User talk:JayJasper/Archive 7

{aan}}

Please comment on Talk:Colonialism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Colonialism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Conservator of the peace

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Conservator of the peace. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you very much for the barnstar. We are all very much under appreciated. Glad you are helping to fix that! Cheers!-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome, as it was well deserved! Kudos as well for your work on Fail-Safe Investing.--JayJasper (talk) 20:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help on Separation of money and state

JayJasper

I have been following and using some of your sources and references on classical liberalism. Thank you.

But I am writing to draw your attention to the following point: before yesterday, Wikipedia lacked an article about the liberal proposition of separating money and state.

Free banking, Currency competition, and Legal tender all have articles. There are even redundant articles about complemetary currencies (one two three four).

As you know, non-involvement of the government in monetary affairs implies free banking but is not implied by it. Free banking is a hyponym of money/state separation: it can exist in an environment when a (commodity/paper) government currency competes with private currencies. As the government would levy taxes in its own currency, it would benefit from an undue monopolistic advantage despite the free banking environment. Hayek and Rothbard clearly advocated total abolition of government control over monetary affairs, rather than mere abolition of legal tender laws.

Furthermore, the debt crisis, and recent headlines about Bitcoin and the Liberty Dollar, have renewed the proposition. The reference to church/state separation was initially made by Hayek (to my knowledge) but has been repeated recently (I have repeatedly read it recently, and I'm still looking for more references).

Anyhow, I have taken the initiative of creating such an article.

I would very much appreciate your contribution to help me source and expand the article. This would be especially useful as it seems the requirements in that regard are much more stringent if one doesn't describe the Krugman/Bernanke precepts.

Thank you !

Alfy32 (talk) 23:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken John

Hello there. As you were one of the participants at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken John, I thought I should let you know that I have relisted the article at AfD after a discussion on my talk page. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken John (2nd nomination) if you are interested in commenting. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^♪ talk ♪ 01:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Progressive utilization theory

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Progressive utilization theory. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for review

Thank you for your review of the Scott Cassell article and for removing the "new unreviewed article" template. I really appreciate it. :-) Gildir (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite welcome, glad I could be helpful. Good job with that article, BTW.--JayJasper (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Transportation of the President of the United States

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Transportation of the President of the United States. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC happy hour on Thursday, February 28!

Please join Wikimedia DC for Happy Hour at the Capitol City Brewery at Metro Center on Thursday, February 28 at 6 p.m. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 34. Hope to see you there! Harej (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Nuclear option

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nuclear option. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to a discussion: Wikipedia and legislative data

Hi JayJasper, since you are interested in meetups in DC, I'd like to invite you to attend the Cato Institute's "Wikipedia and Legislative Data" events on March 14. (There's also an all day workshop on March 15; let me know if you are interested, we may be able to add more people.)

There will be an introduction to Wikipedia and open edit-a-thon in the afternoon, and a Sunshine Week Reception in the evening. I hope you can make it!

• Please sign up here
• Announcement on Cato's blog
• Background from Cato sponsor Jim Harper's perspective
• Background from Wikipedian Pete Forsyth's perspective

Hope to see you there! -Pete (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minorities in Greece

Hello. I made a Request for Comments in Minorities in Greece page and thought you may be interested. The issue is, I was trying to add information about problems of muslims living in Athens (some 300,000 people) since some time but my edits are being reverted by multiple users. The main argument against adding this information is that those people are not minorities but immigrants. Details of the discussion are here. If you would like to contribute with your comments, that would be very welcome. Filanca (talk) 09:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, March 9!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Guapo's at Tenleytown-AU on Saturday, March 9 at 5 PM All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 35. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 14:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Rape culture

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape culture. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bush Derangement Syndrome for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bush Derangement Syndrome is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bush Derangement Syndrome (6th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yworo (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback deployment

Hey JayJasper; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

yay

Roaster666 (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Minorities in Greece

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Minorities in Greece. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to a Women in the Arts Meetup & Edit-a-thon on Friday, March 29

In honor of Women's History Month, the Smithsonian and the National Museum of Women in the Arts are teaming up to organize a Women in the Arts Meetup & Edit-a-thon on Friday, March 29, 2013 from 10:00am - 5:00pm. The event is focused on encouraging women editors while improving Wikipedia entries about women artists and art world figures. This event is free of charge, but participation is limited to 20 volunteers, so RSVP today! Sarasays (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Fascism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Fascism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes

Per the WP:RFC and WP:FRS guidelines, I respectfully request your feedback regarding a question of law.

