User talk:EditGirl99

EditGirl99, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo

Hi EditGirl99! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Adding way too much

EditGirl99 - I appreciate your enthusiasm, but my opinion is that you are adding far too much content to these articles. I recommend deleting the sections titled Group shows and Public Exhibitions. Consider the article on Charles Demuth as an example. That article also shows how to add representative art images as a gallery, which takes up less space. David notMD (talk) 18:48, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From EditGirl99: Oh you have excellent taste with the Demuth, both as artist and article. I was actually just figuring out how to add a gallery when I got your note. As for Group Shows/Public exhibitions and whatnot, I agree with you there, too, and maybe I should cut them back. Oh, I see you just did. I feel convinced. Thank you.
When responding to a comment in Talk, indent by adding one more ":" than the last person. And do remember to sign your User name by typing four of "~". As for the articles you are editing and creating, in my opinion you are over-referencing. Good luck with the MZ draft. David notMD (talk) 10:30, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tips! I've found the article writing/editing features on Wikipedia to be extremely user-friendly, and everything else not so much. Anyway, your opinion about over-referencing is interesting. I suppose I'm perhaps overly aware of the weight of Wikipedia being the first reference of choice for most people. Do you have a rule of thumb, by any chance, as to how many references are typical with these sorts of arts and culture articles? EditGirl99 (talk) 00:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
More of a science/health/medicine guy, which has its own referencing guidelines. For artists, generally quality over quantity. For living people, especially, Wikipedia frowns on using the artists' websites as references. Ditto interviews. And ref that have only minimal mentions of the person in question, or are a reference to a place the artists' works are/were on display. David notMD (talk) 02:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Any thought on what opinions might be re: The Smithsonian's Archives of American Art? There are several often long oral history interviews there with mid-century American artists from that period. EditGirl99 (talk) 03:13, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
These might help David notMD (talk) 08:01, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mel Zabarsky has been accepted

Mel Zabarsky, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyediting for the sake of copyediting

I don't understand why you're rewriting the article on Boston Expressionism. You don't appear to be adding much new information. You're just rephrasing things. I majored in English and know how to write a readable paragraph. Why don't you focus your energy on improving one of the many badly written, typo-laden articles in Wikipedia? --MopTop (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC) @MopTop: I've been working on a whole series of Figurative Expressionist-based links for the last several months, as well as a few Abstract Expressionist links. The idea was not to correct you so much as slowly broaden the entry from the three artists you focus on to a greater number who influenced the Boston-based movement. [[User:EditGirl99|EditGirl99 (talk)EditGirl99]] (talk)[reply]

A page you started (Joyce Reopel) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Joyce Reopel.

User:Rosguill while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

The article is well written, but some of the word choices are a bit too emotive and thus not quite neutral. For the relevant entry in the manual of style, please see WP:PEACOCK

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

signed, Rosguill talk 04:52, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{Re|Rosguill}} Thank you for reviewing my article! I looked up the discussion of "Peacocking" before I saw your comment here, and I understand the criticism, but will have to think about it more to get the distance to apply it. In the meantime, if anything occurs to you, to point out to me, or to simply edit yourself, I'll be on the look-out. Thanks also for the reminder on how to signal my response to you, as well as my username. I tried to do that just the other day, and couldn't remember how, or where to look it up. ~~~~ .

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Please help me with... 

EditGirl99 (talk) 11:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve The Gehenna Press

Hello, EditGirl99,

Thank you for creating The Gehenna Press.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The full backlist is an unnecessary level of detail for a Wikipedia article. As for neutrality, the article prose lavishes a bit too much praise on the subject and needs to be reigned in a bit. Additionally, the article needs more sources, as it's currently over reliant on sources that are either unreliable (BiblioOdyssey, per WP:BLOGS) or affiliated with Baskin/Gehenna Press. Additional secondary sources would be preferred.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

signed, Rosguill talk 23:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


@Rosguill: @Rosguill: Hi Rosguill,

Thank you for your note. I was actually going to write questions in the talk page of The Gehenna Press article, but I was wondering how effective that was, and you've gotten to me first. Here goes:

(1) If I write questions in the talk pages of articles I've done/redone is there someone (like yourself, for example) who will get some sort of alert, and sooner or later take a look and write back? I've somehow made it my mission to work on lots of unloved art articles, or start entirely new ones, which sometimes have their issues.

For example, I radically reformatted, labeled and added pictures to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_colony. But like an earlier user suggested on that article's talk page, I think a real art historian type probably needs to help advise what are important criteria in choosing what should stay or go in terms of the million colonies the original author included. That article, as yet another talk commenter noted, is also very under-referenced. So I thought what I could do at this time was clean it up broadly, especially because that article is surprisingly well trafficked.

