a bit of work with several of them, but considered that intensive work with one society was the way to go (his K'wa-K'wa or Kwakiutl studies). Even by the time of Mead and Benedict, it was getting hard to find Hunter-Gatherers, Mead studied mostly simple farmers. However, my claim was not that anthropologists studied "mainly" hunter-gatherers at the end of the 19th century/beginning of the 20th (although they would have liked to), but that hunter-gatherers, as a percentage of overall studies, declined steadily (along with the actual disappearance of indigeneous hunter-gatherers - a fact which is stated many times in the basic literature of cultural anthropology). My point was that anthropologists (as stated without citation in the Anthropology article) are known for studying "other cultures," and so they did - although at no point in time did they "study" only other cultures. Around the time Dell Hymes wrote Reinventing Anthropology (it's cited somewhere in one of the main anthropology articles - I find it a weak and belated contribution/popularization of themes from the 60's in anthropology, although Dell himself was a gifted anthropologist and wrote way more to support his ideas than is represented in that popularized collection), the fact that anthropologists were "inventing" urban anthropology, applied anthropology, "studying up" (Hymes himself borrowed heavily from B. Babcock's notions - and of course cites her in his book - I believe it contains an essay written by her) was well-known by the 70's. The citation using Hymes, btw, is a weak one (I will find it) as the book is a collection of essays, all of them taking somewhat different points of view on this alleged "reinvention" of anthropology, which was really a compilation of new notions expressed at AAA meetings and in articles throughout the 60's and early 70's. It's rather out of date today, I think, after more than 30 years of anthropologists studying urban societies.

At any rate, I am trying to make the Anthropology article make sense, so that the history section makes sense. The best way to do this is to quote Marvin Harris and use his seminal book, The Rise of Theory. The literature after his book makes no new additional points about ancient or Enlightenment anthropology. However, contemporary anthropology (see the talk page for comments from other readers about the lack of words about contemporary anthrpology) needs a different approach, as no one can write a history of it.

Anthropologists are known for studying "other cultures," is my main point. And that's what they mainly tried to do in the first decades of professional work. It is still done and studying "other cultures," and the preparation for it is still the main focus of top-ranked programs in graduate anthropology. You have only to look at the required training at those programs to make this point. I don't know how Wikipedia views citing university catalogs as sources, but in other articles, I see that statements are constantly made about the state of academia (which types of physics have their own programs and departments, for example) without actually referencing the university catalogs that would document the information. If I didn't make that point clear, then I did a poor edit. That doesn't change the fact that in the midsection of the Anthropology article, without citations, it is suddenly declared that certain ancients were "anthropologists" or anthropologist-like because they studied "other peoples."Levalley (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Etic analysis, hunter-gatherers and the history of anthropology
You left a long message on my talk page. I understand it, but I do not understand why you left it for me. You say your point is anthropologists generally study other cultures. Okay, where did I say that they do not? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 22:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

For example, which quote supports your claim that the existence or extinction of hunter-gatherers is relevant to the question of whether an anthropology provides an etic account or an emic account? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 22:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Etic and Emic
You left many quotes on my page. I understand them, but I do not understand why you left them for me. What did I say that contradicts any of those qhotes? Also, how do these quotes support your edits?

For example, which of the quotes you placed on my page support the following:
 * The line between etic and emic can be blurred as one makes entry into the field. Since anthropology relies heavily on participant observation as a research method, the anthropologist does participate in the observed culture, and may end up more or less inside of it (sometimes referred to as going native. Therefore, emic and etic are usually reserved for accounts that are truly fresh (beginning fieldwork produces etic perspectives) or truly insider (someone born into the particular culture or present at its founding). The terms are now standard in anthropology, with specific meanings (regardless of how they are used as word endings in other fields).

??Slrubenstein  |  Talk 22:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Outline and watchlists
Hi. Two things:

I've left some comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthropology. Let me know there if you have any questions, or just dive in.

