User talk:Neelix/Archive 18

re: ProtoGalaxy
I will try to review it this weekend. Cheers. --Niwi3 (talk) 00:34, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Soviet divisions template
Hi Neelix, thank you for your hard work on this but you may not be fully aware of the scope of Soviet divisions in general. This ru:Шаблон:Стрелковые дивизии СССР is the list of Soviet infantry divisions only, for the Second World War only. An approximate count would be five hundred regular rifle divisions, many formed twice or thrice during the war (or up to four times), a hundred and third odd Guards Rifle divisions, a hundred cavalry divisions, at least fifty artillery divisions, and dozens of anti-aircraft divisions etc. Then there are the two hundred motor rifle divisions, fifty-sixty tank divisions, maybe fifteen artillery divisions, fifty plus mechanised divisions, twenty or thirty Strategic Rocket Forces divisions, and sundry others postwar. This excludes Aviation Division which has a list of two hundred or so air divisions. Take a look at List of Soviet Union divisions for a semi-complete list of Second World War divisions only. Thus would you mind considering taking down your list until at least some of the redlinks are installed? Kind regards and many thanks, Buckshot06 (talk) 02:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Secondly, would you mind explaining why you merged the 1989-91 divisions with the list of divisions circa 1917-1957? There are, for example, two completely different sets of tank divisions, with different organisational inspirations (the theorising of the 1930s and the actual experience of the Great Patriotic War/Second World War), not to mention a enormous amount of additional information to be added to the subpages. If you wish to make major changes to this type of specialist page, would you kindly please at least check with WP:MILHIST where those who have expertise on this type of thing gather on wikipedia?

Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 02:25, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * On your first point, there is, in my view, no need for a navbox at all. The category system works just fine. The enormous size of the navboxes generated are merely confirmation in my view that we should stick to categories - none of them are orphans simply because they don't have navboxes. They're linked by the references in each article, primarily, to the armies, corps, and operational groups that supervised them (for the World War II articles) and the myriad of other internal links.
 * Secondly, the reason that articles dealing with large subjects are sub-divided is because of our WP:SIZE article subdivisions. This is why List of infantry divisions of the Soviet Union 1917-1957 exists: because we split it from the original List of Soviet Union divisions. The 'sub' articles that we're discussing are all well above the 70-100kB split size that is normally utilised. In addition, I'm interested in your use of the term 'unencyclopedic': would you like to kindly explain on what basis you make this judgement? Buckshot06 (talk) 06:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thirdly, would you also mind explaining why you removed the *vital* source data explanation at the top of the 1989-91 divisions list? It's impossible to do proper further research to expand and place the data on a more sound footing of verificable scholarly sources if you remove the source notes !! Buckshot06 (talk) 06:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Fourthly, if you want a mainlink for a template covering World War II, that was what 'List of Soviet divisions 1917-1957' was intended to do: that *covers* that historical period until the next major evolution in Soviet Ground Forces' force structure!! Buckshot06 (talk) 06:22, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)
Books & Bytes Sign up for monthly delivery Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world. Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations... Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...  Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...  Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...   Read Books & Bytes , 16:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Watchlist and notifications question
Hi Neelix, I am having problems with my Watchlist and notification set up. Up until last Sunday I was receiving email notifications anytime a change was made to any article on my Watchlist. This past week I have been checking my email daily, but saw not Wiki notifications for article changes. Due to other work, I haven't had much time to work on Wikipedia until night. I went into my Watchlist and found out that a great deal of changes had been made to several articles on my Watchlist, yet I did not receive any notifications of these changes. I have already checked my settings on Wikipedia and nothing has been changed. When I have a few minutes free at work, I try to check my school email, mostly to see if there are any Wiki changes. I don't usually have time until I get home to go on Wikipedia itself. As such, these notifications are really important and have been a great reminder system up until now. Please advise!!!! Thanks,Madscientist2007 (talk) 02:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Formatting question
Hi Neelix, I have another question for you. This time it has to do with a formatting change that was proposed by one of my classmates. The same classmate then wrote back later with a concern regarding his proposed changed and suggested that I contact an OA. Please see below:

