User talk:StarryGrandma/Archive 3

Messages posted on my talk page in 2014.

Another editor is WP:WIKIHOUNDING me
Hello, dear StarryGrandma.

I've been wondering about this for awhile, but it's become clear to me in recent days that another editor is WP:WIKIHOUNDING me.

No other editor seems to find it necessary to follow me around and revert my edits but this one. It has happened more times than I can count now, and on numerous pages. Would you like me to provide some links?

Please advise.

Thanks.

--Lightbreather (talk) 22:34, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Electrostatic Spray Ionization
Dear StarryGrandma,

I am the author of the Article Electrostatic Spray Ionization that you kindly refereed. Thank you very much for it. However, before adding it to Electrospray Ionization as you proposed I would like to know why Laser Ablation Electrospray Ionization (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Ablation_Electrospray_Ionization), which is a comparable technique and article, has been accepted to be an article for its own and Electrostatic Spray Ionization not.

With my best regards,

AnSteLe (talk) 10:18, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi AnSteLe. It's nice to see work being done on good science articles for Wikipedia. I suggested adding the material to an existing article because the first paragraph does not provide enough of an explanation for anyone but an expert to know what the article is about. I find it is often easier for new editors to add material to an article that has a good lead paragraph or paragraphs in place than for them to try to put the material into context.


 * The article Laser Ablation Electrospray Ionization did not go through the Articles for Creation process. The page was written directly into Wikipedia by the original editor, and rearranged a bit by later editors. It had an overview section that became the lead paragraph and describes what is going on enough for physicists at least to know what is happening. It should be made clearer for a wider range of readers, however.


 * If you wish, write a lead paragraph along the model of the one in Laser Ablation Electrospray Ionization, explaining what happens in the process and what the advantages of using it are. See Manual of Style/Lead section for an explanation of what this section should do in a Wikipedia article. Happy editing. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:47, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Dear StarryGrandma,

thank you very much for your response and suggestions! I will work then on a well written lead paragraph! Thanks and with my best regards, AnSteLe (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Comment
This was a very nice example of everything that I love about this project. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 08:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.
Thanks for helping me add just a slash. --Nahnah4 (talk) 08:40, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Skin Absorption edit
Combined my page with existing page via edit. I hope this works. 570lah (talk) 13:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Very nice. Now we have a good article on the subject. Thanks. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:20, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

OMG you're in The New York Times
Did you already know this? You're in The New York Times. "http://nytimes.com/2014/01/09/fashion/Wikipedia-Judith-Newman.html"

Get ready for your 15 minutes! ;-)

Lightbreather (talk) 23:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=590183896 your edit] to Digital ceramic printing on glass may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * making printing of all sizes and replacement of any panel simple, in high resolution, full color . Unlike UV printing it is suitable for both interior and exterior

Help, on a 3rr thing
Dear StarryGrandma,

I reported Sue for edit warring today. I thought that process was just between the parties involved and the admin, but I see another editor has weighed in on the issue, so I am asking for your help. The discussion is at "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Sue_Rangell_reported_by_User:Lightbreather_.28Result:_.29" (Trying to insert links on my phone causes problems, so I hope that works.)

As a follow-up to the BLP issue, she finally quit pushing that activist/advocate thing and the article looks pretty good now. The last admin to comment on it, Newyorkbrad even said so. (Thanks, NYB.) And the subject hasn't complained any further, so I think he's satisfied, too. Thanks for your support during that. Lightbreather (talk) 12:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

LB
Could you give some additional mentoring to LB please? she is doing mass deletions of content   in at least one case directly contrary to a consensus discussion she started. Talk:Gun_politics_in_the_United_States There is an ongoing ArbCom on gun control and gun politics ongoing. Im very tempted to add her as an involved party, or take her to ANI for WP:DE but want to avoid more drama if possible, but she cannot continue editing like this unchecked. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I will see what I can do. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:33, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

CLASS Telescope page
Thanks for approving the CLASS page! I have linked to the article from the List of Cosmic Microwave Background Experiments page. The List of Radio Telescopes seemed to all be deployed telescopes, whereas the List of CMB Experiments included future projects like CLASS. Tom.essinger.hileman (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited APM 08279+5255, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Starburst (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * APM 08279+5255 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to IRAM


 * Deep-focus earthquake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Mantle

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thankyou for the encouragement. I really appreciate it. StarryGrandma (talk) 03:32, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You are welcome.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  03:35, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

A page you started (Solveig Hisdal) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Solveig Hisdal, StarryGrandma!

