This is the talk page for User:Rhododendrites.

Your Thoughts...Edit

We have discussed the possibility of expanding THIS... I am seriously considering the creation of a full genre article comparable to stuff like Swedish death metal or West Coast hip hop etc. It would essentially be the narrative of the Don't Think I've Forgotten film in expanded form with robust links and independent sources. I am confident that text and sources for such an article will come together rather easily from our existing artist articles plus Cambodian Rocks and related items on Cambodian history and the war. The problem is I cannot think of a GOOD TITLE!
Cambodian rock might be pretty good but the era of interest will be 1959-1975 and current Cambodian music will be excluded. Cambodian psychedelic rock might also be good because it's a label that is often used by modern fans like Dengue Fever (band) but it implies that psychedelic was the only genre practiced in that scene. Something like 1960-70s rock in Cambodia might be too long and unwieldy for WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. Any thoughts? ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:59, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

I've found myself thinking about this a few times now. The best I've come up with so far is "Music of/in/during pre-Khmer Rouge Cambodia", with honorable mentions for "Music of Sihanouk Era Cambodia and the Khmer Republic", "Music of Cambodia, 1960-1975", "Mid-20th century music in Cambodia" and the like. It seems hard to draw a clear line -- musically or politically. I haven't read anything that does much to contrast music under Sihanouk vs. the Khmer Republic. That is, I've read plenty about how Sihanouk fostered music/culture, but not much about what changed between 1970-75. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Pinging Wikirictor, who wrote most of History of Cambodia, and WilliamThweatt, who has provided some useful insight about related topics in the past. @Wikirictor, since I don't know if you know the context here, we've been working on 1960s-70s Cambodian pop/rock music articles like Sinn Sisamouth, Yol Aularong, Pen Ran, Baksey Cham Krong, Meas Samon, Ros Serey Sothea, etc. (and my gateway to the music, Cambodian Rocks). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
In the near future I'm ready to write a first draft of such an article on the scene/genre, but I'll take any ideas on what to call the dang thing. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:19, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. As I've noted before, I don't have much time to dedicate to WP these days, so I won't say much. However, I will say that both by its title and in its content, such an article should make it clear that this was (to use Doomsdayer's terms) one specific scene in Cambodian popular music of the era. The "rock" music has been brought to the attention of the Western world in recent times and that may make it seem like it was something more than it really was. But rock music wasn't the only kind of pop music in Cambodia during that era, nor was it likely even the most popular. Among Khmer, Sisamouth and SereiSothea for example, are more well-known for slow ballads like this and this or their myriad rom vong and rom kbach songs. These types of songs were (and are) way more popular among all Cambodian demographic groups than any of the psychedelic or "garage band" type music, which although popular among college and international students at the time for its "western" sound, was/is viewed as not much more than a novelty by most Cambodians. On top of that, in addition to pop music, there were other genres including court music, traditional and folk music that also prospered during this era. And...I've rambled on more than I intended. Suffice to say that the title and the article should put the CambodiaRocks-type music in the proper Cambodian context (i.e. not at all representative of all Cambodian popular music of the time) in addition to noting its new-found, and rather incongruous, popularity among westerners.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 07:19, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the helpful reminder, William. Documentaries like Don't Think I've Forgotten and the selection of music that's been imported to the US have definitely shaped my understanding such that I may be of the impression that it was more popular than it was, but I've listened to enough e.g. Sinn Sisamouth and Ros Serey Sothea that I know it's not all western-influenced rock/pop/garage/psych. I don't know specifically what Doomsdayer's article plan is, but I would assume incorporate material about all sorts of pop music if doing an article on that era. Perhaps that just gets too much overlap with the existing article, and perhaps we would run into trouble with two people who don't read Khmer searching for sources on the elements of Khmer music that haven't become popular in the west (I say popular, but it's even more of a niche here :) ). So maybe the most succinct title/scope (which doesn't read as very succinct, but oh well) might be "Rock music of pre-Khmer Rouge Cambodia". — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:47, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
William's thoughts indicate why Music of Cambodia should remain the primary article in this area. Unfortunately that article has been in need of expansion for years, and international WP users do not have the expertise, and anyone who does have the expertise is probably not able to use international WP. In the history of the Sinn Sisamouth talk page you can see people popping up occasionally who really are Cambodian (as in an old dispute over how to spell his name), but otherwise we have a bunch of articles written by Americans with material that Americans know about. .......................... It's surely not perfect but the scene/genre has gained international notice that may very well transcend Cambodia itself. Or in other words, Klezmer is enjoyed and talked about worldwide by people who know little about its European Jewish originators and may not have to. "1960s-70s Cambodian Rock" (or whatever title) could survive WP's notability requirements thanks to its international recognition. Any article here must avoid implying that it represents ALL Cambodian popular music, which hopefully can be done with sensitive writing. I envision a tight genre-specific article; consider the article for Jazz fusion which does not imply that it's the only kind of jazz. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:08, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Palace of Fine Arts (2020)Edit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Palace of Fine Arts (16794p).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 23:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/California sea lion in La JollaEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:California sea lion in La Jolla (70568).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 22:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

