User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2018/Jan

Your GA nomination of New York State Route 878

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article New York State Route 878 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 00:40, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

BMT Nassau St Line Errors

Hey, long time no see.

The Nassau St Line page still lists the (M) as a transfer between Bowery & Broad St, and I can't seem to find the template to edit it. Can you help? AahdTahar (talk) 17:53, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@AahdTahar: The M runs on the line to Chambers Street during weekday evenings. I have fixed Fulton and Broad Streets, though. epicgenius 19:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

SIR maps

I really like the track maps. However, there are some mistakes on them. I don't know how best to indicate them to you as I presume you don't have the track map book by Peter Dougherty.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 01:27, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't have the books. Could you tell me which pages need to be fixed? epicgenius 01:37, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I need to go to bed. Maybe tomorrow. --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 02:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

You are missing a switch on the Eltingville (Staten Island Railway station) page. The switch is directly to the compass-north of the station and goes from the Tottenville-bound track to the St. George-bound track. The St. George map is incorrect. I will email you an image of it. It is copyrighted.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Epicgenius/Archive/2018. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Trump Tower

Hello:

I am in the midst of a copy edit you requested of the Trump Tower article. I have found the Destruction of Bonwit Teller Building features section somewhat confusing. As I read it the order of events as you have them is:

1. On April 16, 1980, the sculptures were destroyed
2. Stiebel rode by taxicab to the building site and attempted to pay the workmen for the sculptures, but she was rebuffed:[56]
3. the workers in charge of demolition canceled several appointments she had made to see the demolished sculptures.[55]
4. The workers later told Stiebel the building's decorative grille had been transported to a New Jersey warehouse,[55][53] but it was never recovered,
5. on May 28, Stiebel was informed the grille had been "lost".[57][53]
6. On June 5, the sculptures were also destroyed.[58][57]
7. By the time Stiebel reached the site, the workmen told her that they had been ordered to "destroy it all."[57]
8. The sculptures and grille were scrapped,

First, there are two different destruction dates April 16 and June 5. Was April 16th the day they were removed, and June 5 the day they were destroyed? Was the grille also destroyed on that date? When Stiebel went by taxi to try to buy them, was that when she was told they had been ordered to "destroy it all"? When were the appointments to see the sculptures before or after they were removed?

Rather than repeat the sculptures and grille were scrapped which isn't really the same as destroyed — the sculptures would have been destroyed — the grille would have been scrapped — why not say: Trump later said he had ordered the destruction of the sculptures and grille himself.[54]?

If you could have a look at this and clarify it all that would be helpful. I will continue to copy edit the rest of the article.

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: Sure, I'll take a look. #1 is taken down, not destroyed. epicgenius 22:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:56, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Trump Tower Copy Edit Completed

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Trump Tower has been completed.

I noticed several occasions like those below from the Security section where multiple citations are used for a single event. You may want to go through the article and identify any other and then select one or two of the most reliable sources and remove the others. An FAC reviewer may require this citing Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Other than this, I think the article is in great shape.

The man was aid climbing using industrial suction cups.

Rogata was arrested for endangerment and criminal trespassing and taken to Bellevue Hospital for psychiatric evaluation.

I am still trying to get the image of Trump sawing down the trees out of my head!

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: Thanks for the copyedit and the citekill suggestions. I really appreciate it. epicgenius 22:32, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Broadway Junction (New York City Subway)

That article wasn't tagged as part of {{WPNYC}}. Do you think that's a widespread problem among NYC subway articles? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Yeah, that's a big problem. Maybe 90% of subway station articles are only tagged with {{NYCPT}} and {{WikiProject Trains}}. I was planning to tag these articles, but that's going to be a large undertaking. epicgenius 18:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Maybe we could request a bot to help us? I had tried once to tag all the bios of people born in NYC with the project template with AWB and found it too daunting. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

That should work. I created a list of subway articles whose talk pages may need to be tagged and pasted it into User:Epicgenius/sandbox/13. epicgenius 18:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Yowza, is that all? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that's about 433 articles. epicgenius 18:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Precious four years!