Here is the idea: When the article opens up, most of what I see is a super long "contents box" that kind of overwhelms me. And, as I scroll through the article, I hit the major sections, sub-sections, and sub-sub-sections and I can't really tell what is a "sub-section" and what is a "sub-sub-section". (If I look real close, I can see that the font size is very slightly smaller, but it is hard to tell.) So, one idea is the make the sub-sub-sections just "indented bullets". This will help to visually separate sub-sections from sub-sub-sections and also will take the sub-sub-sections out of the contents box (making it much shorter). To illustrate this, I did a copy/paste of part of your article into my "sandbox3". Click this link to get to it: Jim892/sandbox3  Good luck thinking through this. Note that I replaced the sub-sub-sections (that have 4 equal signs on each side) with a "*" at the beginning of the line and then bolded the sub-sub-section text. Then, I added two ":" at the beginning of each block of text below the sub-sub-section. The editing required to do the indenting is a little tedious, but might be worth it for the visual effect.

Here is the concern:You are correct. The "TOC limit" just changes what displays in the Contents Box. You can do the "TOC limit" and the indenting/bulleting together or do just one and not the other. They won't interfere with each other. '''Now, one concern I have about my own suggestion on the indenting and bulleting... You might want to check with an Online Volunteer concerning my approach to be sure it doesn't violate Wikipedia's style guidelines or something. I got a comment on my own article about "bolding" items in a list, so I'd hate for you to do all that work and then find out it isn't "legal" to do it that way.'''

I like the idea that he put together in his sandbox (Jim892/sandbox3). I think that it would help enhance my group's article (Molecular-weight size marker). However, I do not want to go through and make the changes only to find out that it is against Wikipedia guidelines, especially since my class is coming to a close on 12/14. Any advice/suggestions/feedback would be appreciated. Thanks,Madscientist2007 (talk) 17:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Joe Smith (footballer)
Hello, and sorry I didn't come to your talk page in the first place. I think my point was that although the hatnote may be discouraged by WP:NAMB, the object of the exercise is to help the reader. If a reader is looking for one of the 1880s footballers via the dropdown search, they might well guess, but end up at the wrong one. Without the hatnote, we're not giving them any help in finding the one they're really looking for. OK, they can guess that typing just Joe Smith into the search box might work, but with the hatnote, we're giving them an obvious link to the dab page where the description should get then to the right one. Anyway, that's something we can disagree on, and I'm not ready for an edit war about it. But I really wish you hadn't renamed them all contrary to the relevant naming conventions. By WP:NCSP, footballers of similar names are dabbed by nationality, or if that doesn't work, by birth year. Using middle names runs counter to the advice at WP:NCP against doing so just for disambiguation, and removing (footballer) from the article title makes it impossible for the reader using the search box to even spot the footballers. I realise you've got far more experience than I have in working with disambiguations, but the logic of renaming the correctly titled (per NCSP) Joe Smith (footballer born 1886) to Joseph Edward Smith, apparently for reasons of length of disambiguator, and renaming one of the 1889 births with vital years and the other with middle name, escapes me. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. How best to disambiguate the 1889 pair was raised by another editor at WT:FOOTY, and I should apologise again, for not linking you to that discussion when I replied in it earlier today (I was off-wiki all day yesterday). I suggested an alternative at that discussion, of including the playing position: (football forward, born 1889) and (football halfback, born 1889). As to the hatnotes, I'm not comfortable with removing them: WP:NAMB doesn't unambiguously support their removal, and in messy circumstances like the many Joe Smiths, they do help the reader by clearly pointing out how to find their desired target. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Nefarious: Merchant of Souls
This is a note to let the main editors of Nefarious: Merchant of Souls know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 17, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/December 17, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Nefarious: Merchant of Souls is a 2011 American documentary film about modern human trafficking, specifically sexual slavery. Presented from a Christian worldview, Nefarious covers human trafficking in the United States, Western and Eastern Europe, and Southeast Asia, alternating interviews with re-enactments. Nefarious was written, directed, produced and narrated by Benjamin Nolot, founder and president of Exodus Cry, the film's distributor. Nolot travelled to 19 countries to collect the film's content. Interviewees in the film include Agape International Missions founder Don Brewster, former prostitute Annie Lobert, and Swedish Detective Superintendent Kajsa Wahlberg. Laila Mickelwait (pictured), Exodus Cry's Director of Awareness and Prevention, screened the film in several countries in an attempt to persuade governments to make laws similar to Sweden's Sex Purchase Act, which criminalizes the purchasing rather than the selling of sex. Nefarious has won a variety of film awards, including the Honolulu Film Award for Best Screenplay, the Urban Mediamakers Film Festival Best Documentary Feature Award, and the Indie Fest Feature Documentary Award of Excellence. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Congratulations David! And well done. You are doing a really great thing by raising awareness of this issue. I hope you're enjoying your weekend —Cliftonian (talk) 15:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Addams.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:23, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Alan Alda (handprints and signature in cement).jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Allyson.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Amanda Falk performing at YC Newfoundland in 2009.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Andrews.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Bethany Dillon.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:BobHope.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:52, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Burns.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:54, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Waqar Younis
Hi, I've reverted your recent edit to the above article since these things have already been discussed at the FLC. some similar lists are: List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Allan Donald, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev and List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by B. S. Chandrasekhar. Regards, Zia Khan 04:11, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A right-arm fast bowler who represented his country between 1989 to 2003, the BBC described Waqar as "one of the most feared fast bowlers in recent cricketing history",[5] while former Pakistan captain Imran Khan said that Waqar was "a thinking cricketer and, at his peak, he was the most destructive bowler the game had seen".[6] was the part of the articleat the time of discussion at FLC (see this version). The cricket almanack Wisden noted his "pace and swing", and named him one of their Cricketers of the Year in 1992.[7] Waqar was inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame on 9 December 2013.[8][9] were added later which are normally part of almost every article (List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Dennis Lillee, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Curtly Ambrose and the above mentioned). Zia Khan 11:49, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The second thing is the blurb at Today's featured list/December 30, 2013. I've only added the last sentence the (He was inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame in December 2013). This blurb was selected for the main page in May 2012 but the administrators deleted the whole data per discussion and the rest you know! Zia Khan 12:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've responded to your concerns at my talk page, please have a look. Regards, Zia Khan 17:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Neelix! This is the last day for my molecular class at Johns Hopkins and I just wanted to say thank you for your help as an online ambassador with our on-going Wiki project! Your suggestions and peer reviews were very useful and provided the guidance we needed to transform our stub article. Again, thanks for your help! Juanquina Thomas (talk) 03:03, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of Spy Fox characters


