Jump to content

User talk:CorbieVreccan/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Help with Dignity picture

You had posted a nice message to me about the photograph I posted of the Dignity (statue). In that, you said I needed to demonstrate that I have the relevant permissions. I actually think I do have the permissions, I just don't know how to submit them or attach them to the file. In the meantime, the photograph was tagged for "speedy deletion," and although the tag said I could contest it and get the permissions, the deletion occurred only about 90 minutes later - I wasn't even home during the interval.

I am hoping you can tell me what I need to submit so I can reupload the photograph, this time with the necessary tag to avoid all of this trouble. There are all sorts of pictures like this on Wikipedia so there must be a way to do it. Thanks much. Otis1000 (talk) 01:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, when you go to upload it it's going to ask you some questions about whether it's your own work, or who took the photo, and what the licensing is. Fill all of those in to the best of your ability. There is no deadline. If you're not sure if you did it right, mention that in an edit summary or on the talk page. Just do your best with it. Once you've done that bit, let me know and I'll take a look. In the meantime, I'll put the other photo back in. That one has also been flagged. You said that one is your own work. If you took that photo that one should be fine to use for now. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 02:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, CorbieVreccan. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons


October 2016

Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Sweat Lodge WP Tag

Hi :) I saw you removed the WP Altered States of Consciousness Banner from the Sweat Lodge article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sweat_lodge Our scope includes methods of inducing altered states of consciousness and for example this research paper points to sweat lodges being effective in inducing those, therefore I added it. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20558090 Meerpirat (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

It's not the purpose of the ceremony. It's a religious ceremony. Are you adding the tag to other religious ceremonies? The very phrasing of abstract shows a lack of basic familarity with the topic. The source is not WP:RS for the Indigenous cultures in question. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 15:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
We do have other religious ceremonies tagged, for example the ayahuasca ceremony, as they also result in altered states of consciousness. I think I didn't explain this clearly, our focus is not what the ceremony is for, but about the psychological consequences of the ceremony.

Meerpirat (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

And the reasons there are the same; you are taking a piece of a religious rite out of context and reinterpreting it. Unless you're also putting the ecstatic states reached by prayer, fasting and singing, etc in mainstream religions in that category, it's not really appropriate. It singles those religions out as somehow "exotic" to westerners and products for consumption rather than part of the cultural fabric in which they exist. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 17:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Ah okay, you are absolutely right, we also should include other practices from other religions that induce altered states. I don't know why so far especially Buddhist and from the Western viewpoint more "exotic" practices received special attention in the research we have found, but if you have Wiki-worthy reports of altered states in for example Christian prayer, we'd be glad to have it and add it to our project. Meerpirat (talk) 15:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Meerpirat: with this edit summary:[1] you misrepresented our discussion here, as well as your edits. I do not see you putting the "altered states project" thing on articles about Western religions. The same issues I brought up above with this still stand. As far as I can see, nothing has changed. Are you consciously misrepresenting this situation or did you just misunderstand? I have also pinged the Indigenous wikiproject members about this. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 01:24, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey CorbieVreccan. I am really sorry if I couldn't clear up all misunderstandings. Our project has not updated our list of methods that are in our scope since our discussion here. If I had stumbled upon relevant research (e.g. something I offered you to provide), I would have added the practice accordingly (no matter if Western or not). As this hasn't happened since, I see no reason why our banner shouldn't be on the sweat lodge article until we have expanded our list of articles in the direction you desire (to Western religions). And I interpreted your lack of response to my last message, that in my view nicely concluded our discussion, as a solution of our misunderstandings. That is why I added the banner again. Maybe we should ask somebody else what he/she thinks of this discussion, as this is obviously going nowhere. What should we do? Meerpirat (talk) 15:36, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Go ask on the talk page at the Indigenous Wikiproject what they think. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 17:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Indian giver

I restored the change you undid. The cited source does not support claiming that "every single treaty" has been broken. It will have to be properly sourced (if it can be) before being restored. Meters (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

