User talk:Puddleglum2.0/Archive 20

Teahouse Host - welcome
Dear Puddleglum2.0, thank you for volunteering as a host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users get a hold of the ropes here at Wikipedia, and helping experienced users that just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:
 * Helpful scripts you can install to make Teahouse responding easier,
 * templates to use and, of course:
 * the question forum itself.

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.


 * Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:38, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: You have some rather weird and confusing 'archiving' going on on this page. It makes it near impossible to view your past discussions. Do you need help with setting up automatic archiving? If so, errm, do ask at the Teahouse! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:38, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the welcome! I am aware of how to set up automatic archiving, can you point to the problem you have with how I am doing so currentlyr? I seem to be able to view my archive just fine, but maybe that's just the computer I'm using? Thanks for your input, Puddleglum  2.0   01:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, well, for a start, there's no visible link that I can see to any archive of past talk discussion, so where does a user look if they don't know about displaying subpages. At a quick glance, you seem to be deleting more than archiving, though I've not pored over every edit, of course - it was just a gut reaction that you seemed to be deleting every single discussion to leave a blank page, bar the Signpost, with no appearance of any archive. There's nothing wrong in this per se, but it looks very odd and, if I already had doubts about an editors intentions (and I don;t with you!), I might wonder if they were trying to obfuscate in someway. It's just friendly advice - not a ticking off, or criticism. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)Added
 * Thank you for the advice again, I appreciate it. I will make the link to my archive more visible, and make my rational for only deleting some t breads more clear. (All the ones I delete are just spam or template notifications, I don't see it necessary to include that). Thanks again for the advice, I appreciate it a lot! Puddleglum  2.0   01:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand. What I do is go to the individual post, edit, select and delete the text, then write 'delete as read' in my edit summary. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Your input is requested
at Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view before Friday.

Only 100 or so words. It should be fun and serious at the same time.

All the best,

Smallbones( smalltalk ) 00:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

OK, doing that now! Puddleglum  2.0  00:15, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Added ✅ OK, should be done. Didn't have much to say, but ah well. :) Puddleglum  2.0   00:54, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to our WikiProject
Hi. I am the Lead Coordinator at WikiProject History. I saw that you joined our WikiProject as a member recently. I would like to thank you for joining. Welcome!!

If I may, I would like to ask for your assistance. We are requesting input and assistance from all new members; our main reason for doing so is that this project has been semi-inactive for quite some time, and we are trying to get it to be fully active.

On that note, might you be able to go to the section below, and provide a brief introductory comment? you can feel free to let us know what type of items, topics, or articles you'd like to work on; or else, which areas of history you are most interested in; or else, you can simply say hello.


 * Link: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_History

I hope that's okay? We would welcome any insights or input that you might like to share. We are going through a crucial period of reinstatement for WikiProject History at the current time, so right now, we are asking for "All hands on deck." You are welcome to add your comments at our talk page; or alternately, you can reply to me here if that is easier. We welcome any comments that you may have. Thanks for joining!! --Sm8900 (talk) 05:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft Help
Hi, Thanks for the encouraging review of my submission. I have two questions, for now. Are you a Wiki editor? And can you help me draft a third submission that will be more acceptable to Wiki editors? ThanksDriverSafety (talk) 21:52, 30 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, I hope I am responding in the correct place. You asked that I use your Talk page, and I think, but I am not sure this is where I am. In any case, I greatly appreciate your offer of help. Tomorrow I will send you the last reference I found and an idea of how to possibly improve the submission. Thanks again.DriverSafety (talk) 01:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Yup,, this is a good place to chat! I look forward to getting the reference, definitely no hurries, take your time! Thanks, Puddleglum  2.0   05:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, how shall we proceed? I have questions about how to interpret the rules governing notability. 1. Are newspaper articles that feature a company evidence of notability? Opinions seem to be mixed. One Wiki member said that if there are interviews with company executives, then the answer is no, the source is not independent. This seems silly to me, but I am new to Wiki. 2. Are peer-reviewed academic articles that evaluate the company's products, but were written by a company employee who worked with independent university researchers who collected and analyzed all the data, independent? The article submission is supported by four newspaper feature articles (three in major city dailies, one in a university paper serving 15,000 students). There are two peer-reviewed journal articles that evaluate the companies products and one peer-reviewed conference paper that describes the company's approach to working with clients to validate and improve the training programs.