Wikipedia editor Carriearchdale just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Thanks"

To reply, leave a comment on Carriearchdale's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=611714553 your edit] to Rachel Whiteread may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Rachel Whiteread - House.jpg|thumb|right|House 1993], London]

Disambiguation link notification for June 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rachel Whiteread, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DAAD (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

08:24:06, 12 July 2014 review of submission by 41.132.199.247
41.132.199.247 (talk) 08:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

My entry on the French-Swiss artist Janika Fabrikant for Wikipedia was rejected. I accept the criticism of the article being "too romantic" and insubstantial. I will rewrite it. I am still convinced that Janika Fabrikant's work merits a Wikipedia entry. My question to you at this stage is: should I enter all her exhibitions, combined and solo that she held throughout the years? Regards Ute Ben Yosef


 * Hi, (or ). It is not a matter of an artist "meriting" an entry. Her art is wonderful. An artist just needs to be well enough known, with published sources to show it, even if all those sources say the art is terrible. Many of your references, especially those which are databases, only show that she exists. They aren't necessary. A link to her curriculum vitae will be enough. Instead talk about her work and its development in chronological order, using reviews or other analysis of her work as sources. Some of sources need to be in publications independent of her galleries. A source I found is http://oesterreich.architekturzeitung.com/architekturmagazin/architektur-und-kunst/382-faszination-urbaner-strukturen-galerie-alex-schlesinger-in-zuerich.html. But the published sources don't have to be online (or in English).


 * Don't put in her exhibitions except as part of the her artistic development. She is also listed at http://wwol.inre.asu.edu/fabrikant.html, a curated site. Is the quote from you given there published somewhere? StarryGrandma (talk) 16:16, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

YGM

 * Didn't get the ping. Got the mail. Things are going well here medically, but its going to be a long process. Thanks for asking. StarryGrandma (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

15:29:58, 16 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
StarryGrandma said she would be glad to help. I have followed her suggestion with respect to notability and have prepared documentation for her review. Please tell me how to submit it. Thank you, Jan Richmond Lourie

Janvermont (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Jan. Tell me what kind of sources you have found. Have they been published and where? I've managed to find enough online to establish notability:
 * has a nice mention of you.
 * refers to your "revolutionary system".
 * is an interview with Sam Matsa of IBM which says "The Geospace plotter was used for many graphics projects. One of them is discussed in a book entitled Textile Graphics/Computer Aided by Janice Lourie and published by Fairchild Publications in 1973. Janice is in Vermont enjoying the good life of nature. At that time she was living right near the United Nations in an apartment in Manhattan on 1st Avenue and 44th Street. But, because of Janice's involvement with textile design, IBM eventually donated that Geospace plotter to the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York City."


 * Let me know what information you have. Do you have a curriculum vitae anywhere? I'm going to make some changes to the article to make it more of an encyclopedia article. Anything I take out won't be lost; it will be available in the article history. StarryGrandma (talk) 16:41, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

18:52:30, 16 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
I wrote this before your prompt response on July 16, so it will, in part, be redundant. StarryGrandma, I would like to take advantage of your help. I appreciate your offer. The Janice Lourie submission was prepared by three people -- by me, a colleague and the wife of my former IBM manager. I am a first responder. I reread the notability criteria as you suggested. I believe I can define sources that meet the criteria. I believe sources 1 and 3 (listed below), the Goldstine book and US patent, meet the criterion of Wikipedia Creative professionals 2. – “The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique”. The patent emphasizes the new or original aspect of both concept and technique and the Goldstine reference alludes to its economic and historic significance. source 2 complies with Wikipedia Creative professionals criterion 4.b – “The persons work has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition”. (In this case it was the entire exhibition at the Durango pavilion.) I think that source 4 does not meet criterion 4d yet –“represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums”.

Other works which I think reinforce notability are the Stewart Kranz book: Science and Technology in the Arts (good section on me and my work), the James martin book Design of Man Computer Dialogues which uses my system illustrations to show interaction, the Korte, Peche book Downtown San Antonio which has a description of my system working at the Hemisfair.

