User talk:SusunW/Archive 27

List of women writers
Please use an en rule, not a hyphen between numerals or spaces. If you don't have an en rule on your keyboard, please copy it from another entry. Thanks, Brian. Bmcln1 (talk) 16:44, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I have absolutely no idea what that is. I type 120 words per minute, thus hunting for some specific character is a really odd request and destroys the rhythm of creating a document. I know of no such character on a standard keyboard. Surely there is a bot that searches for such things, if the programming requires one to use a character which is not on a standard keyboard? SusunW (talk) 16:51, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry I spoke. Believe me it will never happen again. Bmcln1 (talk) 19:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Huh? Dialogue is how we come to consensus on what should be part of the encyclopedia, why would you apologize? I am sincere in that I have no idea what that character is. I am not a technician, I am a writer. Often I have found while working on WP that technicians do not understand problems writers encounter and vice verse. If there isn't a bot created to fix this situation, which is a problem I was unaware of, then surely one should be developed. SusunW (talk) 19:11, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I sympathize with you 100% on this, Susun. Years ago, when we systematically submitted our new articles to DYK, there was always someone who came in at the last minute and used a bot to replace all the hyphens in the dates. There are two hyphens/dashes in the Wiki markup (below) but with no explanation as to what they represent. What really annoys me is that many highly respectable biographical dictionaries and data bases use standard hyphens for the date sequences. What is so special about Wikipedia that we can't use the same approach? : As one of WP's top content editors, perhaps you could do something about this anomaly? (cc )--Ipigott (talk) 20:42, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * By the way, I type pretty fast too, without looking at the keyboard. Nearly all educated Brits from the 1940s and before were brought up on standard typewriters and QWERTY keyboards. My dear Danish wife (also from the 1940s but not a Wikipedia editor) tells me that her average is 180 words per minute. Certainly no time to look for special characters. It's bad enough using ALT all the time for {, [, |, ~, etc., etc, for the wiki markup.--Ipigott (talk) 20:53, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I never look at the keyboard either and no one can use mine if they need to because my fingernails have taken all the letters off. LOL I use Alt all the time for á, é, ñ, etc., but it doesn't mess with my flow, because I use them often. But, yes, you understand my dilemma. It's not that I am trying to be difficult, it is that using some weird character is illogical and is a curtailment to writing. SusunW (talk) 21:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You all type faster than me, and I thought I typed fast. :) I have "Wiki markup" enabled when I click the edit button (maybe it's through My Preferences; dunno) the "en dash" is the first character available in this list of helpful one-NW11 6YDclick options:       ""             Do you see the same? This is not something on my keyboard; it's something which appears on my screen below my editing box, and above the Edit Summary box.  Also,, can you verify if the "en rule" is the same as the en-dash? --Rosiestep (talk) 21:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem is, Rosie, that using the markup options slows you down considerably. In any case, if you read the background rules, you seem to have to use the first dash for certain sequences and the second one for others. Why not just a simple hyphen?--Ipigott (talk) 21:20, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Rosie, good to be in touch again. Yes, I believe the en rule and em rule are the same as the en dash and em dash. Bmcln1 (talk) 21:54, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * , yes, I see those things at the bottom but mine just says insert. Ian nailed the problem, I would have to stop typing to insert one (I guess with a mouse hovering over the character?). I don't look at what I type. Read a source, type my info, add the citation (also extremely cumbersome, IMO), preview and save. I cannot imagine how many fewer articles I would be able to produce if I had to stop and search out coding information every time I had to insert a special character. The alphabets I use often, as I said, I am aware of the coding needed to produce those characters and it doesn't slow down the flow. WP should be easy to use and it is not. I cannot tell you how many times I almost quit writing the first year and a half, because of all the technical hoops one has to know to produce content. If we want to attract good content editors, we should make it more easily accessible to people who actually write. Otherwise, we end up with a bunch of technicians who are cleaning up stuff all the time. I would really prefer that they not have to do that with my articles, but if I am going to produce quality articles, I have to be able to create, not focus on minutia. I see absolutely no logic for having to use a special character which is not part of a standard keyboard set rather than a hypen. In essence, it forces one to conform to the illogical o.O SusunW (talk) 22:17, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree it does stop the flow to have to click the en-dash, but for me, it's no different than stopping to click the link for REDIRECT, which is in the line below it, or the picture icon (to add an image), which is directly above the editing box. But I don't think it's a big deal if you stick with the hyphen and let some bot make the change to en-dash. Truth be told, I've only switched to the end-dash in the last few months; my first 10 years, I used the hyphen for dates. ; just curious... did a bot show a list of users who use hyphen vs. en-dash, or was there another way that you spotted that SusunW uses hyphenates dates, vs. en-dash? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:42, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * , I don't use any of that. I make a redirect by opening a red link and typing and I insert a photo by copying the link to the file. I really have zero clue how to do all this technical stuff. I do what works for me, so that I can write content, which is usually pasting stuff I don't know how to use. I don't see anything at the bottom of my page that says anything about photos or redirects. SusunW (talk) 22:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I check certain List pages fairly regularly and noticed this User makes the error from time to time. It's one of several recurrent differences between typescript and typesetting. If there is a bot that does the job I'll happily stop. Bmcln1 (talk) 22:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I hope there is a bot and if not that they develop one. I'm glad there are people who help with that kind of thing, I just think that it would serve us all better to automate clean up stuff like this. ;) SusunW (talk) 23:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