(2) So when I'm just taking an article a level or two up but don't have the current means to seek out a catalogue raisonné, should I mention next steps in the talk pages? (I'm not sure how to use them. Some are very active; some haven't been touched in years.)

That brings me to this article. I agree with you on nearly all counts. My thought was to get something out there because the Press wasn't mentioned at all in the original article about Baskin, and it is definitely extremely important in the history of fine arts printing. I did, however, have trouble finding references (and will need to make several more rounds to see if I can find more). As for the lengthy publication list, as with the colony article, I don't have enough information to really know which are the most important, so I wasn't quite sure how to choose with a scarcity of information out there from what I've seen so far.

(3) Are there any best practice tips for sorting the abundance when you don't have all the information up yet, but think that some article should be available, at least as a start?

(4) Further, the closest infobox I could find for Gehenna was the infobox publisher. That box, however, is most geared to commercial publishers where revenue is a focus. That's not at all important with the Gehenna Press (or another similarly important one I'm working on now — "It is. A Magazine for Abstract Art," — which is also under-referenced, but like Gehenna administered by an important artist working with several other celebrated important artists.) Is there any way to request the addition of info options relating to what a press is known for, its lifespan (since they don't always live long), who it was influenced by or whom it influenced? Those are all reasons art readers glancing in the box first might find interesting enough to keep reading. Using the standard box leaves me with makeshift options or blank space.

(5) I don't know if I'm praising too much in the Gehenna article. I've been on a writing bender, and will recheck it when I'm fresher. His work is definitely important and original, and I was definitely frustrated that practically all of his images are locked up tight, which is really highly unfortunate in an art article. https://bibliodyssey.blogspot.com/2006/05/leonard-baskin-and-gehenna-press.html actually has a fantastic selection of images and careful captions, which is why I included it. Should I just confine that sort of thing to External Links?

(6) Finally, how do I make a new long-lasting sandbox. I have two old ones that have become redirects, and there's no clear way for me to create a clean third one?

Appreciatively and feel free to yes/no me, I'm getting tired and therefore long-winded.

EditGirl99 (talk) 00:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, EditGirl99

Thank you for creating The Gehenna Press.

User:Slashme, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Very interesting topic and well covered!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Slashme}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Slashme (talk) 14:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blanked your user page

Hi there,

I noticed that your user page was a redirect to The Gehenna Press. This was almost certainly a mistake, so I've removed the redirect by blanking the page for now. Normally you'd write something about yourself there. When you want to create draft pages, it's usual to put them on subpages of your user page, e.g. User:EditGirl99/Draft_article_title . --Slashme (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slashme / @Slashme:,
Thank you for the review of the Gehenna Press page. I appreciated it! My sandbox redirects to an earlier article too, and I've had terrible trouble figuring out how (or if) to blank it out. In a related vein, I just moved another small press draft into an article, but I neglected to remove the word "draft" from the title. Do you know how to correct this?
Appreciatively.
EditGirl99 (talk) 09:38, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. I just studied parallel examples (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Art_(journal)), and I realize the title should be (without terminal punctuation after Art):
It is. A Magazine for Abstract Art (journal)

Hi there!

I've just gotten back from a long weekend, so sorry for the slow replies. It seems as if you're figuring things out along the way, like the title of the article. In general, you only need to add something in brackets to the end of a title if it's not clear what it would be, so for example American art is a thing, so it is less confusing to the reader if you put (journal) at the end of American Art (journal), but there's no confusion about It is. A Magazine for Abstract Art.

You don't have to put a message on my talk page: you can do either [[User:Slashme|Slashme]] or {{Re|Slashme}}, and that will attract my attention, either here or on an article talk page. I got a notification this time, for example.