The article List of Spy Fox characters has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * In-universe fancruft

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 11:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Nefarious: Merchant of Souls
Wow, congrats on another FA and Main Page appearance! I made a few minor edits to the article, mostly relating to the portals and image sizes. I hope my edits are okay. Keep up the great work! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 00:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Congratulations also from me. Great to see this highlighted. Really jolly good show. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Spy Fox characters for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Spy Fox characters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of Spy Fox characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Frank Jenner
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Frank Jenner 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 Quadell -- 16:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Frank Jenner
The article Frank Jenner 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 needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Frank Jenner for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 23:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Frank Jenner
The article Frank Jenner you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Frank Jenner for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 14:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey
If you have a little spare time, I'd be glad for some comments and suggestions for improvement for my current FAC, Featured article candidates/Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey/archive1. Thanks in advance.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

First Question for GLAM
Greetings, nice to meet a wikipedian interested in GLAM. Almost simultaneously, I left a message on Nikkimaria's page. As you are interested in outreach on linguistics, I think you would be more appropriate for my contact. For starters, where shall one go for information, FAQs, tips and advices ? Shall I talk with GLAM/Connect first ? --- Ktsquare (talk) 03:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC) P.S. Obviously GLAM/About provides a page of overview but is something going on for W:GLAM in Canada ? -- Ktsquare (talk) 04:05, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Glad Tidings and all that ...
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jet Black Stones for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jet Black Stones is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Jet Black Stones until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DBaK (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - looks like a bad notification based on an old redirect. If so please ignore. I will notify the other editor. Thanks DBaK (talk) 23:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