There is a bot but I can't remember what it's called. I know one of the editors who reviews DYKs uses it frequently. I saw it used was just a few days ago on an article that had been submitted to DYK - so I'll see if I can find it.--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I've found it. The article is Anna Marguerite McCann and the editor who used the bot was who points to User:GregU/dashes.js. I have no idea how to run it although I would very much like to tidy up the many, many lists of women I have created or worked on over the years. Unless, of course, we can alter the rules to allow hyphens. : Are you able to see how to use it?--Ipigott (talk) 07:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


 * It's not a "bot", it's a script. You need to copy some stuff to your monobook, which you can create at User:Susun W/monobook.js.  Check out mine at User:The Rambling Man/monobook.js, you need to copy and paste the stuff under "dash fixer", ie:
 * Once you done that, purge the cache on the monobook by forcing a reload, and then we you go to any page, you should see a new tab at the top of the page with an en-dash in it. Pressing that runs the script.  Be careful, it sometimes needs to be run a couple of times, and never use it on airplane articles because e.g. 737-800 really does use a hyphen, not an en-dash.  Hope that helps. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. This will allow you to keep using hyphens when you type, and then use the script when you're done and "fix them" (per MOS:DASH) in one hit. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:08, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * P.P.S. The original complaint was somewhat excessive. MOS compliance is not mandated, and should not be a barrier to adding more content.  For featured content, we tend to mandate adherence to the MOS, but otherwise you should be encouraged to keep on adding material, not discouraged simply because you used the "wrong kind" of punctuation separation.  In my opinion.  The Rambling Man (talk) 08:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * yay that there is a bot. Boo that I cannot install it. When I pressed on the red link, I get:
 * "User account "Susun W" is not registered.
 * Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact name.
 * This page is protected from creation, so only administrators can create it."
 * I am curious if you were able to install it, Ian? SusunW (talk) 13:22, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, try User:SusunW/monobook.js, the link I provided had a space in it. The script should be straightforward enough to install, let me know if you need any more help. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, that doesn't work either. Ask an admin at WP:AN to create the page for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you see exactly why I am not technical. Too tedious ;) Maybe can wave her admin wand. SusunW (talk) 13:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Please check and see if it works. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:42, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have no idea how to use it. I have gone to 6 different pages, and see nothing at the top of the page. Nothing in the tool bar on the left, and nothing different if I open edit. SusunW (talk) 13:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you purge the monobook page cache? You should see at least one tiny tab at the top of each page, usually between "history" and "move" with an en-dash inside.  The Rambling Man (talk) 13:53, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I purged SusunW's cache after I installed the script, but maybe she has to do it, too. Then I went to my monobook to install the script for my use, and found I already had it, but, guess what... I don't have the tab with the en-dash either. So I could use some help with this, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Technically inept me has no idea how to purge a page. I see no option to do such a thing? See why I think technical stuff works against creation? I could've written an article or at least started one by now *sigh*. (Smiles at the irony of it as she drinks more coffee). SusunW (talk) 14:04, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Usually in Windows it's CTRL+SHIFT+R. Restart browser? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:28, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, for background, see WP:PURGE. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. So I went to User:SusunW/monobook.js did that CSR and nothing different. I went to my browser and cleared the cache, nothing different. I signed out of WP and back in, I still see no different tabs at the top of my page. Sorry to be the cause of so much grief. Why is it that we are forced to use this character again? SusunW (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It's very odd because I just removed the script from my monobook and immediately the tab disappeared, then I re-added the script, and it re-appeared. So it's definitely what you need to do.  I'm using Firefox, but it also works on Chrome under OSX... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No clue. I am using Firefox as well. Typically I clear my cache there every 4 hours. But this I did manually per your instruction with C+S+R, then when that didn't work, I cleared it, etc. It is beyond me. I really appreciate your trying to help, but maybe it is just something I cannot do. Maybe one has to be or have been an admin. I have no idea, but for now, I am going back to writing. I am frustrated with my inability to do technology and the fact that the technology fails me. SusunW (talk) 15:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Keep using the hyphens, and if you'd like me to blitz your articles with the script, drop me a line.  The Rambling Man (talk) 15:04, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. What I'd like is for the Tron Gods to change the MOS rule and go to using hypens, but as that is not gonna happen, I truly appreciate your kind offer. SusunW (talk) 15:08, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, like I said, MOS is a guideline, not a policy, adherence is optional and claiming that using a hyphen instead of an en-dash to be a "error" is erroneous itself. There are literally hundreds of thousands of other articles that this user could be fixing up, better if he left you to get on with your content creation. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a big deal... but if the Tron Gods can sort out why it's not showing up for me (I use Firefox; it's never shown up), I'd be appreciative. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I have found that the Tron Gods are completely capricious, as evidenced that The Rambling Man uses the same browser and it works for him. Mayhaps you should leave out a plate of cookies tonight ;) SusunW (talk) 22:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a big deal... but if the Tron Gods can sort out why it's not showing up for me (I use Firefox; it's never shown up), I'd be appreciative. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I have found that the Tron Gods are completely capricious, as evidenced that The Rambling Man uses the same browser and it works for him. Mayhaps you should leave out a plate of cookies tonight ;) SusunW (talk) 22:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Per your comments here, I tried to add those two lines of information to User:SusunW/common.js and still see no en dash on my page, even after purge, manually clearing my cache and rebooting my computer. SusunW (talk) 19:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Have you tried hovering over 'More'? On my computer the dash is the first option above 'Move'. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It is indeed there. I am so not technically oriented and truly appreciate the info. the Tron Gods were apparently appeased and sent us emissaries to solve the problem :)
 * I successfully used the program on Aletta Beaujon! Yippee! Thank you all so much. It truly does "take a village" ;) SusunW (talk) 17:52, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You are welcome!! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Susun, : While we're on the subject of hyphens/dashes... Did I use the em-dash appropriately on Ernestine Schaffner or should I have used a hyphen or an en-dash? --Rosiestep (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Olga T. Weber
SusunW Hello thank you for your repsonse on Olga T. Weber article, how did you come across that information on the GPO website? That was pretty great. ConstitutionTown (talk) 17:47, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I just checked the tabs for google books. Saw that there was an entry and as it was only a snippet view, searched archive.org for the Congressional Record. I have often found that items which are not accessible in Google books are open access in either archive.org or Hathitrust. SusunW (talk) 17:51, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