New exercise regimen while staying indoors during the pandemicEdit

I'll just leave this here... — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Outstanding!!!   Video now shared with dog owners I know. --cart-Talk 15:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mandarin PatinkinEdit

The article Mandarin Patinkin you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Mandarin Patinkin 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 Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 17:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alice GrayEdit

The article Alice Gray you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Alice Gray 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 The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:02, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hudson YardsEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Hudson Yards from Hudson Commons (95131p).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 05:46, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fulton CenterEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Fulton Center skylight (91420).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 16:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gowanus BatcaveEdit

The article Gowanus Batcave you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Gowanus Batcave 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 Mujinga -- Mujinga (talk) 11:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Great work on the page! You definitely deserve this. epicgenius (talk) 16:17, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ellis Island hospitalEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Ellis Island hospital window mural (01897).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 17:59, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Orlando JuliusEdit

 On 31 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Orlando Julius, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Robin Denselow of The Guardian called Orlando Julius (pictured) "one of the heroes of Nigerian music"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Orlando Julius. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Orlando Julius), 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for George Floyd protests in New York CityEdit

 On 13 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article George Floyd protests in New York City, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that amid the George Floyd protests, New York City implemented its first nighttime curfew since the Harlem riot of 1943? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/George Floyd protests in New York City. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, George Floyd protests in New York City), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Reasonable criteria and the "List of fictional vegetarian characters"Edit

So, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional vegetarian characters just closed. I saw you said that you "have no trouble imagining that a reasonable inclusion criteria could be established" and that you have "concerns about the notability of the subject as established by coverage as a group." Can you explain more about that? Since the page is preserved, I want to try and revise it so that another AFD doesn't come up again. --Historyday01 (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Historyday01: By the former I did not mean that I had one particular set of criteria in mind but that I have no trouble imagining that there are [various] ways that could be accomplished (implying that that doesn't look like a reason for deletion here). By notability, I mean some solid coverage of "fictional vegetarians" as a group, apart from low quality blog listicles, etc. It may exist, but on my cursory look I didn't see much of that. I may be wrong, though; I didn't look all that hard since I was already coming down on the keep side of things. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Ah, good point there. Yeah, it is hard to find anything on them, but I think that's just a consequence of the fact that far too few people have written about it. That's my thought on it at least.Historyday01 (talk) 23:13, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Exactly. And whether enough people have written about a subject is what Wikipedia means by notable. :) Anyway, I don't intend on following it up with a new nomination for deletion or anything FYI. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

two centsEdit

I was just thinking, shouldn't you write "my two cents" instead of "$0.02" !   Govvy (talk) 17:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Govvy: Quite possibly. I've wondered in the past if the meaning might not translate well outside of the US/UK, but within those countries I presume $0.02 would be understood the same way as 2¢ (which I'd write instead if only that pesky ¢ character were more easily accessible)? :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Even know it's American I actually think that "my two cents" has becoming part of the lexican in the UK, although I don't think it's used that much. Govvy (talk) 17:49, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Featured Picture TrophyEdit

 
Awarded to Rhododendrites, who scored the most points for Featured Pictures in any individual round of the 2020 WikiCup and in the whole contest.

Congratulations! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:01, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Hatnote on BurberryEdit

Hi, I noticed that you'd removed the hatnote I put on the Burberry article. I put the hatnote there because I found the Burberry article while looking for Barberry, as the two are pronounced almost identically and I'd always thought burberry was the actual name for the plant. I would guess that many other people have this same confusion so I believe the hatnote is justified. RedPanda25 02:37, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

@RedPanda25: Seems like a straightforward WP:NAMB issue. Sounding alike isn't usually a good reason (as far as I'm aware) nor unrelated topics spelled a letter or two away from each other. e.g. we would also need hatnotes at Barbary, Barbery, Bob Berry, etc. If we had some sources which showed there to be confusion between the terms, that might make sense. All this said, it's not something I feel terribly strongly about so if you're in an WP:IAR mood, have at it (I'd just ask that you link to this thread or otherwise contextualize in the edit summary). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Revert on Fox NewsEdit

Hi, you recently reverted my edit on the Fox News article, alleging WP:FALSEBALANCE. Can you please explain what makes you think this rule applies here? As I said in the edit summary, MSNBC article gets no criticism in lead. Fox denies bias in its reporting content (as opposed to commentary). Allegations of bias are addressed at great length where appropriate, more so than comparable articles. Maintain consistent and fair standards. If the most directly comparable left-of-centre cable networks don't have nearly as much (or, in the case of MSNBC, any) mention of alleged or real bias in their article leads yet Fox does, despite a plethora of reliable sources available, there is clear bias. Not to mention, as I said, Fox denies bias or partisanship in their core news content, which is clearly differentiated from commentary content. If you haven't, I encourage you to read an article of two from (or at least visit the homepages of) both Fox and MSNBC; you might be surprised. Kind regards, thorpewilliam (talk) 02:16, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thorpewilliam You're looking for balance between amounts of criticisms or kinds of descriptions between MSNBC and Fox (or something else and Fox). Subjects are covered here according to the way that source has been written about in reliable sources. The false balance is saying it should be written about with consideration of summaries of other subjects like MSNBC. If the MSNBC aren't isn't adequately and proportionally summarizing the body of literature about that subject, that's a matter for that talk page. As far as what they say about themselves, Wikipedia typically cares more about what other people say about a company (or most subjects, really) than what they say about themselves. Sometimes it's worth mentioning that a subject disputes characterizations of bias, but the bulk of the article should be summarizing what other reliable sources say. FYI when it comes to using Fox as a source (this is independent of the content of the article), we do differentiate between the news content and the talk shows (see the WP:RSP entries). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
@Rhododendrites: Duly noted. Thanks for correcting my understanding of the rule. Regards, thorpewilliam (talk) 08:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Media Bias in the USEdit

