User talk:Miniapolis/Archives/2014/May

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:24, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

GOCEreviewed template and elimination drive "scoring"
I just spent 2 hours explaining on the "Talk" page of a 344-word article (Talk:Pipe industry of Russia) why a template got stuck on the article. In this case, the rule doesn't seem fair. I'm taking credit for the article; yell at me later if you like.

[I'm writing here because I just noticed that the person who requested the review is very active on the Drive's "Talk" page]

--LukasMatt (talk) 09:05, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to make sense of all this. First of all, GOCEreviewed goes on the talk page, not the article page. The restriction on not counting articles you've tagged with does not apply if you later do a proper copyedit; in practical terms, the "proper copyedit" bar is higher for request articles. Judging by the article history you didn't do that, so I don't know why you marked the article "Done" on the requests page. IMO, the only valid reason for using  (and I use it fairly often) is if the article may later be deleted; the template has an "issues" parameter, which should be used. This page recently survived a deletion discussion (AFD is not cleanup), and I agree with DThomsen8's copyedit request; let's face it, some articles are more valuable than others and this is one of them. Copyediting is not GA review; we clean up the prose and fix whatever else we can, rather than leaving a laundry list on the talk page for the article creator(s). While you're free to skip copyediting an article of course, it's disruptive to accept a copyedit request, then refuse it for invalid reasons and mark the article "Done". WP is not a battleground. All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, we count full articles and their words (unless they're tagged with copyedit-section), not abandoned copyedits.  Mini  apolis  13:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Come on, Miniapolis--I expected better from you. I do NOT agree with the copyedit request.  I work VERY hard when I perform a copy edit (see Talk:Murder of Shanda Sharer from the current drive and Talk:Angkor I / Talk:Angkor I from the previous blitz).  Why should I work so hard when the article's author has barely made an effort?
 * I had a similar problem with an article during the previous blitz that left me with two impressions:
 * Such "lazy" people who request a copy edit are looking for someone else to do their work;
 * Interestingly enough, the "problem" requester from the blitz was also "active" on Wikipedia tasks.
 * Did you look at my comments on Talk:Pipe industry of Russia?
 * Dthomsen8 can't even write a proper citation...and Dthomsen8 is a reviewer for the May 2014 Drive?#@!
 * Dthomsen8 can't write a coherent 344-word article...and Dthomsen8 is a reviewer for the May 2014 Drive?#@!
 * Dthomsen8 wrote on the request for GOCE/REQ, "This is the first time I have made a request here"......and Dthomsen8 is a reviewer for the May 2014 Drive?#@!
 * You're right--there's a lot to make sense of here.
 * --LukasMatt (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, I did not write this article, I did not significantly update it, and you should not call me a "problem" requester. I have never done a copyright request before, and I see I am still pretty far down on the learning curve. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:51, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Then, why did you submit a copy edit request for it? It's a complete crap article.  Why should I or any other competent editor waste our time on such an article, especially when its author doesn't care enough to put effort into it?
 * ...and to Miniapolis, you should learn to distinguish between "abandoning a copy edit request" and putting 110% effort into rejecting a request. I work just as hard on a rejection as on a copy edit request that I complete.  As I previously wrote to you, I spent 2 HOURS rejecting the Pipe industry of Russia request, including lots of research on the topic and reading the article's markup code and finding appropriate Wiki pages for the lazy author to read and writing the "Talk" page instructions.  Unlike your knee-jerk reaction to my so-called "abandoning a copy edit request".
 * LukasMatt (talk) 15:08, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