SusunW I searched on Google Books and found an entry on congressoinal records but, can't seem to find the entry on archive.org, gpo.gov or hathitrust. How did you make your search in their search box? This is what I found on Google books, https://books.google.com/books?id=AV2i5Hq19HUC&q=Olga+T.+Weber&dq=Olga+T.+Weber&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjwzbKHmMfXAhUCziYKHfwOB4MQ6AEIPjAE ConstitutionTown (talk) 03:35, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not finding it either. Weird. To search archive.org, follow the instructions here WP:WREF. I tried but got no results. Your book says it was 1967 volume, so that is the 90th Congress. I also tried here: and am not getting any records for the 90th Congress, which is totally weird. SusunW (talk) 04:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

SusunW I ended up finding it through and extensive google search. Thank you again for your help! ConstitutionTown (talk) 17:56, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks ! It means a lot coming from you. If I stay on track, I have Colombia and Chile, Brazil and Bolivia, Argentina and Antarctica, and will finish with the US and Canada, hopefully ahead of the deadline for the end of the month. I've been able to do two per day, though it's tough, and I figure I have 4 more days of work and 7 days to get it done :) Then I will have covered every country/territory/dependent in the Americas. Oh, and I should hit my year end goal of 1,000 articles before the end of the month too. SusunW (talk) 22:16, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Wow! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  22:18, 23 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Truly impressive. And the articles are really informative.--Ipigott (talk) 13:33, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks I have been really happy with the women I found to write about. I was totally surprised at the number of 17th-18th century women I found for the islands :) SusunW (talk) 15:12, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Historians rock!

 * Thank you so much, . I really do find the hunt just as exciting as the learning process of writing. To me, it's all like a giant jigsaw puzzle trying to figure out the mysteries of a life :) SusunW (talk) 21:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Canadian biography
Hi, SusunW! I saw you wrote a Canadian biography for the WIR Contest. If you'd like, you can also submit this to The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Please use this link for convenience. Thanks for all your work on the contest! – Reidgreg (talk) 11:51, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll add her. I added all my Latin America and Caribbean ones to that 10,000 page, but did not know about the Canadian one. SusunW (talk) 14:14, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Template:The 100,000 Challenge should give you a current list of all the challenges. It's usually at the bottom of the main page for any of the challenges, but the lists are so long it's often easy to overlook. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I often write about Canadian women, but I am amazed at how hard finding sourcing is. Maybe it is because I am in Mexico? I have no idea, but I know for absolute certain that different google sites give different results when you search in a different country. I am not really much into competition, but my goals for this world contest were to write one comprehensive article for each country/dependent/territory in the Americas and I managed to do that, plus wrote 3 extras one for Asia, and 2 18th century businesswomen/planters/slavers. should be proud of his work in coordinating the whole thing and he still managed to write articles.  I am thrilled with the outcome overall. SusunW (talk) 14:52, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it feels good to be part of what they're saying is the most-successful edit-a-thon ever. The Can10k challenge only averages about 3-4 articles a day, so seeing this one hitting 100 was something.  And before this contest I'd only written one article.  Now I'm close to fifty.  I think I'm only up for one $10 prize.  I forgot about daylight savings time and so the American biography I wrote came in 4 minutes after the end of the contest, so I missed out on third-place for North America.  I got the most Canadian biographies, but there's no prize for that, just bragging rights.  I came up against a lot of link rot while looking for sources, but once I figured out which websites were likely to write about the person (a specific university or the Governor General's site), refining a google search to that site helped quite a bit.  And of course use google.ca instead of google.com. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:28, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I hit my 1,000th article (I don't write stubs) during the contest. There wasn't a prize for quality that saw for Latin America and the Caribbean, and lumping the islands with all of Mexico (North America), Central and South America always means that the Latinos will win on quantity, but I am really happy with the number of women from the Caribbean that were covered. Archive.org is a lifesaver for finding links that have died, though it doesn't always work. They also have a new checkout function so you can actually sign up and check out books that they have on file. Maybe not so important in the US and Canada, but here in Mexico, without lending libraries, it is a fabulous service. I use google.mx but have figured out that if you change to google.wherever, you get different results, though you are still denied access to various items based on copyright restrictions and your IP. :) SusunW (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

barnstar

 * You are very welcome . I am always glad to help save notable women ;) SusunW (talk) 19:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

