Hi, if I would like to write a history of a company in NPOV (no promotion on company & its products), something like Coca-Cola & Nestle done, how can I do that? 219.95.123.254 (talk) 02:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was patrolling with Huggle when the user placed the Prod, so I investigated. We need an article on this topic, but the one we had was totally unrelated to the facts. There are some reliable sources out there, including an article on the Johns Hopkins website. Maybe I will be writing an article today! Cheers, --Diannaa(Talk)17:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!
Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:User:The Utahraptor/Christmas tree}} to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.
Wishing you a very Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays! Wishing you all the very best for the season. Thanks for all your help and support this year. Merry Christmas and may Santa be good to you! – SMasters (talk) 03:37, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply] Click to play!
...for your kind note on ANI, and of course your help with that issue! I worry about that a bit -- how many more of those are there? I know precious little about TV shows and I'm not even sure I can spot a hoax unless I'm following one of these serial vandals around. Most of them acquire an identifiable style after a while. (I don't watchlist ANI any more ... too much drama for drama's sake ... I've come to believe hanging out there too much is a burnout risk.) Thanks again and have a happy holiday season, Antandrus (talk)21:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, most pop culture topics are outside my area of expertise as well. I don't watchlist ANI either, but I do tend to read it almost every day. I participate only lightly as I am pretty new at the admin-game. Best holiday wishes! --Diannaa(Talk)22:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Fellow editor, Thanks for the response. The main concern was for me the WP:AGF and accusations of WP:Sockpuppetry. You re right about [this], and I should have responded in a better fashion. The reason for this particular instance is that on Jat people there had been a prolonged discussion by Admin User:Dbachmann into the removal of 19th Century sources. I must admit I get frustrated with the India based articles, as 99% of editors and anonymous IP's comes on to "big up" their own "caste" group. I will do better. Thanks--Sikh-History08:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking my criticism in good spirit. I know what you mean about the India/Pakistan articles. People are constantly juggling for position and status rather than trying to improve the encyclopedia. You are actually one of the few who do not behave that way. Thank you for reporting this incident. --Diannaa(Talk)15:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted another message on his talk page. There is no new incident he is complaining about; he is still complaining about the removal of that talk page post. Please try to avoid this user for the next while if possible, and hopefully things will cool down. There will be no way to avoid them permanently, as there is overlap in the type of articles you wish to edit. And make sure your editing and behavior is above reproach, so he will have no new ammunition for further complaints. I have watch-listed both your talk pages and will monitor events. --Diannaa(Talk)17:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think its more like a case of WP:IDHT. Perhaps my last post will get results. They have not edited since, so hopefully that means they are thinking about what I said and will not stalk you any more. --Diannaa(Talk)15:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am concerned you may be sending the wrong message here
You say that it is not a social network and yet you let these things go without a thought. Birthday committee? are you serious? please explain because i really dont think you are sending the right message there. is it because i am new and you enjoy harassing new users to feel superior? This is legitimate wiki-related talk so dont try to go and say im being off topic on people's talk pages. I would genuinely like to know why these things go on. This environment has not been welcoming at all. Needless to say i am very upset at the behavior of your sysops. thank you for your time.--Marsha Watson (talk) 05:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not actually a member of this birthday committee, so sorry, so I cannot comment on that. You are very welcome here if your aim is to improve the encyclopedia; if you are here to chit-chat with your friends, you have come to the wrong place. Regards, --Diannaa(Talk)05:29, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What an evasive response. are you a sysop? i dont see you leaving templates claiming that they are social networking on their talk page or removing them from the site completely? I am physically ill at your hypocrisy. --Marsha Watson (talk) 05:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dianaa, thanks for completing the copyedit of this article. A few people have done some cursory copyedits of it, but with your thorough job, I believe that it's now ready to be submitted to FAC. Which, I must admit, is a bit anxiety-provoking for me, since I've found the FAC process to be a tad brutal, doncha know. You have helped immensely. Wish me luck, and hope you have a Happy New Year. Christine (talk) 12:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi Diannaa! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.
