Disambiguation link notification for February 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedLynn Hill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Long (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 14:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

The Signpost: 04 March 2013

The Signpost: 11 March 2013

Geonotice

Hello, Wadewitz. You have new messages at Andrew Gray's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andrew Gray (talk) 21:09, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2013

Norman Selfe

Hi Wadewitz!

I've just relisted my first ever FA attempt - which was closed last week due to lack of commentary. I'd be grateful if you would give it the once-over. I'm sure you'll find Norman Selfe to be a fascinating character! (nomination).Wittylama 09:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem! If you feel like it, you can review my first FAC in a few years, Lynn Hill. Female rock climber. :) Wadewitz (talk) 19:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Education Program

Do you know whenish Education Program:Chapman University/Survey of Jewish History (Spring 2013) will start editing? --Guerillero | My Talk 04:34, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

No - I haven't heard from the professor since the beginning of the semester. Wadewitz(talk) 23:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 March 2013

Can you advise?

A plea for a moment of your time. I have a problem with Jane Cobden, which I have worked up from a stub. The difficulty is - what to call her in the text? The surname convention is problematic, as the article deals also with her father, Richard Cobden, and other Cobdens too. Referring to her as "Jane Cobden", which I have done in the lead, makes wearisome reading if applied throughout. For the moment I have done what her biographical articles tend to do, and mainly referred to her just as "Jane". Can you suggest an alternative that might work better? Any help would be much appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 23:35, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Later: having taken other advice I think I've dealt with this issue, so no need for you to find time for this. The article will be on peer review soon, and you are of course welcome to comment there if time permits.Brianboulton (talk) 11:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

See Mary Shelley where the same problem arose. I'll try to peer review! Wadewitz(talk) 19:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

Jürgen Ehlers trying for FA

Hi Adrianne, just a heads-up that Jürgen Ehlers, to whose peer review you kindly contributed, is now an FA candidate here. Markus Pössel (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! My latest, Lynn Hill, is also up for FAC here, if you want to read about a female rock climber. I've recently gotten into rock climbing and I thought I would stretch myself and write about something new! Wadewitz (talk) 23:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Template:Jane Austen makeover

I am going to make work specific templates. The huge template has a lot of content that is related, but it is formatted differently than a lot of other great writers. When I am done the bottom of this page will look something like Charles Dickens, Oscar Wilde, H. G. Wells and Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Creating works specific templates allows for some tangential content that is relevant to the work but not the general audience for the author. I am notifying you because you are one of a handful of editors with more than 5 edits to the template. Ping me if this is a problem.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

San Diego Comic-Con International meetup proposal

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/LA/SDCC1. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:02, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

Mary Cooper (publisher)

Time to update your blog! Drmies (talk) 17:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I love the Wikipedia community! Wadewitz (talk) 17:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Tweet that to my boss--he won't count these articles for real. Good to see you again, by the way. I'm trying to get a copy of Pandora's Box but haven't found one online yet. Have a great weekend, Wadewitz. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

Appreciate your blog posts

Hi - I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your blogposts on the current controversies. There's lots of emotion involved - nobody likes to think they have been relegated to the junior varsity team (even if that is just their perception); nobody likes to put in a bunch of hard work over a long period of time and get accused of a) sexism, and b) being part of a monolithic Borg that has "an" opinion; and nobody likes to be personally called out by the whole Internet, led by the New York Times, as being sexist, "shadowy", "misguided", or whatever. And, being that we are all human beings, stuff happens...

I have mixed feelings about the whole practice of using gender in categorization. I think there is a certain amount of validity to the criticisms expressed, and I am not saying that everyone couldn't stand to be challenged on what they think, why they think it, and how they came to think that way (that is true for many things) but I think that a lot of this drama stems from reactions to perceived group insults. And, I think that while there may be some merit to the argument to discontinue use of the female subcategories for writers and novelists, there are still times where there is some utility to gender-based subcategories, just because of the fact that members of a certain gender are uncommon in a certain category. For instance, I thinkCategory:Female heavy metal singers is appropriate, because people generally don't think of females when they think of heavy metal singers.

I hope this turns into more of a discussion/debate/brainstorming session of how the display and nesting of categories ought to work. Maybe design it so that users could choose to display all the lowest-level categories for an article, or the highest level, or some combination thereof. (Of course, all categories do not follow a child-->parent--> grandparent structure, so we would need to figure out what to do about that. Maybe invent some extra systematic tags for certain categories?)