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cross-platform interchange, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KCR (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

New World Trade Center GA Review

Hi Epicgenius – this article will pass GA requirements without a problem. However, I made some comments regarding references, which should be fixed or addressed before I go ahead and pass it. I placed the 2.a. GA criteria on hold, but it shouldn't take too much time to fix those references. Another job well done! Thanks, CookieMonster755✉ 00:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@CookieMonster755: Thank you for the comprehensive review. I will get to these last issues shortly. epicgenius 01:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of World Trade Center (2001–present)

The article World Trade Center (2001–present) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:World Trade Center (2001–present) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CookieMonster755 -- CookieMonster755 (talk) 14:41, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

/* Poetry */ added info about Bronx poetry

Dear Epicgenius--

In December I thought I added this to the Bronx Lit Poetry section.

I see it when I click "contributions" but I do not see it in the article when I am not logged in.

Perhaps I did not do the entry correctly. I am not a frequent contributor.

Could you help get this in?

I stumbled upon Michelle's work and bought it and read it. In my opinion it seems to deserve a mention.

This is what I wrote:

"Bronx Migrations by Michelle M. Tokarczyk (Cherry Castle Publishing: 2016) offers poems about The Bronx that range over five decades, from “The Stoop, Daly Avenue, 1961” to “Beacon, 2010.” The poems cover Tokarczyk’s reluctant exodus from The Bronx in 1962, memories of her Bronx childhood and of her family, and her return to The Bronx in search of her childhood tenement."

Thank you. Xnorbex 1/11/18 Xnorbex (talk) 14:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xnorbex: The entry looks like it was removed by Michael Bednarek a few days after you added it, so maybe you didn't get a notification. His edit summary was partly revert to revision 814970455 dated 2017-12-11 23:38:32 by EricEnfermero: a) Tokarczyk notability & sources; b) Section "In songs" is for songs.. I suppose this should be discussed on the talk page if you really want to include it, since I couldn't really find secondary sources for the book. Or a single sentence may do:

"Bronx Migrations" by Michelle M. Tokarczyk is a collection that spans five decades of Tokarczyk's life in the Bronx, from her exodus in 1962 to her return in search of her childhood tenement.

References

epicgenius 14:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of New York State Route 878

The article New York State Route 878 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:New York State Route 878 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 01:41, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify: Current Backlog Reduction Plan

Hey, I noticed you marked yourself as a member of WikiProject Wikify and you are currently listed as active. I was wondering if you would be able to assist with our current backlog reduction plan. While traditional drives are more structured month-long sprints by WikiProject Wikify members, there is currently lacking activity within the project and in order to significantly reduce the incredible backlog, members are encouraged to review all articles marked with the Underlinked Template Message - {{underlinked}} - a list of which can be found here - to analyze the worthiness of the template message on the given article. Articles that have nothing to link or are have had wikilinks sufficiently added should have the template removed to clear the backlog and make it easier for editors to find articles in genuine need of wikification. This can be done by any editor; however, all editors should consider joining if they haven't done so already. Thank you!

The Novac (talk) 03:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of New York State Route 878

Hello! Your submission of New York State Route 878 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SounderBruce 05:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Irwin Untermyer

Hello! Your submission of Irwin Untermyer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of M60 (New York City bus)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article M60 (New York City bus) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of M60 (New York City bus)

The article M60 (New York City bus) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:M60 (New York City bus) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 22:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Q70 (New York City bus)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Q70 (New York City bus) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 00:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Q70 (New York City bus)

The article Q70 (New York City bus) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Q70 (New York City bus) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 00:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Q70 (New York City bus)

The article Q70 (New York City bus) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Q70 (New York City bus) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 02:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of M60 (New York City bus)

The article M60 (New York City bus) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:M60 (New York City bus) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 02:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Q20 and Q44 buses

The article Q20 and Q44 buses you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Q20 and Q44 buses for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NYC year nav

Template:NYC year nav has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- M2545 (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Man at the Crossroads

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Man at the Crossroads you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Usernameunique -- Usernameunique (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

TWA Hotel has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Epicgenius. TWA Hotel, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

/* Poetry */ added info about Bronx poetry: Bx Migrations

Dear Epicgenius--

Thank you for explaining the removal of the information about Bronx Migrations. I do not understand the part that says "songs is for songs." Did I accidentally put this in the wrong place (which I do not think that I did), or was the proposed entry misunderstood, or did that part of the comment refer to a different issue?