If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!
You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).
Of course, that would be ok. We did not set a firm deadline so anytime in the next week or so would be awesome. Sorry to hear about your loss. --Diannaa(Talk)21:29, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One or two paragaphs, depending on how much info you find. Something about their diet; what kind of dwellings they lived in and how far away from the actual town of Silver Reef; interactions (if any) between them and the white settlers; were they still living in the area when the settlers arrived? That would be great and would give a little more depth to the article. Thanks --Diannaa(Talk)21:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good! I will pass it. Please try to tighten up the language on the new material again, while I find out what to do next to get it listed. Congratulations! --Diannaa(Talk)01:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The December 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive Needs Your Help!
Please help!
The December 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive is almost complete. Please help, as the backlog has begun to climb back up. Already exceeding 20,000 articles! The backlog was down to 19,275, let's try to put it back down there by the end of the drive! We're going to need all the firepower we can get, so please remind your friends to help as well.Thanks for all your help thus far!
You need to get permission in place first; if you do not already have it go to Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage to get permission. Once you are ok'd, you can download the software onto your computer. On mine (Toshiba laptop running Windows 7) it placed the software and documentation in a folder in the "Documents" section.
I have AWB perm, and it's downloaded.
Start up the software and set the parameters: place the category you wish to review in the slot labelled "category" over on the left under "Make List". Press "make list" and it will generate a list of all items in the category. Click on the tab marked "skip" and ask it to skip all articles where no changes are made. It will then pause only on articles where if finds something. Once you press "Start" (a button available once you click on the "Start" tab) then you will be asked to log in. Use your Wikipedia username and password. The software will then begin reviewing the articles and pausing on ones where it finds things.
So I can do any category, basically, that has Articles that need Wikification, right?
As it is only judging whether or not there are enough wikilinks present, you will still need to review and add section headers, info boxes, and the like. You can also fill in the metadata at the bottom of the page on biographies. You will sometimes improve the linking as well, of course. I would tend only to do the simpler ones in the AWB browser window as it is quite small and a little more awkward to use than the regular interface.
OK
I have just been reviewing one month at a time (I am going to finish Oct 2008 in a minute), but if you wish to look at larger lists is is possible to save your work partway through a list. Just go to the "file" tab in the upper left corner and save the settings, either as the default, or you can create a different name for your save if you like. Then you can resume a larger list exactly where you left off.--Diannaa(Talk)03:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the filter you create is by inserting the name of the category you wish to review in the wee box. The AWB will check all its various parameters. For instance on lots of articles it wants to add an "orphan" tag or make other changes. But for our purposes, wikification drive, I have been skipping those and just focusing on the ones where it says the Wikify tag can be removed. I think you are understanding it now, yes? --Diannaa(Talk)01:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, but the internet has been out at my house for a while and I haven't been able to gain access to a computer with internet access so that I could at least warn people about it. I am going to remove myself anyway as I haven't exactly done much to help. My apologies once again. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:18, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dianna.Sorry for the late merry Christmas and a happy coming New Year.I am going to try to write the Rajput article in chronological order.I will write the article on talk page first and then if you think it sounds ok to write on the main page the we will move it to the main page.I have read Col. James Tod,s Annals and antiquities of Rajasthan.There is material available on the internet on a website "Project South Asia" from Greek, Roman and Chinese sources. For Example, Megasthene,s Indika, Heaun Tsiang,s Bhuddist records of the Western world.All my material will be from the foreign sources which can be verified.Just bear with me for a few days. Thanks.Rajbaz (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dianna.It,s Rajbaz.I am trying to write the Rajput article in chronological order, so that it makes sense.I am using foreign sources only e.g., British historian Tod,s Annals, Greek historian Megasthene,s Indika, Chinese historian Hiuan Tsang,s Budhist records of the Western world.I am not trying to write Rajput hitory.That will be too long.Tod,s History of Rajputs is in 4 volumes with aproximately 1000 pages in each volume.This article is just going to be a drop in the ocean.this is just going to be a sketch for the main Rajput article in chronological order.