Before proceeding with a third revision, it might be wiser to determine if Wiki editors will accept the above references as proof of notability. What do you think?DriverSafety (talk) 18:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi! I believe both peer-reviewed articles and interviews should be fine, as long as they are not primary sources and as long as they have significant coverage. Does that make sense? We can proceed however you want, if you just want to ask me questions and then have me review the article before you submit it to AfC, that would probably work, but however you want really. I might have to enlist the help of a different experienced editor who helped teach me at some point if it gets to complicated for me, is that fine? If you do t want me to, I totally understand. Also, could you please skim this quick policy? It makes it easier to follow talk page conversations Thanks, Puddleglum  2.0   18:18, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, I am okay with all your suggestions. Wiki is a community and having more than one editor's feedback is a plus.

One of the newspaper articles is hidden behind a paywall. I cannot access that article without paying. How do Wiki editors get past the paywall? I send you a draft to review tomorrow. Thanks for offering your help.DriverSafety (talk) 19:02, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * OK, you can make a request here to get past a paywall. (Disclaimer: I've never had to do it, so I can't walk you through the steps, but it seems pretty intuitive, and I can direct you to helping you need it. I will be ready for the draft whenever, thanks! Puddleglum  2.0   19:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the info about paywalls. I was mainly curious about how editors could properly evaluate the claim to significant coverage in articles that are behind these barriers. Now, thanks to you, I understand how this is achieved. You are being wonderfully helpful and I do not want to impose on your time. As I better understand the criteria for notability, I think that it might be worthwhile to canvas the editors you know to see if my references pass the test.

I have two categories of references that potentially demonstrate notability: Newspapers (4): There are three feature articles in major metropolitan daily newspapers and one feature article in a university campus paper serving 15,000 students, and; Academic papers (4): Two journal articles describing the results of evaluation studies of the company's training programs, and two conference papers, one describing the methodology the company uses to develop its training programs and the other describing the results of another evaluation study of a training program developed by the company. On the plus side, all the academic articles were peer-reviewed. On the minus side, all but one were co-authored by the research director of the company. Unfortunately, nothing inside the articles directly attests to the rigorous arms-length relationship between the company researcher and his university colleagues who were 100% responsible for collecting and analyzing all the data from the six separate studies.

I suggest that you ask your Wiki colleagues if all or some of these eight references demonstrate sufficient notability for Virage Simulation. Here they are. NEWSPAPERS: (1) Duquette, Esther Dec. 3 2008. "One PME montréalaise au volant d'une petite révolution". Montreal Campus. Retrieved 9 September2019.; (2) Mennie, James (June 7, 2009). "Steering a course to the future". The Montreal Gazette; (3) Prime, Martin. "Virage Simulation une expansion soigneusement planifiee". La Presser's. Retrieved 9 September 2019; (4) Jean-Sébastien Gagnon (12 février 2018) La Presse. Une occasion unique pour Virage Simulation. http://mi.lapresse.ca/screens/6cd089f4-bd9c-4a7d-bcca-a6aee00bccee__7C___0.html. ACADEMIC PAPERS: (1) Hirsch, P; Bellavance, F (2017). "Transfer of skills learned on a driving simulator to on-road driving behavior". Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2637: 67–73. doi:10.3141/2637-08; (2) Hirsch, P; Choukou, MA; Bellavance, F (May 2017). "Transfer of Training in Basic Control Skills from a Truck Simulator to a Real Truck". Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2637. doi:10.3141/2637-08; (3) Seecharan, TS; Donmez, B; Chen, W; Jardine, A (2016). Koskinen, K. (ed.). "Simulator-Based Eco-drive Training for Fleet Drivers". Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Engineering Asset Management (WCEAM 2015). Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham: 545–552.; (4) Romoser, M; Hirsch, P (2012). "From lab to real life: A case study in the deployment of advanced driving simulator-based training systems". Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. doi:10.1177/1071181312561525.