Hi! I noticed that in the history for the page above you reverted my edit with the comment "business week". This is a Harvard document. Where did you get business week? Was it otherwise published in that journal? I accept the revert but the comment confused me. I will be here on and off throughout the day, so feel free to leave a message here or my talk page. Thanks! Dswitz10734 (talk) 12:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, Dswitz10734. Here's the revert. Scholar.harvard.edu is where Harvard faculty's personal websites are. Sometimes they upload PDF versions of their publications. If you click through the link, you can see it's a print-out/PDF version of an opinion piece in BusinessWeek, not something published in a journal or by harvard. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

A new page which addresses your concern back in October...Edit

So, back in October, you supported the keeping of the page List of fictional vegetarian characters but only "reluctantly," saying you have "concerns about the notability of the subject as established by coverage as a group, but not quite concerned enough to start scrutinizing that at the end of a snowing AfD." Anyway, the list page has been limited, to the best of my knowledge (although a few characters might have slipped in there) to recurring and main characters. And, I have a page I created today, which I've worked on, off and on, since that deletion discussion, titled Vegetarian characters in fiction, so I thought I'd share that too. --Historyday01 (talk) 03:49, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

note re meetupEdit

Hi. why hasn't a notice gone out of this upcoming meetup?

--Sm8900 (talk) 00:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

@Sm8900: I think that with Wikicon just finishing, it's just nobody's gotten around to it. Thanks for the reminder, though. @Pharos: are you available to do your centralnotice/massmessage wizardry? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:44, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Presto! — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:00, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
terrific! thanks so much! I do appreciate all your amazing work. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 15:14, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion on Growth team "add an image" ideaEdit

Hello Rhododendrites! I'm Marshall Miller; I'm the product manager for the WMF's Growth team, which works on features to help retain new editors. Lately, we have been working on this set of ideas called "structured tasks", which break down editing workflows into steps that make sense for newcomers and make sense on mobile devices. We're currently thinking about an idea for a workflow in which newcomers would be recommended images from Commons that might be a good fit for unillustrated Wikipedia articles. One of the community members participating in the conversation recommended you as someone who has a particularly strong grasp on the usage of images in articles. Since this project is in its beginning phases, we really depend on community members to help us think through the feasibility, opportunities, and pitfalls. If you have time, it would be really helpful to us if you could check out the project page and weigh in on the discussion. Thank you! -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 05:38, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

