User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 147

Archive 140Archive 145Archive 146Archive 147Archive 148Archive 149Archive 150

Wikidata weekly summary #447

20:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion on Growth team "add an image" idea

Hello Pigsonthewing! I'm Marshall Miller; I'm the product manager for the WMF's Growth team, which works on features to help retain new editors. Lately, we have been working on this set of ideas called "structured tasks", which break down editing workflows into steps that make sense for newcomers and make sense on mobile devices. We're currently thinking about an idea for a workflow in which newcomers would be recommended images from Commons that might be a good fit for unillustrated Wikipedia articles. One of my colleagues recommended you as someone who has a particularly strong grasp on the usage of images in articles. Since this project is in its beginning phases, we really depend on community members to help us think through the feasibility, opportunities, and pitfalls. If you have time, it would be really helpful to us if you could check out the project page and weigh in on the discussion. Thank you! -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Dog & Bull

Compliments of the season. I just dashed off a quick stub to satisfy an issue I noticed on my watchlist. But I'm puzzled about its map pin behaviour. When I preview the page, I see a blue map pin marking the spot in the infobox mapframe. But after it has been saved, I no longer see the pin. Can you explain or help, please? No rush, of course. Cheers! Andrew🐉(talk) 12:27, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@Andrew Davidson: I remember pubs. The pin is visible for me; maybe a caching issue? Merry Christmas! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020

Wikidata weekly summary #448

A New Year With Women in Red!

 
 
Women in Red | January 2021, Volume 7, Issue 1, Numbers 182, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

  Facebook |   Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hope for 2021

take courage
 

Thank you for improving article quality in December, and good wishes for a time of transition. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Have a good new year 2021! Success seems to be under your wings looking at the opera templates ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations on the No. 1 hook of 2020!

The 2020 totals are now complete, and your hook for Captain Tom generated more total DYK views (179,256) and more DYK views per hour (14,938) than any other hook during the year. A list of the 25 most viewed hooks of 2020 can be viewed at "Top hooks of 2020". Congratulations on being at the top of the list, and keep up the good work! Cbl62 (talk) 08:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Notice of updates to Alex Chinneck page

Hi Andy, Happy New Year. I've resolved to start contributing more to Wikipedia this year and I'm thinking of updating one of the pages started by you (regarding the artist Alex Chinneck), so I thought I'd flag my intention. I'm planning to cover his work from 2016 - 2020 (currently absent) and expand the intro a bit. Cheers. Tim Culverdene (talk) 19:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Andy, have a nice day. --Lyrasx (talk) 15:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello.

Hello Andy

This has been a very useful training session. --Mojo2021 (talk) 15:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #449

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  • By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
  • Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.

U.S. Tank Corps WWI Insignia.

Dear Mr. Mabbett,

Thank you for observations on the above https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:First-Tank-Corps-Branch-Insignia.png

I note that you disagree with and have reversed my corrections of 2016 and 2018.

I have set out and explained at great length the sources pertaining to these corrections, but in order to obviate an edit war, I shall clarify them still further.

The original problem seems to lie with William K. Emerson in his Encyclopedia of United States Army Insignia and Uniforms (University of Oklahoma Press, 1996, pp 367-8). At the beginning of Chapter 39 he writes:

In December 1917 army regulations described the first insignia for the army's newest combatant arm, the Tank Corps, as "a conventionalized tank, one inch high, with the number of the regiment attached to the bottom." Figure 39-1 is an example of this insignia without the number. No example of the insignia with a number below has ever been seen.

Most people did not readily understand this artistically attractive 1917 design. It showed the front view of a French tank with armor plate and large rivets, with an enclosure for three cannons and two additional cannons sticking out of the sides, all topped by a small turret. This first pattern did not last long. On the last day of February 1918, Colonel Rockenback (sic) requested General Pershing to formally approve the insignia armywide. Pershing approved this new collar device on 19 April 1918 and published the orders in May 1918. For officers it was to be a "wreath surmounted by two dragons supporting a tank, guns pointed to the front. The device is to be one inch in height."

Unfortunately, the problem is that this is not a view of any known French tank.

It seems that "editor" Corneliusseon used this passage as a source when creating the page back in 2009 and thus perpetuated the misapprehension. As is often the case with Wikipedia, the error remained uncorrected for many years.

Why Emerson made this mistake isn't clear. We don't know if he has/had ever seen a French tank. There is a French WWI tank, the Saint-Chamond, that might at first glance, from the front, be mistaken for the Land Cruiser/Alligator http://www.chars-francais.net/2015/index.php/engins-blindes/chars?task=view&id=61 but any serious examination would reveal the difference. Perhaps Mr. Emerson did not have that opportunity. I await a reply from his publisher to see if a) he is still alive and, if so, b) he can throw any light on the subject. I also await a reply from Corneliusseon, but he does't seem to have been active on this file since 2009 and would appear to be permanently banned from Wikipedia. I do not hold much hope of a reply. In late 2017 I asked the Institute of Heraldry, Corneliusseon's source, if they could help, and they replied that they were overworked and underfunded and didn't have the time to do research, but kindly sent me some scans of pages from Emerson's book, which was obviously no help.

In the meantime, we have a familiar Wikipedia conundrum: a reliable reference that is demonstrably wrong. The "French" tank is in fact a tank of which two might or might not have been built, in America, and which certainly never saw combat. It went by a variety of names, but was not French. I suggest that that makes this source flawed and unreliable. Wikipedia isn't here to defend the indefensible, although some "editors" appear to be. The very least we can do is remove the allegation that the tank is French.

I do hope common sense will prevail here. I enclose a source that should suffice: https://landships.activeboard.com/t60775897/us-tank-corps-badgepinbutton-solved/

I should be happy to read your views.

Hengistmate (talk) 22:37, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Please use the file's talk page, on Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Why don't you just read it? It's FYI. Hengistmate (talk) 17:22, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Heroes of Kosovo has been nominated for listification

 

Category:Heroes of Kosovo has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 17:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox member of the Knesset

 Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 15:15, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

15:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #450

This Month in GLAM: December 2020

 




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.