An exceptional barnstar for you
Thankyou so much for the hard work! I make it $275 that you've won. Please double check. If you would like to donate any of your winnings into the Women in Red Book Fund to raise money to buy books for editors of women topics who need them on demand please add your name and the amount you'd like to donate in the sub section below the prize winners on the main contest page.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I am really thrilled. Donated it all, with suggestions on things I'd like to be able to access ;) I'm surprised I finished in the top winners at all. Thank you for all of your hard work to make this happen. SusunW (talk) 17:41, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thankyou!! I've emailed you as you can certainly use some of it to buy yourself subscriptions. How much do you need? ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:44, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:MCQ
You are invited to join the discussion at. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I know absolutely nothing about the commons file or their licensing. It was uploaded last month. I uploaded the fair use image a year previous to the commons one. As far as I can tell, neither source gives any publishing data, or authorship, only that the image was taken from the Archives of the Society of Nurses and Health Care Professionals of Slovenia. From what I understand, it isn't sufficient criteria for it to have been made prior to X, it has to have been published. My fair use rationale stands—I am unable to ascertain when it was published. If the uploader of the commons image can verify publishing, then replace the image. But, as it appears to be the same photo from the same original source, published by two different newspapers, I don't see verification of publishing prior to 1 January 1945 or 1 January 1970 as cited in the commons upload and would not replace the fair use image. SusunW (talk) 06:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Please understand I wasn't accussing you of anything, I just wanted you to know about the other file with the same name. FWIW, your upload seems fine, but sometimes people find a free file after the fact which is what I am trying to clarify. If the Commons file's licensing is determined to be OK, then most likely you're crop can be converted to a similar license. If the Commons file's licensing is not OK, then it most likely will be deleted. Right now what is happening is that there's a bot adding your file to various other pages because the meta data the bot is using for reference shows that there's a freely available file on Commons with the same name. The problem is that the Wikipedia software will always call out the local file whenever someone or something adds the file to a page, even if they mean to use the Commons file. This is called "shadowing" and what is usually done is that Template:ShadowsCommons is added to the local file's page to make others aware of the issue. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:08, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't think you were accusing me of anything. Why would I? I was simply pointing out that the commons upload appears to be flawed and I don't want mine replaced, because the commons one will likely be deleted unless publishing data can be verified. I know diddly about bots, am not remotely technical. ;) It seems weird to me that the commons uploader would have been allowed to use the same photo name, but again, I am not a technician. SusunW (talk) 07:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Although Commons and Wikipedia overlap quite a bit, they are technically different sites with there own respective policies and guidelines. Commons files can be used on all WP:WMF pages whereas Wikipedia files can only be used locally here. Although the file names are the same, they are technically on different sites, so no red flags were raised when the Commons file was uploaded.
 * For reference, the local file wasn't nominated or tagged for deletion, and it's still being used in Angela Boškin. The shadowing is just being discussed to see if it can be sorted out. If licensing for the Commons file can be verified, then the local one can probably be converted to the same licensing and the name slightly tweaked to say it's a crop. It is possible that the local file may be deleted if the quality of the Commons one is considered superior, but in that case someone will probably make a crop of the Commons one as a replacement. If the Commons licensing cannot be verified, then that file will be deleted and the local file's name will remain as is. It will all be eventually sorted out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:44, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * What needs to be remembered is that there are many instances where non-free files are copied from here-not moved-and licensed as PD images. Because some projects do not permit use of any non-free files; this is a sort of "way" to get around that for a while.  Have seen clearly non-free film posters copied from here and uploaded at Commons as PD posters.  When the duplicate file is discovered, there's a rush for FFD and a call for deletion here.  Finding it at Commons doesn't make it PD; before any FFD/deletions here, one should know the status of the Commons file-whether it IS truly in the PD in its home country & the US. If not, it needs to go to Commons DR, but there's no point in losing both copies.  The film posters I mentioned were sent to Commons DR and deleted as vios; by not rushing things here, the WP non-free copy was kept.