The reason i am writing it on the Rajput talk page is for all the editors of this article to see whether they agree with it or not.I have already let Matthew Vanitas know about my intentions.If everyone agrees then we will put it on the main page.Cheers.Rajbaz (talk) 18:09, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome, and will you please watch my talk page since I'm watching yours, and plus thanks for that revert on my talk page. WAYNESLAM19:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2010. Read all about these in the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report.
Highlights
Membership grows to 503 editors
2,589 articles removed through four Backlog elimination drives
Certainly. If any of the information comes from books, newspapers, and magazines instead of from local knowledge, you could put that in as a source. For example, if there are any newspaper articles in the local paper that discuss the economy, you could use it as a source to improve that section. If the temples have been discussed in any scholarly works, that would be a source for that section. Right now there is no way to verify what is in the village other than going there ourselves and taking a look. --Diannaa(Talk)17:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Archived articles
Thanks very much for the kind words, Diannaa; I'm proof that fools rush in where angels fear to tread, and will try not to take on another humongous article till I have more editing experience (I've had an account for several years, but was bitten by the editing bug only recently and find moving commas around to be an acceptable substitute for true creativity :-)). I archived Iowa class battleship in January, and will move it today. Thanks for the heads-up, and happy new year! Wi2g16:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I notice that you've speedy deleted one of my templates for the 1980 Toronto election. You've also returned the basic information to the Ron Kanter page (which I appreciate), but I can't help but think I should explain my logic in having created in the first place.
There are several templates of this sort on Wikipedia, and they're often posted on multiple pages. (This particular template could be posted on the pages for Ron Kanter, Ying Hope, and the 1980 Toronto election; in fact, it was posted on the last of these pages until someone removed it not long ago). Storing this information in template form makes it easier to make changes, when and as necessary. It also takes up less space. Until now, no-one has objected to the existence of this information in template form.
I can't help but think the original speedy delete was the result of a misunderstanding; I certainly don't regard the existence of the template as controversial. Would you be willing to restore the template? CJCurrie (talk) 04:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sure. Sorry about that; there was no way for me to know that the template had recently been removed from several articles and was therefore in use. --Diannaa(Talk)04:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the subject is at least as notable as many others here on wikipedia, and I was in the process of rewriting to make it less of an advertorial. Could I ask you to restore it to my userspace so that I may continue work on it there? MalleusFatuorum00:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I understand why you deleted it, given the style in which it was written, but I think I can save it and demonstrate notability. We'll see anyway. MalleusFatuorum00:50, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That explains why the version you restored wasn't quite the same as the version I was working on then. Staggering as it may seem I've never done this before; is there anything special I need to do when I recreate the article? Can I just move it from my userspace into mainspace? MalleusFatuorum01:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you do it as a WP:MOVE that would be best, as it gives a record of the edit history. Once you are done and satisfied that the article will survive in mainspace, you can tag the subpage for speedy with a {{db-u1}}. --Diannaa(Talk)01:23, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ravenart has re-created the page, and it is already re-tagged for speedy. What now?? big sigh. Is yours ready yet? They are gonna salt it for sure so we might have to move fast. --Diannaa(Talk)01:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have transferred your version into mainspace but it is still tagged for speedy. I am going to Worldcat to look for ISBNs.--Diannaa(Talk)01:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'd like it to be noted that my article, outline of bodybuilding, was not a duplication, but rather an outline, of the subject. (see WP:OOK) Is there any way my work can be restored? Thanks Tarheel95 (talk) 14:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, Diannaa! I see you done 91 articles and over 15,000 words on this month's backlog! That's a lot! At least you're a good copy editor on large articles. WAYNESLAM01:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Why don't you give one a try, Wayne? I noticed that you stopped working on an article because the first section was "too long". Remember to do what I do and take a break between sections. In case you come across large sections, such as in the article you gave up on, take breaks after copy editing a couple paragraphs. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs01:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Start paying attention in English class. ;) You might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Basic copyediting. That should have some good tips. Read it thoroughly, and if there are any linked pages that are associated with copy editing, read them, too. You may also want to read this page and the pages it links to. It's a lot of reading, but as long as it improves your copy editing skills, it's worth it. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs02:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there are. We'll work on writing articles in February, after the drive is over. Although I haven't created many articles, I still have writing experience, as I have a Good article. We'll discuss this more at the end of this month. Now, let's focus on your copy editing skills. If you're in school, ask your English teacher to give you a couple extra lessons about proper grammar before or after school. Also remember to read the links about copy editing. You don't have to do this; I just recommend it. If you're not in school, then simply read the copy editing links. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs03:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Wayne. thank you for noticing how many articles I have worked on in the drive so far. One of the things I like to do during the drives is copy edit a lot of short articles as that helps keep the totals going down. I am also working on Clint Eastwood, which is, I think, the largest article I have ever worked on. It has been nominated for GA but there is no way it will pass in its present state, and it might not pass when I am finished. We shall see. With a huge article of this size, I usually only do one or two sections per day, as otherwise I start to get bored and don't do as good of a job. But it is surely possible to do a good job of copy editing an article of any size. You will know you are starting to be a good copy editor when you notice errors in magazines and newspapers that you read. --Diannaa(Talk)04:34, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Diannaa. It could happen in books, too, Diannaa. If you're confident that you may get it as a GA you may get it. You just never know until you find out. You may want to nominate articles that you copy edited for Did you knows A.K.A. DYKs if it meets the criteria. When did you start copy editing? WAYNESLAM19:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I started when I opened my Wikipedia account in October 2009; I chose to copy edit as it seemed a task I could help with that did not require a lot of knowledge of wiki mark-up, which I did not have at all when I started. I always had high marks in English in school and I read a lot, particularly non-fiction. I do not have any formal training for editing; I have been figuring it out as I go along. I started with small low-profile articles from the backlog and would usually check first in the edit history and on the talk page to make sure I wasn't wading in to a contentious article. Eventually I started doing larger and more important articles like Battle of Kursk, Korean War, Rajput, and Indiana class battleship. Some contentious ones I have worked on include biographies like Adi Da, Yoshiyahu Yosef Pinto, and Mayawati. I have been working on the Clint Eastwood article daily since December 31.--Diannaa(Talk)20:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you put it on the WP:GOCE January backlog. You make it look so easy even though it's not for me. I did try a large article but I have yet to finish it. I did not contribute much to November's backlog due to vandal fighting. WAYNESLAM21:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I love it too. I used to vandal fight all day every day (afternoon to night on school days). Some users Huggle everyday. It's just like Jimmy Wales reading his article. Would you be surprised if Clint Eastwood edited his article? Wales has made a few edits to his article. WAYNESLAM23:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would be surprised if he edited it, but I would not be surprised if he read it. The GA reveiwers have arrived at the article now and they tell the author it is too long; there is a massive trimming going on right now. This does not surprise me; it was 153K and 15600 words when I started. --Diannaa(Talk)23:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It must be divided into sections, too. Are you helping them out? One of the articles that I didn't finish copy editing due to a large section has been edited by other users. WAYNESLAM23:15, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They are. Thanks. You will probably earn a lot of barnstars for your great copy editing skills. :) I appreciate what you did but you don't put padlocks in userspace unless if requested. WAYNESLAM23:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for protecting the article on Locks Heath. Unfortunately you may have protected the wrong version, as there were several edits since the last repair by Osric Wuscfrea. Scillystuff (talk) 22:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I Thought it was mandatory to protect the wrong version! :) But seriously, admins are not supposed to make a determination on the content and then protect the article. That would give the impression that a particular version is being viewed as official or preferred. I made a couple of minor fixes to the info box and that's all I'm gonna do. Since you are a registered user, you are free to make the necessary repairs yourself. Regards, --Diannaa(Talk)22:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I thought it might work that way, but didn't want to wade in whilst the process was continuing. I'll get it fixed. Thanks again. Scillystuff (talk) 16:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have looked at major earthquake and major tragedies. Most have a reaction section and a debate. Why allow so many repeated debates when we know the question will pop up every few weeks?
