User talk:Markworthen/Archive 3

WikiProject Numismatics newsletter - November 2019


Read the full newsletter here

Article of the Month

The euro (sign: €; code: EUR) is the official currency of 19 of the 28 member states of the European Union. This group of states is known as the eurozone or euro area, and counts about 343 million citizens as of 2019. The euro, which is divided into 100 cents, is the second-largest and second-most traded currency in the foreign exchange market after the United States dollar.

The currency is also used officially by the institutions of the European Union, by four European microstates that are not EU members, as well as unilaterally by Montenegro and Kosovo. Outside Europe, a number of special territories of EU members also use the euro as their currency. Additionally, over 200 million people worldwide use currencies pegged to the euro.

The euro is the second-largest reserve currency as well as the second-most traded currency in the world after the United States dollar. As of August 2018, with more than €1.2 trillion in circulation, the euro has one of the highest combined values of banknotes and coins in circulation in the world, having surpassed the U.S. dollar.

The name euro was officially adopted on 16 December 1995 in Madrid. The euro was introduced to world financial markets as an accounting currency on 1 January 1999, replacing the former European Currency Unit (ECU) at a ratio of 1:1 (US$1.1743). Physical euro coins and banknotes entered into circulation on 1 January 2002, making it the day-to-day operating currency of its original members, and by March 2002 it had completely replaced the former currencies. While the euro dropped subsequently to US$0.83 within two years (26 October 2000), it has traded above the U.S. dollar since the end of 2002, peaking at US$1.60 on 18 July 2008. In late 2009, the euro became immersed in the European sovereign-debt crisis, which led to the creation of the European Financial Stability Facility as well as other reforms aimed at stabilising and strengthening the currency.

On the Main Page

Today's Featured Article October 16

The McKinley Birthplace Memorial gold dollar was a commemorative coin struck by the United States Bureau of the Mint in 1916 and 1917, with the obverse designed by Mint Chief Engraver Charles E. Barber, and the reverse by his assistant, George T. Morgan. As William McKinley had appeared on a version of the 1903-dated Louisiana Purchase Exposition gold dollar, the 1916 release made him the first person to appear on two issues of U.S. coins. The coins benefitted the National McKinley Birthplace Memorial at Niles, Ohio. The issue was originally proposed as a silver dollar; this changed when it was realized it would not be appropriate to honor a president who had supported the gold standard with such a piece. The coins were poorly promoted, and did not sell well. Despite an authorized mintage of 100,000, only about 20,000 were sold, many of these at a reduced price to Texas coin dealer B. Max Mehl. Another 10,000 pieces were returned to the Mint for melting.

Picture of the Day October 13



(see more)

-

The WikiProject Numismatics newsletter is a monthly newsletter published by WikiProject Numismatics • If you have any questions about the project or numismatics in general, feel free to ask here • Discuss this newsletter here • View previous issues here New members are automatically added to the subscriber list • If you are not a member and would like to receive this newsletter, or are a member but would not like to receive future issues, you may subscribe/unsubscribe here Delivered by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 00:07, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 36
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 36, September – October 2019 
 * #1Lib1Ref January 2020
 * #1Lib1Ref 2019 stories and learnings

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Numismatics newsletter - December 2019


Read the full newsletter here

Article of the Month

The Kalākaua coinage is a set of silver coins of the Kingdom of Hawaii dated 1883, authorized to boost Hawaiian pride by giving the kingdom its own money. They were designed by Charles E. Barber, Chief Engraver of the United States Bureau of the Mint, and were struck at the San Francisco Mint. The issued coins are a dime (ten-cent piece), quarter dollar, half dollar, and dollar.

No immediate action had been taken after the 1880 act authorizing coins, but King Kalākaua was interested and government officials saw a way to get out of a financial bind by getting coins issued in exchange for government bonds. Businessman Claus Spreckels was willing to make the arrangements with the United States in exchange for profits from the coin production, and contracted with the US Mint to have $1,000,000 worth of coins struck. Originally, a 12$1/2$ cent piece was planned and a few specimens were struck, but it was scrapped in an effort to have uniformity between US and Hawaiian coins, and a dime was substituted. The coins were struck at San Francisco in 1883 and 1884, though all bear the earlier date.

The coins met a hostile reception from the business community in Honolulu, who feared inflation of the currency in a time of recession. After legal maneuvering, the government agreed to use over half of the coinage as backing for paper currency, and this continued until better economic times began in 1885. After that, the coins were more eagerly accepted in circulation. They remained in the flow of commerce on the islands until withdrawn in 1903, after Hawaii had become a US territory.