@MMiller (WMF): Thanks for reaching out. I'd be happy to help in any way I can, though I've been really busy with some off-wiki projects in these last few days so haven't had time to read through those pages. If there are specific questions/elements that would be more helpful for me to jump into than others, let me know; otherwise I'll try to take a look at the general topics soon.
In general, I think there's an incredible opportunity not just to "harness the crowd" but also as a low-investment way to bring new people in. My sense of the other data "games" relating to images have had rather mixed results (suggestededits in the wikipedia app and the one that invites people to add "depicts" statements), so my initial reaction from a Wikipedia standpoint is that there's some risk involved. We'd want articles that don't already have images, probably would want to omit all BLPs, and could use a flag that makes third party review easy as a sort of maintenance tag. SuggestedEdits has an edit filter so I could go through and fix a batch of the problematic ones a few weeks ago, for example, but maybe something even more visible in the article? Just first thoughts -- I look forward to learning more. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
@Rhododendrites: thank you for giving this a bit of thought. I'm glad to hear you think the idea has potential. This idea was, in fact, inspired by the "suggested edits" in the Android app, and we're working with that team on ideating around this. They may wind up building something similar. And the Growth team is actually in the middle of building our first "structured task" for adding wikilinks to articles (note that our team deploys everything on smaller wikis first, and we haven't brought any of our features to English Wikipedia yet). Thinking back to the Android context, I think that something that would set this image task apart from some of the other suggested edits is that they would be edits to Wikipedia, rather than to Commons or Wikidata (e.g. depicts statements). This may be more engaging to newcomers, since they would immediately be able to see and show their impact on real articles. But, as you say, it also comes with risk because the visibility is higher.
We would plan to only offer articles that are totally unillustrated, so that newcomers would be adding the first/only image to the article. And we would also include a tag so that people could monitor and patrol them if needed. I like your idea about excluding BLPs -- I presume because a higher level of care is needed for those articles. I can check to see if it's possible to filter our BLPs without filtering out all biographies (there are a fair number of unillustrated historical biographies with good images in Commons). I definitely look forward to when you have time to check out the whole project page and participate on the discussion page (we're hoping to have the bulk of the discussion in the next four weeks or so). But these are the questions that are top-of-mind right now:
  • What rules to use around placing the image into the article? For instance, perhaps we should do something like: if there is an infobox that has a slot for an image, put it in there, otherwise put it below the templates and above the body. But I'm concerned that there would be many edge cases or reasons such a set of rules wouldn't work.
  • How could we help newcomers write good captions for the images?
  • Given that most metadata from Commons is in English, how might we make a similar experience that could work for people who don't read English in other wikis?
  • What other pitfalls should we be concerned about? Where can newcomers go wrong here, so that we can help them?
Thank you for any time you can take on this! -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
@MMiller (WMF): Out of curiosity, is there any research which estimates the number of opportunities there may be. To demonstrate beyond anecdotal evidence that there is a large enough number of clearly relevant images that need to be placed in respective articles? I'm more often hunting down images off-wiki and uploading than searching Commons for what's already there (or it's possible I just do that without thinking!), so don't have a very clear idea. Those figures would, of course, vary by project/language. As for your questions:
Rules: When there's no image currently in the article, except with a rare BLP case I've never seen it be controversial, no matter the quality or whether it directly or obliquely depicts the subject. That placement sounds fine with me, but some people have their own personal preferences that I don't think you need to worry about. Worst case scenario is an image that isn't actually a good infobox photo (so a person in a large group photo for example, or an unknown interior room rather than the exterior of a building), then someone who isn't new can just move it out afterwards. In short, if there's no image at all and the image found does in some way depict the subject, I don't think you need to worry much.
Captions: It might be nice to have some variable caption advice, perhaps based on the "instance of" whatever the image "depicts" (or perhaps Wikidata won't be involved as much?). So advice for a person, a species, a building, etc. But of course we have a whole long MOS page for captions (because of course we do) which is probably better to summarize than anything I'd say.
Languages: It seems like a useful starting point would be just to see what images are in the corresponding English article? But I guess I'm not sure which data set you're working with. While captions are language-dependent, of course, I wouldn't have thought you'd be using those much. Even in English many captions on Commons are missing or poor. Depicts shouldn't be a problem with language, right?
Pitfalls: Based on what you said to my initial comments it sounds like you've already thought about the major "what can go wrong" stuff. Working only with unillustrated articles, removing BLPs, and having an edit filter/tag/whatnot on the edit to make it easy to review them removes a lot of the concerns I'd have. The rest (captions, placement, etc.) is IMO relatively minor and easy for other people to fix if necessary. I'd be curious about the research into suggestededits, though, because if that's any indication, getting people to understand the task at all and engage with it in good faith seems like the challenge. Anecdotally, when I did a spot check more than half of the edits were wrong/low quality. That kind of error rate kind of defeats the point. I raised it on the suggested edits talk page and at AN there, but didn't get much of a response. FYI. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:44, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Rhododendrites -- I'm sorry for the delayed response; I lost track of your reply over the holidays, but I'm glad I rediscovered it. Here are my responses and follow-up questions:
Number of opportunities: Yes, this is something we looked into early on to make sure we were in the ballpark of having a sufficient number of tasks to offer in any given Wikipedia. You can see some of the rough estimates here, and we're going to make a fresh set of more accurate estimates here. Using English Wikipedia as an example (though we would first try out such a feature on smaller wikis), there are about 2.9 million unillustrated articles, and the algorithm would be able to propose images for something like 300,000 to 400,000 of them (about 10% of the unillustrated articles), with about 36,000 coming from Wikidata's P18 and the majority coming from the images used in the same articles on other language Wikipedias. With hundreds of thousands of images available, I think that's enough opportunity to build a feature for, and enough suggestions that it won't run out quickly. What do you think?
Captions: That's a good idea, to have variable advice for captions, more tailored to the type of article. Or perhaps we could show example captions from images placed on similar articles.
Languages: In running some user tests with our prototypes, it seems like the workflow people go through in doing the task is they look at the unillustrated article (e.g. "St. Paul's Church in Chicago") and see if the image could presumably be that entity (e.g. "yes, this is a church"). Then they look for the title of the article somewhere in the image's metadata to confirm that the image is that specific instance (e.g. "Good, the filename is StPaulsChicago.jpeg"). In these user tests, it looks like the most useful metadata fields from Commons for matching an image are the filename and the description, because those are the ones that have the highest coverage. The Commons captions and depicts are also useful, but are populated a lot less often than the description. And since the Commons image titles and descriptions are usually in English, this causes the challenge in other languages. The main idea I have for this right now is to only offer the task to people who can read English, similarly to how knowledge of two languages is needed to use the Content Translation Tool. This is unfortunate, because it would be best if everyone could use this task, regardless of their language skills.
Pitfalls: I'm glad you have feedback about the Android app's suggested edits. That team has a new product manager who wants to hear community thoughts on how to improve suggested edits. I'll start a new thread on your talk page to introduce her.
Thank you for your help. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
@MMiller (WMF): Thanks for following up with this information. I'd love to test it out if/when it gets to that point. Just one more question to follow up: I've noticed, of course, that descriptions on Commons are in English by default (the major exceptions being some subset of featured pictures -- POTDs, POTY finalists, etc. -- and even then only a handful of languages). Is it worth making description-level translations more of a priority? Or is the idea to use Wikidata captions/depicts statements as an alternative? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
@Rhododendrites: about the testing, we actually have a new plan for how people like you can try it out. The Android team, the same team as JTanner (WMF) below, is going to use the existing suggested edits feed to build an image recommendation feature for learning purposes. Importantly, this "minimum viable product" won't save any edits to Wikipedia. It's just for us to gather data, improve the algorithm, and learn. It will be made clear to users of the app that their work is only being used for learning, not for edits. We'll let you know when you could try it out (if you have an Android device). About the descriptions: we actually recently calculated some numbers around local-language metadata on Commons. In general, local-language descriptions and local-language Wikidata captions are quite rare at this point. When we look at the images we're able to recommend, in most wikis fewer than 5% of them have local-language descriptions or captions. I agree that there's an opportunity there for some "upstream" tasks to encourage people to increase the coverage (like how the Android has a "translate image captions" task), and then that goodness would flow down into the task to put the images on articles. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 02:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Thoughts on suggested editsEdit