The one sentence you suggested is better than no entry at all. Perhaps you could present that to the editors. I am not an experienced Wiki contributor, and you could probably do that a lot quicker than I could.

Since I carefully read the book, I thought it would be beneficial to Bronxites to mention a few of the places it covers.

I have followed poetry about The Bronx for years. In my opinion, this is an important book from the point of view of Bronx history and culture. It directly deals with social and historical issues that have been a factor in the South Bronx since the 1950s. And the poems are well crafted.

Small press poetry does not get a lot of publicity, so I guess that there will not be much in the way of secondary sources. I am hoping that The Bronx County Historical Society Journal will review the book. It would be a shame to let this book fade away.

Thank you for your help. I appreciate your time.

Xnorbex

1/12/18 Xnorbex (talk) 15:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xnorbex: I have added the sentence to the article. "Songs is for songs" was intended for another edit, not for you. I agree that it's important, but without secondary sources someone else may remove it again. epicgenius 15:16, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Epicgenius--

Thank you!

What would be considered a secondary source?

Would that be something like a third party review?

The book is listed in Worldcat. It is in one library.

If I have a better idea of what a secondary source is, perhaps I can encourage the author or publisher to provide one.

Xnorbex 1/12/18 Xnorbex (talk) 22:16, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xnorbex: Yes, a third party review of the book (or an analysis) would be considered a secondary source. I appreciate that you are willing to ask the author or publisher for a secondary source, but that would still be a primary source since the author and publisher is directly involved in the original work. You could read this page for an explanation on primary vs secondary sources. epicgenius 23:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Epicgenius--Thank you for the link, and for your patience! I saw only one on-line review of Bx Migrations, and that seems to have been written by the publisher, so that obviously does not count. I will try to find out from the author or publisher if there are any third party reviews. And I will encourage them to get one. I do not know if they will be able to. As a poet myself, I know how difficult it is to get reviewers for a book of poetry.

I do not know the author personally. In December 2017, I stumbled upon her work at this link: http://www.newyorkdreaming.net/a-personal-history-of-the-bronx-river-and-other-poems/ The poem about Alexander's struck home: my family spent a lot of time there. The bio's mention of a future book called "Coming Back" is, I presume, a reference to Bronx Migrations, which, if I remember correctly, includes the poems on the link. I bought the book and was delighted to see that another poet was focused on the South Bronx.

I am hoping that Michelle or her publisher will be able to lead me to a third party review, which I will share with you.

--Xnorbex 1/13/18 Xnorbex (talk) 15:35, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xnorbex: If you do find a third-party review, it would be much appreciated. I hope they can tell you about any third party reviews soon. epicgenius 16:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Epicgenilus--

I just received this in an email from Michelle Tokarczyk:

"Here is a link to a review of my book in Working-Class Perspectives--an online scholarly publication. . . . If the link doesn't work, you can google Journal of Working-Class Studies. Jim Daniels wrote the review."

(The link is not accepted by Wiki, so I removed it.It was a long link, and the Wiki message said something about a blacklist--Xnorbex)

I do not have Facebook, but I did Google the reference. This is the heading:

"Journal of Working-Class Studies Volume 1 Issue 1, December 2016 Tokarczyk, Michelle M. (2016) Bronx Migrations, Cherry Castle Publishing, Columbia, Md. Review by Jim Daniels"

I saved the text of the review as a pdf file.

I went to this link and had to scroll down to find Vol 1, Issue 1:

https://workingclassstudiesjournal.com/previous-issues/

I hope this helps.

Xnorbex 1/18/18 Xnorbex (talk) 12:27, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xnorbex: I really appreciate it. Thanks. When I tried to paste the link, it seems to work for me, so I'll try to put it into the Bronx article. epicgenius 14:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

/* Poetry */ added info about Bronx poetry: Bx Migrations

Dear Epicgenius--

The link I sent you worked for me. If it works for you, would that mean the entry would have a valid secondary source??

