Jump to content

Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by OneMember (talk | contribs) at 20:35, 6 May 2017 (→Regarding global renaming: fixed, as said it was an question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
Shortcuts
The miscellaneous section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please post on the policy, technical, or proposals pages, or – for assistance – at the help desk, rather than here, if at all appropriate. For general knowledge questions, please use the reference desk.
« Archives, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80


Linking to non-English Wikipedia?

In this diff user:Ag2gaeh is linking to German Wikipedia instead of clarifying a statement he has made. Is this appropriate? I don't think we should be sending English speaking users to German Wikipedia to seek clarification, when the author can simply explain the thing his or herself. (Note that he has provided a German reference in addition to the interwiki link, which is not a problem. But why can't he simply explain it himself?) He has also been removing all the {{clarify}} tags I've added to the article. His writing style is not very advanced, and I am having trouble understanding the article. SharkD  Talk  12:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful, if SharkD would look for an English source instead to remove my link. I have no access to English literature. An explanation in more detail would be an extra article. SharkD has "fortgeschrittene Deutschkenntnisse" and is able to read the German links. So perhaps he may be able to insert a "short" explanation. A long explanation would be not convenient. I intend to translate the German Wiki article "orthogonale Axonometrie". But it takes time. Discussions like this here and there are preventing me from working for Wikipedia. --Ag2gaeh (talk) 13:39, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It should be mentioned here that SharkD is a disruptive editor, who has never learnt that, in mathematics, many words have an accurate meaning that may differ from their common meaning. It results that he call "grammar errors of a non-native English speaker" many phrases that could be clarified by simply adding an appropriate wikilink, and does not really take into account the posts from other editors who disagree with him (see Talk:Parallel projection and its history for details). This results in the retirement from Wikipedia of a good mathematical editor (they are too few). This could be the object of a notice to WP:ANI, if I had the time for detailing this disruptive behaviour, which is of a minor importance, because the implied article have a very small audience.. D.Lazard (talk) 15:49, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to go into too much detail here, but I reverted one edit, and you yourself said the change I reverted was ill-advised to begin with. Since then, I have tried to discuss each of the issues I have found in the articles on the Talk page, and use the {{clarify}} template as I was instructed. (Which have been deleted.) If you would like to participate constructively, why not join the discussion on the Talk page? That is why it is there. That said, I would still like to know what the policy is on directing English-speaking users to German Wikipedia for further info. I imagine the reverse happens a lot, but it still bothers me and seems sloppy. SharkD  Talk  16:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To help clarify, the issue is about partially explaining a topic, and then asking readers to, "Please go to German Wikipedia for more info." SharkD  Talk  01:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's not ideal, but it might be better than nothing. Have you considered providing the clarification that you want yourself? WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:13, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand all of what the author is trying to say. Every grammar error or ambiguity can potentially have a large effect. SharkD  Talk  21:18, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Article Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija should be renamed in only Kosovo and Metohija, as has already been done with Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (Vojvodina). --SrpskiAnonimac (talk) 22:53, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with the WP:Requested moves process? Any editor can start it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you accidentally closed the move discussion at Talk:Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, instead of starting it. I also see that someone else proposed this idea last year, and that there have been no objections so far. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphen in this name

Library

This redirect page, Lavonia-Carnegie Library, is about the Carnegie Library in the town of Lavonia, Georgia. Of course, hyphens are used when combining two of the same type of thing, e.g. the Smith-Jones house, the Dallas-Ft. Worth area, but is it correct to use it when one is a town and the other is a person's last name? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From their web page,[1] it seems that the name of the library is Lavonia-Carnegie Library, so this would seem appropriate usage. Robminchin (talk) 04:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But the name on the building and the sign in front of the building don't say that. A manual of style says to use hyphens for things that are of equal importance. And neither does the NRHP form. And I checked with a language expert and he stated that there should not be a hyphen there. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As there is also a Lavonia Carnegie Library redirect to the same article, I think we have it covered either way. Anything wrong with status quo? The rules are different for redirects, which is why we deliberately keep redirects with spelling errors, etc. ―Mandruss ☎ 23:29, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The version with the (incorrect) hyphen is also used in line 25 of National Register of Historic Places listings in Franklin County, Georgia and in Athens Regional Library System. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia:Manual of Style, section on Dashes, under "In compounds when the connection might otherwise be expressed with to, versus, and, or between", it says "Here the relationship is thought of as parallel, symmetric, equal, oppositional, or at least involving separate or independent elements. ... " and gives examples: "the Uganda–Tanzania War; the Roman–Syrian War; the east–west runway; the Lincoln–Douglas debates; a carbon–carbon bond". Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:11, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is overridden for particular institutions etc, where they get to choose their own way of naming themselves. The website page is clear, and enough for us. Why not contact them & tell them they are doing it all wrong? Johnbod (talk) 09:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The cause of the Wikipedia block in Turkey