@Rhododendrites: like I mentioned in the other thread, I'd like to introduce you to JTanner (WMF), who is the new product manager for the WMF's Android app team. I know you had some thoughts and concerns about suggested edits, and I think Jazmin may want to ask you about your experience as she gets onboarded to the team in the next couple weeks. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: Hi its nice to connect with you. Thank you for taking the time to flag so many important things about how we should reexamine Suggested Edits and the disruptions it creates for experienced Commons Volunteers. I am new to the Android team but have been at the Foundation for almost 3 years and have always greatly valued volunteers that give us feedback on how to improve. I want to apologize that there has been such a delay in response. I have made improvements to Suggested Edits a priority for the team. Feel free to collaborate with us and follow along as we tackle improvements to this feature https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T271727. I hope to continue to partner with you in improving this experience. JTanner (WMF) (talk) 21:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@JTanner (WMF): Hello, and nice to connect with you, too. Thanks for the update. I've subscribed to the Phabricator ticket. What's been said there so far looks spot-on.
One comment, though: I wouldn't consider the Commons "Depicts" page set in stone. As far as I can tell, it was written/discussed by only a few people and can very likely be changed with some thoughtfully framed discussion/proposals. It seems like discussions about structured data outside the walls of Wikidata (on Commons, on enwp) are often complicated by incomplete or incorrect information, which causes people who have trouble understanding to throw their hands up or err on the side of what's familiar. There are plenty of people more knowledgeable than me, but just in case it would be helpful, I'm happy to help with the community communication stuff. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 04:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
@Rhododendrites: This is very helpful! I will add this nuance to the Phabricator task so that we can include it in our discussions. We would actually love the help, thank you for offering. I'm going to ping Johan (WMF) , our team's Community Relations Specialist, who expressed interest earlier this week in connecting with you to discuss community consultation and partnering to get this right. Thank you again for being so helpful as we truly seek to improve this experience. JTanner (WMF) (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Undid of my changes of page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_birdwatching_incidentEdit

Mr. Rhododendrites,

are you sure that your bird watching hobby, that is obviously true after looking your twitter account, which is publicly linked to this Wikipedia account, has not affected on your decision to revert my changes on this wikipage of titled incident?

It cannot be that challengeable persons, e.g. persons who share the same hobby IN THE SAME CITY, edit pages to favour one side of the discussed incident.

In Finland, the word is JÄÄVI and you are JÄÄVI in this situation. There is a high possibility that you either know mr. Cooper personally OR favour him sharing the same hobby, in the same city.

The risk of Conflict of Interest is too high. You have no other option, but to revert back. If you like to challenge my words in said wikipage, ask some moderator to look it up and write his decision of this, without any possibility of Conflict of Interest.


2001:14BA:16F6:5500:28C2:A665:E20E:EC10 (talk) 23:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I have never met either of the involved Coopers to my knowledge and no, birding in the same metropolitan area does not give me a COI when it comes to basic Wikipedia policy. Happy to discuss the specifics of WP:OR and WP:WEIGHT on the article talk page. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esteellisyys

The possibility is enough. There is no need to prove or unprove your relationship to mr. Cooper and please do not try to do so, as your personal relationships are not public information. The possibility>0 exists. It is nonzero. See, our local bank had to fire one person from the bank as they married a collague. Nobody even accused them to do anything illegal, but the possiblity had to be eliminated. Two related persons always have a possibility to conspire, but of course they seldom do.