JC's Girls
Well, thank you for the address which I could not find. This is an excellent example for why the city of Las Vegas is not the primary use of Las Vegas. According to the county assessors office, that address, are you ready for this, is actually in Henderson, Nevada which is a totally different city. Another clear cut case where Las Vegas is used to describe anything in the entire valley. So while Las Vegas Valley is accurate, it is not the most precise, but clearly it is not wrong like saying it is in the city of Las Vegas is! Vegaswikian (talk) 23:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi
Someone has recreated the Miss Asia Pacific World 2012 pageant and the other articles of the same subject that your merged per consensus in an AfD. --BabbaQ (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * They are now trying to evade notice by creating the articles as Miss Asia Pacific World Super Talent 2013 etc.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Also I wouldnt be surprised if user Lemontee33 who created and expanded them are a pageant official as he edits several articles concerning the pageant with biased information.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Miss Asia Pacific World 2014 also needs merger. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Spy Fox
Template:Spy Fox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Puzzled
Besides John Smith (Ohio politician born 1735), who else meets the description "John Smith (Ohio Senator)"? I can't find any on the disambiguation page. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:54, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Russ,


 * Thank you for contacting me on this issue. John Quincy Smith also served as Ohio Senator. Please let me know if you have any remaining concerns regarding the move.


 * Neelix (talk) 20:57, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Greetings! I have reverted you bold move because I believe this is a controversial determination, which therefore requires discussion per WP:RM. John Quincy Smith was a member of the state senate, and was therefore a "state senator" who represented one senate district in Ohio, not an "Ohio Senator", which implies both service in the United States Senate, and service as a senator for the entire state. Cheers! bd2412  T 02:23, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Because there is an Ohio Senate, and this (to the casual reader) will seem the likeliest intended meaning, I have moved the article to a less ambiguous title: John Smith (United States Senator from Ohio). I hope this alternative meets with your approval. Neelix (talk) 16:27, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding WP:PAIDHELP and Coal in Canada
My apologies for not being able to timely respond to your request for information over at WP:PAIDHELP back in November. I had finals going on and Christmas was...hectic. I hope you were able to get the answers you sought from other editors? Silver seren C 04:51, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue
Books & Bytes ''Volume 1 Issue 3, December/January 2013 (Sign up for monthly delivery)'' Happy New Year, and welcome to a special double issue of Books & Bytes. We've included a retrospective on the changes and progress TWL has seen over the last year, the results of the survey TWL participants completed in December, some of our plans for the future, a second interview with a Wiki Love Libraries coordinator, and more. Here's to 2014 being a year of expansion and innovation for TWL!

The Wikipedia Library completed the first 6 months of its Individual Engagement grant last week. Here's where we are and what we've done:
 * Increased access to sources: 1500 editors signed up for 3700 free accounts, individually worth over $500,000, with usage increases of 400-600%
 * Deep networking: Built relationships with Credo, HighBeam, Questia, JSTOR, Cochrane, LexisNexis, EBSCO, New York Times, and OCLC
 * New pilot projects: Started the Wikipedia Visiting Scholar project to empower university-affiliated Wikipedia researchers
 * Developed community: Created portal connecting 250 newsletter recipients, 30 library members, 3 volunteer coordinators, and 2 part-time contractors
 * Tech scoped: Spec'd out a reference tool for linking to full-text sources and established a basis for OAuth integration
 * Broad outreach: Wrote a feature article for Library Journal's The Digital Shift; presenting at the American Library Association annual meeting

...Read Books & Bytes!