(The original link Michelle sent in her email seemed to be to facebook, and if remember correctly, it was several lines long, so I suspect that might be why Wiki did not accept it.)

Thanks for all!

Xnorbex 1/18/18 Xnorbex (talk) 16:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Xnorbex: I have already added it as a secondary source. Maybe the long link to Facebook was why you couldn't add it. Facebook isn't seen as a reliable source on Wikipedia. epicgenius 17:12, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Man at the Crossroads

The article Man at the Crossroads you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Man at the Crossroads for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Usernameunique -- Usernameunique (talk) 19:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

removal of quote mark in decade used in quotation

Thanks for this edit, though I would think that removing the quote mark in a decade specified in a quotation (e.g., changing "1920's" to "1920s") -- without using the Sic template -- would be appropriate per MOS:QUOTE / MOS:CONFORM. As always, thanks for all of your New York City edits. Alansohn (talk) 03:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I appreciate that you added the quotes to the Pop Culture section. I've also adjusted the quote marks in the decades mentioned and removed the {{sic}} template. epicgenius 14:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK Sabina Puertolas

Thank you for your review! [1] I have made some changes based on your good suggestions. Vanguard10 (talk) 05:00, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. I have made some comments there. epicgenius 14:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jamaica Bay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Berry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rainbow Room

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rainbow Room you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Googoogootoo -- Googoogootoo (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of World Trade Center (1973–2001)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article World Trade Center (1973–2001) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Googoogootoo -- Googoogootoo (talk) 02:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Man at the Crossroads

On 22 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Man at the Crossroads, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Rockefeller Center mural Man at the Crossroads was destroyed after the artist surreptitiously added a portrait of Lenin? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Man at the Crossroads. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Man at the Crossroads), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Man at the Crossroads

Gatoclass (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Trump

Hi EG. Ealdgyth is going to be scheduling your Trump FA for February 28. User:Johnboddie and I have been working on the blurb, and so far we've got:

"Donald Trump" is a segment of the Emmy-winning HBO news satire television series Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. It first aired on February 28, 2016, when Trump had become the frontrunner for the Republican Party nomination, on his way to winning the presidency. During the segment, comedian John Oliver discusses Trump's presidential campaign and its unusual "dark-horse" nature, as well as his career in business. Oliver outlines Trump's campaign rhetoric, varying political positions, and failed business ventures. The comedian also criticizes Trump for making bigoted and untrue statements, and talks about "Drumpf", the Trump family ancestral name. The segment went viral, with 85 million views on YouTube and Facebook combined by the end of March. By the Super Tuesday primaries on March 1, two days after broadcast, Google searches for "Donald Drumpf" had surpassed those for both Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, two of Trump's chief rivals for the nomination. The segment started a public debate on when the Trump family renamed themselves. Reviews of the segment itself were mixed.

That's about as much space as I want to devote to "Drumpf"; it was a one-time joke. I'm concerned that people will argue at ERRORS that we might be playing into Trump's hands if we report only the jokes and none of the substantive criticisms from the segment. It's up to 825 characters so far, and needs to be between 1000 and 1200, hopefully closer to 1100. Thoughts? - Dank (push to talk) 22:06, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dank: I'll add some commentary on this later. Pinging Another Believer, who has also contributed to this article. epicgenius 22:08, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dank: I added 2 sentences, totaling 1,124 bytes. Does this sound good? Apparently I'm illiterate since the two sentences still include "Drumpf". I removed "Drumpf" from one of these sentences. epicgenius 02:19, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

That's not really what I was getting at, I'll go read the article and brb. - Dank (push to talk) 03:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, in the episode summary (before the Drumpf subsection), you guys report that Oliver makes a lot of serious claims about Trump's fitness for office. To devote the entire blurb to a discussion of jokes and reactions to jokes, and leave out any of the substantive stuff, is probably not going to go over well at WP:ERRORS. Is there anything that jumps out at you that would be good in the blurb? - Dank (push to talk) 03:27, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