Greetings,

I think everyone has heard about the block on all Wikipedia editions in Turkey. We, the Wikimedia Turkey User Group, have been trying to find out what the perceived issue is and they finally have an answer for us: the following two articles (subsections, to be exact) at enwiki:

I, of course, wouldn't dream of asking you to censor the content of a WMF project, being an experienced Wikimedian of 11 years with several advanced user rights across-the-board. What I only ask of you, the enwiki community, is to review the subsections in question, ensure that they are up to our standards and make sure we have a product that we can stand behind, as always. Both subsections seem to include 40+ references, but I personally think there is room for improvement due to some unsourced statements and claims. Please help us fight this block by helping the articles become as unbiased as possible. Thank you.

Vito Genovese 14:27, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think Erdogan's government wants unbiased articles? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't suggest that.
Vito Genovese 16:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Shock Brigade Harvester Boris: This is not Erdogan's government, it's Turkish government. Also all people who live in Turkey are affected. Information and Communication Technologies Authority explained this situation. If en.wiki community doesn't help us, we'll never reach wikipedia. I kindly invite everyone to put aside all possible prejudices about us or our politics and help to make them unbiased.--Sabri76'talk 17:32, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is not about Erdogan. Kodvizit (talk) 20:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Let's keep this about the articles ONLY.
Vito Genovese 20:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Like all articles here, if you see a problem please be bold and fix it. However, we aren't about to cave to censorship demands from any nation. Period. We don't do it for the Chinese, we don't do it for the Russians, and we certainly aren't going to do it for the Turks. Sorry. If the Turkish government doesn't like what is on Wikipedia I take that as a sign that we are being neutral and not playing up to their twisted expectations on what they want to see on the Internet. --Majora (talk) 20:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Majora and to anyone else that might be inclined to think this way: the Turkish-language community is NOT requesting censorship here. I do not think they ever will, regardless of the consequences. Let's not let emotions run high about this and use curt statements that do nothing to support a beleaguered community. The request here is for the members of the English-language community to review these pages to ensure that they indeed represent the highest standards of Wikipedia, and are impeccably neutral, well-sourced and well-written, which would strengthen at least the moral position of the Turkish-language community. This is not in any way to imply that these articles in any way violate our standards. It is just a call for editorial support for a community most of whose members have to go through great obstacles even to access Wikipedia at the moment, let alone evaluate and possibly critique content in a foreign language. No more unhelpful comments mistaking this for a call for censorship please. --GGT (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@GGT: The village pump is not really the place to come and request a review of the articles that probably caused the censorship. That is what the article's talk page is for. That is what RfCs are for (which trigger notifications for those that have that featured activated). That is what peer review is for.