The three outstanding scholars in Transportation theory list my topology paper in their books – Dantzig, Charnes and Gass. I don’t have copies so until I get them we can leave that out if you like.

source 1 Herman Goldstine, in his book Computer History from Pascal to Von Neumann (my ref 12),           tells about the relationship between the Jacquard loom and the computer. Then, in a footnote he writes: It is interesting to note that until recently the process of making the Jacquard cards was itself an arduous task. The textile designer in fact drew on paper the threads of the warp and the weft showing at each intersection their relative positions and from these the holes were punched. Then in the mid 1960’s a very ingenious method was found by Miss Janice R. Lourie of IBM to automate the whole process with the help of the modern computer. This was displayed on a working loom at the HemisFair in San Antonio, Texas in 1968. Thus the progenitor of the computer has become its child.

source 2 I went to the HemisFair 68 page in Wikipedia, checked companies with pavilions and found   IBM among them. For the content of the pavilions I had to go the first external link of the HemisFair page. There I found the IBM Durango pavilion which was dedicated to my Textile Graphics system. It described the interactive functioning of the display and subsequent instant manufacture by the loom. This description combined with the Goldstine note, I believe identifies the exhibit as my work. Perhaps the fact that my name is not associated with the invention in this article at the first external link is what you mean by documentation is hard to come by.

source 3 GRAPHICAL DESIGN OF TEXTILES US Patent 33,529,298 1970 Janice Richmond Lourie. This is IBM’s first software patent. (backstory I scheduled an appointment with the director of patent operations. He explained that they were not pursuing software patents. I put forth that creativity should be honored. I did not realize that I was making the basic argument for intellectual property. (There was no such IBM department at the time.) We shook hands and I left pleased that I had been able to express my viewpoint. A month later I received a letter saying that they would make my system a test case for software patenting. (It is not just IBM’s first software patent; it represents a turnaround in their thinking.)

(source 4) Artwork in Collections Four images in the Museum of the New York Historical Society. One image in the Brooklyn Museum Six images at Tufts University requested by the curator of the Aidekman Art Center Twenty-four brushed aluminum prints on display at the 58th Street Library branch of the New York Public Library

Janvermont (talk) 18:52, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for putting all this together. You only need to meet one of the criteria I believe. Also you meet the criteria for a researcher who publishes - your book and early papers turn up as references in all sorts of places as computers started running looms and knitting machines.


 * I've also found:
 * - IBM may not have considered it a software patent at the time, but Computerworld certainly did! Also it's a good reference for the exhibit at HemisFair 68.
 * - mentions how you made some of your pieces
 * - more about the same work
 * StarryGrandma (talk) 22:42, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Advice? - July 2014
Hello. Lightbreather recommended speaking with you in regards to mentoring. She and I were working on the Gun show loophole page. I would appreciate any tips or guidance on improving the this page and dealing with other editors there. Thanks. (DN) Darknipples (talk) 20:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi User:Darknipples. I've been staying away from pages in areas where the topic is a current political controversy. It is very hard for editors to focus on facts in those areas, rather than campaigning for their own causes. I have given up on trying to get editors in those areas to address structural problems with articles.


 * As for the article you are working on, the name "Gun show loophole" is inherently one-sided. However, that is also the name given to legislation so there may be no help for it. An example of one of the problems these political articles face is shown by the section Gun show loophole. I have come to believe that quotes in articles like these are just a way to campaign. Here you have a couple of random quotes that were added to support one side or other. Articles get loaded down with these quotes and cause a lot of argument among editors. An article like this doesn't need any quotes at all, just summaries of positions. The section Gun show loophole has a similar problem. Again random things are in there without any structure to the section. However editors resist taking these things out.


 * I would be glad to answer questions about general editing and to help in non-political areas. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:22, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

13:25:31, 18 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
Good morning StarryGrandma, Your searching turned up things that I didn't find! I appreciate your making changes to the article to make it look more like an encyclopedia article. Jan Janvermont (talk) 13:25, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

22:19:43, 18 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
StarryGrandma, I would like to request your guidance for my next steps. I reviewed your changes and I like the new tone. I'm not sure if you have in mind to do more on this, or am I to begin now to modify the text following your original notes. May I still communicate with you? Jan Janvermont (talk) 22:19, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


 * It's best on Wikipedia not to edit articles about yourself if you can find someone else to do it. So I will keep on making changes. However I will need your help. Everything in a Wikipedia article needs to have been published somewhere else. So I will need your help finding sources.


 * Question 1: I can only see the first page of your 1964 paper here: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2627999. Does the paper say enough about the generalized transportation problem that I can use it as the reference for the technical material in the "Operations research" section?