2001:14BA:16F6:5500:28C2:A665:E20E:EC10 (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

If you have read the WP:COI policy and those I linked above and feel something is wrong, there is a COI noticeboard where you can make an argument. It's really a straightforward removal though. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 00:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

One more question: what is your given approximate probability of that mr. Cooper had an own dog beside him. What is is your given approximate conditional probability that a bird watcher from a city undoes a change made by physics professional at other side of the globe in a wikipage of an incident in said city's bird watching and outdooring place and has no personal interest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:16F6:5500:28C2:A665:E20E:EC10 (talk) 01:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

If you would like to talk about the article, use the article's talk page. If you would like to pursue COI allegations, use WP:COIN. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

FlemingEdit

Hi Rhododendrites, A couple of things on the Fleming discussion. Firstly, I moved the top of your closed section to leave the note to admin in the open; if you disagree with that, please feel free to move it back to your original position. Secondly, I have !voted in the discussion (at 19:27 UTC today). It is the only !vote I have made, despite the implication made by Hal333. It’s pointless trying to !vote more than once as an IP, as double voting is easily picked up on. As I’ve previously edited as a named account, (and yes, just to be completely open and above board, this is the editor previously known as SchroCat), I know the rules and I’m not so stupid as to try and vote more than once. I’m unsurprised that my !vote has been questioned, particularly by that editor, as I have had problems with them before. Cheers - 213.205.194.6 (talk) 20:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi there,
I mildly disagree only because the comment above yours is no longer a duplicate !vote, and thus that note and what follows does not [IMO] add much to the main discussion. That said, I also don't think it's a big deal and don't intend to move it back. Sometimes people archive/collapse/close in order to keep things on track or reduce drama, but wind up doing the opposite when there's a back-and-forth over the archiving/collapsing/closing itself, so I'd assume leave it be. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for commentEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:University of the People on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: January 2021Edit





Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

February 17: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYCEdit

February 17, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

This month will include a discussion of Black WikiHistory Month in February, plans for WikiWomen's History Month in March, and of course the great work that is being done in these topical areas throughout the year. We will also have a relevant demonstration of the Wikipedia:Did you know process. If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or responding to this message.

7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 01:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Thursday Feb 25: ONLINE Black Wiki History Month at the Schomburg CenterEdit

Feb 25, 1:30-5pm: Black Wiki History Month at the Schomburg Center

You are invited to join the AfroCROWD and Wikimedia NYC communities for the 7th year of this edit-a-thon, this time being held in a virtual format. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page, and register on the form to get the Zoom link.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

1:30pm - 5:30 pm online, register on the form to get the Zoom link

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 07:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2021Edit

WikiCup 2021 March newsletterEdit

Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  •   Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
  •   Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
  •   ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
  •   Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
  •   Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
  •   The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
  •   Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
  •   Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
  •   Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
  •   Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Yellow-bellied sapsuckerEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Yellow-bellied sapsucker in CP (40484).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 15:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Field sparrowEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Field sparrow in CP (41484) (cropped).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 17:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Glass studioEdit

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Brooklyn Glass (32606)a.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 03:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


Sat Mar 6: Met Women's History Month Virtual Edit Meet-upEdit

March 6, 12:30pm: Met Women's History Month Virtual Edit Meet-up

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community and the Metropolitan Museum of Art for our The Met x Wikipedia Virtual Edit Meet-up: Women's History Month.

We will be partially coordinating with Art+Feminism and all of the International Women's Day and Women's History Month campaigns.

Watch and join the livestream! The Metropolitan Museum of Art event on Saturday Mar 6 will host a tutorial and question-and-answer session live on YouTube and other social media platforms.

  • 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm - Presentation
  • 1:30 pm - 2:30 pm - Guidance and Q&A

Chat about improving articles! Support will be provided to help guide new editors in this area at Wikimedia Gender Gap Editing Chat for the duration of the campaign.

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 01:54, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

File:RJ Palacio at BookCon (16102).jpg scheduled for POTDEdit

Hi Rhododendrites,

This is to let you know that the featured picture File:RJ Palacio at BookCon (16102).jpg, which you uploaded or nominated, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for July 13, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-07-13. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:51, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 

R. J. Palacio is the pen name of Raquel Jaramillo (born July 13, 1963), American author and graphic designer. She is seen here signing a book at the 2019 BookCon convention in New York City.

Photograph credit: Rhododendrites

Recently featured:

DYK for Abolitionist PlaceEdit

 On 11 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Abolitionist Place, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a landmarked house on Abolitionist Place in Downtown Brooklyn may have been a stop on the Underground Railroad? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Abolitionist Place. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Abolitionist Place), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: February 2021Edit





Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Sat Mar 13: Asia Art Archive in America: Art and Feminism Edit-a-thonEdit

March 13, 12-5pm: Asia Art Archive in America: Art and Feminism Edit-a-thon

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community and Asia Art Archive for our fourth annual (and first virtual) Asia Art Archive in America: Art and Feminism Edit-a-thon!

Organized by Asia Art Archive in America and NaPupila in collaboration with Asia Art Archive in Hong Kong and supported by Wikimedia NYC, this event brings together participants to discuss, create, share, and improve Wikipedia articles about women and non-binary artists.

We will be partially coordinating with Art+Feminism and all of the International Women's Day and Women's History Month campaigns.

Register and join the virtual event!

P.S. Next WikiWednesday You are also invited to join our March 17 WikiWednesday next week with a Saint Patrick's Day guest speaker from Wikimedia Community Ireland.