On a side note, I have had the following on my wishlist for a while:

Show Venn Diagram type of feature for two categories - Example: Thomas Jefferson is inCategory:United States Secretaries of State and also Category:Presidents of the United States.James Madison is also in both, as are James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, andJames Buchanan. Have a feature where you can bounce the members of the Secretaries of State category up against members of the Presidents category and be able to view overlap.

In any event, I am confident that no matter how long this controversy lasts in the media, or what direction it goes, that eventually Wikipedia will be the stronger for it, whether from a vetting of assumptions about gender-based categorization, or invention of ways to better display and organize categories, or bringing in more people who have never edited before into the community of editors. KConWiki (talk) 12:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this comment! I agree with so much of what you said. I, too, feel very conflicted about the categories. I see both sides of the argument - I understand how the category "woman writer" has been used to denigrate women writers but I also see how it has been used to write them into literary history and empower generations of younger writers to find them. Many of the saner discussions about this issue have raised just the point you have - that it is the category system that needs revising; I'm not sure I see that happening any time soon, though. My most fervent hope is that more people will edit as a result of the news coverage. Again, so nice to meet you! Wadewitz (talk) 22:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

If there were some sort of feature that allowed custom viewing of subcategories by individual readers (as opposed to just editors) (based on broader categories, as with the Thomas Jefferson example above) then maybe we would end up tagging articles for people as male or female, but have those be invisible categories (kind of like how "Year of birth missing (living people)" is now invisible) and then if someone did want to customize a category of, say, American female science fiction writers, they could - Or female science fiction writers of any nationality, or whatever. (And, of course make approp. accommodations for articles about persons of undetermined gender or transsexual persons.) Or maybe as we got into discussion of categorization it would be better to get away from using male/female as the examples of what we want to achieve, just to have the heatedness of the sexism accusations not get in the way. So, back to the presidents, you could maybe go to the Jefferson article, click something to show a big menu of categorizations that pertain to Jefferson, and custom build something to see "U.S. Presidents who were also U.S. Secretaries of State who were also from Virginia" and that would give you Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, but not Adams, Van Buren or Buchanan. Of course, that wouldn't cover all categories, just ones that were based on a parent-child relationship, and I am also certainly an advocate of categorizing based on more abstract ideas, too. KConWiki (talk) 14:34, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm intrigued by the idea of allowing readers to customize Wikipedia. I guess I am a little more top-down than that, because I see Wikipedia as a way to fight systemic bias rather than allow readers to put it back in, if they want. Wadewitz (talk) 19:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

In other news, congrats on getting Lynn Hill up to par to be Today's Featured Article!KConWiki (talk) 01:41, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! There don't seem to be very many female athlete FAs, so perhaps I'll do some more rock climbing bios of awesome women. ;) Wadewitz (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, not a rock climber, but have you thought about Babe Didrikson Zaharias?KConWiki (talk) 02:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I just don't know anything about those sports and do know a tad about rock climbing, which is why I was thinking of sticking to that. Talk page stalkers? Anyone up for a challenge? Wadewitz (talk) 02:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you mind if I vent?

Hi Wadewitz, please first excuse me for being in a foul mood (busy time of year, eye strain, and so on) but wanted to drop you a line re your blog post. My feeling is that not only have the media excluded WP women from the categorygate issue but the WP men are hell bent of solving it as quickly, as expediently and wonderfully as possibly without accepting input from a woman (who might have subject knowledge). I remember when I first began to write here: you were active, as was Moni3, SandyGeorgia, Karanacs, Maria, KafkaLiz and many others - all women, all bright and capable, all now gone. I remember when I first heard of the "woman problem" a few years ago and though, naw, doesn't exist. I've changed my mind since - it's very real and seems to be getting worse. Anyway, thought of you and considered sending email but decided to plop this here instead. Sorry if it's a bit of a rant - when I'm less tired, I'll be able to think more clearly. But in the meantime want you to know that you hit the nail on the head. The question is: what to do going forward? Truthkeeper(talk) 19:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Vent away! I know how you feel. I feel like the "getting worse" part is because it has become such a visible issue - there is always an inevitable backlash in these situations. I'm trying to write a longer, more thoughtful blog post about just this question right now. If you want to think about it with me, message me and I'll share my Google Doc with you! Wadewitz (talk) 19:39, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll do that. I'm in the process of formulating a "reasoned response" regarding categorization on Ernest Hemingway. I see that article as a bit of testing ground because it's impossible to shoehorn his novels into genre. Ironic that such a macho guy is the test for this - but there you go. Truthkeeper(talk) 19:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I've always found the category system (and especially it's whole "diffuse big categories" thing) to be less than useful and very much a walled garden of a certain type of editor who often strike me as very OCD. I rarely mess with them beyond the most obvious cats I can find. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I'm still here! Link for the blog post? I've not got a lot of time to dig for it, unfortunately.Ealdgyth - Talk 19:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Heh, I know! I'm using you as an example in my follow up blog post!Here is the original. Wadewitz (talk) 20:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Cool, nice blog post, btw. Let me know when the followup is up? Ealdgyth - Talk 20:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Will do! Wadewitz (talk) 20:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

