user talk:Bluerasberry

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #21

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon

You are invited to join us at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign (which also includes events in Brooklyn and Westchester!). Saturday February 7 Black Life Matters Editathon (RSVP). 12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 06:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Request to use photo

Hello,

Charisma Media would like to use the photo at this link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Vision_United_States#mediaviewer/File:World_Vision_US_Headquarters.jpg) in our article about World Vision. The photo will be placed as a 10x6 on the page. Do you own the rights to the photo and would you send us a release to use it? Is a photo credit needed?

Thank you, Sean Roberts sean.roberts@charismamedia.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.66.47.26 (talk) 22:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Your note on w:mr

Hello,

Thank you for your note on my home project (Marathi Wikipedia.) I have been active there for a number of years and hoping to continue on for many more. I share your hope and enthusiasm for Indic Language wikipedias. I am outside of India but believe that the Indian diaspora has a major role to play in the development, growth and sustenance of Indic Language Wikipedias.

Thank you for your note of encouragement and do share any thoughts you have towards the goal of well-developed Indic Language Wiki-projects and a healthy user-community to support them.

Cheers,

अभय नातू (talk) 03:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Help on Big Data?

(Posting this on User:Rui Gabriel Correia, User:BlueRasberry, User:SPACKlick)'s pages)

Hi! I hope it's okay to ask for your help on Big Data, since you've been involved in the current discussion.

Frankly, I feel that while User:Jugdev is most likely acting in good faith, he is engaged in disruptive editing. I think we're locked in a pattern: If I revert the page during the US day (and explain why), he'll revert it again in the middle of the US night (and post a message saying "I already explained that my change is in keeping with WP style and it comes from a highly respected source"). (example, example, example)

Honestly, I think our only play--assuming he hasn't already crossed the line to disruptive editing--is to take turns reverting changes. If it's always "Narsil reverts, Jugdev unreverts, Narsil ununreverts", then we're both edit-warring. If several WP editors revert his changes and he's always unreverting, I think we have a clear case that he's being disruptive.

Apologies for bothering you! If you'd rather not be involved any further I totally understand.

(P.S. I see he's already been blocked once, recently, for edit warring. I'll ask User:Kuru--who imposed the block--whether he's reached that point again.) Narsil (talk) 19:20, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Narsil I am watching that talk page. I commented there. Thanks for being in the discussion. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

NuScale Power

It's sounding likely that we'll get some great images.

Did you want to review when a draft is ready or did you feel it may be inappropriate if we are too close and both paid editors. Doesn't matter to me - an editor with an interest in the subject is the ideal person to participate. CorporateM (Talk) 00:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

CorporateM I have watched this page for years and reviewed it in the past. If you draft something share it with me. As I told you, I have a standing request with them going back years requesting images, and if you broker that then it would make me happy. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for all your help in these last few weeks. Suz956 (talk) 00:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Primary sources

Hi Lane, Celeste here, stuck at the hospital in blizzard #4 doing some prep work for San Antonio. Question for you: if a paper is a large cohort study ( i.e.e, Danish Medical Birth registry, >1 million pregnancy records examined) but is labelled as "original research", is that still considered a primary source and thus not favored for citation? thanks!

--Celesteroyce (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Celesteroyce Wikipedia seeks to report the best available information and to qualify conclusions in the way that the authors do. The rule is not that primary sources cannot be cited, but that most of them are not appropriate to cite. Some primary sources may be the best sources to cite in some cases.

In the example you give, if the authors say "This is how things are in Denmark" and do not make an assertion that their observation is more broadly relevant, then the source would be treated like most other primary sources, because if the authors themselves do not draw general conclusions from their observations then Wikipedians should not also. If instead the authors assert "We looked enough at the available research, we designed research which is broad enough to form a general conclusion, and we are arguing that what we observed is broadly applicable", then the study may be appropriate for Wikipedia.

The rule for wanting secondary sources is a rubric to help reviewers without a background in medicine to quickly do a quality check that works in most cases. There are lots of exceptions. For other opinions, anyone could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine or just add the source and statement into an article and see how others respond. To preemptively start a conversation the source could be added to the article while also adding a note of doubt or defense to the talk page of that article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Adding a new page about Authorea?