I will be away from my computer for the next 10 days and unable to respond. Thanks again for your generous support.DriverSafety (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks. Real quick, can you link the draft here? do you know how to link? If not, you can just give the name of the draft and I'll find it. Thanks again! Puddleglum  2.0   16:31, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

The name is: Draft: Virage Simulation. I will take the time to learn the protocols for linking etc in time. Thanks again,DriverSafety (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * OK! Pinging : can you help me look over Draft:Virage Simulation? It looks fine to me, but I wanted to get your opinion also. Thanks! Puddleglum  2.0   20:23, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , hi - I'm about to log off to make dinner, but I'll take a look tomorrow. Cheers! Girth Summit  (blether)  20:31, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Just a quick note, interviews are primary sources, so while they may be fine for verifying uncontroversial information they do nothing to demonstrate notability. Primefac (talk) 01:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks and !  Puddleglum  2.0   01:44, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Puddleglum - also pinging, since this concerns them - I've taken a look at the draft, and I have some concerns which I'll set out below in no particular order.
 * From what they've put on their user page, it's clear that DriverSafety is making a good faith attempt to abide by our rules by declaring their COI. However, as an employee of the subject they are writing about, I would strongly advise them to read WP:PAID and ensure that they abide by the requirements there - even if writing an article here is not part of their job, I think that this policy would apply to them, and since it is also part of the terms of use it is particularly important that it is followed closely.
 * For me, the article is still written in too promotional a manner. Some commentary from a reviewer of a product is permissible, but sentences like Independent testing by university researchers has validated Virage Simulation training programs for novice driver licensing, basic truck driver skills, and fuel-efficient, eco-drive skills simply aren't appropriate.
 * There are some assertions that don't seem to be supported by the references. For example, ...and is the first company in Canada to design and manufacture driving simulators - I read through the source and didn't see this stated anywhere (although it's possible that I missed it - feel free to correct me if that is in there).
 * There are seventeen sources there, some of which are in French which I can read, but not particularly well and it would take me some time. One of the previous reviewers' comments was that there weren't enough secondary independent sources about the subject to satisfy WP:NCORP. So, in order to help me satisfy myself about whether the subject meets NCORP, could you or DriverSafety point out the WP:THREE best sources, giving most significant coverage of the subject, so I can limit what I have to look at?
 * Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  12:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Ergo Sum • Nick Moyes • QEDK • Wugapodes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Dennis Brown
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Aude • BrownHairedGirl • CALR • Jengod • John Reaves • J.smith • Kim Dent-Brown • K1Bond007 • MECU • Refdoc • RHaworth



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Partial blocks.
 * The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news
 * Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating.  There is currently one template: uw-pblock.
 * When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title.

Arbitration
 * Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous
 * Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
 * The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Girth Summit, Thank you for looking into my submission and providing feedback. I would like to respond to your concerns.

First, thank you for assuming that my efforts are in good faith, rather than the opposite.

Now, if a feature article on a company in a major newspaper includes interviews with company employees (a standard method for all articles), does this completely disqualify the feature as a secondary source. What other sources of information will a journalist have if interviews are excluded?