Coin Note
Hi Neelix- I don't understand why Treasury (Coin) Note has been renamed Coin Note? (not asked in a snarky or aggressive way). It's actually known as a Treasury Note in numismatics (per the title on the bill itself). The reason "coin" is sometime added is to differentiate it from a broader category of Treasury Notes issued during the War of 1812. I'm concerned calling it a coin note is not using it's most popular and well known name. Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 04:24, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a bit odd that it's on the main page ITN as a Treasury Note.-Godot13 (talk) 04:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I responded to your comment on my talk page. Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 04:43, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

FL on main page
Thanks for nominating List of presidents of Washington & Jefferson College for the main page.--GrapedApe (talk) 17:04, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

New features for course pages
Several noticeable improvements to the EducationProgram extension (in addition to some small bug fixes) will go live on or around 2014-01-23:

Notifications
 * All participants in a course (students, instructors, volunteers) will receive Notifications whenever their course talk page is edited. Thus, editors can use course talk pages to send messages they want the whole class to be aware of, and the class participants are likely to see them.

Special:Contributions student notice
 * For users enrolled as students in courses that are active, a notice will appear at the top of Special:Contributions noting which course(s) they are enrolled in. This will make it easy for users who come across the work of student editors to find out that they are part of a course and identify other class participants.

Adding articles
 * Course instructors and volunteers will be able to assign articles to student editors, instead of all articles needing to be added by the student editors themselves.

Adding students
 * Instructors and volunteers will be able to add users as students in courses, instead of all student editors needing to enroll for themselves. This makes it easier to maintain complete lists of students, and also makes the extension more suitable for tracking participation in edit-a-thons, workshops and other collaborative projects beyond the Wikipedia Education Program.

If you have feedback about these new features, or other questions or ideas related to course pages, please let me know! --Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Subscribe or unsubscribe from future Wikipedia Education Program technical updates.

