User talk:Michael Goodyear/Archive 11

2016

Your GA nomination of Taxonomy of Liliaceae
The article Taxonomy of Liliaceae you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Taxonomy of Liliaceae for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tylototriton -- Tylototriton (talk) 23:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Maculation listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Maculation. Since you had some involvement with the Maculation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:47, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Harvc again
To get the completely correct formatting of the "in" citations at Lilioid monocots, as we've discussed before, the harvc template would have to be used, because of the refusal to allow contribution without title in any of the cite/citation templates. I don't have the energy (at present anyway). Sigh... Peter coxhead (talk) 21:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I know you are a great stickler for style - more than I, but unfortunately your changes as before left a sea of problems that will take a huge effort to fix. I will investigate your point further but it seemed to work fine before you changed it. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:19, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Botanist template
I had to return to the earlier version because the live one wasn't working correctly when used inline. My experience is that it can be very tricky to stop templates adding newlines; I think that somewhere among your added comments one slipped in. I suggest only updating the sandbox version and checking the testcases before going live. Have a look at Template:Botanist/testcases now, including the generated references. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:32, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, I assure you I spent a lot of time testing before going live! Curious - I will take a peek. Yes i knew about the new line problem, but as you say, they can slip in. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js
Although User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js flags any use of or  as an error if there is nothing actually using the generated id, this is  an error. There's no policy or guidance that requires these ids to be used; indeed, any such requirement would be against policy, since it would prevent CS2 formats in bibliographies, further reading, general sources, etc., whereas it's policy to be neutral on consistent citation style. Only the first of the checks in User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js is actually an error check. The second check could be a warning note, perhaps, but certainly not an error.

This has already been raised at User talk:Ucucha/HarvErrors. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for tip off - responded there. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 22:31, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Emonocot.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Emonocot.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free 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 the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Emonocot.png
Thank you for uploading File:Emonocot.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Taxon bar
I find it very odd that the most important source for monocots, namely WCSP, isn't included in the taxon bar template when it's added to articles like Habranthus. Can you explain the value of this template to me? I really can't see it. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I thought he said he was working on that - for the time being I am adding it to taxon pages if I am editing them, as a placeholder. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 22:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Unlike taxonids the others= function is not working at the moment. I added it as an external link. The problem presumab;y is that Wikidata does not use it. I sent a request to Wikidata. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 22:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, that seems the best that you can do for now. There's also eMonocot, of course, which has the potential to be even more useful. I continue to be bothered by the lack of botanical input to the decisions made at Wikidata.
 * On the subject of eMonocot, I'm glad to see that commonsense seems to have prevailed over the logo. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I put my name forward at Wikidata. Yes eMonocot has the potential to be quite useful (see links I placed on page) and continues to grow. What a kerfuffle! And they are a collaborative scientific organisation devoted to disseminating information. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 13:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * OK: emonocot and wcsp can now be added manually, e.g. for Eithea  --Michael Goodyear (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Good! Hopefully this will be automatic at some time. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lilioid monocots
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lilioid monocots 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 Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 09:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Wow! yes - I recall it. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you recall which article it was? I would love to know. Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 16:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hippeastrum, my first GA, which I hope to take to FA one day - still tweaking it --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh yes! Don't wait to nominate it, it is in a great shape! Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 16:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well let's get Lilioids done first - I have high (obsessive) standards !
 * Ping me any time you like once you get it ready, I have much FAC experience to get it through! Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 16:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Generally when working up an article, I like to make sure all the articles in which it fits contextually are up to date - so I am doing a general upgrade of all the Amaryllidaceae pages at present, before zeroing in. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 19:09, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That is a new idea! I believe you should move on with it. Meanwhile, let me see if I can repair any issues with Hippeastrum... Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 02:19, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Referencing
Rather than add to what's supposed to be a side issue in the MOS talk, I thought I'd comment here. I was very enthusiastic about sfn and similar templates when I first found them, and gave up my earlier practice of
 * putting in the text
 * having a Bibliography for at least the main citations.

I'm wondering now if in a long article it might be better to:
 * put in the wikitext
 * expand these to in list-defined references in a reflist
 * have the full citations in a Bibliography.

This would seem to avoid the creation of long sfn's once there's a need for URLs, which is generally the case with pages of old documents at the BHL, for example.

I often get caught by old journal articles; these were regularly much longer than today, so I want to give a URL to a section, but cite journal doesn't allow any level below title – you can't have a contribution as in a book. I'm still not sure of the best way to handle such cases. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:43, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes perhaps better not to add to that! I am always experimenting but there currently is no "best way" unless one of us designs one. I recall at one stage you were enthusiastic about putting everything into a tided alphabetised reflinks= format. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it depends on the article length and complexity. For short articles where a reference isn't re-used many times at different pages/sections, I think that alphabetically ordered list-defined references work well. They don't work well for long articles with multiple use of the same source, as in the current version of Lilioid monocots. But then neither does sfn.
 * All this is, of course, secondary; writing a great article is the most important! I'm sure that Lilioid monocots is now at least GA. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:58, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Apparently it is well on its way - will keep you posted --Michael Goodyear (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I tried that in Gethyllis (ref 1) - it has to be harvnb --Michael Goodyear (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Now Gethyllidinae is the first complete page written from scratch using this compromise style - but it is more work. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:58, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lilioid monocots
The article Lilioid monocots you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lilioid monocots for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 19:41, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hippeastrinae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fimbriate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Centralized ENGVAR, DATEVAR, CITEVAR discussion
This may be of interest, since you were involved in previous discussions about these guidelines and their impact: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:25, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to our April event
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Sent by Rosiestep (talk) 13:13, 26 March 2016 (UTC) via WP:MassMessage