An invitation to November's events


November 2016

Announcing two exciting online editathons
Women in Food and Drink and Women Writers
as well as our strong support for articles on women in connection with
Wikipedia Asian Month
Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Reference errors on 25 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Your message re: LaDonna Brave Bull Allard entry

Hello. I made the change because the redirect was incorrect. LaDonna Brave Bull Allard is a woman who were are drafting a biographical page about at the moment. She is not the Dakota Access Pipeline Protests per se. That redirect is confusing and should be eliminated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosariolibrarian (talk • contribs) 22:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

You blanked a redirect page that sent people to the page that currently has the most information and sourcing about her. When there is enough about her, it can be split into her own article. I just had to totally redo the David Archambeault one because it was a mess. Who is "we"? If it's the student project, so far all we've had is headaches and massive cleanup. I'm very concerned about what is going to come out of this project about LaDonna, given what I've seen so far. Please utilize the talk pages and WP:Indigenous. You have now joined the Wikipedia community. We already exist. You are joining a community and will need to learn to adapt to this community's way of doing things. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 23:06, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Rosario, Given the problems we've been seeing coming out of the student edit-a-thon, I am putting on my admin hat here and very strongly advising that you draft any proposed article on LaDonna in your sandbox only, and link to it on the Indigenous Wikiproject and from the talk page of the Pipeline protest article, so more experienced Wikipedians can work on it as well, before trying to put it in mainspace. LaDonna is a respected elder and it is important that this be done right if it's to be done at all. I haven't contacted her about this, but in the past I don't think she would have wanted a WP article, and I'm not certain this is a good idea. She wants the pipeline stopped. It's not about her. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 23:18, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi CorbieVrecan -- I'm also an Admin, with my Admin hat on. So I'd like to encourage you to not bite the newcomers. Wikipedia edit-a-thons are designed to encourage new users to come in and learn about the project, and negative interactions can dissuade new editors from sticking around to learn the community. Please note that this edit-a-thon just wrapped up a few hours ago, and the moderators / instructors haven't yet even had a few hours to go back in and help clean up the articles. --Lquilter (talk) 00:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
As to the article about LaDonna, we have to respect BLP, but this is also an encyclopedia, and if someone is notable, then it's not really a matter of whether they want an article or not. If you have BLP specific knowledge that indicates that there should not be an article for some compelling reason, then state so. Otherwise, your personal opinion or knowledge that someone may or may not want a page about them isn't the issue. Her notability is. --Lquilter (talk) 00:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Actually, this is a systemic bias issue, not a newcomer to WP issue. The edits on the Indigenous articles were from a heavily non-Native perspective. They were full of misinformation and things that were actually culturally offensive in places. The other issues are easy to fix. It's the severe lack of understanding of the subject matter that caused the need for complete rewrites. Having that happen on a whole bunch of articles all at once, boldly, in defiance of WP values of consensus and policy, and without a single one of the students engaging on article talk or wikiproject pages, is going to lead to frustration among even the most seasoned editors in this field.
(Edit Conflict) There is BLP precedent that a borderline-notable BLP who does not want a solo article doesn't have to have one. I've been involved in those decisions and saltings before. In the past she has not wanted that personal attention, so right now I do not think it's appropriate. She has been contacted about whether her opinion on this has changed. But please understand, she is on the literal front lines right now. She may not be able to respond in a timely manner. So please have some patience and compassion here. Her wishes and wellbeing are more important to me than some students desire to learn to edit WP. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 00:51, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
First, regarding LaDonna-WP:BLP1E, second, I do not think it's fair or appropriate to unleash students onto the Indigenous community at this time in particular. Articles have been heavily whitewashed and it's incredibly frustrating. Information that is grossly inaccurate, for example the spelling of the name of Standing Rock's tribal chairman and including one of the societies he belongs to as his name, is degrading and shows a serious lack of due diligence.Indigenous girl (talk) 01:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, the effort is to combat systemic biases, making sure that notable topics are at least covered, and writing articles based on available sources. Articles which can then be improved, and already have been. -- I'm certain there have been problems in existing articles, and I'm glad you're working on them. I don't think we have a conflict here; I think it would just be helpful if folks did not bite the newcomers. --Lquilter (talk) 01:09, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Actually it's the students who have been whitewashing the articles. The Dakota Access Pipieline Protests article turned into Tiger Beat Magazine.Indigenous girl (talk) 01:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I don't know what's been happening on other articles. I'm sure there are frustrating situations that happen on various articles, but as more senior editors & administrators, we still need to be gentle mentors to newcomers who are also attempting to remedy systemic biases. Again, new editors want very much to learn and contribute, and please remember that most edit-a-thons are organized in an effort to remedy those systemic biases. --Lquilter (talk) 02:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
People that have been editting since 2012 are not newcomers. Individuals who whitewash articles that relate to indigenous people are doing nothing to remedy systemic bias, they are adding to it. If the intention is actually to remedy systemic bias and newcomers are coddled then they will not learn how to properly combat systemic bias, will they? They will continue to contribute to the situation through a white lens. Tone policing doesn't help. I personally have not interacted with anyone in a combative manner.Indigenous girl (talk) 14:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I'd like some info. re "the misinformation and things that were actually culturally offensive in places" and what specifically caused "the need for complete rewrites." The edit-a-thon we held was a bit chaotic but valuable and we are sincerely trying to do this right. 01:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Rosariolibrarian (talk)rosariolibrarian