Should the Ugg boots trademark disputes article include example cases of counterfeit consumer goods? Is the counterfeiting of brand name goods a "trademark dispute" when the counterfeiters are taken to court? Also, an editor has claimed that the introduction of example cases of counterfeiting "dilute" the discussion about whether the word "UGG" is a generic term, and therefore ineligible for trademark protection.

Please respond to the survey here with "Support" if you believe counterfeiting is a trademark dispute when taken to court, or "Oppose" if you believe the reverse is true. Thank you. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 13:22, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Campaign finance

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Campaign finance. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fahrenheit 451. fyi

BBC version broadcast again today [1] and tomorrow

Spelling of Montgomery is wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.117.144 (talk) 13:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, April 13!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, April 13 at 5:30 PM All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 36. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 19:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetups on April 19 and 20

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for two exciting events this weekend:

On the evening of Friday, April 19, we're hosting our first-ever WikiSalon at our K Street office. The WikiSalon will be a twice-monthly informal meetup and collaborative editing event to help build the community of Wikimedia enthusiasts here in DC; please join us for its inaugural session. Light refreshments will be provided.

On Saturday, April 20, we've partnered with the George Washington University to host the All Things GW Edit-a-Thon at the Teamsters Labor History Research Center. Please join us for behind-the-scenes tours of the University Archives and help edit articles about GWU history.

We look forward to seeing you at one or both of these events! Kirill ^[talk] 20:14, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:BP

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:BP. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, May 11!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, May 11 at 5:30 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 23:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Treaty

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Treaty. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC WikiSalon on May 24

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next DC WikiSalon, which will be held on the evening of May 24 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill ^[talk] 18:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:CentreForum

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:CentreForum. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Webinar / edit-a-thon at the National Library of Medicine (NLM)

Join us at the NLM next week, either in person or online, to learn about NLM resources, hear some great speakers, and do some editing!

organized by Wiki Project Med

On Tuesday, 28 May there will be a community Wikipedia meeting at the United States National Library of Medicine in Bethesda, Maryland - with a second on Thursday, 30 May for those who can't make it on Tuesday. You can participate either in-person, or via an online webinar. If you attend in person, USB sticks (but not external drives) are ok to use.

Please go to the event page to get more information, including a detailed program schedule.

If you are interested in participating, please register by sending an email to [e-mail]. Please indicate if you are coming in person or if you will be joining us via the webinar. After registering, you will receive additional information about how to get to our campus (if coming in-person) and details about how to join the webinar. Klortho (talk) 00:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Narendra Modi

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Narendra Modi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC WikiSalon on June 6

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next DC WikiSalon, which will be held on the evening of Thursday, June 6 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill ^[talk] 12:01, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have time on Saturday?

I'm sorry for the last-minute notice, but on Saturday, June 8, from 3 to 6 PM, Wikimedia DC and the Cato Institute are hosting a Legislative Data Meetup. We will discuss the work done so far by WikiProject U.S. Federal Government Legislative Data to put data from Congress onto Wikipedia, as well as what more needs to be done. If you have ideas you'd like to contribute, or if you're just curious and feel like meeting up with other Wikipedians, you are welcome to come! Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested.

I hope to see you there!

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for D.C.-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Harej (talk) 04:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of libertarians in the United States

Hey, I've started a discussion at Talk:List of libertarians in the United States#Scope, relating to the scope of that list and the possibility of others being created, and would welcome your input. Thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:49, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, June 15!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, June 15 at 5:30 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 20:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Join us this Sunday for the Great American Wiknic!

	Great American Wiknic DC at Meridian Hill Park
	You are invited to the Great American Wiknic DC at the James Buchanan Memorial at Meridian Hill Park. We would love to see you there, so sign up and bring something fun for the potluck! :)

Boilerplate message generously borrowed from Wikimedia NYC. To unsubscribe from future DC area event notifications, remove your name from this list.

Harej (talk) 16:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to It Ain't Me Babe may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Live In Japan'' also contains the song. She sang a duet of this song with Dylan at Newporror (film)]].