You wouldn't happen to have....

Access to the following?

• English Literary Renaissance
• Chaucer Review
• European Medieval Drama
• Mediaeval Studies

I'm digging into an obscure little French medieval poet who wrote in Latin, and data is rather sparse on the ground. Already searched through JSTOR, but these journals aren't in JSTOR. Any help would be appreciated!Ealdgyth - Talk 20:51, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I can probably get those - I'll work on it tomorrow. For a medieval poet, definitely!Wadewitz (talk) 21:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I can only get the first two - new institution! Emailed. Wadewitz (talk) 19:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Since you helped...

William of Blois (poet). I warned you he was obscure! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

And still awesome. Wadewitz (talk) 18:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Input request

Hello Wadewitz,

I am requesting input from all participants in the discussion from the recent Signpost article on sexism in Wikipedia for a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/National teams#Proposed change: consistency in article title gendering. Thank you in advance for any contributions to the discussion. Dkreisst (talk) 21:23, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

2013 Wikinic

	Great American Wikinic at Pan-Pacific Park
	You are invited to the third Great American Wikinic taking place in Pan-Pacific Park, in Los Angeles, on Saturday, June 22, 2013! We would love to see you there!—howcheng {chat} 02:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
	If you would not like to receive future messages about meetups, please remove your name fromWikipedia:Meetup/LA/Invite.

Precious again

teaching of reading
Thank you for expanding our knowledge of literature and of the people who love it, write it and teach it, -repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (24 Novbember 2008)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 123rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Wadewitz (talk) 19:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

South Pacific (musical)

Please comment on our PR for this important musical at the PR page, here. We are on the way to FAC -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

Main Page appearance: Lynn Hill

This is a note to let the main editors of Lynn Hill know that the article will be appearing astoday's featured article on June 17, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), andBencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 17, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Lynn Hill (born 1961) is an American rock climber. Widely regarded as one of the leading competitive sport climbers in the world during the late 1980s and early 1990s, she made the first ascent without aid of the difficult sheer rock face of The Nose on El Capitan in Yosemite Valley and the first free ascent in 24 hours. Hill shaped rock climbing for women and became a public spokesperson, helping it gain wider popularity and arguing for gender equity. She has publicized climbing by appearing on television shows and documentaries and writing an autobiography, Climbing Free: My Life in the Vertical World. She took to climbing at a young age and became a part of the climbing community in Southern California and Camp 4 in Yosemite Valley. During the early 1980s, she traveled around the United States, climbing increasingly difficult routes and setting records not only for first female ascents but also for first ascents. From 1986 to 1992 she won over thirty international titles, including five victories at the Arco Rock Master; she left competitive climbing in 1992. She has been described as both one of the best female climbers in the world and one of the best climbers of all time. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