To encourage debates so often is disruptive. I am revolutionary in foreseeing that these debates happen time and time again.
By getting some discussion, we can help WP in the near future. We don't have to apply it to the Tucson tragedy. It is worthwhile to discuss if we should have reactions sections. If we do, it is helpful if we have an idea on who to include. Just who I want? Maybe what reliable sources are reporting? Or if Brad Pitt comments, include him??? Hakkapeliitta (talk) 00:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is a great idea. I will try it later but right now I am going to try to tackle some articles from the copy edit backlog. Have you heard any good reports about the new version?--Diannaa(Talk)22:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What I know is that many Hugglers have decided to try Huggle2 and have remained using it. It was founded in late 2010. Plus in the revert summary on HG2, it also has a reason such as unexplained removal of content and others. WAYNESLAM22:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will check it out after supper. I am done with Clint Eastwood for the time being, by the way, as the nominators have been asked to trim the article down to 60K from an original size of some 153 K. They are presently down to 87K after some ruthless trimming and once they are down to the target size I will do another copy editing pass. --Diannaa(Talk)23:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The primary authors will make the decisions what to cut, and I will copy edit the material that remains when they are done. --Diannaa(Talk)23:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Edit war. I caught this article patrolling recent changes. I agree with anons contributing since one fix a mistake I made last summer. But isn't it wierd that any god knows who can come in and dictate content? An anon persistantly making changes without consensus shouldn't be able to prevail. It just doesn't make sense. Did you check out those IPs? Slightsmile (talk) 04:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I didn't intend to have a discussion here, I would have preferred my page where your template is but here is fine too. It's a good thing I didn't use rollback even though this (these) IP is a vandal - see one and two , different IPs same person. I think it's outrageous that you threaten to block me for standing up to this guy. Even if this wasn't a vandal IP, anyone who has ever gone near a newspaper knows that North Korea is a communist country and this IP is a fringe of the fringe. This isn't about North Korea or if someone wants to put his girlfriend's crotch on the Vulva article. When patrolling recent changes sometimes editors have to bend the rules and shouldn't be intimidated when encountering disruptive IP's. Common sense. Slightsmile (talk) 16:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The IP vandalised the talk page, for sure, but I still do not agree that the edits to the article were vandalism, so sorry. The 3rr notice board says, "...content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism." --Diannaa(Talk)20:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I sometimes see vandal IPs notified that all their edits are automatically reversed vandalism or not. Also how can you possibly assume good-faith with this IP? Another concern is if anons find out that all they have to do is put their POV twice and then the community is forced to let it stay or go through procedures to remove. Slightsmile (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also if may add. Years ago people swore by Wikipedia. It was always my sole source of info. And now everybody says they don't trust Wikipedia. Unreliable etc. I know you don't make policy, we're just talking. I think that anons should be welcome to edit, but established members with concerns should be allowed to undo. Like my (I, gulp, broke the rule there) similar dispute at the Vulva article last week, who the hell is he to order us around about content! Slightsmile (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
not 4chan - one person picking up open proxy servers from the Internet, resetting his browser. Google his IP + "proxy" and you'll get a hint on the port number, then it can be checked further to be sure. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 05:18, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I got a message from you saying that I am in a 'edit war', but I am not in any edit war that I know of. Can you clarify to me exactly what you are referring to?74.216.37.246 (talk) 02:58, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you revert me?? I am pretty that the inclusion of a new team in a national league is not a sport highlight of a whole decade, even if it is in the NFL.
It is well known that Association Football is the most practiced and popular sport in the world, so I just reworded the entry on it and added some hyperlinks.
BTW, I edited the article again.
PD: I didnt know how to contact you, so I edited this page, sorry for the inconvenience.
.jpg)
