User talk:SusanLesch/Archives/2018/December
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi--thank you very much for taking the time to review the DYK nom! I revised (diffs) per your suggestions (and also tweaked some other stuff). What do you think? Also, what do you think about combining hook1 and alt2 into: ... that no woman in the US was awarded a PhD in mechanical engineering until Lois Graham became the first in 1959? I'm not sure if I'm supposed to post this on the DYK nom page, or here or elsewhere, so sorry if this is the wrong place. Thanks again! Levivich (talk) 04:27, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping me with this! Especially the sandbox!
- Edited copyvio issues and reduced the quote down to where Earwig is at 74%. I don't know if you think I reduced the quote properly (i.e., left "the best part"), or if you even think that quote needs to be there at all (I mean the last one, which was the long one). All the Earwig problems now are proper nouns, quotes, and "first woman in the United States" and "PhD in mechanical engineering." I don't think it's actually a copyright violation, though?
- Incorporated your edits for STEM, Degrees awarded, and the lead.
- Citations... here is what it looked like before I bundled citations (an older draft): diff That's a mess. But being a new editor, I feel so clueless about proper sourcing, particularly where I'm writing about a somewhat obscure topic that is not well covered in traditional RSes, so I'm kind of stitching together multiple kinds of sources (her own interview, her employer/alma maters, small newspapers, a family death notice, brief mentions in published books/journals). Without an encyclopedia article, full book chapter, or New York Times profile to sort of rely on, I'm not sure which of a bunch of second-tier sources should stay and which should go. Specific questions:
- Generally speaking, should it be left at paragraph-level cites, or should it be sentence cites? I did paragraph cites except direct quotes and potential controversial statements.
- Better to expand the description of the sources in the bundled cite (For RPI:', etc.), or split apart the bundled cite?
- Are there sources that can just go? You can see in the unbundled version linked to above that a lot of the sources provide the same information, so we don't need all of them, probably one or two would be enough? But I'm not sure which sources from the ones used are "more" or "less" reliable.
- Are the statements from RPI/IIT's website sufficient on their own? Under WP:SELF? Or are they not independent and thus not good enough to stand on their own? What about ASHRAE and SWE?
- What about her interview and family death notice? I see these as the least reliable, but they also provide the most information in one place.
- What about North Country Now? I can't tell if this is a reliable source or not.
- In sum I'd appreciate guidance on whether I should cite every sentence; expand the bundle or unbundle; and/or delete any sources in favor of others when there is overlap
- Tartan: Wow, good eye... and small world!
Sorry, didn't mean to skip the first paragraph; fixed that, with some slight rewording to get earwig down a bit more (now 62.1%). I also unbundled the cites and added some more detail about her early life. How's it look? Your comments have been very helpful, I think it's gotten much better! Levivich (talk) 02:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you again for all of your help! Levivich (talk) 15:32, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia Day 2019
There's discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Minnesota of a celebration in the Twin Cities on January 19. It would be great if that fits your schedule. Jonathunder (talk) 01:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Solar storm of August 1972
On 15 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Solar storm of August 1972, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a record-breaking solar storm of August 1972 is thought to have caused the spontaneous detonation of numerous U.S. Navy sea mines in North Vietnam? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Solar storm of August 1972. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Solar storm of August 1972), 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.
DYK for Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a President
On 19 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a President, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kathleen Hall Jamieson (pictured), author of Cyberwar, thinks it "highly probable" that Russia changed the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a President. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a President), 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.
January 2019 at Women in Red
 January events:
|
On the main page! Woo!
Just wanted to say thank you for your help with the Lois Graham DYK nom! Levivich (talk) 02:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
- Congrats! Well done Levivich. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:09, 21 December 2018 (UTC)