On the Main Page

Today's Featured Article November 28

The Pilgrim Tercentenary half dollar was a commemorative fifty-cent coin struck by the United States Bureau of the Mint in 1920 and 1921 to mark the 300th anniversary of the arrival of the Pilgrims in North America. It was designed by Cyrus E. Dallin. Massachusetts congressman Joseph Walsh was involved in joint federal and state efforts to mark the anniversary. He saw a reference to a proposed Maine Centennial half dollar and realized that a coin could be issued for the Pilgrim anniversary in support of the observances at Plymouth, Massachusetts. The bill moved quickly through the legislative process and became the Act of May 12, 1920, with the signature of President Woodrow Wilson. Sculptor James Earle Fraser criticized some aspects of the design, but the Treasury approved it. After a promising start, sales tailed off, and tens of thousands of coins from each year were returned to the Philadelphia Mint for melting.

Picture of the Day November 5



(see more)

-

The WikiProject Numismatics newsletter is a monthly newsletter published by WikiProject Numismatics • If you have any questions about the project or numismatics in general, feel free to ask here • Discuss this newsletter here • View previous issues here New members are automatically added to the subscriber list • If you are not a member and would like to receive this newsletter, or are a member but would not like to receive future issues, you may subscribe/unsubscribe here Delivered by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 01:33, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry XMAS!
  "And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,  I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.  For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version) Ozzie10aaaa (talk) is wishing you a  Merry Christmas. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove. Spread the cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much Ozzie10aaaa!  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)  (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 16:08, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Numismatics newsletter - January 2020


Read the full newsletter here

Article of the Month

The sovereign is a gold coin of the United Kingdom, with a nominal value of one pound sterling. Struck from 1817 until the present time, it was originally a circulating coin accepted in Britain and elsewhere in the world; it is now a bullion coin and is sometimes mounted in jewellery. In most recent years, it has borne the well-known design of Saint George and the Dragon on the reverse; the initials (B P) of the designer, Benedetto Pistrucci, are visible to the right of the date.

The coin was named after the English gold sovereign, last minted about 1603, and originated as part of the Great Recoinage of 1816. Many in Parliament believed a one-pound coin should be issued rather than the 21-shilling (1.05 pounds) guinea struck until that time. The Master of the Mint, William Wellesley Pole, had Pistrucci design the new coin, and his depiction was also used for other gold coins. Originally, the coin was unpopular as the public preferred the convenience of banknotes, but paper currency of value £1 was soon limited by law. With that competition gone, the sovereign not only became a popular circulating coin, but was used in international trade and in foreign lands, trusted as a coin containing a known quantity of gold.

The British government promoted the use of the sovereign as an aid to international trade, and the Royal Mint took steps to see that lightweight gold coins were withdrawn from circulation. From the 1850s until 1932, the sovereign was also struck at colonial mints, initially in Australia, and later in Canada, South Africa and India—they have been struck again in India since 2013 (in addition to the production in Britain by the Royal Mint) for the local market. The sovereigns issued in Australia initially carried a unique local design, but by 1887, all new sovereigns bore Pistrucci's George and Dragon design. Strikings there were so large that by 1900, about 40 per cent of the sovereigns in Britain had been minted in Australia.

With the start of the First World War in 1914, the sovereign vanished from circulation in Britain, replaced by paper money, and it did not return after the war, though issues at colonial mints continued until 1932. The coin was still used in the Middle East, and demand rose in the 1950s, which the Royal Mint eventually responded to by striking new sovereigns in 1957. It has been struck since then both as a bullion coin and, beginning in 1979, for collectors. Though the sovereign is no longer in circulation, it is still legal tender in the United Kingdom.

On the Main Page Today's Featured Article December 22

The Maryland Tercentenary half dollar was a commemorative fifty-cent piece issued by the United States Bureau of the Mint in 1934. It depicts Cecil Calvert, 2nd Baron Baltimore, on the obverse (pictured) and the coat of arms of Maryland on the reverse. The Maryland Tercentenary Commission sought a coin in honor of the 300th anniversary of the arrival of English settlers in Maryland. The state's senators introduced legislation, and it passed both houses of Congress with no opposition. A design had already been prepared by Professor Hans Schuler; it passed review by the Commission of Fine Arts, though there was controversy over whether Lord Baltimore, a Cavalier and Catholic, would have worn a collar typical of Puritans. The Commission sold about 15,000 of the full issue of 25,000 for $1 each, and thereafter discounted the price for large sales to dealers and speculators. The coins have increased in value over time, and are now valued in the low hundreds of dollars.

