User talk:NoDepositNoReturn

Douglas Jones
It's fine to add the NYT articles as External links (it's normal to flag them as 'subscription' or 'requires payment' though). If you are using them as references in the text you can add them providing you've read them yourself, otherwise you need to cite the intermediate source. Good luck. Yomangani 23:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I always read my citations before citing them, but having a non-pay site makes good sense. Generally, though, I prefer references that are most likely to be static; Wikipedia has a lot of dead links in its references. I suppose it's a trade-off between "verifiable with a click today and not at all in a few years" vs. "having to go to bugmenot today and the library in a few years" in my mind, but if I can cite different periodicals or other indexable and likely-to-be-static sources instead of the pay versions, I try to. Is there a macro for 'subscription' and 'requires payment' flags? Thanks for the comments. NoDepositNoReturn (talk)

AfD discussion you may be interested in
See here  Enigma  msg! 02:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, btw. By the time I saw your message, it was already taken care of. I probably should have AfD'd it myself, but I was busy. Fixing the redirect seemed the most important thing. (I guess I'm an eventualist.) Cheers! NoDepositNoReturn (talk)

License tagging for Image:Bram-cohen-feb-2006.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bram-cohen-feb-2006.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Done. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 03:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

"Greenie"
I don't think it would add anything to the article to put "real name unknown" in it. Obviously, if her full name were known to the authors of the article (or to the interview subjects upon whose memories, recorded in oral histories, the article is sourced from), then it would be included in the article--so its being unknown is implicit. To say that her name is unknown is not a fact--potentially, there is some person or some printed reference that could disclose it. It is just that, for the moment, the nickname by which she was called is the best designation available. Robert K S (talk) 03:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to disagree. The use of the nickname, rather than given name, implies one of two things to me -- either that the authors of the Wikipedia entry are unaware of any other designation for her, in which case I was hoping to prompt someone to find a source for her name, or that her real name is lost to history. If there's a primary research source that says her name is unknown, I think that stating "name unknown" with a reference to that source makes perfect sense, as it clarifies that the name "Greenie" is not just the best that the article authors can come up with, but the best that historical writings and remaining documents can provide for us. "Is her name known to historians of early computing or by the US Military" is a worthwhile question. (For my own reference, this was about my comment on the Kathleen Antonelli talk page. Note I don't think it's a high priority issue, but one that would be good to see clarified eventually. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 03:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Jean Bartik, who got the job Greenie declined, is still living. I will ask her if she can clarify.  Asserting that something is "lost to history" would be improper.  No one is qualified to make such a statement unless he or she has conducted an exhaustive search, and perhaps not even then.  Moore School employment records may yet exist, that could be cross-referenced to the memories of living participants or to other documents to determine Greenie's name.  Just because you don't know Greenie's actual name, or I don't know her name, doesn't mean it can't in principle be discovered, or there aren't still living individuals who would remember, or that her name isn't recorded in someone's unpublished research. Robert K S (talk) 13:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not assuming this is lost to history -- I'm asking if anyone has done that sort of search and failed to learn the information. It appears that's not the case -- great! Let's get "Greenie" a name, then. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Jean replies: "I believe the block diagrams were also classified but it wasn't so obvious they were breaking security as going through a door with big letter stating its classification. Plus all the human computers had a security classification but not as high as the ENIAC. The differential analyzer was classified but it was a low one. I had a security classification, I had worked in a defense plant during the summer before I was a senior. Greenie's name was Helen Greenman." Robert K S (talk) 00:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Any idea how I source this as to avoid violating the ban on original research? Or do you want to just go ahead and add it to the article? (It should probably be in ENIAC as well, too.) NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 02:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I Googled "Helen Greenman" and found a couple of scholarly articles that mentioned her name, one from the Annals . They also mention another name for her, Malone, which I take to indicate was her later married name.  Incidentally, the first Google result shows that a Helen Greenman of just the right age and from the Northeast died just less than a month ago in Florida. Robert K S (talk) 16:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope--according to Jean, she was older than that and passed away a while ago. Robert K S (talk) 23:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, not enough to start an article on her, but at least she's named by her full name as well as nickname now. I left the ENIAC page alone, but if you wanted to work it into that article, that would be good. Thanks for finding this out and doing the research, and it's really cool that you know Jean. :) NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 03:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, she's being honored as a fellow of the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California this October along with Linux originator Linus Torvalds and Ethernet inventor Bob Metcalfe. (Have those two men ever been put in the same room together?  I would think it would be dangerous.)  Robert K S (talk) 04:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