That's an excellent question and super easy to do. If you go to the edit histories and look at the diff sections it will show you. :) Indigenous girl (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Bob Lansing

Re your message: I tried to add "Bob Lansing" (Navajo ceramic artist & potter) under the "ARTISTS" category. Sorry, I don't understand how to edit wikipedia too well, and I guess the reference link didn't take.

He is a famous Navajo artist whose works are in museums and galleries all over the world. Bob Lansing's web site is here: http://boblansingpottery.com/ I had the privilege of meeting this man during a trip to the Navajo reservation in 2012: http://www.ipernity.com/doc/appalooosa/43395270/in/album/924960

I would be very much obliged if you could add his name to the list of artists, on the Navajo wikipedia page. If you need to reach me, you can contact me through the ipernity link above.

Hágoónee´

Hi, If Mr. Lansing meets Wikipedia's Notability criteria, he will first need a well-sourced article here about him. The article can be brief, but it must include third-party reliable sources that indicate notability by Wikipedia standards for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Once he has an article, then you add an internal link to that article, the kind with the double square brackets, rather than an external link (the kind you added). I don't have a personal opinion about Mr. Lansing's notability, but as a Wikipedian it's my job to make sure articles follow the format and standards we use here. For more on this please read: Wikipedia:Write the article first, and Wikipedia:Your first article. It can take a bit of time to learn how this site works, but I hope you stick around. Choosing and registering a username for yourself will also make communication easier. Best, - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 20:47, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi CorbieVreccan.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CorbieVreccan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

December 2016 at Women in Red

File:Roza Shanina.jpg


December 2016

Two new topics for our online editathons
Women in Aviation and Women in the Military
Our geographical topic of the month is
Caribbean Women
During the period of 21 Nov - 8 Dec, we are also supporting
BBC 100 Women

Women in Red

(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:42, 23 November 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Vandal removing pertinent and sourced information

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Fuck&action=history User Captain Raju is vandalising and removing pertinent information. He sent a threat to my talk page and reported me for vandalism too. UtherPendrogn (talk) 13:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Abuse and insults

I was insulted and abused by User:Cagwinn, a blocked user who has also threatened to continue edit warring once he is unblocked. Despite him insulting me profusely and calling me insane (despite asking me for my sources), an admin called User:Doug Weller is trying to waive the insults and saying it's "my fault" for not leaving when Cagwinn said I was "harassing" him (despite asking me for my sources and immediately insulting me afterwards). Cagwinn seems to have known Doug Weller would be biased towards me, as he specifically pinged him to "have me dealt with". He expressed wishes of me being banned from Wikipedia for showing him sources that prove him wrong. I'm asking you as an impartial source to act as is required. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cagwinn UtherPendrogn (talk) 19:40, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