Picture of the Day December 11



(see more)

-

The WikiProject Numismatics newsletter is a monthly newsletter published by WikiProject Numismatics • If you have any questions about the project or numismatics in general, feel free to ask here • Discuss this newsletter here • View previous issues here New members are automatically added to the subscriber list • If you are not a member and would like to receive this newsletter, or are a member but would not like to receive future issues, you may subscribe/unsubscribe here Delivered by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 18:00, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed Equality Act draft revisions
Hi Markworthen! I hope all is well. I finally made some draft edits for Equality Act (United States) on its Talk Page that I think should be added to article and I would like your feedback on Talk:Equality Act (United States). Thank you! -TenorTwelve (talk) 06:32, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 09:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:National Association of Scholars. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. ''Specifically " It seems that some editors want to persuade the reader to adopt a particular opinion about NAS, rather than presenting objective information about the organization and letting the reader draw his/her/their own conclusions." That's also a misunderstanding of WP:NPOV. '' Doug Weller  talk 09:44, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Doug Weller - I did not write anything on Talk:Stefan Molyneux - I think you are referring to our discussion at Talk:National Association of Scholars.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  14:55, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was a copy-paste error which I've fixed. Doug Weller  talk 16:07, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I thought it might have been something like that. No problem. Thank you for the fast response.  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  17:50, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States has been completed.

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

Best of luck with the GA process.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:58, 24 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you Twofingered Typist!  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  19:54, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 37
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 37, November – December 2019 
 * #1Lib1Ref
 * Wikimedia and Libraries User Group

Read the full newsletter On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Numismatics newsletter - February 2020


Read the full newsletter here

Article of the Month

The Coinage Act of 1873 or Mint Act of 1873, 17 Stat. 424, was a general revision of the laws relating to the Mint of the United States. In abolishing the right of holders of silver bullion to have their metal struck into fully legal tender dollar coins, it ended bimetallism in the United States, placing the nation firmly on the gold standard. Because of this, the act became contentious in later years, and was denounced by some as the "Crime of '73".

By 1869, the Mint Act of 1837 was deemed outdated, and Treasury Secretary George Boutwell had Deputy Comptroller of the Currency John Jay Knox undertake a draft of a revised law, which was introduced into Congress by Ohio Senator John Sherman. Due to the high price of silver, little of that metal was presented at the Mint, but Knox and others foresaw that development of the Comstock Lode and other rich silver-mining areas would lower the price, causing large quantities of silver dollars to be struck and the gold standard to be endangered. During the almost three years the bill was pending before Congress, it was rarely mentioned that it would end bimetallism, though this was not concealed. Congressmen instead debated other provisions. The legislation, in addition to ending the production of the silver dollar, abolished three low-denomination coins. The bill became the Act of February 12, 1873, with the signature of President Ulysses S. Grant.

When silver prices dropped in 1876, producers sought to have their bullion struck at the Mint, only to learn that this was no longer possible. The matter became a major political controversy that lasted the remainder of the century, pitting those who valued the deflationary gold standard against those who believed free coinage of silver to be necessary for economic prosperity. Accusations were made that the passage of the act had been secured through corruption, though there is little evidence of this. The gold standard was explicitly enacted into law in 1900, and was completely abandoned by the U.S. in 1971.

On the Main Page Today's Featured Article January 11

The Lexington-Concord Sesquicentennial half dollar is a fifty-cent piece struck by the United States Bureau of the Mint in 1925 as a commemorative coin in honor of the 150th anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord. It was designed by Chester Beach. Members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation introduced legislation in 1924 to authorize a commemorative half dollar for the anniversary. The bill passed both houses of Congress and was signed by President Calvin Coolidge. Beach had to satisfy committees from both Lexington and Concord, and the Commission of Fine Arts passed the design only reluctantly, feeling he had been given poor materials to work with. The coins were sold for $1, and were vended at the anniversary celebrations in Lexington and in Concord; they were sold at banks across New England. Although just over half of the authorized mintage of 300,000 was struck, almost all the coins that were minted were sold. Depending on condition, they are catalogued in the hundreds of dollars.

Picture of the Day January 13



(see more)

-

The WikiProject Numismatics newsletter is a monthly newsletter published by WikiProject Numismatics • If you have any questions about the project or numismatics in general, feel free to ask here • Discuss this newsletter here • View previous issues here New members are automatically added to the subscriber list • If you are not a member and would like to receive this newsletter, or are a member but would not like to receive future issues, you may subscribe/unsubscribe here Delivered by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 17:16, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Gender dysphoria article
You were WP:Bold, and were reverted. Do not WP:Edit war. I'm taking this to the talk page. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:31, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your characterization, but let's discuss on the Talk page. I already created a new section.  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  05:34, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Regarding this and it being posted to other WikiProjects, the "controversy" part of your heading is not neutral. See WP:APPNOTE. What controversy? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

March Madness 2020
G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

 * please help translate this message into your local language via meta

Thanks again :-) --  Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Numismatics newsletter - April 2020


Read the full newsletter here

Stub Article of the Month

The Big Maple Leaf (BML) is a set of six $1 million (CAD) gold coins each weighing 100 kg (3,215 troy ounces). They were produced by the Royal Canadian Mint (RCM) in 2007, at their Ottawa facility where the first BML produced remains in storage. , the market value of a single Big Maple Leaf had reached approximately $4 million (USD). On 27 March 2017, one of the coins was stolen from a Berlin museum.