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 00:18, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

An enlightening articleEdit

Rhodedentrites, I thought you might find this article of interest given the GOP article discussion [[1]]. It's an older article looking at the motives behind opposition to school bussing which tries to methodically test the theory that white opposition to bussing was based on symbolic racist, the idea that opposition is based on a fundamental prejudice vs other motives. The paper starts with noting that, at that time, whites were increasingly rejecting the idea of blatant racism (their example, "blacks are less intelligent"). The symbolic racism theory suggests then that whites were rejecting issues like bussing because it was harmful to blacks or because of some other inherent attitudinal predisposition, rather than because they had or perceived they had a self interested motive for doing so. In the end the paper concluded that perceived threat and applied policy predispositions were the strongest indications or white attitudes towards busing. Basically it was a self interest motive filtered by one's one understanding of the situation. Bringing this back around to our GOP related topic, someone may oppose the notion that one group is superiors to another yet be warry of how a policy, say bussing, may impact them thus they are against bussing. If a politician sees this fear or even shares it and crafts a message that says they are against bussing it's not clear that is an attempt to appeal to racism. This paper certainly suggests that some would claim it to be an example of symbolic racism but others would say, no, this is appealing to a voter's own self interest (or at least what they think is in their self interest). The problem becomes how do you decide what the motive of the politician was? If the politician actually felt they were appealing to someone's inner racist yet this gave it a vail of respectability then it was an intentionally coded message. However, if they simply saw it as something that concerned the voters and an issue compatible with their own current views of what government should/shouldn't do then it's not a coded message or even racially motivated even if the outcome is not race neutral. Interestingly, the Southern Strategy spends a lot of time saying Nixon was crafting these coded messages but doesn't say what they are. This study at least would show that Nixon's opposition to bussing (which I recall was one of the alleged coded messages) probably was not resonating with voters due to any dog whistles. That doesn't mean the politicians weren't mistakenly believing in the dog whistle effect but now we have to prove the motive vs just the message. This is just one study and we can't be certain that other possible dog whistle topics would have similar results. Still, if much of the opposition to bussing was based on inherent self interest, is it fair to say an anti-bussing message was a coded dog whistle and thus evidence of the "Southern Strategy"? Is someone who is warry of a bussing program coming to their school system an outright racist or perhaps just fearful of what the change would bring (racially conservative). Sorry this was a bit long winded and certainly it isn't a clean argument for the GOP talk page but I thought you might find the perspective interesting. Springee (talk) 03:35, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Haven't had a chance to parse it yet (busy few days). Just responding here to say I intend to soon. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
I was re-reading some of this paper and thought a quote in the conclusion was especially poignant when talking about racially conservative vs racism [emphasis from author]:
The symbolic racism researchers set out to establish that the explicitly racial attitudes of whites are related to where they stand on an issue like busing. This is an important proposition that should not be discarded. Nonetheless, to say that racial attitudes help explain opposition to busing is not to say that prejudice is the problem or that realistic group conflict motives are not involved. On the contrary, whites need not hold blatantly stereotypical beliefs or hostile orientations towards blacks in order to justify to themselves and to others their resistance to black demands for change[sources]. Such resistance appears to them as a simple defense of a lifestyle and position they think they have earned and do not question, not as a rejection of blacks as such.
A few things here caught my eye. First is the part about racial attitudes but not "prejudice". I think that speaks to racial conservativism. It's not based on ill will towards others so much as a fear that change will be bad for one's self. Doing a bit more OR of my own, a conservative politician might be against bussing on conservative grounds simply feeling that there have to be limits to what the government should be allowed to do and bussing is the federal government dictating policy at the local level. Such feelings have motivated conservatives to oppose things like federal laws relating to guns, environment, minimum wage, and parts of education that don't have an a clear racial connection. The politician can emphasize a range of issues but sees that voters in the south are mad about bussing Since they are already opposed to bussing they emphasize that message. It's a "southern strategy" since those are new voters. It's not so much a northern strategy since the politico doesn't expect a big shift in northern attitudes. In this hypothetical bussing is not picked because its dog whistle racist. It's picked because it's something that voters are mad about and the reversal is compatible with conservative ideals. However, since bussing is meant to address a race related disparity and, presumably, ending it would harm minorities the opposition can rightly say*, "the conservatives are doing something that harms minorities". Because this harms minorities the opposition can also claim the motive was to hurt minorities (certainly some voters and politicians were motivated by clear racism). That is a claim that is hard to prove since it involves trying to understand true motives but politically branding the conservative side as "racist" is probably sufficient. *"Rightly say" does assume bussing was effective. History has shown it wasn't but is that because it was a bad idea or there was simply too much resistance? I don't know. Having spent a lot of time reading up on the subject a few years back I feel that some variation of the above is more realistic than the idea that most politicians were cynical enough to try to think that a winning plan was to appeal to hidden racism vs simply looking at what issues bothered voters and were compatible with their current platforms. Certainly it has proven great fodder for the other side to claim a stance of anti-bussing is motivated be racism. Anyway, I've taken up a lot of your time but I hope that helps you understand part of why I think some of the terms used by researchers are important and why we need to be careful about accepting some of the claims of dog whistles at face value. Take care! Springee (talk) 04:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

March 17: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC with Wikimedia Community Ireland for St Patrick's DayEdit

March 17, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC with Wikimedia Community Ireland for St Patrick's Day
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

As this WikiWednesday coincides with Saint Patrick's Day, we will have a guest speaker from Wikimedia Community Ireland, about Irish-language Wikipedia, the efforts of the community in Ireland, and personal work on historical biographies with a special Irish-New York connection.