January 2017 at Women in Red


January 2017

Women Philosophers & Women in Education online editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

January 2017

Information icon Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Film Fan 21:27, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Responding to warnings with templated warnings at those who did the cleanup is not constructive, FilmFan. Your edits were disruptive, and this does not improve matters. This further demonstrates you are not here to work collectively or productively. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 19:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Absolute nonsense. Your warning was entirely bogus. It said something about promotion or something which couldn't be more incorrect. You used the wrong warning template, you failed to assume good faith and I failed to do the same in return. Leave my talk page alone and do something constructive. Bye. — Film Fan 20:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Great Spirit italics

Hi, you reverted my adding italics on the Great Spirit page, leaving the trivia item someone else put on. So the trivia is still there, although I thought about reverting instead of italicizing but on reading the page saw a little connection, yet probably not enough to keep it long term. Thanks for keeping an eye on it. Randy Kryn 03:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Yes, I meant to remove the "IPC" bit. Did so now. :) - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 17:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

February 2017 at Women in Red


February 2017

Black Women & Women Anthropologists online editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Axis Mundi Hill of Uisneach

Thanks for your interest in the article, however I'm curious why you removed the link to the Axis Mundi. I've since re-added the link. In your edit summary for the removal, am I to understand that you kept the reference I added but that you simply don't feel the A.Mundi page does justice to the mythology of Irish cosmology/origin story? What is it specifically about the A.Mundi page that you feel it overlooks?

I don't mind discussing this with you as I am genuinely interested in where it falls down.

As I wonder, why couldn't we fix the A.Mundi page if it is found lacking? Boundarylayer (talk) 09:11, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Because as I said in the edit summary, the Axis Mundi article is firmly rooted in non-Irish cosmology, and if relied on to explain the cosmology of the centre in Irish thought, will give a very misleading impression. Rewriting the Axis Mundi article to fit Irish cosmology would inappropriately change the Axis Mundi concept into something inaccurate. Better to leave it out of the lede. I think it's OK to link it lower in the body of the article, saying that it's simlar to an Axis Mundi concept, but only if the differences are noted. This is where the Rhys's as a source fall short, in their over-reliance on Vedic, rather than Irish, cosmology in that cite. I'm going to take it out of the lede. Let's not edit-war. If you want to discuss this further, please take it to the talk page of the article itself. Thanks. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 18:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
I am persuaded by your argument, however I will be back to see if you follow-up with references that do justice to explaining the comparisons and contrasts, or at the least, show how it differs from the Axis Mundi.
Keep up the good work, and I genuinely look forward to reading this cited, explanatory paragraph that you will write.
All the best,
Boundarylayer (talk) 14:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Clootie well

Hi CorbieVreccan--long ago, when we were all innocent, you wrote up this article--great! I was led to it by way of the Dutch wiki, Koortsboom. (And this in turn because my mom sent me a newspaper article about one such tree in the Netherlands.) So I'm doubting the crosswikilink a bit but I can't really figure out what to do. First of all, the Dutch article doesn't talk about a well, and I don't think that for the Dutch the well is an essential element. So one option is to write "Koortsboom", but then, "Fever tree" doesn't seem to mean anything of the kind in English. In addition, the Dutch article (which has terrible sourcing, of course) lists all kinds of other tantalizing variation--a "nail tree", where people drive nails into a tree to ask for health; a "quarter tree", where they nail quarters to a tree (apparently a Belgian thing, see French article; and the "Children's tree", from which the stork plucks the souls of unborn children. What do you think? I'd be inclined to write each one of those, but the Dutch articles are so poorly referenced that I'm almost embarrassed to translate them. I also wonder about our coverage of sacred trees (I've done some work on the Donar Oak and wrote up Goethe Oak a long time ago), and I think we can probably do with a navigational project. And a WikiProject! so that our knowledge may find root and spread its tendrils across the universe... Drmies (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