I understand that the sentence "Independent testing by university researchers has validated Virage Simulation training programs for novice driver licensing, basic truck driver skills, and fuel-efficient, eco-drive skills}} simply aren't appropriate" can be perceived as too promotional. I will gladly rewrite the text but this will not change the facts I wish to bring to light, facts that underlie any claim to notability. The company does not merely manufacture driving simulators, which on the surface appear to be software integrated into hardware. For training and testing purposes, this combination is inadequate. The company develops courseware that is validated using a cyclical method that is best described by a term from engineering called concurrent engineering. This means that programs are developed in collaboration with experts and end-users' needs and then tested and improved according to the results. The application of this method with one particular client is described in one of the cited conference papers, Romoser, M; Hirsch, P (2012). "From lab to real life: A case study in the deployment of advanced driving simulator-based training systems". Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. In 2017, a peer-reviewed journal article described four separate evaluation studies generated by that method with that client. Ref: Hirsch, P; Choukou, MA; Bellavance, F (May 2017). "Transfer of Training in Basic Control Skills from a Truck Simulator to a Real Truck". Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2637. doi:10.3141/2637-08 (https://doi.org/10.3141%2F2637-08). That article was given an award by the Transporation Research Board. (not mentioned in the submission).

The claim of being the first company Canadian driving simulator manufacturer was stated in the first line in fourth paragraph of the Campus Montreal article that reads "Ce simulateur, le seul jamais conçu au Canada, n’est ni le produit de l’Agence spatiale canadienne, ni celui de Bombardier." Reference: Duquette, Esther. "One PME montréalaise au volant d'une petite révolution" (https://montrealcampus.ca/2008/12/03/une-pme-montrealaise-au-volant-dune-petite-revolution/). Montreal Campus. Retrieved 9 September 2019.

Regarding the best three secondary sources, I have sent Puddleglum what I think are the best eight potentially acceptable secondary sources to review. I leave it to Puddleglum's judgment to send you the top three.

In summary, I am extremely aware that as an employee of this company, my submission of an article has the appearance of bias. That cannot be denied. My response is that I have made and am making every effort to represent unbiased and unvarnished facts. Also, I cannot conceive of any other method of bringing these facts to the public in a nonpromotional way other than to pass the close scrutiny of the Wiki community.

Thanks again. After Monday I will be away from the computer for a week. DriverSafety (talk) 14:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi - some thoughts.
 * Thanks for pointing out the point where the assertion about it being the first one was supported - I had indeed missed that.
 * The Hirsch et al paper does not appear to be independent since, if I am reading it correctly, Hirsch appears to work for Virage. That does not necessarily mean that we can't use information in the paper, but it would not add any weight to a claim of notability since it is not independent of the subject. I note that there are other papers authored by Hirsch in the article - I'm afraid that the same would apply to them.
 * Interviews with subjects are considered primary because the information about the subject is coming from the subject themselves. Journalistic sources can be, and often are used, but we would be looking for evidence that the journalist has done some fact-checking and written a substantial amount of their own prose - straight-up interviews, where the journalist simply presents what the subject said in direct quotations with little other content, aren't much use in putting an article together. Remember, we are seldom interested in what a subject says about itself - we aim to report what reliable third parties say about them.
 * I sympathise with your difficulty in constructing neutral prose about a subject you have a direct connection with - I've never attempted to do it, but I can see that it would be difficult. My honest advice to you would be that you shouldn't try - if the company is notable, someone else without a connection will doubtless write about them in time. I'd suggest you spend your time here writing about stuff that you have an interest in, but no direct connection. I mostly write about historic buildings that I've never visited because I like learning about them - it's fun. I simply wouldn't attempt to write about an entity I have a connection with. Girth Summit  (blether)  19:24, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Puddleglum - I'm sorry, I mewnt to notr thst you nay prefer bot to have this discussion take place on your talk page - if you wish, you could move it to the draft's talk page. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  19:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I understand the gist of that message ? ☺ Either way is fine; whichever is more convenient for you. I don't get a lot of notifications anyway, so I really don't care. DriverSafety has sent me any sources yet (no rush), just wanted to let you know that. Anyway,thanks so much for helping, I greatly appreciate it. Puddleglum  2.0   20:09, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Crikey - sorry, I dashed that out quickly on my mobile, looks like the predictive text wasn't working properly! It's no odds to me, if you're happy with it here then leave it, just noting that you'd be entitled to move it if you like. (BTW - did you ever look at writing something about that cross in Moray? I'd love to take a look when you're ready...) Girth Summit  (blether)  20:19, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * {{ping|Girth Summit} OK, thanks for the note. :) Yes, I've been trying to find sources for the article, but it hasn't been my highest priority. I plan to have it written by perhaps mid-February, I'll definitely notify you when I'm done. ☺ Thanks again -- Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   20:24, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Reping- forgot to wrap the template.  Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   20:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , cool - wasnt meaning to hassle you, just popped into my mind. I've got a couple of offline sources that probably talk about it, if you get the bare bones together I'll be able to add some stuff from them. Cheers Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:script;color:blue;"> (blether)  20:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)!
 * cool, thanks! Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   20:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