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to D. H. Lawrence may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[http://dhlawrencereview.org/ The D. H. Lawrence Review], scholarly journal)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, July 13!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, July 13 at 6:00 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 00:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Rahul Gandhi

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rahul Gandhi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:16, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ari Wolfe for deletion

A nomination is taking place as to whether Ari Wolfe should be deleted or not. The discussion is held at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ari Wolfe and everyone is welcome to join in on the discussion. However do not remove the AfD notice on top. WisconsinBoyClevelandRocks228844 (talk) 21:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daniel Imperato for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Imperato is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Imperato (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 21:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're Invited: Luce and Lunder Edit-a-thon at the Smithsonian

File:SAAM facade.jpg American Art Museum

Luce and Lunder Edit-a-thon at the Smithsonian American Art Museum You're invited to the Luce and Lunder Edit-a-thon, part of a series of edit-a-thons organized by the Smithsonian American Art Museum to add and expand articles about American art and artists on Wikipedia. This event will include a catered lunch and special tours of the Luce Foundation Center for American Art and the Lunder Conservation Center at the Smithsonian American Art Museum. 9:15 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. on Friday, July 19, 2013 Smithsonian American Art Museum Meet at G Street Lobby (9th St. & G St. NW, Washington, D.C.) Capacity is limited, so please sign up today! If you would not like to receive future messages about meetups, please remove your name from our distribution list. Message delivered by Dominic·t 00:32, 12 July 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Luce Foundation Center

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you read your wikimail?

I sent you a message earlier today. TMH (talk) 20:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I'll read it and get back with you.--JayJasper (talk) 20:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Next United Kingdom general election

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Next United Kingdom general election. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox officeholder

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox officeholder. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008

attempting to provide factual information. the lawyer has been an arts advocate recognized as such by art law organizations for over 30 years. the existence of representation and the judgment obtained are fact. please i.d. elements you considered a "plug" or would welcome other suggestion, would be happy to delete whatever is "plug" like reference. thank you. Artlaws1 (talk) 20:51, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The information may have been factual, and your edits may well have been made in good faith, but the information was simply excessive for an article about a presidential campaign (note there are no specific details about Barr's attorney and the firm representing him, and his campaign is the subject of the article). Also note that court documents alone are generally not considered valid citations on Wikipedia unless there is coverage in secondary reliable sources to support the relevance of the content to the subject. Please see WP:ROC & WP:DUE for better understanding. Hope this was helpful. Regards.--JayJasper (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. re ROC and Primary. The section edited was on the aftermath of the campaign. The article raises the claim that there was a claim of unpaid campaign debt. The court determined this to be true and ordered Bovard to recover the 47k. To leave the public with the false impression that this matter was merely a claim or unresolved, does not serve the facts. Shouldn't the public be entitled to the information that a court determined the outcome, rather than with the false impression that this was an unresolved issue? (Do we merely report that there were two sides to Proposition 8, then never state that the Supreme Court issued a ruling, because that would give "undue weight" to one sides position?)

I did not find anything indicating that published court opinions are unreliable per the policy. I may have missed that (I would welcome any guidance there). What I read implied that one would not wish to rely upon a brief presented by one advocate in court as evidence of the truth of a fact. Here THE COURT published the COURT ORDER as an on-line docket entry. see "Maryland case search" and the case number provided in the article. So we are referencing a court order which is published by the court itself. This would seem more reliable than a published newspaper article?

To the extent the the campaign espoused libertarian views, the campaign aftermath was arguably (and the argument is not made) to turn on the very views espoused, e.g. fiscal responsibility. Silverberg's involvement is most salient and his advocacy of financial responsiblity for intellectual property is well known. (He is the attorney who represented such properties as the Zapruder Film of the Kennedy assassination and the 18 million award against the government for the taking of the film, and who was involved in such matters as the valuation of the government's taking of the Nixon presidential materials (embellishments which might sound like a plug and were not included in the edit, etc.) Without arguing the matter, the public is entitled to the facts by which it may understand whether, or not, whether the campaign in the end served the interests it was promoting. The edit presented no argument on the point. It remained entirely neutral, providing only a fact which the public can interpret any way it may wish as to the significance of the campaign aftermath to the campaign itself. I would suggest that additional facts on the aftermath may be reported, which may bring this into greater light. They were not the subject of the edit, but there were many other's whose debts were not honored according the campaign reports that are published by the government. Those matters are left to others. But they are part of an aftermath that helps the public understand the campaign's objectives against the realities with which it was left.