I commend those Turkish Wikipedians who are continuing to fight for free knowledge during this situation and will continue to do so. Just like I commend those Chinese Wikipedians who are forced to use a VPN just to be here. However, there are far better venues to request review of something than the pump. As the very first thing I mentioned in my previous post was to be bold and fix any issues you find, I don't see how that should cause any issues. --Majora (talk) 21:40, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Majora "The village pump is not really the place to come and request a review of the articles that probably caused the censorship" is not true. What the editor posted is perfectly fine, and actually commendable. In a situation like this -- a crisis in fact -- making an extremely reasonable and functional request as a higher-traffic forum than just the article's talk page is perfectly reasonable. Let's all thank User:Vito Genovese and help out, or we don't want to let's confine our objections to rolling our eyes at home and not sniping at people. Herostratus (talk) 23:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to extend my gratitude towards the Turkish Wikipedians and especially the user group for their individual work and commitment to our goals. Hope things are resolved for you soon. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:07, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm here, I'd like to throw my voice into the crowd of others commending the Turkish users of the Encyclopedia for their willingness to stand up to oppression and censorship. For consideration: on April 16, a user name Youngysf changed the picture of Erdogan to a cockroach. Here's the reddit thread on r/Wikipedia. –Vami_IV✠ 23:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That edit does not show up in the edit history of the article. Such vandalism does not stand up to Wikipedia standards of neutral point of view and reliable sources and is not at all commendable. Even if we had no such policies, one of the oldest tricks in the authoritarian playbook is to dehumanise your enemies en depict them as vermin. I hope we do not resort to the same methods. Moreover, such things do not help to convince anyone in Turkey to join the struggle for restoring freedom of expression and democracy in general. Instead, it strengthens Erdoğan's position that his critics are hooligans and chapullers. Hevesli (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it does, and here is another "edit" by the same user that replaces the same image with a karyotype of Reeve's muntjac. Thankfully, however, the page now has semi-protection and all vandalism by registered users has been reverted, kind of making this and my previous comment in this thread kind of useless. &ndah;Vami_IV✠ 21:33, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Lazy) Support a review of the relevant articles and sections. There's no room to get defensive here - imagine if there are actually some poorly cited claims, you'd look pretty silly unconditionally supporting them. Reading through each article/section and taking inventory of the claims/references will give us solid ground to stand on. Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)[1] 01:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. Since the articles are in the media spotlight, there´s no harm in having extra eyes checking if the articles are good from the WP-perspective. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:53, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
hmm Foreign_involvement_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Turkey looks accurate although slightly outdated since it doesn't cover the TFSA and the Battle of al-Bab. State-sponsored_terrorism#Turkey looks like a reasonable rundown of the accusations although its probably a bit larger than it needs to be.©Geni (talk) 07:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Had a look at both of these. Nothing is wildly wrong here, but some checking of sources and editing/trimming wouldn't go amiss. Obviously the whole thing isn't going to be junked because the BTK objected to it. If it was removed, it would lead to a long shopping list of things that would also have to be removed. The Turkish government denies that it has been involved in backing any of the groups fighting the civil war in Syria and regards these allegations as fake news. However, there is enough material in secondary reliable sources mentioning this aspect of the Syrian civil war to meet WP:5P2.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Editing Wikipedia from Turkey is very difficult right now, but I am somewhat surprised that no reference to the MİT trucks scandal is made in the State-sponsored terrorism#Turkey section. Can someone look into that? There is also this report by Nafeez Ahmed, a generally reliable investigative journalist. I hope I won't get arrested now for revealing state secrets. Hevesli (talk) 12:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is an absolutely timely and reasonable request, and I do not understand why it can cause any opposition. We certainly want our articles, and, of all, sensitive articles to be based on reliable sources and unbiased.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have looked at some of the sections and they are supported by sources such as the NYTs, CNN, ect. I guess the question is what content and sources does the Turkish government have issues with? They claim they have "told Wikipedia" But it does not look like they have. The request for the WMF to open up an office in Turkey and pay "taxes" will not be carried out. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:58, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Available Now (May 2017)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for new accounts and research materials from:

Expansions

  • Gale – Biography In Context database added
  • Adam Matthew – all 53 databases now available

Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, Taylor & Francis and Newspaperarchive.com.

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 18:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Aaron.
This message was delivered via the Global Mass Message tool to The Wikipedia Library Global Delivery List.

Introducing the Community health initiative on English Wikipedia

Community health initiative
Helping the Wikimedia volunteer community to reduce the level of harassment and disruptive behavior on our projects.

Hello! Today we'd like to introduce the new Community health initiative, the people who will be working on it, and most importantly how you can get involved.

The Community health initiative

Over the past several years the Wikimedia Foundation has researched and learned how harassment affects participation on Wikipedia[1] and have received numerous requests from the English Wikipedia community for better tools and preparation to deal with negative behavior.[2] In January we received funding via a Newmark Foundation grant to address this problem over the next two years.[3]

We're calling these efforts the 'Community health initiative' and our work contains four equally important parts:

  1. Researching the causes of harassment and workflows of those who report and resolve harassment
  2. Building anti-harassment tools for the MediaWiki platform
  3. Fostering an environment for the Wikipedia community to evaluate and grow their policies on harassment
  4. Identifying and training Wikipedia contributors to properly mitigate reports of harassment

Research

The Research team's Anti-Harassment Research project will aim to understand and model the characteristics of harassment in Wikimedia projects in order to inform the development of anti-harassment tools and recommendations for community-specific behavioral policies and enforcement processes.

Anti-harassment tools

We want to build software that empowers contributors and administrators to make timely, informed decisions when harassment occurs. Four focus areas have been identified where new tools could be beneficial in addressing and responding to harassment:

  1. Detection: We want to make it easier and more efficient for editors to identify and flag harassing behavior. We are currently questioning how harassment can be prevented before it begins, and how minor incidents be resolved before they snowball into larger uncivil problems.
  2. Reporting: According to Detox research, harassment is under reported on English Wikipedia.[4] No victim of harassment should abandon editing because they feel powerless to report abuse. We want to provide victims improved ways to report instances that are more respectful of their privacy, less chaotic and less stressful than the current workflow. Currently the burden of proof is on the victim to prove their own innocence and the harasser's fault, while we believe the MediaWiki software should perform the heavy lifting.
  3. Evaluating: We want to build tools to help volunteers better understand and evaluate harassment cases, and inform the best way to respond. Current processes are time consuming and a high level of proficiency is necessary for an user to be able to analyze and evaluate the true sequence of events of a conduct dispute. We want to reduce the workload on people evaluating cases.
  4. Blocking: We want to improve existing tools and create new tools, if appropriate, to remove troublesome actors from a wiki, or certain areas within a wiki, and to make it more difficult for someone who's blocked from the site to return.