On the Main Page Today's Featured Article February 2

The San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge half dollar is a fifty-cent piece struck by the United States Bureau of the Mint in 1936 as a commemorative coin. One of many commemoratives issued that year, it was designed by Jacques Schnier and honors the opening of the Bay Bridge that November. One side of the coin depicts a grizzly bear, a symbol of California, and the other shows the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge, with the Ferry Building. Congress passed authorizing legislation for the coin in 1936. Schnier's models were approved and the coins were struck at the San Francisco Mint. Just over 70,000 coins were sold, by mail, in person, and from booths at the Bay Bridge's approaches, making it the first commemorative coin to be sold on a drive-in basis. The coins were taken off sale in February 1937, with the unsold remainder returned to the Mint for redemption and melting. The Bay Bridge half dollar catalogs in the low hundreds of dollars, depending on condition.

Picture of the Day March 20



(see more)

-

The WikiProject Numismatics newsletter is a monthly newsletter published by WikiProject Numismatics • If you have any questions about the project or numismatics in general, feel free to ask here • Discuss this newsletter here • View previous issues here New members are automatically added to the subscriber list • If you are not a member and would like to receive this newsletter, or are a member but would not like to receive future issues, you may subscribe/unsubscribe here Delivered by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:57, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual has been accepted
 M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=M21-1_Adjudication_Procedures_Manual help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! AugusteBlanqui (talk) 18:15, 4 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much AugusteBlanqui for reviewing the article and for your kind words—much appreciated! All the best  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  18:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Being analysed
Hi - just following up on the point you made about editors being analysed by that AfD tool. Sorry if I wasn't clear - the point I was trying to make is that there is a massive database with all of everybody's edits in there, and the data it stores is freely available. There are all sorts of tools that allow you to analyse edits - whether that's evaluating AfD votes, looking at the pages you edit most frequently, looking at how you edit, when you edit, and even your level of interactions with specific other editors. You shouldn't feel like there's some creepy AI constantly monitoring you and analysing what you are doing, but you should be aware that there are lots of tools that people can run to query the database and find stuff out about an editor's behaviour.

On the other point you made, I'm not sure there would be any benefit to codifying the rules around suitability for different permissions. There are quite a few factors that admins might want to consider, and different admins probably weight them differently based on their own experiences. Something that I would give a lot of weight to in an AfC reviewer, as well as knowledge of policy, is civility and willingness to communicate. You could have a 100% hit rate at AfD, but if you routinely decline drafts without bothering to explain why, or just tell the newb editor 'This is crap', I'd pull the perm immediately. The same would apply if we suspected that someone was accepting promotional AfC drafts and publishing them in mainspace in return for financial gain - that happens, more often than it should, and always leads to an unceremonious indef block for UPE. So, yeah - I wouldn't spend too long putting together proposals for codifying what often comes down to a 'sniff test', if you see what I mean. Girth Summit  (blether) 16:06, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Very helpful - thank you! - Mark D Worthen PsyD  (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  20:56, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Desktop improvements prototype
, Markworthen!

Thanks for taking the time to participate in the user feedback round for our desktop improvements prototype. This feedback is super valuable to us and is currently being used to determine our next steps. We have published a report gathering the main takeaways from the feedback and highlighting the changes we’ll make based on this feedback. Please take a look and give us your thoughts on the talk page of the report. To learn more about the project overall and the other features we’re planning on building in the future, check out the main project page.

SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 12:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Jobsworths, etc.
Hi Markworthen,

I now realise that "jobsworth" is an almost exclusively British word. Probably with good reason. On my one visit to the US, and in the course of numerous calls to support lines for US businesses, I have received much better service than I would expect in England.

As for replying on a talk page: I would prefer to write immediately below the posting that I'm replying to, with one more level of indentation, as you did. But if someone else has already responded like that, I'd make my way down to immediately below all responses to the message I'm responding to and the responses to them etc., and still use the same level of indentation that I would have done. Maproom (talk) 09:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much. All the best  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  19:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Issue 38, January – April 2020
 The Wikipedia Library <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Books & Bytes

Issue 38, January – April 2020 <div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em">
 * New partnership
 * Global roundup

Read the full newsletter On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hampton, Virginia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Langley Speedway ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Hampton%2C_Virginia check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Hampton%2C_Virginia?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Wow. Than means a lot me James. Thank you very much. - Mark D Worthen PsyD  (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  22:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States 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 CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 03:21, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States
Hello, I saw your page explaining the various reviews that have been conducted on the article and thought I would check in with you here before starting the review. I think that the article looks great and have just a couple of thoughts to run by you.
 * I think it would be good to mention in the intro what PTSD means.
 * Similarly, it would be good to move the PTSD subsection out of the VA disability benefits for PTSD section. In fact, I am not understanding the grouping of subsections there, but this should be able to be addressed quickly. It seems to me that History could be pulled out of this section... with these placed in their own sections before the VA disability benefits for PTSD section.
 * It would be nice to understand why there is overciting in some places.