Adminship

I noticed all your work and noticed if you would like to be an admin! Please respond soon.buffbills (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for asking but I'm content as a nonadmin! Wadewitz (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles(the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members). So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, readthe process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom ofthis page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 14:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC) |} The Signpost: 12 June 2013 News and notes: How Wikimedia affiliates are spending $8.4 million; PRISM scandal Late last year, the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) awarded $8.4 million in donors' money to 11 Wikimedia entities, including the Wikimedia Foundation and 10 nationally defined chapters. Under this arrangement, these organisations are required to issue quarterly reports on how far they have progressed towards their declared programmatic and financial goals. The FDC has now announced that all 11 completed and submitted their reports by the 1 April deadline, and have responded to each. Featured content: Mixing Bowl Interchange Seven articles, two lists, five pictures, and one topic were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week. In the media: VisualEditor will "change world history" In an article published by the Huffington Post's United Kingdom edition, writer Thomas Church asserts that the new VisualEditor will change history, literally. It says that Wikipedia's mark-up language has been to its advantage, as most people didn't bother trying to learn it Op-ed: The tragedy of Wikipedia's commons I've long thought that we should get rid of the Wikimedia Commons as we know it. Commons has evolved into a project with interests that compete with the needs of the primary users of Commons and the reason it was created. It's also understaffed, which results in poor curation, large administrative backlogs, and poor policy development. Discussion report: VisualEditor, elections, bots, and more Current discussions on the English Wikipedia. Traffic report: Who holds the throne? Last week's most popular article list on the English Wikipedia was dominated by the massively popular TV series Game of Thrones, which claimed six slots in the top 25, including the top three. Its popularity was likely stoked by the most recent episode, The Rains of Castamere. Bollywood continued to increase its share of views as well, aided by the tragic suicide of star Nafisa Khan. Arbitration report: Two cases suspended; proposed decision posted in Argentine History Two cases, Race and politics and Tea Party movement have been suspended. Argentine History remains open, and a proposed decision was posted on 12 June. WikiProject report: Processing WikiProject Computing This week, we spent some time with WikiProject Computing. Started in October 2003, the project has grown to include 17 featured articles, 11 featured lists, 3 pieces of featured media, and 80 good articles. Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 09:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC) Interview with the Vampire Am currently reviewing this for GA - you weren't aware or had come across any articles critiquing or exploring the book?See Talk:Interview with the Vampire/GA1 Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC) Commented a bit there. There are tons of sources available. Wadewitz (talk) 23:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC) 1920s in Los Angeles Hi there - I noticed your name at the Meetup LA8 page for the wicnic so I thought 1920s in Los Angelesmight interest you. If not, no worries. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC) I know very little about that period in LA history, I'm afraid! Wadewitz (talk) 23:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC) Edit-a-thon Invitation Please join the Chemical Heritage Foundation Edit-a-Thon, June 20, 2013. Build content relating to women in science, chemistry and the history of science. Use the hashtag #GlamCHF and write your favorite scientist or chemist into Wikipedian history! I don't know if you'll be interested in the Edit-a-thon, but I can't resist thanking you for all the great work you've been doing on some of my favorite women writers, like Anna Barbauld! Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 02:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks so much! I'll try to contribute - what a great idea for an edit-a-thon! Wadewitz(talk) 23:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC) Name I'm just curious, is there a policy for names? I see in most articles, the names in the intro read like "John "Jack" Smith" or whatever the person goes by. Also, it looks to me like Lynn is part of her name. Carolynn, which is where I suppose the Lynn comes from. Beerest355 Talk 19:45, 17 June 2013 (UTC) OK, I found it here: If a person has a commonly known nickname, used in lieu of a given name, it is presented between quote marks following the last given name or initial, as for John F. Kennedy, which has John Fitzgerald "Jack" Kennedy. I figure I will add it back unless there is a reason. Beerest355 Talk19:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC) At WP:MOSBIO, it says to put the legal name first and commonly used names after the full legal name. I just didn't want there to be any confusion and this formulation avoids that, but I won't revert again as I certainly don't want to get into an edit war over name formatting! ;) Wadewitz (talk) 19:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 19 June 2013 Op-ed: Two responses to the 'Tragedy of Wikipedia's Commons' Following last week's op-ed by Gigs ("The Tragedy of Wikipedia's Commons"), the Signpost is carrying