User talk:Jessamyn/archive6

Help appreciated with photo — and a further question

Jessamyn, you were so knowlegeable, forthcoming, and attentive to my little journey of learning, re the photo of Gerald Heard. I'm beyond pleased.

One thing I wonder about now: I sized the pic to your recommended 200 pixels in height (so the dimensions were 200x153 pixels, which by my calculation (perhaps incorrect) should give an area of 30600 — quite well under the "rule of thumb" 100,000. The image isn't really bad in the context of the WP article, but by comparison with other articles the size appears on the small side.

So now I ask myself whether I should have sized the pic larger (?). Frankly, I thought the old image — besides the fact that it was an amateurish painting of Heard at age 25... maybe 30 at most — looked pretty ridiculous. And I don't want to draw undue attention to the one I've put in its place, which might still be nixed by a fuddy-duddy for not being attributable to an identified photographer. At very least, I'd like for this image, if rather small, to be retained in the article until such time that someone, perhaps, comes up with a better photograph to replace it. Any comment? For instance, what if I made a somewhat larger iteration of the pic and inserted it? Do you think I'd be pressing my luck?

Thanks for graciously commenting on my question here.Joel Russ (talk) 06:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Russ, I think you did the right thing. It's really hard when you have a person who lived roughly during Heard's time period because it's hard to get public domain photos of them due to being old enough and ALSO hard to get public domain photos of them due to there being a lot of photos online some of which are properly licensed (or could be asked for). My usual rule of thumb, and I do this a lot,is to have the longest side" of an image be 220 px and then i make sure I have the resolution set to 72. The worst thing that can happen, assuming that you've done the fair use rationale correctly, is that a bot will come along and make it smaller. So I think if you want to try it, replace the one that is there (you can just upload a new version I think, if I am remembering correctly) and see if the bot does anything. I'm so glad this was helpful. Jessamyn (my talk page) 18:15, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. I apologize for bothering you about this. I received notification that the picture I put onto the Gerald Heard article, months ago, has been disputed. The image was still on the article until a few days ago, and you can see it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gerald_Heard&diff=1105620289&oldid=1105620021 I believe the dispute may be some sort of routine fault finding. But it's exasperating.
I thought I had sufficiently justified the use of the (small, low-res) image, especially by explaining the fact that a) I could not find any notation associated with the image (which I found through a Google search) indicating a copyright holder; b) I could find no freely-licenced or public domain images of the subject; c) it's impossible to create a new image of the subject, because Heard died 49 years ago.
If you click on the photo image of Heard, then click on More Details, you can see the rationale I presented. I'd be hugely appreciative if you could coach me on what I might say in defence of using the image. (I strongly dislike the image that the article originally had, and which has now been reverted to.)Joel Russ (talk) 00:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions

Hi there, Jessamyn. I keep coming across your user name in connection with all the biographies of women you've been writing since you became a member of Women in Red. I therefore thought it would be interesting to take a look at all the new articles you have created. Your performance has indeed been really impressive. After my quality ratings of your articles which had not yet been assessed, I see from x-tools that over the years you have created 357 new articles without a single deletion and that you now have one article rated B-class, 42 C-class, 187 Start and 123 Stub. I particularly appreciate the special attention you have been giving to women's biographies. I look forward many more interesting contributions.--Ipigott (talk) 15:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ipigott, Aww hey thank you so much. I've noticed that you've been coming through and rating them and I'm always happy when I can get one out of stub-class. I live just a few hours south of Montréal and the winters are long here so it's nice to have a little project that can keep my mind occupied. Appreciate your note. Jessamyn (my talk page) 16:51, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know how cold it can be in Vermont at this time of year. As a librarian, you have just the right kind of background to help us along. Until I retired, I was closely connected with library interests, working on projects with Europe's national librarians and public library authorities on the improvement of digital services. It's good to see how many librarians contribute to Wikipedia and that they are increasingly helping us to overcome the gender gap. Given your influential position, perhaps you could encourage even more to join our ranks.--Ipigott (talk) 07:59, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You--Carroll Ketchum

Thank You for the message. My prayers and sympathy concerning the loss of your friend. RFD (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert Smith (journalist, born 1967) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Smith (journalist, born 1967) 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/Robert Smith (journalist, born 1967) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

-Liancetalk/contribs 04:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Emily Davenport, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Davenport.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


DYK for Inez Demonet

On 23 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Inez Demonet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that American artist Inez Demonet created watercolors of facial injuries for the War Department? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Inez Demonet. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Inez Demonet), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Zoom (1972) logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Zoom (1972) logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women inventors

You've helped me in the past — in that case, here on Wikipedia. I remain grateful, Jessamyn.