quick note
Hi. this is just a quick note to simply touch base with you briefly. I recall you mentioning that you were working on a possible article for the Signpost, regarding currently active WikiProjects? how's that going? also, how are your efforts going with your new wikiproject, for acapella topics? I hope all's well. thanks!! by the way, please pin me when you reply. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 18:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Hello, and thanks! Yes, I do write the WikiProject Report for the Signpost, in the current issue you can find an interview with WikiProject Japan! I still am not quite sure which one I will interview for this month's issue, do you have any suggestions? :) I think in March I will be interviewing WikiProject USA, thanks for volunteering to join that! It's fun and not that hard to do. Work on the A Cappella Project has been going slow, but that is probably to be expected. I'm thinking of ways right now to have it gain more publicity, there aren't quite enough members yet to do a full blown interview for the Signpost. Besides all that, I've been fairly active over at the Guild, copy-editing articles and what not. :) How's your editing going? Where have you been active lately? I hope the History Project is going well, I am sorry I don't have a lot of time to contribute to it. Thanks for asking, I appreciate the note! Yours, Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   19:35, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ok, no problem. can you please interview me? is that possible? sorry if I'm talking out of turn. I'm juyst trying to offer some input. if you'd prefer not to right now, it's totally fine. I really appreciate your reply, and all your enthusiasm. (by the way, by "interview," if it's only a question or two, that's totally fine as well.) thanks!!--Sm8900 (talk) 19:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Ehm, yeah, I will have the questions ready at some point this week. Sorry, but I try to think up thought-provoking questions, so it does take a bit. I'll get back to you when i'm done with the questions, probably sometime Thursday or Friday. Thanks! Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   20:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * hi there. ok, no problem at all, Puddleglum2.0!! that is so nice of you. I truly appreciate it. no worries, there is absolutely no rush at all on this whatsoever. I appreciate you being willing to be so open to this. thanks for all your great work! whenever you wish to do so is totally fine with me. please don't feel you need to rush anything on my account. I appreciate it. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 20:11, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Of course! Thanks, Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   20:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Page move
I have requested that Homie (disambiguation) be moved to Homie, and the article currently there moved to Homie (real estate). You are welcome to comment on this request at Talk:Homie. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 07:25, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Idea for new community workspace
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.

You have been very helpful, so I wanted to get your brief input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen. I see a few possible options for making this happen, so I would like to get your input and feedback on this. which of the options below would you prefer? also, please reply to the brief questions below.