two contrary opinions from MichaelMaggs, a bureaucrat on Wikimedia Commons, and Mattbuck, a British Commons administrator. Traffic report: Most popular Wikipedia articles of the last week The season finale of Game of Thrones ensured that the epic high fantasy series would dominate the top 10 again last week; however, it was joined by Maurice Sendak and Man of Steel. In the media: South African learners want Wikipedia; Editing of Israel topics Memeburn.com published an article on the yearning of students in South Africa for free knowledge through Wikipedia Zero. WikiProject report: The Volunteer State: WikiProject Tennessee This week, we visited WikiProject Tennessee, a project dedicate to the state at the geographic and cultural crossroads of the United States. News and notes: Swedish Wikipedia's millionth article leads to protests; WMF elections—where are all the voters? With erysichton elaborata, the Swedish Wikipedia passed the one million article Rubicon this week. While this is a mostly symbolic achievement, serving as a convenient benchmark with which to gain publicity and attention in an increasingly statistical world, the particular method by which the Swedish site has passed the mark has garnered significant attention—and controversy. Featured content: Cheaper by the dozen Eleven articles, twelve lists, and eleven pictures were promoted to 'featured' status on the English Wikipedia this week. Discussion report: Citations, non-free content, and a MediaWiki meeting A list of current discussions on the English Wikipedia. Technology report: May engineering report published The WMF's engineering report for May was published recently on the Wikimedia blog and on the MediaWiki wiki ("friendly" summary version), giving an overview of all Foundation-sponsored technical operations in that month. Arbitration report: The Farmbrough amendment request—automation and arbitration enforcement Richard Farmbrough was set to have his day in court, but as events transpired, this was not to be so. On 25 March 2013, an accusation was made against Farmbrough at Arbitration Enforcement (AE), claiming that he violated the terms of an automated edit restriction. Within hours, Farmbrough had filed his own request with the arbitration committee, citing the newly filed AE request and claiming that the motion was being used "in an absurd way" in the filing of enforcement requests: "I have not made any edits that a sane person would consider automation." Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 23:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC) Thank you! Thank you for your participation in theChemical Heritage Foundation Edit-A-Thon , June 20 2013! We are glad to have met you (virtually), and hope to work with you at many more fun edit-a-thon events! Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 00:25, 22 June 2013 (UTC) Hi Good to meet you and your plus one today. Please let me know if you ever need support at Occidental. Chris Troutman(talk) 07:52, 23 June 2013 (UTC) Good to meet you, too! Let's keep each other apprised of educational goings on in LA!Wadewitz (talk) 20:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Navboxes on author pages Since you have over 100 edits at Jane Austen, you might want to participate in the discussion atWikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Derivative_works_and_cultural_references_templates regarding including navigation boxes for adaptations of and related subjects to an authors works on the author's bio page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the notice, but I don't have the time right now! Wadewitz (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 26 June 2013 Traffic report: Most-viewed articles of the week With most TV shows on hiatus for the summer, attention has turned to movies, celebrity and sports. The dramatic events at the 2013 Confederations Cup drew massive attention, as did summer blockbusters like Man of Steel and World War Z. But the most searched event of the week was the tragic and unexpected death of popular actor James Gandolfini on June 19. In the media: Daily Dot on Commons and porn; Jimmy Wales accused of breaking Wikipedia rules in hunt for Snowden The Daily Dot has examined the perennial controversy over explicit or pornographic media on Commons. This latest salvo was touched off when Russavia uploaded a portrait of Jimmy Wales made by the artist Pricasso, who paints with his genitalia. Recent research: Most controversial Wikipedia topics, automatic detection of sockpuppets A comparative work by T. Yasseri., A. Spoerri, M. Graham and J. Kertész looks at the 100 most controversial topics in 10 language versions of Wikipedia, and tries to make sense of the similarities and differences in these lists. News and notes: Election results released Less than three days after the close of voting, the volunteer election committee posted the results on Meta. The worldwide Wikimedia movement has elected three WMF trustees for two-year terms on the 10-seat Board: Samuel Klein (supported by 43.5% of voters), Phoebe Ayers (38.3%), and María Sefidari (35.6%). The new trustees will take their seats at a critical time for the movement: one of the first tasks in their terms will be to help the Board to find and approve the new executive director to take up the top job when Sue Gardner departs. Discussion report: Privacy policy, X!'s edit counter, old rangeblocks, and the Article Incubator A list of current discussions on the English Wikipedia. Featured content: Wikipedia in black + Adam Cuerden This week, the Signpost interviews Adam Cuerden, a Wikimedian who has been for years gathering featured pictures, and who constantly participates in what could be his favourite part of the project. Cuerden dedicates most of his time to scanning and restoring old, valuable illustrative works. He explains to us how the featured process works, its relation with other parts of the encyclopedia, and how pictures evolve before reaching featured status. WikiProject report: WikiProject Fashion This week, we walked the runway with WikiProject Fashion. Started in March 2007, the project is home to 4 Featured Articles and 41 Good Articles. The project has a lengthy list of how you can help and a list of Article Alerts. Arbitration report: Argentine History closed; two cases remain suspended Argentine History was closed. Two cases, Race and politics and Tea Party movement, remain suspended until July. Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 22:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC) The Coral Island Hey Wadewitz, how are you doing? Eric Corbett and I have been working on an article that falls within your field as well, methinks, and perhaps you'd like to have a look at the current FA review. Thanks in advance, Drmies (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Done! What a pleasant read! Wadewitz (talk) 21:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Hey, I meant for you to rubber stamp the thing, not make me do actual work! (I'm on it--thanks for your time and comments.) Drmies (talk) 22:21, 1 July 2013 (UTC) I have to be difficult. :) Wadewitz (talk) 23:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Just remember to roll over and play nice the year that your paperwork is on the T&P committee's desk. The job marked in my biz has been pretty bad; I hope it's better in yours. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2013 (UTC) I must admit I hadn't realised what a significant book this was. I just enjoyed reading it as a kid. Eric Corbett 02:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Wadewitz, I'm sorry you were pulled into this. I tried to disengage, but the last comment to my page put me over the edge. You know my name, you know what I do for work (though not the exact specialty). I think that we have the right to divulge as much and as little as we want to whomever we choose and that shouldn't have any bearing on whether or not a reviewer's comments are heeded. I changed my user name from Truthkeeper88 toVictoria (talk) 02:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Pulled into what? I really, really, don't understand what's going on here. Eric Corbett 02:23, 2 July 2013 (UTC) You don't? She and Drmies are academics at established US institutions, per Drmies on my talk. Therefore her comments carry more weight, (in his mind), than mine. Victoria (talk) 02:25, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Where did you get that from? Have I not responded to every single one of your comments, and made edits to the article based on most if not all of them? The only thing I haven't done anything with is Moffat, for reasons made clear and apparently understood by you. Who said I attached more weight to Wadewitz's comments? All expert commentary is welcome, as far as I am concerned, especially at FA. Drmies (talk) 02:30, 2 July 2013 (UTC) No, not quite. But this isn't the place. And you yourself admitted that you and she are academics in established US institutions and that she specializes in children's lit (which I happen to know). I see it as canvassing for a second opinion. From someone who is an academic, as you are, and hence more trustworthy. Anyway, huge apologies to Wadewitz. I've added the reception section and hopefully they can finish it up soon.Victoria (talk) 02:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC) For all I know Victoria you're also an academic at an established US institution, but whether you are or not your opinion is no less valuable to me than theirs. So I'm still not getting it. I'm not an academic at any institution, but I can write the pants off Drmies, who I would suggest has a tendency towards a rather ponderously didactic style. Can we not just work together on this, each of us contributing what we can, playing to our strengths, and relying on our colleagues to plug any gaps? Eric Corbett 02:37, 2 July 2013 (UTC) I didn't ask for a second opinion--it would have been a third or fourth opinion, as is proper for an FA. For the record, I asked Wadewitz not because she knows children's lit (I didn't know that until just now) but because she knows the 19th century. Drmies (talk) 02:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Um, I'm really at a loss for words. You all do great work here. I know all of you and your work, so I'm just going to be blissfully ignorant of this and go on editing and reviewing for the time being.Wadewitz (talk) 04:04, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Randall Flagg ...is at FAC. Am not hugely confident at assessing out-of-universe material WRT comprehensiveness.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Those are difficult. I've reviewed that article several times in the past few years, though, and don't really feel like going back to it. Wadewitz (talk) 18:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Oh, sorry about that. I'll take a look at older reviews...