look forwrd to your reply Artlaws1 (talk) 23:45, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-inserted your citation, along with information about the judgement rendered, in the article. You are right that the result of the litigation should be included since the legal dispute itself was written about. As for the policy on court documents as a reference, such documents cannot be used as a source of information on living persons, thus the attorney's name and info were deleted. Your assertion that "Silverberg's involvement is most salient and his advocacy of financial responsiblity for intellectual property is well known" may well be accurate, I certainly have no reason to believe otherwise. However, such an assertion would have to be verified by a reliable secondary source for Silverberg to be specifically mentioned in the article. Otherwise, this would be original research which is expressly forbidden by WP policy. Without a published source citing Silverberg's signifance to the particularly case, there is a promotional ring to publishing his name (as well as the firm he represents, etc.). I hope that my latest edit to the article is an acceptable compromise for you. If you still believe that I am mistaken about the excluded content, it would be best to open a discussion thread about it on the article's talk page to try and get a consensus of the page's editors on the matter. Regardless, thanks for articulating your concerns on the matter and for your civil discourse. Regards.--JayJasper (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts.

Court Docs re: livng person

I still cannot find your source for the statement that court documents (in this case the record created by the Clerk of the Court) cannot be used as a source of information on living persons. Can you please identify that for me.

Re: Silverberg, You note "Silverberg's involvement is most salient and his advocacy of financial responsiblity for intellectual property is well known" may well be accurate, I certainly have no reason to believe otherwise. However, such an assertion would have to be verified by a reliable secondary source for Silverberg to be specifically mentioned in the article.

For verifiable support of the statement that he is an author's rights advocate, the public can refer to 1) articles published in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, Dallas Morning News, Secramento Bean, and dozens of other newspapers on Silverberg's representation of copyright owners over 33 years, .2) Articles interviewing him appearing in Huffington Post, Artist's Magazine, and many other magazines, as wells as articles he has published in national magazines, and trade Journals of Professional Organizations (AIGA,. Graphic Artist's Guild, etc), referencing Silverberg's representation of copyright owners, 3) Silverberg's appearance on CBS This morning, 4) The end credits of over one hundred documentaries and television shows produced throughout the world (Nippon Television, ABC/CBS/NBC/ CNNN/ ZDF television) Oliver Stone's Movie JFK noting Silverberg'er representation of the rights owner of the film contribution, and Silverberg's appearance in a video about the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination which has sold over 300,000 copies and which was the #2 selling video in the world when it was released 5) the published court records on Pacer of the United States District Court cases in which Silverberg has represented copyright owners in at least 50 federal cases (including those from New York, Colorado, North Dakota, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, North Carolina, California, Missouri, Georgia, Virginia, etc.), 6) numerous court opinions published by West Publishing, Westlaw, and Lexis (private publishers) in which Silverberg's arguments for copyright owners have been reported to hundreds of thousands if not millions of readers and which have been subsequently quoted in following cases , 7) Reports of Silverberg's presentation of copyright seminars in Atlanta, Seattle, Portland, Charlotte, Chicago, Miami, New York, Washington, D.C., 8) announcements of awards given to Silverberg recognizing his contributions to the field of author representation, e..g. the Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts Award for legal contributions to the Arts Community, 9) His prior faculty appointments which are published in the course manuals of Washington College of Law, Virginia Commonwealth University, 10) Legislative submissions he has made to the Library of Congress Copyright Office which are published by the United States government on rights legislation for Orphan Works, Copyright Claims, and other issues, 11) His published representation of the White House News Photographer's association, 12) his appearance on radio shows in Los Angeles, Canadian Broadcasting System (CBC RADIO), Washington DC Lawyers Radio Program, NPR All Things Considered). etc., this could go on, and on, etc.

The point is that Silverberg meets the wp "notability standards". Only the fact of representation was reported,and that he is an author advocate, because that speaks to the issue itself. There were NO promotional statements made of any type. If I were a student of the Barr campaign aftermath, the fact that the case garnered Silverberg's attention is of interest. It tells me in a non-argumentative fact specific way that one of the nation's leading advocates for the financial rights of authors had to pursue the financial interests of an author against a campaign that made fiscal responsibility a focus of its campaign. Without taking over the point of the article, and I respectfully suggests with as little emphasis as possible, it also tells me, in one less than one sentence, that his involvement was required in order to make the campaign fiscally accountable. It is something analogous to a financial oversight committee finding misdeeds of a financial oversight committee. It was thought that giving a long history of Silverberg to bring that into focus, would go astray of the focus; it was sufficient to state that he was involved as that limited fact, in and of itself, made an important point with the appropriate amount of weight. One might look to the long list of who else the campaign paid, and did not pay for a better understanding of the campaign's fiscal policies. However, whether future edits about the campaign aftermath embellish the point can be left to others.