GA review for Noble gas
I look forward to your GA review of Noble gas. Cheers! Gary King ( talk ) 07:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm working on it! NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, any update on this? I don't mean to push, but if you decide not to review the article, then please remove the notice on WP:GAN to notify other editors that the article has not been reviewed yet. Thanks! Gary King ( talk ) 02:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry; I got about half-way through my review, and then went on vacation. I'll be back next week. If you prefer to have the article relisted rather than wait, go ahead and remove my "reviewing" tag (point people that this page in the change message -- it will be fine.) Otherwise, I'll get my review up Sunday or Monday. Sorry about that. (FWIW, I think it is a really good article, and the remarks I have, while numerous, are easy to fix, and you've fixed many of them already while I was working on the review.) NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 00:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will leave the template there, then. I'm in no hurry, but I just thought that you forgot about the review, in which case it would have been best to just let someone else review the article. Anyways, I await your review. Gary King ( talk ) 04:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, I was completely unaware of your comments at Talk:Noble gas/GA2 until now. There appears to have been consensus gathered among the article, and so it has passed. Thanks! Gary King ( talk ) 21:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

mKR article
Hi. I've followed all your advice. Can you take a quick look & comment? Rhmccullough (talk) 20:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure; it's at the point now where I was comfortable voting Keep, though I will say it's a long way away from being a polished article. That's okay, though; that doesn't happen overnight. If you can enlist someone else to help you edit it, that would probably make it a lot easier. I'll probably not be commenting much on the article anymore -- my interest was seeing it get to a state where it wouldn't be deleted, because I don't think the COI issues or the notability issues warranted it. I did add a cleanup tag, though, which might attract some help from people who monitor that. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Since your name is the only one in the history, I assume you considered my statement re: mKR solving the problem to be too controversial, and deleted it. I can accept that.
 * My name is the only one in what history? I don't have the context for what you're asking -- please clarify (or better yet, provide a link to a diff.) NoDepositNoReturn (talk)
 * Can't mKR be put in a Keep state, so I don't have to worry that it's going to be deleted at any moment? Rhmccullough (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's up to an administrator to determine what the outcome of the AfD was. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 23:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. I'm not asking you to do anything, but I thought you deserved to get a status update. I got a new Wikipedia editor today. He took mKR off the delete list (GOOD!), but everything else is BAD! He deleted everything you told me to add; he said I needed a subject expert to work on my article. After I told him I am a subject expert, I've heard nothing further from him. Rhmccullough (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * While I don't necessarily agree with his deleting everything, I do agree that you should have someone else familiar with mKR working on this with you. There *are* COI issues, even if they're just perceived. Perhaps put in a "subject matter expert requested" template tag. The article seriously needs work -- I lobbied to have it not be deleted, but I'll be honest and say it is a poor article. That said, I hope you don't take offense -- articles on WP take months or years to become "B" class articles. Keep at it, and as I think I suggested before, try your hand at editing other pages that you see needing editing -- stuff that you're familiar enough with to contribute to, but not emotionally invested in. We're all editors here. Good luck! NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 00:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I did do some editing this morning, on several things that interested me. My most significant edit was on "CHILL", which was a real jumble of different topics. Rhmccullough (talk) 23:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You've been trying to help with the MKR article. I can't find any citation in that article that shows any notability. The three notes associated with "attention of a wider audience" are all just short entries in exhaustive lists of programming languages or knowledge engineering tools. I've tried Google.  I've tried Google Scholar. Other than material by McCulloch, I'm not seeing anything. He's not even getting blog entries, let alone articles in refereed journals. Even the archives of a mailing list he cites only have about three relevant messages by someone other than McCulloch, and they're mostly from people trying to figure out what connection, if any, it had to XML and RDF. I don't think you were wrong in voting Keep when the article was in its early stages, but without better citations than we have now, it's all non-notable original research. What do we do now?   (Incidentally, have you ever read "Artificial Intelligence meets Natural Stupidity", by Drew McDermott? It's a good analysis of the mental traps one gets into when trying to hammer the real world into predicate calculus. ) --John Nagle (talk) 21:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Can I get in this conversation? And ask your advice?  I do have a few remarks about notability, etc.  Not earth-shaking, but maybe will help a little.  Also, let me ask -- is my notatbility a question, or an issue, or related in any way? Rhmccullough (talk) 22:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I have more History, and good references to go with it, which never saw the light of day, because Diligent Terrier deletes my stuff instantly. I have seldom been able to finish editing any new material before DT deletes it.  I have to scramble hard to make any copy for myself before he destroys it.  I have recreated some of my references several times.  Enough sob stories.
 * I have a long history of following AI topics, and good references going back to the 1970s.
 * I could be considered notable too. That's why I asked if it had any bearing on the mKR article.
 * I have a specific response re mKE/mKR just being in the list. Jeffery (U. of Idaho) said something to the effect that he chose mKE/mKR for his performance analysis class to analyze because it was the largest known Unicon program which is publicly available.  I just counted it (wc *.icn).  The Unicon source code for mKE is roughly 65,000 lines.
 * I just had one other thought. It could be argued that John De Oliveira (head of The Cyc Foundation) considers mKR notable, because he approved me to work on ResearchCyc, so I could work on Cyc/mKR interfaces. It's mostly big companies that get approved, not individuals like me. Rhmccullough (talk) 23:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe that User:Rhmccullough/Sandbox/History is the kind of background and design motivation that you suggested I write. It can use some more polishing; this is the first time I've been able to pull everything together. Comments? Rhmccullough (talk) 02:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Line-of-Sight