Hi, Lane,

I wonder if you could help me with some advice? What's the best way to add a new page about Authorea (www.authorea.com), or at least propose it for consideration?

Authorea is an online collaborative writing tool for scientists and academics, similar to e.g. ShareLaTeX. Like figshare, Authorea is a strong proponent of Open Access with a freemium business model, hence I think it might fit into WikiProject Open Access.

Since I work for Authorea (as Community person) I can't add it myself -- it's a conflict of interest. Yet I think Authorea satisfies WP:ORG, as with a little research I've already found quite a few articles on sites like Nature and TechCrunch with in-depth coverage of Authorea and discussions of its role in Open Access.

Any advice on what would be a good first step? Would it be helpful for me to draft an article and post it in my sandbox for feedback?

I'd appreciate your advice! Thanks!

Jace Harker (talk) 21:17, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Jace Harker Yes, you seem to know the process already. I will summarize steps here:

1. First collect your third-party sources. Nature and TechCrunch are good starts, as is anything else not published by Authorea or their close business partners. At least 2-3 sources which feature this organization as the subject of journalism or reporting are required to meet the inclusion criteria described at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If you have doubts, show me the sources and I will comment before you proceed.
2. In your sandbox, start the article. Focus on writing content summarized from the sources. If you can do the sentences, other people can do technical formatting.
3. After you have a draft, ask someone to review it to move it into mainspace. You can use the general queue at Articles for Creation, or just ping me, because since I care about open access projects then I would volunteer to help this article through.

Thanks for finding me. I am happy to assist in this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:00, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Bluerasberry Thanks! Great advice, I'll work on a draft and let you know when I think it's ready for review.

I think my sources meet the criteria but would really appreciate an expert opinion. Would you mind taking a look and letting me know if it's reasonable? Here are the sources I was going to work with: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. Thanks again! Jace Harker (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Jace Harker Hello, yes, in my opinion, these sources establish that this platform meets Wikipedia's minimal criteria for inclusion. The TechCrunch, Nature, and HuffPo articles are especially nice. While I cannot say that the others definitely meet reliable source criteria just because I am not familiar with the publications, if they were written by people with some knowledge in the field and standing to do journalism then they seem worth citing also. Ping me again when you have a draft. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:38, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Acne vulgaris

Hey Blue, I apologize for taking a bit of time with the article but I think I've addressed the points you've raised (if I haven't or if I've done so inadequately, please let me know and I will continue to work on them) so I think the article is ready for you to take another look. Thanks! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I replied on that page. Thanks for following up. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Is there anything more we need to do? I've searched pretty extensively and can't find anything for the doing nothing section. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I replied. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Yoga to the People

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Yoga to the People requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Gbawden (talk) 07:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I replied. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Tor: talk

If you insist in keeping the talk section, please put in under your own name and delete references to my ip. I rather avoid any issues that may result from the comment posted; so if you want to keep it, post it under your name and eliminate my ip. Remove this talk section as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:a03f:1285:c600:213:20ff:fe3b:a79e (talk • contribs) 16:37, 24 February 2015‎

I do not insist on anything. I would help but fail to understand what is happening. Your IP address is associated with posting a good question which I answered, and repeatedly deleting that question and answer, and spamming multiple Wikipedia articles with advertisements. If you do not want to draw attention to your IP address then create an WP:ACCOUNT so that your IP will be hidden from public view. I am very sympathetic to privacy needs but do not understand you at all, especially when you came to Wikipedia to criticize anyone's need for Tor privacy and at the same time you do lots of things to draw an unusual amount of attention, scrutiny, and public recordmaking to your own IP address. If you have a safety issue which requires the deletion of your IP records here then please contact the team at WP:OVERSIGHT. I have never seen behavior like yours anywhere else on Wikipedia and think you have made a mistake - Wikipedia by default records the actions of every editor, and if that does not suit you then please cease making comments. I want to help but cannot break Wikipedia rules, especially for an account that does spam vandalism here. Please contact the oversight team to remove your IP address. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:16, 24 February 2015 (UTC)