List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the East of England
I don't understand why you had to meddle with this list. It was, after all, a featured list. That does not mean that it cannot be improved, but the changes you have made have IMO reduced the impact of the list, especially to the casual visitor. The first two paragraphs have gone; they were not redundant but were there to give the reader quick information about what the CCT is and does, without having to go to a separate article. FL criteria states that the lead "introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria". It no longer does so. The photographs were of course duplicated, but they were there to give an immediate impact to the casual reader, and maybe to draw him/her in to look further. Lists should not have emboldened material in the first sentence; and by doing this you have lost the link to the CCT. I accept that the See also section was not necessary, but I do not see the point of the major changes you have made to a list that had been found acceptable at the highest level. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for contacting me about this article. You have produced some great architecture-related articles and lists. I have been editing this article because I have nominated it to go up on the main page here, and I want to to be ready for a main page appearance. Perhaps it would be easiest if we addressed your concerns one at a time. Let's start with the lead images. If I understand you correctly, your reason for wanting these images in the lead is 1) to provide a quick illustration to casual readers who aren't going to read further down the page and 2) to draw in casual readers so they are likelier to continue reading. Would you feel that this functionality would be maintained if the lead images were replaced by a sidebar? Neelix (talk) 20:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah, I had no idea of your motives and intentions, and I can see that your recent edits have made it more suitable for a main page appearance (and nominating it is a compliment, so thanks). If in this form it is more suitable for that purpose, that's OK by me - for now.  I'm not sure that a sidebar would be an improvement for this purpose.  How about keeping it as it is now (more or less) until it has appeared on the main page (if it's accepted), and then restore some of the contents to which I have referred above and which I feel are important - the lead images and introductory paragraphs?  I do feel that these are justified when the list is there for more general use.  And this list is one of a series (all FLs) that have a similar structure, and I would not like to have to change all the others to fit in with this.  What are your thoughts? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm glad to hear that you approve of the list going up on the main page. It would be unprecedented to format an article specifically in preparation for its main page date with the intention of reformatting it after that date. I think we should be able to come to a mutually satisfactory conclusion on how to deal with these issues. If you do not like the idea of a sidebar, how about including lead images that do not duplicate ones in the list? For example, we could use File:St Nicholas, Feltwell, Norfolk - geograph.org.uk - 1618516.jpg and File:St Michael and All Angels, Booton, Norfolk - geograph.org.uk - 321224.jpg, which depict churches already depicted in the list but aren't exactly the same photos. These churches are the oldest and newest churches on the list respectively, and the image captions can indicate that rather than simply identifying the names of the churches. What do you think? Neelix (talk) 18:21, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I suppose those images (which in fact are good) are better than nothing. But I do not see any problem in duplicating what is already in the list in the lead.  In the list they are so small that they are hardly noticeable, and I tried to select the ones most likely to catch the eye of the casual visitor.  Anyway it is no big deal which pictures are used.  What does concern me is that if the article is going to remain as it is after an appearance on the front page (if it happens), I am unhappy.  As I said above, in its present form the lead does not fulfil the requirements of a FL, and I do not think that it should appear on the front page as a FL in this form.  Sorry.  --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I am glad that we have come to a conclusion about the images. I have added them to the lead as discussed. My concern with the two paragraphs I removed from the lead is that they aren't specific to the subject at hand. To spend half the lead on background information and be two paragraphs into the article before the subject of the article is introduced seems excessive to me. This background information is also heavily weighted towards one specific element of the article; those two paragraphs simply summarize the Churches Conservation Trust article, but they could just as easily have been about the preservation of buildings in the East of England, or about churches in general in that area. I see nothing in the featured list criteria that suggests that this amount of background information should be included in the lead. The requirement for there to be a "lead that introduces the subject" indicates to me that information that is specific to the article should dominate the lead, not background information about one element of the article. What are your thoughts? Neelix (talk) 22:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the images. But I cannot agree with you about the absence of info about the CCT in the lead. CCT is part of the title, and very few people know what it is and what it does. I intend to oppose the appearance of the list in its present form on the front page, and I will spell out the objections that I have made above at WP:TFLS --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Neelix, I'm not sure why you've decided to implement such sweeping changes when none of these concerns were brought up at any of the FLCs for Peter's series of lists? I think if you feel such wide-ranging changes needs to be made that you must therefore believe these lists to no longer comply with the FLC criteria, and they should all be nominated at FLRC. Alternatively, you should restore the lead to that which had some level of consensus as a result of the multiple FLCs which led to these lists being featured. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:43, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Question
I don't know how this works, but I'm just going to put this. How are you so smart? My email is personadabes@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.141.141 (talk) 20:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello!
Hello Neelix. I am new to editing and participating on Wikipedia. I've read many articles but never contributed to any. I am apart of the Molecular Biology course through Johns Hopkins, so I am getting involved and trying out editing in Wikipedia via this course. It is an exciting and cool thing to learn how to do and I'm enjoying it so far. I'm looking forward to learning more about Wikipedia via you and this course. Thank for your willingness to assist! Tmckenne (talk) 01:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neelix! My name is Martin and I am a student at John Hopkins University taking an online course (Molecular Biology). I've always thought Wikipedia is awesome, and I look forward to making a contribution to the site in the next coming months! Martinhyou (talk) 18:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello - Brief Introduction
Hi Neelix,
 * My name is Tiffany; I am another student in the Molecular Biology class for which you kindly agreed to be an Ambassador. Thank you for taking the time to help students learn to navigate Wikipedia.  It's good to know we have an expert to help us become more proficient as the course progresses. This is my first experience as a Wikipedia editor and I am looking forward to learning the ropes. Thanks again! Tmo32 (talk) 03:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Ptychopariida infobox
I note you added a "genera belonging to the Ptychopariida" infobox to Yunnanocephalus, and probably to other Ptychopariid genera as well. You have every right to do so, but I do have doubts about its usefulness, as the number of Ptychopariid genera is so staggeringly big, that anybody will lose its way. It also becomes extreme bulky and may easily utterly dominate articles. I realise you included only a few genera so far, but I suppose you intend to expand as you at it to articles. In general, I would say infoboxes for genera per family are of more use, but not in the case of monotypical families like the Yunnanocephalidae, in which case the genus and family articles are merged and a "families belonging to the Ptychopariida" infobox could be useful. -Dwergenpaartje (talk) 16:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah. I see. I guess preventing an orphan is not the best argumentation to have an infobox at all. I had a look at Brassicicephalus, and I think it is lacking much information and it is flawed as well (the monotypicallity). Dunno if you feel any need to improve it. If you would tell me you mailaddress, I will send you the information that is in the Treatise (already made the excerpt). My mailaddress is "jachthuis22 at kpnmail dot nl". If you think it is difficult to make it into layman's language, you can have a look at Yunnanocephalus, Angelina, Conocoryphe, Eoredlichia or many other pages, how I do it. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 10:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I found another source from 1988 that is useful, and it seems to concur that Brassicicephalus is not monotypic, and also says it needs to be suppressed because it is the jr. synonym of Exigua, quite the other way around as in Sepkoski (which I could not check as the link did not work). Perhaps Exigua is unavailabe. Global Names Index on this and and the next page provides multiple generic authors, but according to the notation, the first two would be plants, and it is not clear if the third is a plant or an animal, and it also lacks a publication year. So this is in itself inconclusive. Jell and Adrian (2002) list Brassicicephalus LOCHMAN, 1940 [pulchellus] Bonneterre Dol, Missouri, USA; PLETHOPELTIDAE; UCAM [j.s.s. of Exigua, fide ROBISON, 1988]. Another assignment is Brassicicephalus wolfensis Lochman, 1944. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 11:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I guess we better keep this discussion in one place, I posted a response on my talk page. Regards, Dwergenpaartje