 * Susun-should this image be found to be PD, you can keep copies of these files here at en:WP by marking them . We hope (talk) 13:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you both! I write lots of articles and always try to find a photo. Many of them I upload fair use photos for because the publishing info cannot be determined. If it can be replaced that's fine, I just don't want to end up with no image. I am surprised about the upload, because I am positive that I have had a message come up that a file name I wanted to use was already in use. But maybe that just meant already in use on commons, I truly don't remember. Anyway, thanks for the discussion, I learned something :) SusunW (talk) 14:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah thanks for the further clarification. @Susan: I can attest to what We hope is saying about some editors reuploading local non-free files to Commons. Most times it seems to be just a good-faith mistake, but I have seen it done a couple of times because re-uploader apparently wanted to use the file again on English Wikipedia in a manner which is not allowed by Wikipedia's non-free content policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Angela Boškin.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Angela Boškin.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 14:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The non-free image w:File:Angela Boškin.jpg that you uploaded has been replaced by a cropped version of the full size image that was on the commons from a different source because the license has been changed based on the commons discussion c:COM:VPC, so please don't reupload this one after it get deleted as an orphan non-free image. Hope you understand. ww2censor (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * As long as the article has a photograph, I have no opinion on whether a fair use or commons version is used. My concern, as I expressed before when the topic came up was that the rationale on the commons upload was flawed. If you have verified the publication info, I am glad to defer to someone with more expertise. It would never occur to me to edit war or reverse someone's good faith edit. SusunW (talk) 22:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Google books
Further to our earlier discussion, I have been trying to find some background on access to Google books. The most interesting piece I have found is this New Yorker article. I've no idea whether any Wikipedia/Wikimedia interests would be interested in improving access by Wikipedia editors for research purposes but perhaps could investigate or suggest suitable contacts. You might have some ideas yourself.--Ipigott (talk) 10:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This "Google did manage to reach a settlement to make the full library available to the public, for pay, and to institutions" says there ought to be a way to access it, though it is cryptic. Institutions, like what? Does that include organizations like WP, and institutions like public libraries, or only institutions like university libraries? Finding material, but not being able to access it is the bane of my existence. SusunW (talk) 18:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry,, but I don't have insight (or a suggestion) into this, and lack the bandwidth to investigate. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe who is the "partnerships coordinator for The Wikipedia Library" would be a place to start  SusunW (talk) 20:57, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi both - sorry for the delay, I've been away for the past week. It would certainly be a wonderful thing to get access to Google Books' full database, but unfortunately there's no way to do so right now, for anyone - let alone Wikipedia. This is a comprehensive piece on the topic (and a great read); the TL;DR version is that Google has a huge database of scanned books that it's not legally allowed to provide to anyone. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 18:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, for providing the legal background. As far as I can see from this, the only people who can access Google Books extensively are at Harvard. They don't realize how privileged they are.--Ipigott (talk) 09:22, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * , thank you! Great article. Sad that they are there and just out of reach. I guess that means we must make do with the books at Hathitrust and archive.org. Unless, of course, becomes a visiting scholar at Harvard ;) SusunW (talk) 14:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I must say I still find it very strange that the level of access to Google Books seems to depend on where you happen to be located when you access the service. It also seems to me to be strange that if you are seriously interested in using Google Books as a resource for Wikipedia, your access to a given book is terminated after you have clicked into the Preview service on a given volume after two or three interrogations. The way out, of course, is to keep your first access open for several days until you have completed your research. But these are things which Wikipedia could certainly try to sort out with Google which makes enormous use of the articles/entries we create on Wikipedia and Wikidata. So I still think and friends could try to provide a better level of service for dedicated Wikipedians.--Ipigott (talk) 15:20, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sophia Parnok
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sophia Parnok 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 Katolophyromai -- Katolophyromai (talk) 22:01, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sophia Parnok
The article Sophia Parnok you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sophia Parnok for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Katolophyromai -- Katolophyromai (talk) 03:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