There's this mess of an article: Celtic sacred trees, which I did some cleanup on, but haven't had time to fully rehabilitate. I know there are some other sad orphans around that cover some of these tree-related things as well. Wish Tree covers some of the coins hammered into trees in Scotland, Ireland and England. I think nails are sometimes found in those areas, but less frequently if at all (if so, it's actually contraindicated in the lore, so probably an import). I've never been keen on the coins and nails thing, as it's resulted in killing the trees, and the Fairy Faith lore says it actually drives away nature spirits, so I think it's probably a more recent folk tradition. I'm a bit busy right now, but will try to look more deeply into the Germanic stuff.
@Drmies: The edit from last night... we have OR that garbage trucks of unknown provenance were seen dumping there before the news crew arrived. Not the first time things like that have been staged, and not the first time that news station has fallen for it or accepted a biased press release as truth without bothering to contact the other side for a comment. Right now there's an attempt to get some nonbiased, RS coverage on that. Right now we only have online statements from people in camp, but I'm sure by later today some of them will have given WP:V & RS statements to the press. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 18:55, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Oh, I was pointing at the fact that I reverted to your edit, and here I am on your talk page for a completely unrelated thing. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Dan Davies

Hey Corbie,

Thanks for your edits to the Dan Davies page. Although I am not sure what you mean by "not a reliable source"...per example his ethnicity is as stated and is inherent in the noted article via the reference in the San Francisco Chronicle. Also I am an idiot on the exact templating needed for the references...any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks

Warmest, ShannonJosephDoyle

I read the article linked as the source, then did a text search. Ethnicity is not mentioned, nor are the words "Seneca" or "Iroquois." Also, it takes more evidence than a mention in an interview. Is he enrolled? If so, where? Look over the links I posted on your talk page about how we evaluate sources, and look at Wikipedia articles that are featured articles, where the sources are formatted like in a book report or journalistic article. That is how we do them here, rather than just pasting in bare links. I haven't had a chance to go through all the text and sourcing yet, but those were a few things that jumped out, due to your adding him to pages where we only add enrolled tribal members. Please take the stuff on your talk page seriously, as edit-warring will get you blocked. Best, - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 02:14, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 at Women in Red

Welcome to...
Women's History Month worldwide online editathon
Facilitated by Women in Red
  • March 2017
  • Featuring: "Art+Feminism" and "The Women You Have Never Met"
  • Feel free to add articles in other languages too

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:53, 18 February 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Editing

Hello, Corbie!

Thank you for your welcome message about my recent edits to the page for Richard Erdoes. I am new to editing on Wikipedia and was unaware that editing a family members page is discouraged. Richard Erdoes was my father, and I was just correcting a few details and adding some basic info. Is that a problem?

Specifically, the article originally gave two birthplaces from two different sources. I removed the incorrect info, but I don't know if the source info needs to be changed. There is a citation for the correct birthplace already.

I also added more info about my father's career as an illustrator, and his listed occupations. He never considered himself a journalist, so I removed that. Frankly, I am not sure how to add citations for the many magazines for which he created illustrations. I know them because I have been going through some of his work.

Am I not allowed to edit this page, since I am his daughter? I had thought to add more titles of the books he wrote and illustrated, which can easily be sourced and verified.

Also, may I add a photo, and how do I do that?

Thank you,

Jerdoes (talk) 19:43, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

All your edits so far listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect All your edits so far. Since you had some involvement with the All your edits so far redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 18:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Administrator changes

Amortias • Deckiller • BU Rob13
Ronnotel • Islander • Chamal N • Isomorphic • Keeper76 • Lord Voldemort • Shereth • Bdesham • Pjacobi

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
  • Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
  • A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve LaDonna Brave Bull Allard

Hi, I'm Teblick. CorbieVreccan, thanks for creating LaDonna Brave Bull Allard!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. I have posted comments on the articles Talk page. You need to add more information about Allard. Develop it into a biography of her rather than its current status, which focuses more on camps and activism.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Eddie Blick (talk) 17:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

You said some references were not reliable that I posted on the Choctaw entry

Hi Corbie: Thanks for catching whatever reference was not reliable on the Choctaw. However, I am not sure which one it was. Could you please let me know which one and why it was unreliable? I am new to editing on Wikipedia so I am learning. Thanks.