Do you know about watchlists? If you click the "watch" tab, which is at the top of every page, it will add that page (and its associated talkpage) to your watchlist. You access the list from the "my watchlist" link at the topright. I recommend using this feature, as it helps keep track of conversations on talkpages, and track other editor's changes to articles (using the "diff" links to see what they changed). (Sorry if you already know all this ;) Quiddity (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Left panel
Hi, I've restored it to where it was before your edits - hope that helps! DuncanHill (talk) 22:01, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem - sorry I can't help more with what you are trying to do with the panel. DuncanHill (talk) 22:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I have added a possible explanation to Help desk. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Your questions on Talk:Francesco Carotta
Hi, i saw your questions on Francesco Carotta and can answer some of them. You can tell what links to a page by going to that page and then clicking the "what links here" link in the tool box on the left. In the case of Carotta, almost nothing links there

As for tags, such as NPOV (i dont think there is a fringe tag, sorry) they are not supposed to stay there, rather, they are an invitation to other editors to make improvements and correct problems. You might find wikipedia's fringe policy interesting and also might make use of the Fringe theories/Noticeboard. Hope this helps! Bonewah (talk) 13:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to add a little explanation here: if you're not familiar with the Bible Code topic area, that might be a good place to start to get a handle on what Robert Haralick is claiming. Basically, some people claim that patterns of text near each other in the Hebrew Bible predict world events or describe events in history that had not taken place at the time the Bible was created.  Researchers debunked these claims by showing that similar patterns of names, dates, etc., can be found in any large corpus of Hebrew text- they used the Hebrew versions of Moby Dick and War and Peace- and that there was nothing special about the alleged Bible codes- it's just that in any body of Hebrew text over a certain size, you're going to find these sort of things in the text just by random chance, given the volume of text and the number of different ways of searching for things.  Haralick claims that he performed experiments that show quantitative differences between the patterns found in the Bible and the patterns found in other large bodies of Hebrew text, which he claims means that the Bible 'codes' are not the product of random chance but have actual significance.
 * There is no 'fringe' tag per se; instead what we attempt to do is make sure that 1) fringe theories aren't given more attention than their actual (non)acceptance in the main stream warrants, by making sure that info from fringe sources doesn't overwhelm articles, and 2) that where fringe theories are in conflict with the scientific consensus, it's made clear that that is the case. So the best way to address fringe-y content is to add content from mainstream sources, particularly something that comments on the status of the fringe theory in the mainstream.  --Clay Collier (talk) 01:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Response to quiry
I responded to your quiry at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philosophy/Peer review. Be well, Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Peer review limits
The guidelines for Wikipedia:Peer review ask that editors nominate no more than one article per day (and four total at any one time). While the rules say that one of the requests can be removed, I will let it slide since this is the first time. Take care, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

four fields
I think you are right that we can say something like, most anthropologists divide anthropology into four fields, and there are many emerging subfields which ae generaly but not always associated with one or another field or something like that. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 17:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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 ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2009 Newsletter
The April 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Copyediting
If you aren't too busy, can you take a look at Aladdin (film) and see what needs to be copyedited? Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 21:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter
The May 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter
The June 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Group or band – which one?
We are holding a straw poll (in a very friendly way, of course) to decide if The Beatles should be called a group, or a band. You can add your user signature to one or the other by clicking this link, Group or band – which one?. Thanks.--andreasegde (talk) 00:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter
The July 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter
The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting
The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter
The September 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter
The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:03, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS November Newsletter
The November 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films December 2009 Newsletter
The December 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

BoyCapel
I did some research using Census returns and am pretty sure of his family background, but this is original research and so shouldn't be included? (A pity, because it seems he was the son and grandson of respectable Anglican vicars: the preacher's boy is always the worst, isn't he?) Served in Intelligence in WWI. Also, considering Capel and his sporting background is supposed to have influenced Chanel's styling of women's clothes, I would say in this case a photo of him would be useful, if it were more than a head portrait. Bit academic though since I've never seen a photo. RLamb (talk) 12:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added the possible family origins as a footnote to the article, referring readers to Census returns from 1901 and 1881 as checkable sources. The latter's available online so I've linked to it, and the former can be accessed, though it may not always be free access. There are some photos online but I can't use them as I don't know whether they're copyright. (He doesn't appear to be wearing a blazer in any of them anyway.) If you think the family origins stuff is too speculative just delete it.  I'll try to check it further anyway.