Thank you for your further consideration. I would very much appreciate your helping me locate your specific reference/authority re the court documents and living people point you have made.

Kind regards. Artlaws1 (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you completely understand the policy on original research. Note the statement from the "page in a nutshell" header on the policy page: "Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not clearly advanced by the sources themselves". See also WP:SYNTH for more in-depth explanation on this. Even if can be verified in reliable secondary sources that Silverberg is well-known author's rights advocate, there would need to be specific statements on Silverberg's significance to this particular case. The reader should not be expected to infer it based on coverage of other matters. As for the policy regarding court documents and living people, it's in WP:BLPPRIMARY: "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses."

Again, I appreciate the discourse, but as I earlier suggested, it would be best to discuss the matter further (should you wish to) at Talk:Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008 to get input from other editors as well. Given that the use of court documents as sources has always been somewhat controversial (see the many archived discussions on the matter), and that the original research policy seemingly comes into play here, it would be best to get a consensus before restoring the reverted content. Otherwise, you're likely to encounter the same issue yet again. If you do take it take to the article talk page, feel free to reference this discussion, or copy-and-paste it for that matter (to save you from having to rehash all the points you've made all over again). Hope I've cleared up any matters that were previously unclear.--JayJasper (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

additoinal information

I am sorry that I missed one point that I wanted to bring up: The Maryland Judiciary Case Search which reports Silverberg's appearance for Bovard is the secondary, not primary, source for the information. Although it sometimes can act as a primary source, here it is merely extracting and reporting from the primary paper submissions to the Court that Silverberg appeared for Bovard. In other words it is a second hand account of the underlying submission, itself. It is therefore unlike (and not included in) what WP mentions as the type of court records that are impermissible). You would agree that as a rule of construction, when one goes to the trouble of expressly listing prohibited material, the exclusion from the list implies that the excluded item is not prohibited?