"tis the season...."
Happy Holidays text.png Hello SusunW: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ― Buster7  &#9742;   22:25, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
 * Thank you Hope you and yours have a lovely holiday season. We've been abroad and just returned. Have guests arriving tonight ;) Tis the season! SusunW (talk) 16:54, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Year of death x3
Hi! If you or your pagestalkers have time/inclination to help me with year of death for these biographies —Euphemia Wilson Pitblado, Ruth Ward Kahn, Sarah Dyer Hobart— I'd be appreciate (you seem to have a knack for that!) but if you're busy with other things, no worries! Thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Pitblado SusunW (talk) 21:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Rosiestep (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Kahn is a weird one. Her first marriage appears to have been in 1891. I suspect she remarried, as the last mention I find of her is in 1899. Lee died in Feb 1899  Within 3 months, Ruth was headed to Europe, start at the last sentence in the left column, but stopped to visit her mother Mary Griggs and sisters Sylvia and Stella. Sylvia Wicoff apparently soon became Sylvia Brown (Mrs. Earl M) and moved to Los Angeles . Her mother's husband died in 1915, and the mother went to live with Brown in California. Either Stella or Ruth married someone named Lint who died in 1905 . There are no dates for age of this Ruth Kahn who married in 1908.  I thought by following the sisters and mom, I might gain an idea of what her name became, but so far, no luck. SusunW (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope, wrong about the Lint, it was Sylvia. So who is Mrs. John Blake? Ruth? SusunW (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hobart in 1921 SusunW (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you; thank you! You're the best! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:57, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Christmas greetings
Wishing you all the best for 2018 and beyond! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Hope your holiday season is all that you wish for. SusunW (talk) 00:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Festivus!