Orphaned non-free image File:Aloysandmarieliechstenstein.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Aloysandmarieliechstenstein.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

"Women are everywhere"
Hi Michael Goodyear. I'm an editor (not very active till now) of the Italian Wikipedia, where the gender gap is a real issue. I'm trying to participate to an IEG with the project "Women are everywhere". You will find the draft at this link https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_are_everywhere It would be great if you could have a look at it. I need any kind of suggestion or advice to improve it. Support or endorsement would be fantastic. Many thanks, --Kenzia (talk) 11:10, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Shhh! Invitation to Women in Espionage
--Rosiestep (talk) 03:54, 12 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Photography
--Rosiestep (talk) 12:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Women artists of Middle East / North Africa... a WiR & Guggenheim collaboration
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Spotlight on women entertainers!
--Rosiestep (talk) 02:14, 24 May 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Welcome to the Hall of Fame!
--Rosiestep (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage (To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Women's health
I have removed part of your addition to the above article, as it appears to have been directly copied from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs110/en/, a copyright web page. All content you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you think I may have made a mistake. — Diannaa (talk) 20:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I assure it most certainly was not copied! It was written as a distillate of numerous related sources. In fact I have not looked at your alleged source for some time, or it would have been cited. Please revert ASAP. The article is the subject of a telephone conference next week. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 11:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Accidental incorporation of text from source during browser crash detected and removed! --Michael Goodyear (talk) 14:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your patience and for quickly helping to get this sorted out. Best, — Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and United Nations Women Project
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) Delivered by Rosiestep (talk) via MassMessage 04:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Indigenous women & Polar women editathons
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

Your GA nomination of Women's health
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Women's health 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 Bluerasberry -- Bluerasberry (talk) 19:40, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Wow - I'm used to waiting several months! --Michael Goodyear (talk) 20:04, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * First instincts were correct - this was an error! --Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Women's health
I am eager to help edit this article in such a way that it could become a good article. I am completely unfamiliar with this type of referencing and have never used it at all. I don't know where to go from here. Is it possible to get up to speed on this style of referencing to improve this article in a timely manner? Best Regards,
 * Barbara (WVS) (talk) 20:00, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hullo Barbara, which particular part of the referencing style are you referring to? At the moment I am changing some of the referencing because there are just so many pages within the websites of groups like WHO and CDC that it starts to look a little clumsy in the bibliography. Those additional web pages are being gradually replaced with to simplify them. Otherwise it uses a classified bibliography linked to short footnotes (sfn). The aim is to avoid cluttering the wikitext with complicated reference tags, particularly urls.
 * Also what parts of the article are you particularly interested in? At present I am working on child marriage. Where possible I am trying to tie the next into UN MDGs and SDGs, since I have a background in international and sustainable health.--Michael Goodyear (talk) 20:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Berger (Politiker) Litho.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Berger (Politiker) Litho.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Upcoming editathons: Women in Nursing & Women Labor Activists
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

Invitation to 	 Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Nomination for deletion of Template:Anatolian themata
Template:Anatolian themata has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Constantine  ✍  09:46, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

An invitation to November's events
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women's health
Michael, I've almost completed the GA review of this article, but a couple of images need attention. I think you didn't get pinged by the GA bot as there's already a premature notice for this article above, so I'm simulating the bot as best I can... All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yikes! No I didn't - I thought we had fixed that. I had no idea you were onto this. I had better make it my top priority! --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Women's health
The article Women's health you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Women's health for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

December 2016 at Women in Red
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Taxonomy: Pelargonium zonale (Geraniaceae)
Hi Michael, i made this macro stacked image of. Looking inside, there are also derived by colors, foliage, size. Size of this flower is 25 mm in diameter, petal is around 2,5 mm (around 5-6 mm tall). Could you help me with taxonomy to select which Zonal is it. --PetarM (talk) 08:11, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Nice image but you cannot classify it just by looking at the flower. Where did you find it? --Michael Goodyear (talk) 23:44, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Michael Goodyear its in Botanical Garden, Slovenia. All what was there is Pelargonium zonale (Geraniaceae) sign, and one student to keep the place, and he would know more than that. Yeah, hard to get image, but even harder to put subspecie... so will left as P. Zonale. --PetarM (talk) 15:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Women's health
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Rossiniana
Dear Michael - I see you've helped out with formatting the Rossini bibliography in the past. I'm unsure how best to reference different chapters (several potential good RS :-) from The Cambridge Companion to Rossini, and I wondered if you might like to set the ball rolling. For example, strictly speaking I should be sourcing the statement in the lead beginning "A return to Paris from Italy in 1855 was followed by better health..." and Richard Osborne's chapter on Rossini's life would do the trick. I'm not sure what the most reader-friendly approach is...

May I also CONGRATULATE you on improving Women's health?! A much-needed and highly relevant expansion, imo. 

Best wishes, Robin 86.190.132.143 (talk) 23:12, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank's Robin, Women's Health was a labour of love, and badly needed. Rossini was a long time ago - I will take a peek.
 * I put Senici in refs and fixed the editor name Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:52, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I started your ball - see how I separated the chapters - it looks a bit rough but adding further chapters would sort that out --Michael Goodyear (talk) 04:31, 23 December 2016 (UTC)