Policy growth

We will work with the community to research and analyze how behavioral issues on English Wikipedia are a) covered in policy, and b) enforced in the community, particularly noticeboards where problems are discussed and actioned. We will provide research on alternate forms of addressing specific issues, researching effectiveness, and identifying different approaches that have found success on other Wikimedia projects. We believe this will help the Wikipedia community make informed changes to existing policies and guidelines.

Training

To help functionary and community governance groups better coordinate their work, we will facilitate in the development of a training platform and will guide the establishment of a modules based around the critical area of addressing harassment.

After consultation with functionaries (stewards, global admins, Arbitration Committees, admins), community members, and outside experts an initial group of modules about Online harassment and Keeping events safe was created and is now available for training.

We will further collaborate with the community to development of future training modules.

The team

The Anti-Harassment Tools team includes five Wikimedia Foundation employees, partnering with members of the Wikipedia community who want to participate. The software we build will be useless if it doesn't address real-world workflow problems for the existing Wikipedia community, so we will heavily rely on your input to make our efforts a success.

You can read about more about the team. We're still searching for two PHP developers for this team, if you're interested apply here!

How to get involved

We're just getting started, and we look forward to your participation every step along the way. As we've prepared for the grant and and on-boarded the new team members we've collated some notes on meta,[5] most of which we've moved here to Wikipedia:Community health initiative. These plans and notes will almost certainly change base on the Wikipedia community's input.

Want updates or learn more about how to participate? Sign up for the Community health initiative mailing list or the Community health initiative Newsletter or follow our progress on the Community health initiative on English Wikipedia page.

We'd love to hear your initial thoughts on Wikipedia talk:Community health initiative on English Wikipedia. There's a lot to discuss and we hope to hear from you. Thank you! — Caroline, Sydney, & Trevor of the Anti-Harassment Tools team. 23:41, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ meta.wikimedia.org — Community health initiative#Harassment on Wikimedia projects
  2. ^ meta.wikimedia.org — Community health initiative#Community requests for new tools
  3. ^ meta.wikimedia.org — Community health initiative#External funding
  4. ^ meta.wikimedia.org — Research:Detox
  5. ^ meta.wikimedia.org — Community health initiative
@SPoore (WMF): How do we sign up for the mailing list and newsletter? Both appear to be blank pages; not sure where the mailing list is or what format you want usernames in for the newsletter (the latter might make sense as a MassMessageListContent ContentModel. Sam Walton (talk) 23:53, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sam, thanks for your interest. We haven't completely worked out the details for the newsletter or the email list. But I wanted to get them mentioned in the announcement to begin checking on interest. I improved the pages on meta a bit for now to make clearer that it is a sign up page, and will get a more definite plan together in the next few days. SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Signpost

Nothing has been published for two months because the editor is absent. These things happen, but it is time to move on.

Does someone else what to have a go at running it, or should it be shut down? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.251.27 (talk) 11:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-European (disambiguation)

Article Indo-European (disambiguation) rename in only Indo-European (as was done with English (disambiguation) → English) --SrpskiAnonimac (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

and:
Habsburg (disambiguation) → Habsburg
Romanov (disambiguation) → Romanov
--SrpskiAnonimac (talk) 23:45, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Voting has begun in 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2017 elections for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is the ultimate governing authority of the Wikimedia Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization registered in the United States. The Wikimedia Foundation manages many diverse projects such as Wikipedia and Commons.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 1 to 23:59 UTC May 14. Click here to vote. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2017 Board of Trustees election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
Katie Chan, Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
Joe Sutherland, Community Advocate, Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery • Translate • Get help

19:14, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Question

How many edits a month are needed to be considered "active" on Wikipedia? Was just wondering about this. South Nashua (talk) 19:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to these statistics from the Wikimedia Foundation, approximately 3500 registered users made at least 100 edits in March 2017. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It depends upon the statistics set, but generally it's five edits on one (the same) wiki during the last month. And if all else fails, you ask User:EpochFail, who knows the stats classifications inside and out. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:59, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at Special:Statistics, then "active" means saving at least one edit in the last 30 days. If you look at https://stats.wikimedia.org then, "active" means 5 edits within a calendar month to articles that fall into the "countable" definition. See mw:Analytics/Metric_definitions#Countable_pages. For most recent reports, we've dropped the "countable" definition, as it seems to provide no analytical value. However, "5 edits" threshold remains for "active" status. --EpochFail (talk • contribs) 15:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

?