 * Gracias mi amiga. Hope you and yours have a wonderful seasonal time. Looking forward to our collaborations for next year, SusunW (talk) 00:59, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

HH!

 * Thank you Looking forward to 2018 and what the year holds for us. Hope you have a beautiful holiday season and many more trips around the sun. SusunW (talk) 01:04, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Manuel Amador Guerrero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cartagena ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Manuel_Amador_Guerrero check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Manuel_Amador_Guerrero?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 11:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

New Year's resolution: Write more articles for Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Margaret L. Curry
Happy New Year! I hope you have a nice and productive year. I'm writing this new article and came across a Newspapers.com article which I can't access. It's in the upper right corner of this page. Would you be able to clip it for me? Thanks so much, Yoninah (talk) 22:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * any time. Here you go. Hope you have a wonderful year as well. Let me know if you need more. SusunW (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This is great! I didn't realize it had so much biographical information. There's very little else on her. Thank you—I always keep you in mind! Yoninah (talk) 23:00, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Of any use or interest?

 * Women Film Pioneers Project at Columbia. We hope (talk) 14:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually it is! We have an upcoming editathon in July on Women of film and stage. Thank you SusunW (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Check citations
Before I add more sources/citations to the Native American Fashion draft, I want to make sure that I'm not disrupting what is already going on. If you could take a look and then let me know if this is the sort of referencing you would like, I could adapt and do things differently. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉  03:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * don't worry about it. Nothing will be disruptive and the help is greatly appreciated. I usually convert all the refs to harv style because it is easier for me to edit without the long streams of references in the text when I am trying to read and modify text. Just input whatever you want, however you normally do it. When there's a break in the editing, I will probably convert the refs, but it isn't a huge issue for me. This is one of those articles that I can see will grow over time, so there hopefully will be many people adding to it at some point and I won't bother converting them forever ;) If you think of a scheme to better organize the text, feel free to move things around. The dates are totally arbitrary, just to give us some breaks so that there are no really long strings of text. SusunW (talk) 06:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you ! After I did Josephine Wapp and Wendy Ponca, it just seemed that there was a lot that could be done on the topic. The article was a fun collaboration for our editathon on fashion (not my forte ;) and needless to say I was able to add a lot of red links from it to our indigenous women's list for August's upcoming editathon. Today I did Azalea Thorpe, New's wife. SusunW (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2018 (UTC)