Basically, I consider these minor issues. I am seeing that the content is well-written and should be an otherwise easy review.

This is a bit outside the norm for articles I work on (out of choice), but I was a Health Care and Benefits consultant - and the daughter of a disabled veteran so I feel up to this review.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much! You have a great background for this article IMHO. :) I will get to work straight away to make the changes you recommend, all of which make very good sense to me.  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  02:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Excellent. I think I will go ahead and start the GA review page...and I will likely start on the review tomorrow... or when you are ready. I am not meaning to push.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:12, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I made several edits consistent with your (very helpful) recommendations (diff). I'll post a couple of brief explanatory notes here in a bit, but I wanted you to know that the main editing you suggested has been accomplished. :)  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  12:45, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The section titled, PTSD C&P Exam contains more citations than usual, but for good reasons.


 * (1) The second sentence that begins, "The definition of "VA psychologist or psychiatrist" ...." contains 7 references because:


 * (a) What constitutes a "VA psychologist or psychiatrist" is a frequent point of confusion. Most folks assume that these mental health clinicians are VA staff members. But in reality VA is gradually privatizing C&P exams, and it is more likely these days that a veteran will see a "VA psychologist or psychiatrist" who is in private practice working under contract for one of the MDE companies who in turn contract with VBA to conduct the exams. As you can see, it's a bit complicated and confusing not only for veterans but also policy-makers, attorneys, family members of veterans, veterans advocates, and the general public. and


 * (b) Many people want to know "who is QTC?" "why is LHI calling me", and similar (I've done Google Trends and Google count searches on such questions in the past and can do some again if it would be helpful.)  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  15:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I made some more edits to trim excessive citations (diff).  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  15:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Okay. Sounds good. If there is a reason for the extra citations, I am good... and appreciate that you have trimmed them where possible / able.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The subsection Concerns about reliability also contains more citations than usual, although I removed several.


 * Although this is not a controversial article (as far as I know) the subsection Concerns about reliability is at least potentially controversial. In many instances the Department of Veterans Affairs does not comment on journal articles that criticize the agency's policies and procedures regarding PTSD C&P exams. Where the agency has objected in writing, I have tried to always include those citations. I have sought to describe the controversy without "teaching the controversy". Since this section is potentially controversial I have provided more citations than usual, along the lines of "attribute each sentence, not just a paragraph".  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  16:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * This sentence, under the "false positive and false negative conclusions" image/table, will benefit from a brief explanation.
 * "An empirical study published in 2017 suggested C&P examiner racial bias might have led to an increased rate of 'false negative'[76] conclusions (regarding PTSD diagnosis and service connection) for Black veterans, and a high rate of 'false positive'[77] conclusions for White veterans.[78] This finding corresponds with past research[79][80], subsequent research,[81] and legal scholarship[82] discussing the potential for implicit racial biases on the part of mental health clinicians in general, and C&P psychologists and psychiatrists in particular."
 * (i)The fact that some C&P examiners probably have implicit racial biases that affect their perception of Black veterans and influences their interpretations of interview responses and behavior (e.g., demeanor), is controversial in the sense that many people don't want to believe it. I cannot cite a reference to support that statement specifically for C&P examiners, although there's a lot of research showing how true it is for people generally, and health professionals in particular. Anecdotally, I know from talking with many White C&P examiners (I am also White) that they doubt these implicit bias findings. In fact I've been shocked at how many White examiners seem to minimize these research results, often exhibiting (it seems to me) a bias blind spot—believing that I am less biased than my peers. (I phrased that in first person to emphasize that I believe I am just as susceptible to the blind spot bias as anyone else.)
 * I will look at this when I get to it. I so understand what you mean about a blind spot. It's amazing how many social cues we pickup from various sources that affect our perceptions without being aware. I attended a very interesting weekend workshop once about determining where we sit on the racially biased to anti-racist continuum - and how our behaviors put us there - particularly when we / I am not performing anti-racist behavior / responses. I digress.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:50, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * (ii) I wikilinked and referenced "false negative" and "false positive" because the terms are not readily comprehended by most people, and relatedly, to provide sufficient explanations of the terms immediately below the image of the 4x4 table that uses the terms.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  16:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:50, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States
The article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States 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:Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 00:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I very much appreciate your thorough, conscientious GA review. I started responding and will continue to respond over the next 1–2 days.  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  01:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, it's my pleasure. Sounds good!–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft: accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy
Hi Mark, Biogeographist tagged you in AEDP talk. I hoping it’s alright that I contact you directly. I’ve been working on the Aedp article since 2015. 2016 it was published but then in 2017 it was taken offline. All the reasons are clear in the talk page. I submitted April 27, 2020 and it was declined for same reason of not neutral point of view. I revised considerably but I don’t want to risk resubmitting without someone within Wikipedia giving a green light. I attempted to address every issue: I used every Third party references that there is. I used original references only when absolutely necessary. I included a critique section. I hope you can help. Thank you. Carrie Carrieruggieri (talk) 11:12, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I did read the current version of the article and most of the history. My initial impression was the same as the AfC editor who declined to publish the article. But I'll take another look and offer some suggestions.  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  23:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States
The article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I am not sure why this shows as a fail. I posted an issue here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries, I'm sure someone will figure out the problem. ¶ I found the wikitext (below) on Template talk:GANotice. It works fine. Is there a requirement to use Legobot to keep track of nominations and results? ¶ Thank you for all your hard work on improving this article!
 * "The article Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States you nominated as a good article has passed [[Image:Symbol support vote.png|25px]], see Talk:Veterans benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder in the United States for comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations."
 * All the best  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  23:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It seems that it's a bug and if there is a failed GA, the information needs to be put into article history and then the bot will work correctly.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Markworthen/Frontiers in Psychiatry
I moved this page to User:Markworthen/Frontiers in Psychiatry - assuming you meant to create it in your userspace. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 01:54, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes! Thank you so much for correcting my blunder. :)  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  02:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