 * Radio/telecom, Surveying, ballistics. Primarily radio in my experience. I don't have a strong preference here; someone who knows "line of sight" is going to know "arctangent", but might first look for the commonly used term "line of sight". Does a redirect harm anything? NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

To be clear on this: You're saying that in those fields, "line of sight" means angle of elevation from the horizontal (that being the idea contemplated in this article), and does not mean any of the other specific things that "line of sight" means in some contexts? Is that right? Michael Hardy (talk) 23:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied on the AfD page. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 20:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Infobox
I want to use another one, but I don't really know where to start. My source is of the order of 20 lines high and 25 characters wide. Can you point me in the right direction? Rhmccullough (talk) 03:11, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm on vacation at the moment -- you should type " " on your talk page (edit it and add that template). Someone will come around to answer your questions. If they're still unanswered by next Monday, let me know. Also, you might point them at this page and the mKR talk pages to catch them up. Sorry I can't be of immediate assistance. NoDepositNoReturn (talk) 00:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Parafon Forte
--Cssiitcic (talk) 20:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested


WikiProject Writing Systems is conducting a poll regarding its future goals, and we have identified you as a person with a vested interest in the future of that project. Whether you are a member of the WikiProject, a frequent contributor, or a passerby with an interest in the subject, we want your input as to the future emphasis that the Writing Systems project will take. Please take a moment to peruse the entries and add your comments where you have an opinion. You can visit the poll by clicking here, or on the project image, 書, on the right.

Nomination of Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn 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/Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn 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 template from the top of the article. MSJapan (talk) 01:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn 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/Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn & 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. Someone not using his real name (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014
The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the User WPMed template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors
Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Medical Translation Newsletter
<div style = "color: #F4C430; font-size: 3.5em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

<span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">Medical Translation Newsletter

Issue 1, June/July 2014 by CFCF, Doc James

sign up for monthly delivery

<div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #0000FF; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: .9em">

This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice. note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine

Spotlight - Simplified article translation

Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.

Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:
 * WHO's list of Essential Medicines
 * Neglected tropical diseases
 * Key diseases for medical subspecialties like: oncology, emergency medicine (list), anatomy, internal medicine, surgery, etc.

We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.

What's happening?

I've () taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.
 * IEG grant

For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.
 * Wikimania 2014

There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish. What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.
 * Integration progress


 * Swedish Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that. Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
 * Dutch Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
 * Polish Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article. (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
 * Arabic The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.

Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.
 * Integration guides

Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here

News in short


 * To come
 * Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
 * Proofreading drives


 * Further reading
 * Translators Without Borders
 * Healthcare information for all by 2015, a global campaign

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon
Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 55 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African wildlife articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance. If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing any article related to a topic you often work on, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Might be a good way to work on fleshing out articles you've long been meaning to target and get rewarded for it! Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!