There's a lot. John Oliver names Trump's inconsistent political views, lawsuits, failed businesses, racism, inflated net worth, "serial" lying, and quibbles over minor issues. Would something to that extent be appropriate for the blurb? epicgenius 03:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

All I know is that we can't censor out all of the substantive stuff ... and I hope that's not a reflection of my own biases. I think where I'm coming from is ... although the show has jokes, the reason it keeps winning Emmys is because it tackles well-researched, serious issues. So there should be some kind of acknowledgment or reflection of that in the blurb ... just your like your article does a good job of acknowledging that. I don't really have a preference what we go with. - Dank (push to talk) 03:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll have to think about what else is important enough to be added, and how else I can phrase it. It seems like the issues Oliver outlines are pretty substantive and that there are a lot that we can list. At the same time, though, I also want to attract readers who might like or support Trump, rather than having the blurb as basically an attack of Trump (as the episode is).

I have to go to sleep now, but I will get back to you tomorrow on this issue. epicgenius 03:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dank: I was thinking of splitting off the sentence in the blurb that ends in outlining his campaign rhetoric, varying political positions and failed business ventures. It seems like I can add some of the important content there. Just in case the blurb has to be aligned with the article, I am also planning to do that in the article. epicgenius 14:54, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Perfect. - Dank (push to talk) 15:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dank: I added Oliver outlines Trump's campaign rhetoric, varying political positions, and failed business ventures. The comedian also criticizes Trump for making bigoted and untrue statements to the blurb, replacing that sentence fragment. How does that look? epicgenius 15:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

It's getting there. Of the things Oliver said, which surprised you the most (assuming surprise is still possible at this point)? - Dank (push to talk) 15:42, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I suppose his "dark horse popularity" and his outsider appeal might have been one of the largest surprises at the time: Trump was a political rookie who had never held office before. That, to me, was the most surprising thing. Others may find somethings else to be more surprising, though. epicgenius 16:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

We're almost there. What I'm trying to avoid is a war over interpretations of WP:NPOV. Ealdgyth just scheduled the other 27 days in February and I put up my blurbs, so I want to leave today open to respond to blurb edits ... I'll give this more thought tonight. - Dank (push to talk) 18:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

OK. If you have time, could you suggest some things I can add? I added and its unusual "dark-horse" nature right after During the segment, comedian John Oliver discusses Trump's presidential campaign. epicgenius 18:57, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be happy to look at it tonight. You're on the right track, no complaints. The problem in a nutshell is that Wikipedians require NPOV ... sadly, NPOV is a shifting target with Trump, and what seems "balanced" one month can seem unbalanced after the political winds change. I like your bland language, I'm just trying to think of the best way to CYA (cover your anatomy) in case the current political trends keep moving in the same direction for the next 6 weeks. - Dank (push to talk) 19:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

(I thought CYA was "cover your ass", but OK, other private parts will do. ) Anyway, I looked the blurb over and I saw some places where NPOV may be a problem. "Failed business ventures" and "bigoted and untrue statements" might be seen as opinions in this day and age, even though they may be true, and I do say "may" based on these aforementioned political winds. To some, the view is that Trump can do no wrong, but to others, they think Trump himself is the very definition of wrong. Although failed businesses and bigoted statements (like his shithole countries) may very well be his style, I was thinking that we might not want to include that in the final blurb. Feel free to disagree with me, though. epicgenius 22:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, roughly speaking, I think these are the constraints. For some Americans, just the fact that John Oliver is showing up at FAC, and no other representation of Trump or Republicans, puts us in the dog house ... we don't have to apologize for that, but I think you agree with me (from what you're suggesting) that we don't want to go on and on about perceived flaws, and I'd like to suggest that we should at least suggest [inserted:] that we're getting our information from a "study" or something (so people will know they can look it up for themselves if they have questions). For everyone else, the constraint is the one I already mentioned ... we have to say at least one substantive negative thing, or it may sound like we're acting as his defenders and apologists. So we could maybe say fewer negative things that you orginally suggested (and I think you came around to that position yourself), but we need to say at least one thing that Oliver supports by research in the segment. Perhaps: "Oliver cited a study that checked statements Trump made during the campaign and found three-quarters of them to be partially or completely false." Thoughts? - Dank (push to talk) 10:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dank: I agree with the constraints. I figure there will be three audiences of Wikipedia readers:

• Trump supporters: where just the fact that John Oliver is showing up at FAC, and no other representation of Trump or Republicans, puts us in the dog house. The last thing we want would be for a link to this article showing up under /r/The_Donald with the headline "Boycott Biased Wikipedia!!" or something like that. So I agree that we put disclaimers that Oliver is citing studies and fact-checking sites.
• Trump opponents: where we have to say at least one substantive negative thing, or it may sound like we're acting as his defenders and apologists. This is a little harder because we are trying to maintain NPOV, and facts can be easily twisted into opinions, e.g. the argument between supporters and opponents over whether Trump really lies. Again, the disclaimers should protect Wikipedia from accusations of being biased. We are simply saying that these are Oliver's words.
• Those who don't know or care, or have mixed views: where this article is just stating the facts, nothing else. We don't have to do anything extra in that case.

I personally like using the sentence "Oliver cited a study that checked statements Trump made during the campaign and found three-quarters of them to be partially or completely false." However, I also know Trump supporters who chafe at the idea that Trump is lying. If we don't mention these sites by name in the blurb, we should be fine. TL;DR: I agree. epicgenius 16:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, great. Pinging User:Ealdgyth ... Any thoughts on whether we should run the blurb with these parameters, or run it at all? Also, should we mention that Last Week Tonight has garnered the Emmy for Outstanding Variety Talk Series for the last two years? - Dank (push to talk) 17:24, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

If we include the Emmy in the blurb, do we have to include the Emmy in the article as well? epicgenius 17:30, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

In general at TFA, not necessarily. In this case, yes. I don't have a strong feeling either way, and I don't want to tell you what should go in the article. It seems prudent, though ... if we just pick a random show that criticizes Trump to run at TFA, some people will see that as a POV choice. If we pick the show that's at the top of the awards ecosystem, it's hard to argue that we're just picking a random show. - Dank (push to talk) 18:32, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good. The only problem is that the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Writing for a Variety Series was awarded after the episode aired. It might not be relevant as LWT did not win the award at the time. Therefore, I placed "award-winning" in the article's lead instead. epicgenius 18:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I believe "It won the Emmy" means these days (more often than not) that it won "Outstanding (category) Series", rather than just Best Writing or Best Directing or whatever. The other categories are more likely to be referred to as "an Emmy" instead of "the Emmy". LWT won the Emmy in its category the year before and the year after this episode aired. That's a reasonably big deal ... but I don't mean to be taking a position on this, I'm just throwing out things that I think people might wind up talk about. - Dank (push to talk) 19:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, I put "Emmy-winning" in the blurb. I think we need a third opinion on the inclusion of the Emmy in the blurb/article, just because there's no good place to put it within the article. epicgenius 19:33, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm having second thoughts, I want to sleep on it. What's bothering me is: we haven't had a political figure like this one at TFA before, and we don't know how editors will respond. What if they push, say, a Fox segment on Chuck Schumer through FAC, for "balance"? Maybe this would work better at TFA after Trump is out of office. I do my best thinking when I'm asleep, I'll get back to you in the morning. - Dank (push to talk) 00:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, let me run this by Ealdgyth and see what she wants to do. - Dank (push to talk) 19:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dank: Your comments got me thinking. Maybe it would be good if we take this off the TFA schedule for now. There's too much risk involved, and I don't want to be complicit in any controversy surrounding Wikipedia. epicgenius 04:16, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Pinging Ealdgyth. - Dank (push to talk) 04:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Technical question regarding your latest edit to "New York City"

Greetings and felicitations. In your your latest edit to "New York City" you trimmed cruft from three URLs. I also do this and I hold the opinion that this is common sense, but have been unable to find anything in the MoS to support this practice. Can you point me to any such rule or recommendation? —DocWatson42 (talk) 00:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