This month will also include a discussion of Black WikiHistory Month in February and WikiWomen's History Month and Art+Feminism in March, and of course the great work that is being done in these topical areas throughout the year. If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or the talk page.

7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 14:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request ServiceEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:British royal family on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment, and at Talk:Kevin McCarthy (California politician) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for commentEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crusading on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Suffusion of Yellow/hidetopcontrib.jsEdit

Hi, Rhododendrites . Can you please remove the line containing User:Suffusion of Yellow/hidetopcontrib.js and uncomment the line containingUser:Markhurd/hidetopcontrib.js in User:Rhododendrites/monobook.js? I did not intend to maintain a fork of that script; that was only for testing purposes and I'd like to delete it. The scripts are identical except for the comments. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:36, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow:   Done Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 42Edit

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

  • New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for commentEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Enrique Tarrio on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiLoop 2020 Year in ReviewEdit

Dear editors, developers and friends:

Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.

Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!

María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nominationEdit

 
A token of thanks

Hi Rhododendrites! I've nominated you to receive a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 01:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@Sdkb: I didn't have a great afternoon. While birding by the water I came across an injured red-throated loon down on the rocks below where I was standing. I was excited at first to see a bird close up that I've never been able to get close to, taking pictures before realizing it was hurt. I spent an hour or so contacting knowledgeable people and trying to figure out how to (a) get down to it, (b) without it limping back to the water, (c) how to wrap it up, and (d) how to get it back up... and then how to get it from Brooklyn to the upper west side where the bird rescue is (would a Lyft take me if I had a big waterbird with me?). Anyway, people who know better stopped me and alerted people who know what they're doing, but it's unclear if anyone would come (or if anyone could really do anything). Fun fact: apparently when loons feel threatened they just start stabbing with their beaks, so being prepared also requires wearing heavy gloves and face protection. Sigh.
Anyway, I came home, had some tacos, and saw this message, which was a really nice compliment and a good pick-me-up. Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 04:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to hear about the loon, but glad to be able to help out your day a little bit! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 04:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@Sdkb: Because I'm very sure you're invested in the loon now :) FYI it turns out a rescue was possible. It had fishing line wrapped around its wing which, in hindsight, is visible in this picture. It's recovering at the bird rescue. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
So glad to hear it! {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021Edit

ADL, COI, and The ForwardEdit

I posted a link to this section at WP:COIN#Article in the Forward to avoid belaboring something that's more or less resolved there, for better or worse.

Here's the TL;DR version of what I said in response to an inquiry about the ADL case:
So much of the difficulty of editing Wikipedia as an organization or otherwise with a COI is how few bright lines rules there are, and how many shades of skepticism there are among the community such that a range of outcomes are possible for any given situation. That's true of a lot of Wikipedia, but seems particularly pronounced with COI issues. The reception ADL received in the noticeboard thread was IMO harsher than necessary, given they expressed interest in learning the rules, responded to criticism, and seemed to agree to just about everything we asked of them, stopping short of a self-imposed ban on ever adding ADL sources to articles. But while I think that should've led to a second chance, the result of the thread (to the extent there is a result, except to say that I was in the minority and ADL has stopped its editing project) is also unsurprising because -- and it's hard to overstate this -- first impressions are extremely important. If they hadn't edited the ADL article, hadn't only been adding ADL sources, and hadn't created weight problems (in other words, if they started with the guidelines that they've now agreed to), I doubt we would be here. But organizations and people with a COI do not get the same leeway to make mistakes that ordinary volunteers do, and there's a good reason for that. Any organization interested to edit Wikipedia really needs to do a lot of homework about Wikipedia policies and conventions beforehand, err on the side of transparency, and ask questions if they're not sure about something.

In general, I thought the article was a more or less fair summary of something that was likely frustrating for all involved. Hopefully others do, as well. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:58, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

To add something I've said in several places at this point (as have others, probably more eloquently than me): if we're going to have vague COI rules in order to allow more room for case-by-case judgment, taking a hardline approach which operates as though the rules are not vague and which leaves no room for making mistakes ultimately discourages transparency and makes volunteers' jobs harder in the long run. Editing with a conflict of interest is never ideal, but it's going to happen, and doesn't always harm the project, so we might as well try to be more consistent with how we deal with it. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: March 2021Edit





Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

April 21: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC with with Environmental focusEdit

April 21, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC with Environmental focus
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

As this WikiWednesday is just the day before Earth Day, we will have an environmental focus.

If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or the talk page.

7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 00:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for commentEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination – SuccessfulEdit

 

Hey Rhododendrites,

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email us at merchandise wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!

On behalf of the Merchandise Giveaway program,

-- janbery (talk) 12:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for commentEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Woman on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2021Edit

The Signpost: 25 April 2021Edit

Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for commentEdit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Pavol Hnilica on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 May newsletterEdit

The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:

  •   The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
  •   Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
  •   Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
  •   Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
  •   Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
  •   Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
  •   Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
  •   Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.

Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)