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 03 July 2013 In the media: Jimmy Wales is not an Internet billionaire; a mass shooter's alleged Wikipedia editing Amy Chozick's profile of Jimmy Wales in the New York Times sparked significant controversy in international news outlets this week. Chozick's profile covered Wales's personal life, including his 12-year-old daughter, ex-wife, and current wife Kate Garvey, describing Wales himself as "a well-groomed version of a person who has been slumped over a computer drinking Yoo-hoo for hours." Chozick described his current role in Wikipedia as "Benevolent Dictator for Life", a statement which garnered conflict from all corners of the web, including from Wales, who responded to the piece as a whole with a lengthy talk page statement. Featured content: Queen of France Four articles, four lists, and fifteen pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia last week. WikiProject report: Puppies! This week, the Signpost went to the kennel and interviewed WikiProject Dogs. The project has several featured and good articles, along with a large number of "Did you know" entries. We asked three project members about the challenges of creating, curating, and maintaining canine content in an increasingly dog-obsessed world. News and notes: Wikipedia's medical collaborations gathering pace The key annual event in the Wikimedia calendar, Wikimania 2013, will be held in Hong Kong in just five weeks' time. Among the events will be a presentation by two people who are working to promote the development of medical content on Wikimedia projects. One is James Heilman of Wiki Project Med, a non-profit dedicated to making "clear, reliable, comprehensive, up-to-date educational resources and information in the biomedical and related social sciences freely available to all people in the language of their choice". The other is Lori Thicke, president of Translators Without Borders (TWB), the Connecticut-based organisation set up in 2010 to provide pro-bono translation services for humanitarian non-profits Discussion report: Snuggle, mainpage link to Wikinews, 3RR, and more Current discussions on the English Wikipedia include... Technology report: VisualEditor in midst of game-changing deployment series The VisualEditor extension has gone live by default to registered users on the English Wikipedia, marking a huge milestone in a project that has taken the best part of a decade to reach fruition. The extension was previously described as "the biggest and most important change to our user experience we’ve ever undertaken" by the WMF team behind it. Traffic report: Yahoo! crushes the competition ... in Wikipedia views The real world made a strong showing in the top 10 last week, as news stories such as Yahoo!'s purchase of Tumblr, the murder of Odin Lloyd, the continuing drama over NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and the ill-health of Nelson Mandela crowded out the usual roster of TV shows, movies, websites and video games. Not that they were entirely excluded, of course. Arbitration report: Tea Party movement reopened, new AUSC appointments Following a one-month period of moderated discussion, Tea Party movement has been reopened by the Committee. The proposed decisions are currently being voted upon. Race and politics remains suspended pending the return of User:Apostle12. Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 10 July 2013 Op-ed: It's time to stop pretending the English-language Wikinews is a viable project This is Wikinews' fundamental problem: it can neither do a good job providing a summary of world news, nor does it have any special focus that it does well. It's a collection of random articles, with only the occasional, passing resemblance to important current events. WikiProject report: Not Jimbo: WikiProject Wales This week, we traveled to Cymru with the folks at WikiProject Wales. Traffic report: Inflated view counts here, there, and everywhere The most-viewed articles on the English Wikipedia last week include... News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation Board appoints world expert in women's issues, global south In apparent acknowledgment of the urgency of two issues facing the Wikimedia movement—the need to engage both women and the global south—the WMF Board has appointed Ana Toni as one of its four expert members. Toni will bring rare expertise to the movement, and the Signpost understands that her skills in advocacy and her key roles in international NGOs are likely to be a natural match with the WMF as the hub of disseminating free knowledge around the world. Dispatches: Infoboxes: time for a fresh look? The fundamental idea of an infobox is clear: keep it simple and limited to essentials. At some point, however, these basic principles seem to have been abandoned, in favour of an approach akin to "the more the merrier". Featured content: The week of the birds Five articles, six lists, and ten pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week. Discussion report: Featured article process governance, signature templates, and more Current discussions on the English Wikipedia include ... Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 09:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 17 July 2013 WikiProject report: WikiProject Square Enix This week, we explored the fantasy worlds of video game developer Square Enix by interviewing WikiProject Square Enix. The project began in September 2006 as a spin-off of WikiProject Final Fantasy, but today covers that, Kingdom Hearts, Dragon Quest, Chrono Trigger, and a variety of other game series, with exceptions explained in the interview below. The project is home to 32 pieces of Featured material and 104 Good and A-class articles. Traffic report: Most-viewed articles of the week The most-viewed articles on the English Wikipedia last week include... News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation's new plans announced Last week the Wikimedia Foundation released its annual plan for July 2013 to June 2014. It provides a surprisingly frank view—of past achievements and failures, and future goals and risks—that could be afforded only by a non-profit that is confident and beholden to no commercial or political interests. Featured content: Documents and sports Four articles, five lists, and sixteen pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week. Arbitration report: Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds case opens; July 22 deadline for checkuser and oversight applications The case Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds was opened. Voting on the Tea Party movement case continued, after a failed attempt at moderated discussion. A group tasked with deciding the content of the lead section of the Jerusalem article has reported back to the committee. Applications for checkuser and oversight permissions close on 22 July. Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Talkback Hello, Wadewitz. You have new messages at Talk:Fill the Void. Message added --1ST7 (talk) 00:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Wikipedia Meetup You are invited to "Come Edit Wikipedia!" at the West Hollywood Library on Saturday, July 27th, 2013. There will be coffee, cookies, and good times! -- Olegkagan (talk) — Message delivered byHazard-Bot at 04:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC) Jane Austen to be face of the Bank of England £10 note Hope all is well with you. I saw this BBC story and remembered all the soul-searching we had back in 2008 about the direction of the portrait. The version on the new £10 note bears a faint resemblance to the original. - Pointillist (talk) 14:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC) Yes! But did you see story about the quote? Priceless. Wadewitz (talk) 21:17, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks, I hadn't spotted the second story. Surely they can't be proposing to have both a fake pictureand an inappropriate quote? Whether it's populism, tokenism or just cynicism, it's not a great start forMark Carney. I suspect Miss Austen would have been amused, though. Best wishes from London -Pointillist (talk) 21:46, 25 July 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 24 July 2013 In the media: Wikipedia flamewars The Washington Post reported Tuesday on the most controversial articles on various language Wikipedias as determined by a cross-continental research group. WikiProject report: WikiProject Religion This week, the Signpost delved into the vast and complex areas of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that make up religion. WikiProject Religion has been around since 2005 and has a complex scope, in that it only takes articles that deal with religion in a non-sectarian sense, along with any articles that do not have a dedicated daughter project. Discussion report: Partially disambiguated page names, page protection policy, and more Current discussions on the English Wikipedia include... News and notes: Wikivoyage turns ten, but where to now?; Wikipedia Zero expands into India Contributors to Wikivoyage, the sister project adopted by the Wikimedia Foundation last year, are celebrating their 10th anniversary this week. ... The Wikimedia Foundation has announced via press release that it has partnered with Aircel to provide free mobile access to Wikipedia. Traffic report: Gleeless Death hangs over the top 10 this week, as tragic deaths both past and present continued to cast their pall over an already troubled world. The death of Corey Monteith led to a spike in interest in the man himself, his girlfriend and co-star Lea Michele, and the show that made them both famous, Glee. Featured content: Engineering and the arts Twelve articles, seven lists, and eight pictures were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia this week. Arbitration report: Infoboxes case opens The case Infoboxes was opened. The evidence phase continues in Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds. Voting on the proposed decision continues in the Tea Party movement case. Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 22:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Lynn Hill, notable ascents There are several articles and sources about the first free ascent of the West Face of the Leaning Tower by Leo Houlding and Jason Pickles in 2001: http://www.supertopo.com/tr/Leo-Houlding-FA-of-Westie-Face-story/t10632n.html : http://www.rockandice.com/lates-news/the-prophet . This one is very precise and technically detailed: http://www.stanford.edu/~clint/yos/midhf.htm . As you can see, there is a ladder at the bottom of this route, that makes it an only partially freeable route for any climber, including Houlding and Hill. I would love to learn that the mention "they freed the original bolt ladder on p5" would mean Hill and Brown would be the first climbers to have entirely freed this route, including the ladder?Akseli9 (talk) 12:22, 26 July 2013 (UTC)http://www.planetmountain.com/english/News/shownews4.lasso?l=2&keyid=33545 Yes, so apparently no one as really free climbed the entire thing? Should we remove that from the list?Wadewitz (talk) 20:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC) We should leave it at 'First female free ascent', because it is a greatly respected climb in all articles and videos about the Leaning Tower, and it's also a record about Hill's longevity at the top of her sport.Akseli9 (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC) Ok. Can you add that to the article with a new source? The source currently used does not say first female free ascent. Wadewitz (talk) 17:41, 29 July 2013 (UTC) Done. And I wrote to the #53 source so they (hopefully soon) correct their mistake.Akseli9 (talk) 18:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC) Great! Thank you so much! Wadewitz (talk) 18:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC) Of possible interest - DNB women Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography/Missing women is intended to cover theDictionary of National Biography missing women, for the editions that are in the public domain. It pretty much does that, with a caveat about the second supplement (which is on the way on Wikisource).Charles Matthews (talk) 15:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC) Great! Thank you so much! Wadewitz (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)