@DocWatson42: There's no hard rule for this as far as I'm aware. The closest thing is Template:Cite web#URL, which says Remove tracking parameters from URLs. Some of these extended URLs specify a certain action, such as highlighting a search term, which I find unnecessary because we could add page numbers or direct quotes instead. Other extended URLs are used for tracking purposes. There's also WP:PAGELINKS, which holds that you can modify a PDF or a Google Books URL to point to a specific page. I trim these URLs mostly because the "extra" parts don't add anything to the article. epicgenius 01:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. ^_^ —DocWatson42 (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Global Collaboration products newsletter: 2018-01

Latest news from the Wikimedia Global Collaboration team, about Notifications, Structured discussions, Edit Review Improvements and Content translation. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you.

What's new?

• The Global Collaboration report for December is now available (in English).
• Filters are better integrated on Related Changes (see below).
• Structured discussions now use the 2017 wikitext editor (see below).

Edit Review Improvements [More information • Help pages]

Bug fixes

• When searching, a click on a filter capsule moved the list of filters. [2]
• On Related Changes page, the page name entry box didn't show the entirety of long page names. [3]
• Transcludeing Special:RelatedChanges on a page added unexpected parameters to the URL. [4]
• Filter menu was opening upwards. [5]
• ORES preferences on Recent Changes and Watchlist preferences pages have been rationalized. [6]
• Users are now prevented from clicking on a link when they click outside of the dropdown menu to close it. [7]

Work in progress

• Filters on Related Changes page are better integrated and get new features, for instance: [8]
  • The standard auto-completion mechanism is available when you search for a page to look at.
  • It is more clear if you are looking to pages linked from the target page or to the target page.
  • You no longer need to click the "Show" button; the page updates automatically when a page is positively identified via autocompletion.

Content translation [More information • Help pages]

Recent changes

• Further enhancement are made for list (Suggestions/In-progress/Published) items on mobile screens. Long titles no longer overflow or overlap with other interface elements. [9]
• Various changes to the "New translation" dialog and the selected page for translation have been made: [10]
  • Longer titles of selected pages are displayed in smaller. Some space has been added around to increase readability.
  • Language codes are not truncated by ellipsis anymore. Only full, autonym language names are subject to truncation.
  • Minimal screen sizes and selected suggestion dialog have been revisited. They are more consistent in responding to screen size changes.
  • Discard button is no longer shown on small screen sizes.
• Language filters no longer render wrong or non-existent language codes. [11]
• The "New translation" dialog now shows a loading indicator and doesn't display an error when you change the source language after an unsuccessful research. [12]

Structured discussions [More information • Help pages]

Recent changes

• Structured discussions now uses the 2017 wikitext editor instead of its old custom one. This works with your preference for wikitext or visual editor. [13][14]
  • The documentation has been updated and needs translations updates.
• Prométhée, from French Wikipedia, has created some gadgets to customise Structured discussions interface.
  • The documentation is ready to be translated.

Future changes

• Structured discussions does not always follow wiki's configurations concerning talk pages indexation. This will be fixed. [15]
• Hidden topics will not be indexed by search engines anymore. [16]

Notifications [More information • Help pages]

Bug fixes

• User rights change notifications were displaying a broken link. This is now fixed. [17]
• "Mark as read" buttons had a bad appearance for users who don't have JavaScript activated. [18]

Collaboration team's newsletter prepared by the Global Collaboration team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

00:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Irwin Untermyer

Gatoclass (talk) 12:01, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for TWA Hotel

On 23 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article TWA Hotel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Eero Saarinen-designed TWA Flight Center airport terminal was designated a landmark and is being redeveloped into the TWA Hotel at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/TWA Hotel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, TWA Hotel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:01, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

Right under our noses, someone stuck a fair use image making us look like fools and law breakers when this article was DYK. As you know, fair use images are not allowed in DYK. This is not good. The Wikipedia system of self policing failed. As a sign of good faith, I propose that the image be removed from the article for 10 days to show that we are serious about top quality DYK's. Removing the image will not harm the article. If you have alternate ideas, let me know. I definitely do not think that punishing the user is warranted because she/he probably didn't know and that would only hurt a user's enthusiasm for Wikipedia. (Didn't you know that.....) Vanguard10 (talk) 05:23, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