RLamb (talk) 18:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2010 Newsletter
The January 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2010 Newsletter
The February 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2010 Newsletter
The March 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyedit Backlog Elimination Drive
Hi, as a member of the Guild of Copy Editors you're hereby notified of and invited to participate in the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/May 2010. Please help us eliminate the 8,000+ copyedit backlog! Participating editors will receive barnstars and other awards, according to their level of participation. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Funks
Peter Funk (

The Funk (Funcke) branch of [Mennonites] was recruited into the religion in the mid 17th century, when [Heinrich Funcke], a Swiss national and native of Zurich, married a Dutch Mennonite girl and began to rise in the hierarchy of the new religion. Henry Funk rose to the level of bishop, leading the canton of Bern until the scourge of 1671 drove Mennonites out from Switzerland.

As persecution of the Mennonites grew, the Funk branches of the church spread to Heidelburg, Germany, Lithuania, and to the New World. One of

WP:FILMS April Newsletter
The April 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:53, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Graciela Casillas
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Graciela Casillas, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Graciela Casillas-Boggs. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 08:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Graciela Casillas-Boggs a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Graciela Casillas. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Hqb (talk) 09:27, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS May 2010 Newsletter
The May 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS June 2010 Newsletter
The June 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:34, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS July 2010 Newsletter
The July 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive Wrap-up
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor at 22:15, 3 August 2010 (UTC).

Should you be in need of a smile
Q: What is the difference between a conjurer and a psychologist? A: A conjurer pulls rabbits out of hats, a psychologist pulls habits out of rats.

Q: Why do cannibals not eat clowns? A: Because they taste funny.

Q: When arresting a mime in the US, do you have to say: "You have the right to remain silent? A:

From somebody who has studied philosophy and western cultural anthropology. --JHvW (talk) 21:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Logos Page Peer Review
I have recently requested a peer review of the logos page. I am hoping you might join in to help us out. I look forward to your comments! Edunoramus (talk) 13:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS August 2010 Newsletter
The August 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Nomination Period Open
The September 2010 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting five coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next year; members are invited to nominate themselves if interested. Please do not vote yet, voting will begin on September 15. This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Collier image.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Collier image.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS September 2010 Newsletter
The September 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM October 2010 Newsletter
The Octoberr 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:46, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 backlog elimination drive update
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor (talk) at 16:21, 14 November 2010 (UTC).

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM November 2010 Newsletter
The November 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 23:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC).

GOCE Year-end Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM December 2010 Newsletter
The December 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive news
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 20:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC).

WP:FILM January 2011 Newsletter
The January 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

The/the Beatles
Yes folks, it's here again. Please look at this link and leave your vote. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

GOCE January Backlog elimination drive conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 15:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC).

WP:FILM February 2011 Newsletter
The February 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM March 2011 Newsletter
The March 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM April 2011 Newsletter
The April 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:45, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM May 2011 Newsletter
The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM June 2011 Newsletter
The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. We are also seeking new members to assist in writing the newsletter, if interested please leave a note on the Outreach department's talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM July 2011 Newsletter
The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. We are also seeking new members to assist in writing the newsletter, if interested please leave a note on the Outreach department's talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:59, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM September 2011 Newsletter
The September 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:42, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

2011 WikiProject Film coordinator election
Voting for WikiProject Film's October 2011 project coordinator election has started. We are aiming to select five coordinators to serve for the next year; please take a moment from editing to vote here by October 29! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:03, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 01:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM October 2011 Newsletter
The October 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Film November 2011 Newsletter
The  2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Peppage (talk &#124; contribs) 22:41, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:56, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Film December 2011 Newsletter
The December 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Peppage (talk &#124; contribs) 22:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Film's January–February Newsletter
The January 2012 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the distribution list. GRAPPLE  X  00:41, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (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!

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list