GOCE June newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC).

Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020
<div style = "color: #936c29; font-size: 4em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> The Wikipedia Library <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Books & Bytes

Issue 39, May – June 2020 <div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em">
 * Library Card Platform
 * New partnerships
 * ProQuest
 * Springer Nature
 * BioOne
 * CEEOL
 * IWA Publishing
 * ICE Publishing
 * Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:27, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 13:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi!
Thanks for responding! I left the question on the page itself because I'm having trouble navigating the talk pages (I'm not used to it and find it very confusing) and I'm trying to get it seen by people who might want to be interviewed. So far, leaving messages on talk pages has not been working out too well-- but thank you for the tip! Hgiardina (talk) 23:42, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiLoop Battlefield new name vote
Dear Markworthen,

Thank you for your interest and contributions to WikiLoop Battlefield. We are holding a voting for proposed new name. We would like to invite you to this voting. The voting is held at m:WikiProject_WikiLoop/New_name_vote and ends on July 13th 00:00 UTC.

xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 05:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Numismatics newsletter - July 2020
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#606060; background-color:#f8f8f8; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">

Read the full newsletter here

Article of the Month

Operation Bernhard was an exercise by Nazi Germany to forge British bank notes. The initial plan was to drop the notes over Britain to bring about a collapse of the British economy during the Second World War. The first phase was run from early 1940 by the Sicherheitsdienst (SD) under the title Unternehmen Andreas (Operation Andreas, Operation Andrew). The unit successfully duplicated the rag paper used by the British, produced near-identical engraving blocks and deduced the algorithm used to create the alpha-numeric serial code on each note. The unit closed in early 1942 after its head, Alfred Naujocks, fell out of favour with his superior officer, Reinhard Heydrich.

The operation was revived later in the year; the aim was changed to forging money to finance German intelligence operations. Instead of a specialist unit within the SD, prisoners from Nazi concentration camps were selected and sent to Sachsenhausen concentration camp to work under SS Major Bernhard Krüger. The unit produced British notes until mid-1945; estimates vary of the number and value of notes printed, from £132.6 million up to £300 million. By the time the unit ceased production, they had perfected the artwork for US dollars, although the paper and serial numbers were still being analysed. The counterfeit money was laundered in exchange for money and other assets. Counterfeit notes from the operation were used to pay the Turkish agent Elyesa Bazna—code named Cicero—for his work in obtaining British secrets from the British ambassador in Ankara, and £100,000 from Operation Bernhard was used to obtain information that helped to free the Italian leader Benito Mussolini in the Gran Sasso raid in September 1943.

In early 1945 the unit was moved to Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp in Austria, then to the Redl-Zipf series of tunnels and finally to Ebensee concentration camp. Because of an overly precise interpretation of a German order, the prisoners were not executed on their arrival; they were liberated shortly afterwards by the American Army. Much of the output of the unit was dumped into the Toplitz and Grundlsee lakes at the end of the war, but enough went into general circulation that the Bank of England stopped releasing new notes and issued a new design after the war. The operation has been dramatised in a comedy-drama miniseries Private Schulz by the BBC and in a 2007 film, The Counterfeiters (Die Fälscher).

On the Main Page Today's Featured Article April 29

The Hudson Sesquicentennial half dollar is a fifty-cent piece struck by the United States Bureau of the Mint in 1935 as a commemorative coin. The coin was designed by Chester Beach. Its obverse depicts the Half Moon, flagship of Henry Hudson, after whom the city of Hudson is named. In addition to showing the ship, the coin displays a version of the Hudson city seal, with Neptune riding a whale, a design that has drawn commentary. Although the city of Hudson was a relatively small municipality, legislation to issue a coin in honor of its 150th anniversary went through Congress without opposition and was signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, becoming the Act of May 2, 1935. Most of the coins were likely bought by coin dealers, leaving few for collectors, with the result that prices spiked from the $1 cost at the time of issue. This caused collector anger, but did not lower the coin's value, which has continued to increase in the 80-plus years since it was struck.