I'm on a web forum where a guy posted about the lengthy helpful role men have played for hardworking, homemaking women (via inventions). I was able to point out that Josephine Garis-Cochrane invented the first really practical & successful dishwasher. Also, I know Hedy Lamar was a credited inventor.

I'd be interested to find some lists of women inventors. There's a link for one at the bottom of the Cochrane article, but it's 'American Women', not international. If you can point me toward something international, I'd appreciate it.Joel Russ (talk) 16:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, happy to. You probably are looking for List of women innovators and inventors by country. Not sure why there's not a specific category but the ins and outs of Wikipedia categorization often baffle me. Hope this is helpful. Jessamyn (my talk page) 17:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Eleanor Young Love.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eleanor Young Love.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Claude Humphrey.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Claude Humphrey.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:DonaldCozzens.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DonaldCozzens.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Birger Mörner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evening News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I need perspective, contacting you again

Hello Jessamyn, from British Columbia. You've helped me in the past, for which I've been most grateful. I'm perplexed about something. The background is that, although I did start some Wikipedia articles years ago, I've mostly added to ones that have been at the stub stage (or further), or I've factually corrected bits of content, or restructured an article, or improved wording, or added citations, etc.

I've wanted to fill out a short existing article about Richard (Dick) Raymond, a visionary project initiator, mentor, financier, and publisher. But, as I prepared to do that, I learned that the stub article had been axed. Dick Raymond was deemed by some editor(s) to be non-notable. Not to be daunted, I started a fresh article about Raymond, with much more substance to it and drawing on many sources. But the 'notifications' I've received since I began working on the draft have been chary and, if anything, discouraging.

Do some projects face prejudice right from the start? As yet, I've hesitated to publish a final draft. I've spent a month or so to develop the current one. I wonder if I'm on a fool's errand, and I thought I'd send you the link to my recent draft. If you'd have time, I'd be very grateful if you could even just skim it to give me your impression.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Richard_Raymond_(publisher)Joel Russ (talk) 03:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joel -- I don't think the issue with this article is notability but it's the tone the article is taking. It needs to be written like an encyclopedia and not like a feature article about the guy. So just factual, what the guy did and what he is known for, not quotes about why he's a big deal. I think if you wind up with a draft that is sort of dry but survives a notability challenge, you can then flesh it out a bit more and add in more things later. Is that helpful? Like be prepared to say why he hits wikipedia's notability guidelines either for business people or the general notability guidelines. I think he fits, but yes, getting new articles approved is frequently a pain, particularly if there's been a previously deleted stub. I've made a few edits that might make it be a little better received. Hope that's okay! Jessamyn (my talk page) 00:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jessamyn

Coming out of uni with degrees in psych & anthropology, I had to learn to write articles people in general wanted to read, in contrast with dry academic stuff. Yes, indeed, it's okay. I truly appreciate your help. Going dry & flat is difficult for me now.

Best of luck with your continuing work.Joel Russ (talk) 00:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A few days ago, I published the modified draft, which you helped me with. So far, so good — no one has discredited or picked-at it. So I thank you once again.Joel Russ (talk) 17:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey hey I am glad. Thank you for letting me know.

Stephanie Mills, author, environmentlist

Not sure of the full range of your interests, Jessamyn, but Stephanie Mills (not the singer of the same name) seems to me an important woman. She's been a magazine journalist and book author. She was involved with the Whole Earth Catalogs, CoEvolution Quarterly and various projects of the Portola & POINT people.

She's been noted for hosting salons of thinkers and doers, inviting people whom she thought should exchange views, share ideas and possibly develop symbiotic work relationships. Many of her salons were in the SF Bay Area (and I believe also at least one at a major environmental event in Stockholm). Originally based in Northern California, I seem to have read somewhere that Ms Mills relocated to New York City.Joel Russ (talk) 21:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure does look that way. I'll see what I can work up as a stub. Jessamyn (my talk page) 21:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got an outline done with a few major articles/sources. Feel free to add. Stephanie Mills (journalist) Jessamyn (my talk page) 23:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You've done a fine job with the stub so far.
I feel the Luddite tag should be discarded from the article intro, and perhaps brought up later if it can be unpacked somehow. I believe she used the term early in her career and somewhat flippantly, facetiously. I'm certain there are forms of technology that have emerged since Mills graduated from college that she utilizes and appreciates.
Andrew G. Kirk mentions Mills here & there in Counterculture Green (see my reference in the Raymond article for info on that book). She was involved in a UNESCO conference early on. On page 148 Kirk refers to Mills as an "environmental restoration expert". His backpages notes on info sources for the chapters provide references for Mills and the salons she organized.Joel Russ (talk) 17:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - I'm probably done with my part of this for now. Please feel free to edit as you please. Jessamyn (my talk page) 18:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]