If you like, we can schedule an audio conference with screen sharing: that way we can cover a lot of ground quickly and I can give you lots of hints and tips. I'm in the Central European time zone and I am usually home by around 18:00. If we can manage it soon, we can go over the It Is article together: I have some copy-editing and stylistic comments that might work well for a training session. --Slashme (talk) 09:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Slashme:
Hey there,
Thanks for you note. No worries about the timing. As you could see, I'm never sure if I contacted someone or not! I consider myself a reasonably advanced user of desktop software, but nearly everything related to Wikipedia's software has utterly stumped me, often even after I've found directions. So, yes, any tips you want to offer would be appreciated!
One thing worth noting re: copyediting is I tend to move my articles too early, really. Writing/editing is my day job, too, so I was surprised to realize I liked writing/editing on Wikipedia, too, but I do. Thus far, I've pretty much exclusively written on the arts on topics where there were gaps or where the original article was just not ... very complete. Ideally, I'd do draft after draft behind the scenes, and start going through the library archives to fill out gaps and background and create a perfect 10 of an article, ready for professional-grade publication. But that's also my day job, and I only have so much time.
So my goal is to put out a reasonable amount of information in a reasonably respectable, readable, correct way, and keep editing it as I have time. That approach means that nearly all of my articles have gotten "C" grades. At first, I was a little offended by that, but then I studied Wikipedia's grading system — and thought it was exactly right.
I'd rather propose that you put up a stub article first: It should say what the topic is, why it's significant, and have two reliable, independent sources that discuss the topic in detail. Then you and other editors can work on it together in Wikipedia fashion. That will save you from getting too attached to the article, and should reduce the stress of perfectionism.
@Slashme:
Nah, I don't suffer from ownership. I've ripped up other people's work, and they've ripped up mine. There are just limits to what I want to do here.
All of that is a long way of saying I think the intro to the "It is" article needs rewriting, and ideally paring down. The long lists of artists in the "Content" section should be replaced by summaries of key articles in each issue. But in that case, and with a lot of the art stuff, it struck me as more important to get that information on the Web, then to wait for perfection because I think the odds of them getting lost if they’re not on the Web are reasonably high, and both the press and the magazine, say, make important contributions to their fields.
I completely agree!
Anyway, this is not to say I shouldn't be edited: I think everyone should. It's really just to explain my starting point. As for Wikipedia's Style Guide, I've found that to be as baffling as its software, so I'm happy to get input!
I'll do my best. My girlfriend's mother is a semi-retired professional editor and she loves the Wikipedia style guide, but de gustibus non est disputandum. The key thing to remember is that it doesn't have to be perfect.
As for an audio conference: I'm NYC-based, so you're six hours ahead of me. Noon is too early for me to cut out on a work-day. How late after 6PM would it be reasonable for you to talk? 3PM here would be 9PM there, is that too late for you? (No worries if it is.)
9 PM is fine, even 10 PM at a pinch. Otherwise over the weekend. I'm daverichfield on skype, and this evening I'm available. --Slashme (talk) 09:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm out straight during late afternoons for the rest of this week. Any time next week?
Almost any time next week is fine. --Slashme (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Slashme:
How about Thursday or Friday at 3PM my time, which would be 9PM your time? Note I used to have a Skype account, but it was supplanted by Whatsapp and Zoom a while ago. Will look for it if that's the best platform for you. EditGirl99 (talk) 01:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can do WhatsApp or Zoom, no problem! You can mail me at davidrichfield@gmail.com with details. Friday is better for me because I don't have to get up early on Saturday. --Slashme (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
EditGirl99 (talk) 09:07, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. I see you're South African of origin. I was actually researching Mandela's role in the 1995 World Rugby Cup for a client yesterday.
Ah, our favourite feel-good story! Truly a great man who did a lot for South Africa. By the way, I hope you don't mind that I'm indenting your comments when I reply!
I'm trying to indent back. We'll see how this goes!
Looks much neater ;-] --Slashme (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, EditGirl99

Thank you for creating Bruno Civitico.

User:Scope creep, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Need an image. A good one and some art is possible.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Scope creep}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

{{Re|Scope creep}}

I agree! I think that about all of the art pages! I never found anything with the right permissions, but I'll keep an eye out, or maybe someone else will?
Thanks for your comment.
EditGirl99 (talk) 00:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

scope_creepTalk 23:23, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 9th Street Art Exhibition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Smith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cedar Tavern, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Plimpton and Pollack (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American National Exhibition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Herman Miller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Reed Clubs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 14th Street.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE: QUESTIONS OF NON-FREE USE

@Diannaa User:Diannaa Hi Diannaa,

I saw the non-free use template you put up on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Club_(fine_arts). I assume you are referring to the photos, is that right? I understand why you're providing notification about fair use vs. public domain, but all of those photos fall within those categories. I know because there were several jazzier photos I would have liked to have used, but could not for that reason, so I spent a lot of time looking for photos. But I also write a fair amount about artists in this period so I was semi-familiar with Wikimedia Commons' holdings. Anyway, how should I proceed?

Thanks!