@Vanguard10: The article has actually already been featured on DYK. The above credit is given only when the article is featured on the Main Page. DYK's don't stay on the Main Page for more than 24 hours, so by the time you removed the logo, the article had already been taken off DYK. Once the article is removed from the Main Page, it no longer falls under the "free-use-image only" restriction. That's why I restored the logo. epicgenius 15:18, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Why is there the "no fair use" in DYK's? My guess is that Wikipedia wants DYK's to be the very best, beyond reproach. Does that make sense? Vanguard10 (talk) 04:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Not exactly. I think the rule has more to do with the number of people who will see the image. If a non-free image is on the Main Page, there might be a higher probability of someone just reusing it without permission. DYK has a much lower standard than featured or even good articles: often, only the hook reference is checked, and most minor grammar issues are overlooked. If each paragraph is referenced (even if it's a tangential reference) and if the article is not obviously biased, it's usually good to go. This is not so for good articles or featured articles, which have a much more stringent review. epicgenius 18:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

My sincere appreciation...

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		In an era when too many editors believe that Wikipedia is all about fixing trivial grammatical errors or deleting articles, it is the rare editor who tirelessly works to expand the articles that need expansion. As part of your extensive work on New York City-related articles, your recent edits to Canarsie, Brooklyn doubled the size and number of sources, while making a substantial improvement in the core content of the article; this one edit alone, which added more than 22,000 characters to the article, equals what would have been weeks -- if not months -- of contributions by the overwhelming majority of other editors. This article is just one of many that have benefited from your attention. Please accept my sincere appreciation. Alansohn (talk) 03:55, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Alansohn: Thank you very much for the barnstar. I don't mean to downplay my work, but I'd intended to add these sources for a very long time. I also appreciate all you do for New York City articles, especially in the "Notable people" and "Demographics" sections. Your edits are just as important, if not more so, than my additions of historic and descriptive contents to specific pages. epicgenius 04:06, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks for the thanks. Keep up the great work. Alansohn (talk) 04:14, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for IND World's Fair Line

On 29 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article IND World's Fair Line, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that passengers traveling to the 1939 New York World's Fair via the World's Fair subway line paid the standard five-cent fare to board, but had to pay the fare again on arrival? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/IND World's Fair Line. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, IND World's Fair Line), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

~~ 00:03, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/World Trade Center (2001–present) at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you think this could be a potential article?

User:Kew Gardens 613/List of closed New York City Subway entrances Thanks. --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:03, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kew Gardens 613: I don't know. On the one hand, a list of closed station entrances is interesting. However, this might also be regarded as trivia by other editors. (For instance, Articles for deletion/New York City transit fares revolved on whether our article comparing mass transit fares should be deleted. It was kept.) It may have a better chance of surviving if it were a subset of List of closed New York City Subway stations.

Unrelated, but you could also probably combine the "Locations" and "Number" columns into a single "notes" column. epicgenius 20:12, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't sure if it would be deemed trivia. How it work for it to be part of the closed subway stations page? These stations are open. I will combine the columns.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I think there can be a section titled "Open stations with closed entrances". There's already a section about stations with closed platforms. epicgenius 20:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

That works. The main issue would be sourcing. I initially intended this to be something in my Userbox, and therefore I cite subchat. We would need to find proper sourcing.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 21:00, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree. I'll help find sources later. epicgenius 21:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Barren Island, Brooklyn

On 30 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Barren Island, Brooklyn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that horse carcasses, and trash from three of New York City's boroughs, were once processed at Barren Island, Brooklyn? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Barren Island, Brooklyn. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Barren Island, Brooklyn), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Broadway Junction (New York City Subway)

On 31 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Broadway Junction (New York City Subway), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that New York City's Broadway Junction station sees 100,000 daily riders, the vast majority using it to make transfers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Broadway Junction (New York City Subway). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Broadway Junction (New York City Subway)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)