Again, your thoughts are appreciated Artlaws1 (talk) 16:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per my understanding of WP policies on primary/secondary sources, the case search is a primary source as it originates from the court itself. As for your question regarding "a rule of construction", I'm not sure I understand it, quite honestly. I will say that WP recognizes that there are times when it is acceptable to ignore all rules, but doing so needs a consensus as to prevent the issue at hand from becoming a perennial bone of contention. Again, it is best take the discussion to the article article talk page to get more input. I will be glad to continue contributing to the discussion there. And, should a consensus form that suppors your reasoning, I will respect that. Regards.--JayJasper (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your further comment. I have learned a lot from your remarks. I respectfully inquire have you ever looked at, and to do you understand, the source your are referring to? WP readily acknowledges that some public documents may appear as both a primary and secondary source. In this instance the primary source would be the papers filed by Silverberg. This would be an "entry of appearance" or any legal equivalent (e.g., filing a pleading or motion under the court rules). Based on the filing of that paper or those papers, there is a separate secondary report. This is Maryland case search, a secondary source, that extrapolates from and reports based on the primary filing. This no different than Time Magazine reporting Silverberg appeared for Bovard, as his lawyer, unless the increased reliability of the report made by the Circuit Court is taken into account. The Maryland case search report is merely extrapolating and noticing the underlying information. Another way of saying this is that it would never report Silverberg as a lawyer for Bovard by itself. It is only secondarily reporting based on an underlying paper that was filed. I am not sure, but you seem to abandon the notion that Silverberg is not "notable" per WP policy. And according to WP policy that determination IS made by the public's ability to verify through a secondary source, which can be done from the over one dozen references provided. I respectfully disagree with you here. The point (on which we depart?) is not as you suggest that the public should not have to verify a reported fact. According to WP policy, the point is that the public must "be able to" verify the fact from reference to a secondary source. In this case they can. They can refer to dozens, and perhaps hundreds of secondary sources. So in the end it seems that your comment is intended to challenge the reliability of the fact that Silverberg represented Bovard as reported in the Court documents based on the fact that this is an "assertion" from a primary source. This is a highly technical objection to substantive information and relies on a quite strained interpretation of the word "assertion." I respectfully do not agree that the fact of Silverberg's representation would be considered an "assertion" within this context. I would respectfully request that you respond this question: 1) are you seriously challenging the validity of a second hand report issued by the Circuit Court of Maryland that Silverberg was the lawyer for Bovard? Do you think that this second hand report by the publishers of the Maryland Case Search information may be erroneous, unreliable, or not in keeping with wp policy? If so, I think that is where we would have an irreconcilable difference. This is not the type of Court document that WP is referring to. In the case of a "complaint" or an "answer" or a "motion," we, may be dealing with "assertions" within the meaning of the policy. However, the fact that something occurred on Tuesday, as reported in a secondary source, or that Silverberg was the lawyer, is not really an "assertion" that might be questioned, unless you are seriously concerned that the second hand report of the Circuit court about who was the lawyer is reporting false or unreliable information to the public. I believe you made your edit in good faith. I totally understand where you might be coming from. Silverberg is not a household word. One could perhaps footnote the fact of his 33 year involvement in arts and author advocacy across the nation, (and internationally) and then the public would not have to check for themselves. If it is acceptable to you, a brief footnote could be added referencing his 33 year career in author advocacy. But that would give undue weight, and would sound laudatory, and a distraction. What the public should know is his involvement because of its independent significance in the campaign aftermath. If anyone wishes to delve deeper, they can google his name. And the ultimate point is that the information is needed, precisely because of the very question you raise. It shares a fact which may shed a light which you have perhaps missed. So, this is why I disagree with you about promo. It is a secondarily reported fact, not promo, and in this instance it is a fact which sheds light on the campaign aftermath and its relevance to the campaign itself and the issues raised. Your criticism ultimately creates an untenable situation: one would have to give even greater description to Silverberg's involvement in order to address your concerns, in which case the greater description would offend your editing criteria as because it would sound promo. I respectfully urge that the edit merely states the fact that he is an author advocate. We could embellish that to address part of your concerns, but that is not a direction in which I would wish to go. I urge that the snippet is the appropriate comment without undue weight or any shift in the balance of the reporting. So again, I ask for your agreement. Thank you for your patient attention.Artlaws1 (talk) 02:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me first me clarify that no, I am not challenging the validity or accuracy of the Maryland Case Search information nor am I "abandoning" the notion that Silverberg is notable. It might be helpful to encapsulate my postion as such: My take is that the entire Barr-Bovard dispute is of only marginal relevance, given the rather scant attention it received from the media. Relevant to the subject, yes. Notable enough to warrant mention in the article, given that it concerns key campaign material, yes. But, given the dearth of media coverage generated by it, the matter is rightly relegated to a small paragraph in the aftermath section of the article with only the most relevant and rudimentary facts of the case that are provided in the few media reports that covered it. Outside of court documents, which routinely and obligatorily identify attorneys involved, there was no mention of Siverberg, much less the firm he represents. Thus, it appeared from my vantagepoint, promotional and laudatory as well as superfluous to include such information.

As to your assertion that my argument ultimately creates an untenable situation, your impression that such is the case is likely the result of my failure to adequately articulate my position. It was not my intention to suggest that a "greater description" of Silverberg's involvement would be needed in the text of the article. If one of the sources has said something to the effect of "Bovard was represented by noted author's rights attorney James Silverberg", I would have been open to Silverberg being mentioned in "snippet" form as you suggest, as there would be a clear indication of the significance his involvement in this particular case. However, there appeared no news coverage whatsoever of the rendered judgement outside of the court documents (at least none that I could find), let alone mention of the attorneys involved. Of course, the judgement itself of course warranted mention in the article, as we agree that it would be derelict for Wikipedia to leave the reader with the impression the matter is still an unresolved issue when such is demonstrably not the case. But, seeing that reliable news outlets sources seemed not to find the matter worthy of report, I could see no reason to include anything but the most basic details.

With all that being said, your argument is not unreasonable. I can't honestly say I'm sold on the notion that mention of Silverberg in the article is vital, but at this point I don't have a strenuous objection to it either. Should you add your suggested snippet on Silverberg to the article, I will not revert it. So consider this not so much an agreement as a non-objection. Don't be too surprised, however, if another editor reverts it or challenges its inclusion, given WP:NOR and the seemingly contentious matter of court documents as sources. If such does occur, I would urge that you take the matter to the article's talk page as I earlier as I earlier suggested (and feel free to reference this discussion) for reasons I have previously discussed. If such does not occur, then we'll just leave well enough alone. So it would be appear we've reached a resolution. Thanks again for the thoughtful and civil discussion.--JayJasper (talk) 20:42, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DC meetup & dinner on Saturday, August 24!