New to Wikipedia editing
Hi Neelix, I am a student at Johns Hopkins University, and in our Molecular Biology course, we have an opportunity to edit a article in Wikipedia. I find Wikipedia very resourceful, and I am looking forward to contributing to it. This is my first time editing in Wikipedia, and will appreciate any advice/help you can provide. Best regards. SabFernMB (talk) 23:20, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Introduction - Randel
Hello, I'm Randel with the Johns Hopkins University/Molecular Biology, Section 82 (SP14) education program. I've never done editing with Wikipedia, but I'm learning quickly. Thank you for being one of our ambassadors for the program. Crandel5425 (talk) 16:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Assignment Introduction
Hi Neelix,

My name is Luyao Kevin Xu. Thank you very much for being the ambassador for our class (JHU, AAP, Molecular Biology SP14). I am looking forward to talking with you throughout this assignment.

Best, LXLuyao Kevin Xu (talk) 03:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Another Introduction
Hey Neelix! My name is Adam and I, as well, am part of the Molecular Biology course at JHU. Wanted to stop by and say hello. Hope all is well! BigA726 (talk) 15:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Another Intro
Hi Neelix! I too am in the Molecular Bio class at JHU and just wanted to say hi. Thanks for the help in advance for this upcoming seamster. Jhayes21 (talk) 19:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Another introduction
Hi, Neelix! I'm also a student in the Molecular Biology course at JHU. I've never edited a Wikipedia article before. I look forward to working with you on this project. --Jocelyn Munson (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neelix
Hi Neelix,

I'm another student in the spring 2014 Molecular Biology course at John Hopkins. Thank you for being our online ambassador. I look forward to furthering my education in molecular biology and wiki!

Best regards,

Cindy Atwell Catwell99 (talk) 01:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neelix
Hi! My name is Jennifer Huh (androidhu) from Molecular Biology class at JHU. It's nice to meet you. Thank you for being our ambassadorAndroidhu (talk) 02:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Introduction
Hi Neelix! I'm Lisa, and I'm also with the Molecular Biology class at JHU. Thank you for helping us, looking forward to working with you. Lisawisa (talk) 03:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Sex worker activists
You're objectively wrong, you can't support someone's right while actively working against their best interests. There are plenty of other categories these people could be in that are more accurate, like Anti-prostitution feminism (for example), but I should know better than to try and make constructive edits to sex work related articles that go against Wikipedia's prohibitionist stance. Best of luck! 184.161.25.16 (talk) 04:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry if my previous message was a bit abrupt. It has been a long fight, generally losing fight, to stop prohibitionist POV slanting of sex work articles. I'll assume good faith and accept that your reversions were based entirely upon the lack of an edit summary, as stated in your edit summary. Based on that, I have reinstated the edits with a summary, so there should be no issue now. As mentioned before, here are some more appropriate categories for anti-sex work activists: Again, best of luck. 184.161.25.16 (talk) 05:02, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sexual abuse victims activists
 * Victims' rights organizations
 * Women's issues non-governmental organizations
 * Organizations opposed to human trafficking
 * Anti-pornography activists