 * Thanks. StarryGrandma (talk) 16:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

19:09:03, 19 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
I begin with thank you. Answer to question 1: yes, the paper is about the move forward from the basic transportation problem to the generalized problem. Sections following the page you have are: "Relationshp to the General Linear Progamming Problem", "Relationship to Transportation Problem", "Topology of the Generalized Transportation Problem", "Outline of the Solution of the Generalized Transportation Problem"... I believe I used a published reference for everything I referred to except the current show "The first internet -- the alphabet" which is on now. ( I will take care of that.) All the sources are in the "Publications" or "References". I have copies of almost everything -- my publications in IFIPS, IEEE, ACM ...in the original volumes. If anything I am missing is necessary I will download it for their modest fee.

I am amazed at what you have done so far and I will enlist one of my colleague to do anything else necessary in her sandbox when you give the word. Please let me know when you come to the next resource question. Jan (appreciatively) Janvermont (talk) 19:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

19:03:27, 23 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
Hello StarryGrandma, I was checking our interactions and did not find any additions from you, but when I went back through the sandbox path and scrolled down I found a notation that you had made a modification 37 minutes ago. Am I looking in the wrong place? Janvermont (talk) 19:03, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've just sent you an email. I think we can work on this faster by email if that is OK with you. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Florence Mildred White
Hello StarryGrandma, Thank you for your informative guide on the removal of text from my article to another article. I appreciate now the move was in order and I have written to the person who did it. He has offered help for the future should I need it which I might well take up. I continue to try to improve the article as suggested, but it is slow and time consuming ! TimothyWF (talk) 21:25, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you are going to keep working on it. I have the same problem when I want to add new information to an existing article. It is time consuming to figure out how to add it in smoothly. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

10:32:35, 24 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
Thank you StarryGrandma. Email will be great. I have to check frequently. I did not receive the email you sent on the 23rd so promptly after I used this messaging means. I checked everything I had deleted on the 23rd and did not find it. would you please resend. I'm sorry to bother you. Jan janvermont@aol.com

Janvermont (talk) 10:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

00:20:26, 28 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
Hello StarryGrandma, you may be expecting an email from me and I am anxious to pursue that form of communication. However, I did not receive the email you sent to me. I checked my spam, my trash (during the period in which you sent it) and my Wikipedia preferences, but I did not find the reason why I didn't get your email. I hope you get this message on your talk page. If you send another email would you please also comment to me on your talk page so that I know when it was sent.

My colleague and I greatly appreciated your rewrite of the operations research section. Jan Janvermont (talk) 00:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

15:04:59, 30 July 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
teahouse told me how to send an email to you. hope all is well. janvermont Janvermont (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

16:31:46, 1 August 2014 review of submission by Janvermont
Hello StarryGrandma, Thank you for resuming. I get it that you didn't get it, but that you got it that I didn't get it. I did get your reassuring message on my talk page and I do know how to "speak" to you with this messaging means. We'll make do. Jan Janvermont (talk) 16:31, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * I had already noticed that. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

topic ban
You stated Since Lightbreather was topic banned from articles relating to gun control in this edit. Can you point me to where that ban was enacted?

I reviewed Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gun_control, which handed out some topic bans, but not to Lightbreather.

I reviewed this request for a ban but it was closed without enacting a ban.

I ask because topic bans are supposed to be recorded at Editing restrictions and I do not see it.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  01:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


 * It was an enforcement request which banned both Lightbreather and Scalhotrod: Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive152. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:22, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  01:36, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Goodbye, StarryGrandma
Hello, dear. I am retiring from Wikipedia and I wanted to make my last edit a goodbye to you. There have been others who have helped me over the months, but you were the first good thing to happen to me me, and I will be forever indebted to you for the generosity, kindness, and patience you showed me when I needed it most. Live long and prosper, starry lady. Lightbreather (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Eiffel Tower -- Another correction
Could you please make the other correction I requested on 24 May 2014? In the Tourism / Transport artiicle, the nearest RER station is not Pont de l'Alma. The nearest RER station is Champ de Mars-Tour Eiffel. http://www.toureiffel.paris/en/preparing-your-visit/getting-to-the-eiffel-tower.html Retrieved 23 October,2014--Tvbanfield (talk) 17:40, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews
Hello. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular. The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered. If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.) If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with. Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors. I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC). Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)