EditGirl99 (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is about the text, not the images. The number and size of the quotations from your sources is excessive.— Diannaa (talk) 13:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa User:Diannaa

So it's fairly scrupulously footnoted as you can see if you glance through the article, given the variety and number of citations. There are two block :quotes, and one could be shortened. The Club History section was the most difficult to write while also giving a sense of the range and quality of :the interactions and remaining factually accurate. I considered paraphrasing some of it, and then citing source material but each of the people I cite has relevant training to comment on something as amorphous as years of interaction in ways I do not (e.g. one is citing archives I have no way of seeing; two others are art historians and a third is an historian). Collectively, there is also no overlap in what they were saying, though cumulatively it paints a picture. For all these reasons, it seemed better to cite them directly. I'm also not an art historian and I frankly wish there were more around. Anyway, if you have some rules of thumb, I'm happy to listen. Thanks. EditGirl99 (talk) 08:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Currently we have 514 words of quotations in a 1318-word article. That's 39% of the article. That's too much. Wikipedia articles are written mostly using our own words, using quotations only when absolutely necessary.— Diannaa (talk) 11:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Diannaa User:Diannaa
I see your point, and it's well made. If someone doesn't get to it first, I'll figure out how to best revise it. Thank you.
EditGirl99 (talk) 06:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Gould Cozzens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page By Love Possessed.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MikeBlas User:MikeBlas
I know there's something funky with the references. The original author had done them in such a way I couldn't add anymore, and I couldn't figure out the glitch, so I tried ::::to work around it, but I'm not surprised there's still a glitch. I'm on deadline for my non-virtual life right now, but at a glance I couldn't make any sense of it from the ::::revisions page. If you have time to give some quick info to explain the problem and tell me what to do with it, it would be helpful. Thanks!

EditGirl99 (talk) 09:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Garth Williams, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages George Selden and Little House.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Expressionism

Per WP:PRECISE, there's no need to rename the article Expressionism (fine arts) as there is no form of Expressionism that is not associated with the fine arts, and therefore nothing to be disambiguated. Survey articles such as this are typically named for the primary topic without additional qualifiers – e.g., Fish rather than Fish (animal), even though there are many kinds of fish as well as Fish (card game), Fish (British TV series), Fish (cryptography), Fish as food, etc. Ewulp (talk) 11:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)@[reply]

@Ewulp Thanks! That was very clearly explained. EditGirl99 (talk) 23:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Blue Room (White House)
added a link pointing to Revival
Red Room (White House)
added a link pointing to Federal

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Blue Room (White House), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Revival.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited African-American art, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Bush.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
I noticed you've done a lot of good copyediting work. Thank you for your contributions - you deserve this barnstar! Ganesha811 (talk) 15:02, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! That's very sweet of you! I appreciate it. :) EditGirl99 (talk) 01:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American Figurative Expressionism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Symbolism.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abstract expressionism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Smith.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Audience (magazine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marisol.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Lester Walton
added links pointing to George Walker and Lafayette Theatre
The Frogs (club)
added a link pointing to George Walker

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Varvara Stepanova, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constructivism.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kino Lorber's Pioneers of African-American Cinema, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Kahn.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of films about black girlhood, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leslie Harris.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sonelius Smith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hillhouse.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Herman Weisberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Wren T. Brown

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Wren T. Brown, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Wren T. Brown

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wren T. Brown requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wren T. Brown. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Velinga Parish, Sweden

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Velinga Parish, Sweden requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CycloneYoris talk! 02:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Velinga Parish, Sweden moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Velinga Parish, Sweden. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because this article is empty. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 02:26, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I had not intended to publish it! I had intended to translate it, and somehow the translation didn't take!
So suddenly I ended up with a blank page I was trying to make respectable, with the uneven help of Google translate.
Anyway, nice save. Thank you again. EditGirl99 (talk) 04:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. I see the text and citations I published moments ago have all disappeared. Perhaps I published at the same time the document was moved. At any rate, all of that's gone now. EditGirl99 (talk) 04:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No one's fault, but hugely disappointing. EditGirl99 (talk) 04:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, EditGirl99. Thank you for your work on Velinga Parish, Sweden. Ingratis, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for writing the article. You mention above that you translated it but it seems not to be a translation of the corresponding Swedish Wikipedia article. Could you say what the source text was that you translated?

Best wishes, Ingratis (talk) 11:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Velinga is of note because of its archeological remains. Velinga Parish and Velinga District are different governmental and religious names for the same land. (The latter was created to encompass the boundaries of the former.) In both Swedish and English, information on both should appear on a single page.
I can no longer recall which page I attempted to translate, and there is no text to remind me. I was torn, however, as to which would be a more likely search term for users, and hadn't come to a final conclusion. EditGirl99 (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Velinga Parish, Sweden. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hi EditGirl99! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Saint-Jacques, Quebec that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 13:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carville, Louisiana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Hansen's Disease Museum.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cinque Gallery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Johnson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Velinga Parish, Sweden

Information icon Hello, EditGirl99. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Velinga Parish, Sweden, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:Velinga Parish, Sweden

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Velinga Parish, Sweden, was deleted as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz Read! Talk! 05:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]