Picture of the Day April 13



(see more)

-

The WikiProject Numismatics newsletter is a monthly newsletter published by WikiProject Numismatics • If you have any questions about the project or numismatics in general, feel free to ask here • Discuss this newsletter here • View previous issues here New members are automatically added to the subscriber list • If you are not a member and would like to receive this newsletter, or are a member but would not like to receive future issues, you may subscribe/unsubscribe here Delivered by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 20:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Space Launch System on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 07:31, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Announcing WikiLoop DoubleCheck
Dear Wikipedians and contributors, the open source Wikipedia review tool, previously "WikiLoop Battlefield" has completed its name vote and is announcing its new name: WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Read the full story on the program page on Meta-wiki, learn about ways to support this tool, and find out what future developments are coming for this tool.

Thank you to everyone who took part in the vote!

xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 18:26, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Guideline on Medical Advice
In the period 22-24 April 2018 you contributed to a discussion on the subject of the Reference desk guidelines. See Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/Archive 130.

This subject is now being discussed again in a Request for Comment at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/Guidelines/Medical advice. You may wish to contribute to the discussion. <i style="color: green;">Dolphin</i> ( t ) 13:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:National Rally&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 22:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alcoholism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DSM.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Gender preferences
Just a quick note to say that if we express our gender-labelling preferences in Special:Preferences, then the selection is available to everyone typically through templates like they. So: Of course, you can just preview using the template the first time you want to use a third-person pronoun and then use the appropriate form to refer to them without worrying about misgendering anyone or using awkward constructions. Hope you find that helpful. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 01:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * → they
 * → they
 * → they
 * → they
 * I did not know that! Thank you so much RexxS!  - Mark D Worthen PsyD   (talk)   (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.)  15:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Join the RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck
Hi , you are receiving this message because you are an active user of WikiLoop DoubleCheck. We are currently holding a Request for Comments to define trust levels for users of this tool. If you can spare a few minutes, please consider leaving your feedback on the RfC page. Thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts. Your opinion matters greatly! María Cruz

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC) If you would like to modify your subscription to these messages you can do so here.

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Joe Biden sexual assault allegation&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 15:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter – September 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 02:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the United States&#32; on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 17:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 40
<div style = "color: #936c29; font-size: 4em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> The Wikipedia Library <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Books & Bytes

Issue 40, July – August 2020 <div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em">
 * New partnerships
 * Al Manhal
 * Ancestry
 * RILM
 * #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
 * AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:2020 United States presidential election&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 01:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Amaranta Osorio
Hi, Markworthen, I appreciate a lot your feedback on how to improve the article. I have used a lot of sources to support much of the data. Regarding the style I do not know exactly where I am very enthusiastic or not neutral. As this is a collaborative encyclopedia I ask you to point out where or what phrases can be said differently. I have developed the article in Spanish and French, of course with the help of other wikipedians. If you can mark me or help me in the writing I appreciate it, because my first language is not English but Spanish. --DamAzul (talk) 16:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC)--DamAzul (talk) 16:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - October 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 00:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Hindutva&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 17:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:MED Newsletter - November 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 20:56, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you so much for the star and very kind words - much appreciated. Best--Iztwoz (talk) 09:38, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion about First Lady and Second Gentleman-designate titles in infoboxes of Jill Biden and Doug Emhoff
Please join a discussion here regarding whether the terms "First Lady of the United States Designate" and "Second Gentleman of the United States Designate" should be in the infoboxes of Jill Biden and Doug Emhoff, spouses of the president-elect and vice president-elect, respectively. We need to come to a consensus. Thank you for your participation. cookie monster (2020)  755  21:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 41
<div style = "color: #936c29; font-size: 4em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> The Wikipedia Library <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Books & Bytes

Issue 41, September – October 2020 <div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em">
 * New partnership: Taxmann
 * WikiCite
 * 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

New, simpler RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck
HI , I'm writing to let you know we have simplified the RfC on trust levels for the tool WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Please join and share your thoughts about this feature! We made this change after hearing users' comments on the first RfC being too complicated. I hope that you can participate this time around, giving your feedback on this new feature for WikiLoop DoubleCheck users. Thanks and see you around online, María Cruz MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC) If you would like to update your settings to change the wiki where you receive these messages, please do so here.