I make redirects, so I ask what is correctly next to Dunđerski Palace and Dunđerski Castle:

1. Palace of Dunđerski or only Palace Dunđerski
2. Castle of Dunđerski or only Castle Dunđerski

?

Survey on Donald Trump talk

Hello, please find it in your hearts to comment on the Donald Trump talk page HERE regarding how to best state how Trump won the election. Really would appreciate the input so that we might put this to rest, finally. Appreciate it. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about US representatives articles

I wasn't sure where to start a discussion about the US repesentative articles and the inclusion of information about the American Health Care Act, so I started it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/American politics#Does one consequence of a bill belong in the article of every politician that voted for the bill?. ~ GB fan 14:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Birthday Honours articles (lists)

There are a lots of articles that are Birthday Honours lists.

Taking two as examples 100 years apart:

They are copies of the information contained in the London Gazette
  • 1908:
    • "No. 28151". The London Gazette (Supplement). 23 June 1908.

2008:

Not composite lists

These lists are different from lists like those of the High Sheriffs eg: High Sheriff of Surrey that have been created by extracting one line of information from lots of different issues of the London Gazette among other sources, because a Birthday Honours list copy the structure of the Gazette birthday honours list as well as its content.

Not articles with analysis

These lists which are laid out nearly identical to the Gazette lists. They are not part of articles where there is an analysis of what is specifically in the list that is different from other similar lists. Eg analysis like this:

The first BHL under the New Labour government of 2023 saw a decrease in the number of honours going to members of City firms and an increase in those going to member of the NHS (reliable source). ...

The 1920 Birthday Honours list/article does not mention the selling of honours scandal (see Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925), nor does the 2006 Birthday Honours list mention the Cash for Honours scandal (at the time I am writing this note even in a See also section).

What can be done to improve them?

Given the tone of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and some of its specific comments in it, ought these Birthday Honour Lists (BHLs) be on Wikiepdia, or should the content be moved onto Wikisource? If they are not to be moved, what can be done to improve them?

-- PBS (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Discussion

1908: first section (GCB Military Division):
London Gazette Wikipedia
General Sir William Gustavus Nicholson, K.C.B., Chief of the General Staff (1st Military Member, Army Council.) General Sir William Gustavus Nicholson, K.C.B., Chief of the General Staff (1st Military Member, Army Council.)
General Sir John James Hood Gordon, K.C.B., Indian Army, Colonel 29th Punjabis. General Sir John James Hood Gordon, K.C.B., Indian Army, Colonel 29th Punjabis.
2008, first 3 entries in the first section (Knights Bachelor)
Gazette Wikipedia
Dr. James Iain Walker Anderson, C.B.E. For public and voluntary service. Dr. James Anderson, CBE. For public and voluntary service.
William Samuel Atkinson, Headteacher, Phoenix High School, Hammersmith and Fulham, London. For services to Education and to Community Relation William Atkinson, Headteacher, Phoenix High School, Hammersmith and Fulham, London. For services to Education and to Community Relations.
The Right Honourable Alan James Beith, M.P., Member of Parliament for Berwick-upon-Tweed. For services to Parliament Rt. Hon. Alan Beith, MP, Member of Parliament for Berwick-upon-Tweed. For services to Parliament.

Copyright is not really an issue partly because of US law on lists and partly because the UK government's new Open licence that is close to Wikipedia's CC BY-SA 3.0 License. However to met the licensing requirements I think that the articles on Birthday Honour's do need to add attribution to the references section:

--PBS (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Children's books by year

This category was still missing, but it has just been created. Actually every article about a children's book fits in it. The Wiki ghost (talk) 18:22, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding global renaming

Not sure where to post this, but I would like some clarity on the matter. A while back I did global name change and after that all links to my old page/chat worked as redirects, but now when someone created a new account with my old name all those redirects was deleted so they link into his account now. I was talking about this on my finnish chat page and seems this is how system has been working from the start (unless you know to request block or create new account with your own old name after name change to mark as dummy). My question is, has there been any attempt to improve the way renaming accounts work to prevent something like this? Can’t imagine this to be super rare issue… --OneMember (Talk) 20:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)&oldid=779063386"