A process comment from the lead coordinator of the GOCE (that's me): rejecting a copy edit Request should be done only after discussion on the Requests Talk page and confirmation from one or more of the GOCE coordinators. A lone editor, even a GOCE coordinator or other very experienced editor, should not make that decision unilaterally. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree in principle; although I don't think it's necessary to get an okay from a GOCE coordinator, it's assumed that editors copyediting requests are experienced enough to understand the need for communication and some semblance of consensus (i.e. more than one set of eyes). All the best,  Mini  apolis  22:58, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ball culture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Outcast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:52, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Kit Whitfield
You just deleted Kit Whitfield as expired prod while I was checking the backlinks. Did you see World Fantasy Award for Best Novel Agathoclea (talk) 14:14, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * There was nothing on the talk page indicating that the prod was contested. IMO a single award (several are given each year) does not mean that the subject meets WP:AUTHOR, but feel free to undelete if desired. All the best,  Mini  apolis  16:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I am unsure myself. What got my attention though was that it was an SPA placing the prod and an IP was quick to remove incoming links after you deleted the article. I leave a note at WT:FANTASY maybe they have an idea. Agathoclea (talk) 17:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Again, please feel free to recreate. All the best,  Mini  apolis  17:29, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Help with GAN changes?
I might be able to help you with GAN changes. I managed to get it to insert a "no change" line a while ago, so I've played with it a bit. What is your goal? – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jonesey; I was thinking of asking you, but what I'd like to do is minor and I figured you're busy enough :-). I'd like to eliminate word wrap on the dates (once the days get into double digits) so the chart takes up less room, but it may not be possible because of the progress graph (which can be moved above or below, of course, but I didn't see any way to resize GAN changes). Thanks again for your offer and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Glad to help! All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * My pleasure (my daughter loved the show in college :-)), and the same to you! All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Glad to help! Good luck and all the best,  Mini  apolis  14:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kizlyar-Pervomayskoye hostage crisis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:54, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=608436899 your edit] to Campuses of Keio University may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page]. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=608742364 your edit] to Apollon Grigoryev may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [{{fullurl:Apollon Grigoryev|action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+typo+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3ABracketBot%7CBracketBot%5D%5D}} edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:26, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * wide-ranging. He referred to his style of criticism as "organic", in contrast to "theorists" {{red|&#40;}} Chernishevsky, Nikolai Dobrolyubov and Dmitri Pisarev "aesthetics" and "historians" ([[

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=609281377 your edit] to Franz Fühmann may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s and 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [{{fullurl:Franz Fühmann|action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+typo+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3ABracketBot%7CBracketBot%5D%5D}} edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20{{subst :REVISIONUSER}}&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ) and a collaboration with a photographer (Was für eine Insel in was für einem Meer) about the {{red|&#91;&#91;}} Developmental disability|developmentally disabled. He also compiled a volume of poems by
 * ', Die dampfenden Hälse der Pferde im Turm von Babel) and retellings of classical literature {{red|&#40;}} Reineke Fuchs, Das Hölzerne Pferd (the Iliad and the Odyssey) and

Question about copyediting and sources
Hi, I have a copyediting related question that you may be able to help me with! I'm currently working on editing Udham Singh and I'm noticing a couple of the frequently-cited sources are by one particular author that I can't find much about. I suspect this could be a biased source or a source with a conflict of interest but have no way of knowing for sure. Is checking out these sources (and replacing them if needed) something that falls within the purview of a copyeditor? Or should I just flag sections in the article as needed and finish up the copyediting? I'm trying to decide if I should take the time to replace many or all of the possibly-questionable references with ones that I can confirm as being definitely independent. Thanks! --Hustlecat (talk) 14:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, Hustlecat, and thanks very much for your help. I just double-checked WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/How to to be sure, and while it's nice to improve sources if you have the time and inclination it's not necessary as part of a copyedit. Do as much (or as little) source-checking and -improving as you want, and tag as needed. I often tweak tags; some tags' issues have already been addressed, and other problems may become apparent during a copyedit. If an article looks like it may be deleted (for non-notability, say), don't waste your time copyediting it at all; remove the copyedit tag and add GOCEreviewed to the talk page, explaining in the "issues" parameter why it's unsuitable for a copyedit at this time. Hope this helps; it seems complicated at first, but you pick it up as you go along :-). Have fun and all the best,  Mini  apolis  23:30, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at Wikimania 2014
Hi,

Thanks for signing up for a leaflet at Wikimania 2014.

However, I noticed that you have not included the Primary webpage URL for the wikiproject. Please fill this section out as soon as possible.

Thanks.

Adikhajuria (talk) 12:32, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅; sorry for the omission. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:38, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:03, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Sally Kellerman
Thank you so much for your edits on Sally Kellerman's article; after you editing, do you think it meets GA standards? Avario87 (talk)
 * Glad to help, but I still have three sections to go plus tweaks on the tables; I should be done today, and will tag the talk page and let you know. WP:WIAGA lists the GA criteria; although there were copyright issues with images, the ones in the article now look okay. So yes, when I'm done with the copyedit I think it has a decent shot of passing a GA review. Good luck and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)