Please join Wikimedia DC for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) on Saturday, August 24 at 6:00 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please see the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 04:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you free on Wednesday? Join us at the Wikimedia DC WikiSalon!

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next DC WikiSalon, which will be held on the evening of Wednesday, August 24 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill ^[talk] 12:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meet up with local Wikipedians on September 14!

Are you free on Saturday, September 14? If so, please join Wikimedia DC and local Wikipedians for a social meetup and dinner at Vapiano (near Farragut North/Farragut West) at 6:00 PM. All Wikipedia/Wikimedia and free knowledge/culture enthusiasts, regardless of editing experience, are welcome to attend! All ages are welcome!

For more information and to sign up, please visit the meetup page. Hope to see you there! Kirill ^[talk] 19:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Persecution of indigenous peoples in Bangladesh

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Persecution of indigenous peoples in Bangladesh. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Hey! I've done a major redesign of The Wikipedia Library portal. As one of our original volunteers, I'd love you to check it out, pick a role, create a profile to share your story and skills, sign up for the newsletter, and see how you can get involved. I'd also be interested in having a skype chat with you in the next few weeks to see how we can best put your energy to use (or email if that's better for you). Hope you're doing well, Ocaasi^t | c 13:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you free next Thursday? Join us at the Wikimedia DC WikiSalon!

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next WikiSalon, which will be held from 7 to 9 PM on Thursday, September 5 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon is an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill ^[talk] 15:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of new religious movements

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of new religious movements. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. This message was delivered manually as RFC bot is currently offline. Thank you. --Tgeairn (talk) 21:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Josh Willis

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Josh Willis. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:51, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you free next Thursday? Join us at the Wikimedia DC WikiSalon!

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for our next WikiSalon, which will be held from 7 to 9 PM on Thursday, September 26 at our K Street office.

The WikiSalon is an informal gathering of Wikimedia enthusiasts, who come together to discuss the Wikimedia projects and collaboratively edit. There's no set agenda, and guests are welcome to recommend articles for the group to edit or edit on their own. Light refreshments will be provided.

We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill ^[talk] 06:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Golden Dawn (Greece)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Golden Dawn (Greece). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Vladimir Putin

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Vladimir Putin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you free on Sunday? Join us for a special Wikimedia DC WikiSalon!

Wikimedia DC invites you to join us for a special WikiSalon at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library's Digital Commons Center. We will gather at 3 PM on Sunday, October 13, 2013 to discuss an important topic: what can Wikipedia and the DC area do to help each other? We hope to hear your thoughts and suggestions; if you have an idea you would like to pursue, please let us know and we will help!

Following the WikiSalon, we will be having dinner at a nearby restaurant, Ella's Wood Fired Pizza.

If you're interested in attending, please sign up at the event page. We look forward to seeing you there! Kirill ^[talk] 02:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Praveen Swami photo

Can you include a photo of Mr.Swami in the article of the same name?KartikGomala (talk) 06:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know where to find a photo that can used for that article. Sorry.--JayJasper (talk) 17:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Islamophobia

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Islamophobia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Stormfront (website)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Stormfront (website). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection, 2012

It's up for deletion; as the person who restored the article, perhaps you'd like to weigh in. —rybec 22:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the alert.--JayJasper (talk) 03:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Report

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Freedom of Speech for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -buffbills7701

Please comment on Talk:Lyndon LaRouche

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Lyndon LaRouche. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on an RfC about Living members of deposed royal families and the titles attributed to them on WP

Hello - I have opened an RfC about suggested guidelines in the Manual of Style for articles about living members of families whose ancestors were deposed as monarchs of various countries and the titles and "styles" attributed to these living people, at the moment often in a misleading and inaccurate way in my opinion. Please join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies "Use of royal "Titles and styles" and honorific prefixes in articles and templates referring to pretenders to abolished royal titles and their families"[2]Regards,Smeat75 (talk) 05:21, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Foro de São Paulo

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Foro de São Paulo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)

Books & Bytes

Sign up for monthly delivery

Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world.

Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations...

Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...

Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...

Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...

Read Books & Bytes

The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs) 16:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi^t | c 15:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:United States Air Force Office of Special Investigations

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States Air Force Office of Special Investigations. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Jay Cost

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jay Cost. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]