Voting
Voting is generally a poor way to write the lead of an article. Would you please consider not having a support/oppose section on the RFC? Plain old iterative discussion is likely to be more effective. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:43, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you WhatamIdoing - I very much respect your opinion. I started an RfC to initiate more discussion as past discussions were limited to only a few editors. What would have been a better way to engage more editors in the discussion? I will also seriously consider your suggestion - just signing on, so I'm off to look at the RfC now. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 17:42, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Starting an RFC is a fine idea. The problem is that if you start an RFC with a section that says , then you're asking people to reduce their opinions and suggestions to a binary choice.  This is okay if you're asking a yes/no question, , but how to phrase something, or which of the many definitions to present first, isn't a yes/no question.
 * The most popular formatting choice is just to ask the question and not add any ===Subsections===. They're usually unnecessary. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:28, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, silly me, of course! What you write makes great sense. Thank you very much. - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 23:38, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Mark, if you hadn't already seen this: WP:Requests for comment/Example formatting. Kolya Butternut (talk) 03:42, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I had not seen that Kolya Butternut. Thank you! - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 20:04, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem, and if you lack orginality like me, copy everyone else: WP:Requests for comment/All. Kolya Butternut (talk) 21:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - December 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 01:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open
G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

 * Thank you so much Ozzie10aaaa! You made my day. :0) - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 19:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing
G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

How can I ask for expert help on an economics article?
Hi ! I'm editing an article about the European Monetary System and there's a statement that I think may be wrong. I have looked around a little bit online but it's all Greek to me. Can I tag editors who are economists on the talk page of the article? Can I use Category:Wikipedian economists or something to tag members of the Wikipedian economist category in the talk page? Thanks! TheMadDesperado (talk) 19:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, good questions. Yes, you can tag editors who are economists on the talk page of the article. I don't know the answer to your second question, but I bet the folks at the Teahouse will know! All the best - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 22:15, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - January 2021
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:49, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Amendment to the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 14:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 42
<div style = "color: #936c29; font-size: 4em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> The Wikipedia Library <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Books & Bytes

Issue 42, November – December 2020 <div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em">
 * New EBSCO collections now available
 * 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
 * Library Card input requested
 * Libraries love Wikimedia, too!

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - February 2021
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - March 2021
Ajpolino (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 42
<div style = "color: #936c29; font-size: 4em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> The Wikipedia Library <span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Books & Bytes

Issue 42, January – February 2021 <div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em">
 * New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
 * 1Lib1Ref
 * Library Card

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiLoop 2020 Year in Review
Dear editors, developers and friends:

Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.

Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!

María Cruz MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Ramapough Lenape Nation
Good evening. I see that you suggest the Ramapough Lenape Nation page is not written from a neutral point of view? May i ask how can you make facts be neutral, unless youre suggesting to add some of the inaccuracies to it. I would like to work with you on this if possible and since i am a Ramapough Tribal member, a tribal historian, and a Commissioner of Indian Affair for the State of New Jersey, I am qualified to answer any and all questions. Looking forward to your reply. Ramapoughnative (talk) 03:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind message. First, please let me know if you are thoroughly familiar with the most relevant Wikipedia policies, which I list below, as I do not want to tell you things you already know. This is a quote from Core content policies:

Wikipedia's content is governed by three principal core content policies: neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research. Editors should familiarize themselves with all three, jointly interpreted:


 * 1) Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV) – All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately and without bias.


 * 1) Verifiability (WP:V) – Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source. In Wikipedia, verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that information comes from a reliable source.


 * 1) No original research (WP:NOR) – Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not clearly advanced by the sources.


 * Also, be aware that many editors will probably question your involvement with the article because of Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. You will notice that I have not raised this objection because I believe that people involved in an issue often bring important knowledge and perspective to articles, and we (Wikipedia) should balance that fact with the potential for bias due to a conflict of interest. But that's just my personal opinion.


 * So if you would be so kind as to let me know something like, "Yes, I am very familiar with the Wikipedia policies you mentioned", or words to that effect, then let's go from there.


 * All the best - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 16:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes i am familiar with Wikipedia's policies you mentioned. Ive been on Wiki for almost 20 years. All posts have documented verifiable sources, usually written by 1st hand accounts or by professionals in that field and at that time were available online. I'm curious about what you would consider a neutral point of view. This wouldn't include speculation and 1st person fairytales that are not backed by verifiable research, correct? Most history about the Ramapough before 1900 is derogatory, not from scientific basis but superstition. We also have Cohen who thinks of himself as a modern day "historian", but his college thesis about the Ramapough was highly inaccurate, almost to the point of a slander suit. His college professor also disagreed with his thesis and he is in the minority with his views. We have a few historians and we're working with a few Rutgers College professors to go back thru our history and find factual sources. I would like to include NPOV rule: 'In a neutral representation, the content is constructed in such a way none of the pertinent differing points of view are prominently presented. Wikibooks content needs to be based in facts not falsehoods, opinions or judgments.' Where would you like to begin? Ramapoughnative (talk) 03:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, thank you. Let's discuss on the article's talk page. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 03:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 18:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 21:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive and create a worklist at WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - April 2021
Ajpolino (talk) 02:24, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Al-Qaeda&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 05:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Queering Wikipedia 2021 User Group Working Days: May 14–16
The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.

We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.

More information, and registration details, at QW2021 .--Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group 02:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)