 * Would you be interested in an idea of this nature?
 * If so, which option below seems most feasible to you?
 * Create a new page/talk page at the existing WikiProject Council, where members of various WikiProject can gather to offer updates, information and ideas on the latest efforts at each of their own WikiProject, such as WikiProject Council/Town Hall.
 * Create an entirely new WikiProject with an inclusive name such as
 * WIkiProject Town Hall,
 * WikiProject Bulletin Board,
 * WikiProject Water Cooler
 * Create a new collaborative page or forum, but not as a new WIkiProject, i.e. with some name like
 * Town Hall or
 * Water Cooler
 * Create a new sub-page in my own userspace, such as User:Sm8900/Town Hall
 * Create a subpage at an umbrella-type WikiProject that already covers a broad topical area, such as WikiProject History/Town Hall

Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know. --Sm8900 (talk) 16:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * hi. this idea is now receiving a full and active discussion! you can participate at: Village_pump_(proposals). thanks!!  --Sm8900 (talk) 16:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Rollback on my talk page
I don’t know how to ping people, so here is a notification to tell you that I have responded ActualJoe  ❯❯❯  Talk  23:10, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * here's how to ping: simply type ; type the editor's user name where shown. --Sm8900 (talk) 02:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Anti-estrogenic diet moved to draftspace
I'm moving this back to draft space. The lone reliable source doesn't actually mention "anti-estrogenic diet", and doesn't meet WP:MEDRS standards to boot. I think that it's likely that actual coverage of the book promoting the theory in question could be used to write an article, but this does not belong in mainspace in the meantime. signed,Rosguill talk 08:13, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

January drive article list
Hi,. Baffle gab1978 noted that you need to include word counts with your drive-list articles. Since I couldn't run the barnstar script without the word counts, I had to remove those last four articles from your tally. All the best,  Mini  apolis  03:15, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh! I believe I included word count with all my articles? Or did I just update the total? Either way, it's fine, barnstars are not my main priority in drives.  Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   03:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You just updated the total. I know the bookkeeping is a PITA, but the script stops if there's no word count for an article and all this tallying (with the 50-percent bonus on some—not all—articles) would be impossible to do manually. The script can be aggravating enough as it is . All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:34, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

January 2020 GOCE drive bling
Thanks for your work on requests and helping to bring the copy-editing backlog to a record low! – Reidgreg (talk) 16:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you ! Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   16:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Rollback Rights
Hello ! I would be very thankful if you were to nominate me for ROLLBACK rights! You asked me a few days ago, and I was wondering if you were still able to nominate me, if you haven’t already. Thanks! -- ActualJoe  ❯❯❯  Talk  13:51, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually,, do you want to just nominate yourself here and I will offer a support statement? I think that would be easier. Thank you! Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   18:50, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

note re your group efforts and projects
Hi Puddleglum2.0 ! thanks so much for your recent post at Village Pump, to support my idea and effort for a new community forum and bulletin board.

I am writing to ask for your help with this new idea. could you please draft a notice for editors to help out at the group effort that you referred to there? I think your main focus was a drive for article improvement, specifically at WP:GOCE ? Feel free to add any other items, if I left anything out. This is in order to post this info at the new user:Sm8900/community forum, if that's okay? and please feel free to add any comments, thoughts, or insights, to let us know more about the great efforts that you have been considering.

I am looking for editor events and group projects that I could post to post there, in order to get things rolling. my new approach to this is to approach editors individually, and request input and items from that we can post there, in order to get things rolling, and provide some content to show what we are trying to do. could you please let me know if that sounds okay to you? I really appreciate it. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 14:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It sounds OK, but I am not quite clear what you want me to do? Can you elaborate? Thanks.  Puddleglum <sup style="font-family:impact;color:silver;"> 2.0   15:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * sure, no problem! I'd be glad to elaborate. I appreciate your reply. It would be good if you could please compose a brief message, letting other editors know what is currently going on at WP:GOCE, and how they can help out and get involved there, and also, any special projects or group efforts that are currently going on there, if any such items exist.


 * we hope to add current messages like that to the User:Sm8900/community forum, and to try to steadily build it up as a community resource that others might find helpful, including for finding group efforts and projects that they can participate in. I appreciate your help and input. Please feel free to let me know any other thoughts, comments, or questions, that you may have. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Little Cross
Hello! Your submission of Little Cross at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:17, 13 February 2020 (UTC)