EdThat2 --Edthat2 (talk) 02:51, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Please read the edit summary and the note I put on your talk page asking you to read WP:IRS. You added commercial sources and websites with amateur essays that include no sourcing, so their reliability cannot be evaluated. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 17:03, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Heteropatriarchy

Hi! They are trying to delete again the article about heteropatriarchy. Could you help to improve the article or to take part in the discussion? Thanks a lot! DaddyCell (talk) 13:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

April events at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's
April 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Participation is welcome in any language.



(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) ----Rosiestep (talk) 18:40, 24 March 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Glass Flowers needs help

Hello old friend. It has been a while, and I hope you notice that my offenses have dwindled to nothing now that I know the rules of Wikipedia. Anyway, I write to ask for your Administrative help. The Glass Flowers page has been suffering repeated attacks of possible vandalism by User:EEng, and I lack the required know-how and authority to fully stop it. I know we have clashed in the past, and I apologize for the, in your words, "large swathes of unsourced or inadequately-sourced text" I generated as a New User, but I have tried to keep the Glass Flowers page and is affiliates as professional as possible and would dearly like your assistance. If you need proof that the page has suffered possible vandalism, just look at the Revision History.--Bard Cadarn (talk) 00:53, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's
May 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Participation is welcome in any language.



(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 19:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

Administrator changes

added Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
removed Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

June 2017 offerings @ WikiProject Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's June 2017 worldwide online editathons.

File:Nefertari.jpg

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Template:Gender_and_sexual_identities

I saw you reverted my change here. That article is now linked three times in the template. Why does it need to appear any more than once, as sworn virgin? Its really annoying clicking on a link in a box only to be redirected back to an article you've already read. Thanks. Bangabandhu (talk) 16:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

As long as it's there once and is easy to find, I'm not attached. I didn't see the other linkage. Let me take another look. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 16:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I see what you mean. I've self-reverted. That template is difficult. Some of these articles don't fit neatly into these categories. I don't have an easy answer to this. I think I would make an "other" section in addition to the current "other" section, with a different title. Not sure what, though... - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 16:42, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

July 2017 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's July 2017 worldwide online editathons.

File:60C0074BA4FF-1 Джемма Халид.jpg


(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

re Kindred Spirits (sculpture)

Um, excuse me, but here you removed the ref info from the ref section and peppered it into the article body, which makes the article much harder to read and edit in source mode. Please do not do this as I did that way on purpose and I had to clean it up. Are you are in the habit of doing this? I sure hope not. Herostratus (talk) 15:28, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Has there been some change to WP:MOS / WP:CITE in favor of putting all refs below then using short form in the body? Everyone I work with puts the first usage in full form and then uses the short form afterwards. What is your precedent or reason for prioritizing this form? - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 18:00, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
It's common sense because it makes the article easier to read and edit. It's supported by the |refs= field of the reflist template so I assume its allowable. Where in the rules does it say not to do that. There's a lot of rules here, but rather than getting into that explain in plain English how peppering the details of the refs up in the body of the text so that they are intermingled with the article text makes the article easier to read and edit or has some other benefit. (I use the old source editor; if peppering the ref details into the article text makes it easier to use the visual editor, I'm willing to be educated.)
If there's a rule somewhere that proscribes this, point it out and let's see if we can get it corrected (and if not, we should probably work to remove the support for the |refs=option of the reflist template). Herostratus (talk) 03:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
FWIW, at Wikipedia:Citing sources, under "Inline citations" subsection "Avoiding clutter" it says "Inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can become difficult and confusing. There are two main methods to avoid clutter in the edit window... 2) Using list-defined references by collecting the full citation code within the reference list template, and then inserting them in the text with <ref name="ABC" /> tags" which is just what I did. Herostratus (talk) 00:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edits re sovereignty goddess

Thanks for reverting my recent edits re this article. I didn't know the guideline you cite. But just to save you trouble on this occasion, I'll have the article finished in about 20 minutes! Alarichall (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CorbieVreccan/Archive_16&oldid=1085938160"