Earth Day 2022 Edit-a-thon - April 22nd - 2PM EST

edit
You're invited! NYC Earth Day 2022 Edit-a-thon! April 22nd!
 

Sure We Can and the Environment of New York City Task Force invite you to join us for:

This Edit-a-Thon is part of a larger Earth Day celebration, hosted by Brooklyn based recycling and community center Sure We Can, that runs from 1PM-7PM and is open to the public! See this flyer for more information: https://www.instagram.com/p/CcGr4FyuqEa/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

-- Environment of New York City Task Force

Your GA nomination of Big Duck

edit

The article Big Duck you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Big Duck for comments about the article, and Talk:Big Duck/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

 

  Administrator changes

 
 

  Technical news

  Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2024-28

edit

MediaWiki message delivery 21:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your GA nomination of Robert Weinberg (urban planner)

edit

The article Robert Weinberg (urban planner) you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:Robert Weinberg (urban planner) for comments about the article, and Talk:Robert Weinberg (urban planner)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pbritti -- Pbritti (talk) 02:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Promotion of Arthur O. Austin

edit
Congratulations, RoySmith! The article you nominated, Arthur O. Austin, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, David Fuchs (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Fri July 19: Wikicurious in NYC, Editing Wikipedia for Beginners

edit
July 19: Wikicurious: Editing Wikipedia for Beginners @ Civic Hall
 

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for the inaugural event of the beginner-focused Wikicurious series at Civic Hall! All are welcome, and newcomers and aspiring editors are especially encouraged to attend.

Registration via Eventbrite is required for building entry, and is also encouraged on the event page on Meta.

The Wikicurious series at Civic Hall is supported by Craig Newmark Philanthropies. Wikimedia NYC is an official affiliate and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation.

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct.

Meeting info:

  • RSVP is necessary for building entry

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Google Maps

edit

I was looking at the U.S. Route 13 in Maryland article, which is also a good article, and I noticed that the parts addressing the terrain US 13 passes through (such as "US 13 passes through wooded areas") has Google Maps as a source. Do you think I could use Google Maps as a source for I-85 passing through forest and rural areas? Let me know your thoughts and I'll reply back ASAP. Thanks. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nvm, I figured it out. Do you mind letting me get back on the 17th and finishing up the rest of the article? I'm almost done, and I saw on the GAN page that there are reassessments that have been open for as early as June 14th. I'm not asking for a massive extension, but just for the 17th so that I can get back to my computer and add the citations. I understand if you don't want to grant me the extension, but I have in fact made improvements on my computer, although they haven't been saved yet. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 08:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure what to tell you. There's a request for reassessment open. At some point somebody will pick it up and make a decision. I have no control over when that happens. RoySmith (talk) 14:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ok. All I hope is that I make it back to my computer before it closes and finish up whatever improvements I make to the article. I think I've found out what sources to use for the sentencing and what to remove from the wording. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 16:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited West Farms Soldiers Cemetery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daily News.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Four Award for You!

edit
  Four Award
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Arthur O. Austin. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Tech News: 2024-29

edit

MediaWiki message delivery 01:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Re the wikirefs tool

edit

Just tried it on The Argosy (magazine) and got an internal server error; my mistake that it should have been Argosy (magazine) (which it coped with), but presumably it doesn't like being asked about non-existent pages. I like what I see of the tool so far, particularly that it preserves links in the references. I could imagine an option to restrict what comes back to only refs with links, or only ones without. Perhaps an option to ask for X randomly selected ones, and an option to copy them to the copy-paste buffer in some appropriate wikitext form -- I use a standardized bullet list with wording that you can see here, for example, but anything pasteable into a GA or FA review would work.

One thing I find myself doing in spotchecks is that I get an intuition pretty quickly about whether there are problems to be found, and if I suspect problems (I'm more right than not, but my instincts are not infallible on this) then I'll go looking for structures that I know from experience are more likely to reveal errors. A couple of examples:

  • Direct quotes, e.g. in reception sections, are rarely wrong, so if I'm hunting errors I'll often skip these.
  • Situations of the form "Here is a sentence with multiple clauses,[1] with a citation halfway through. Here's a second sentence with the citation at the end.[2]" often failed verification on the second half of sentence 1.
  • Paragraphs with one or two cites at the end of each sentence are rarely wrong. The longer the series of sentences cited to a single source, the more likely an error becomes, though this is not as reliable in producing errors as the previous case.
  • Declarative sentences that assert things such as names or dates are less likely to be wrong.
  • Multiple citations, perhaps surprisingly, don't seem to be correlated with reliability -- that is, picking something to verify that has multiple citations doesn't seem to increase the chances of finding an error.
  • Flowery, unnatural, old-fashioned or highly academic or formal language is a moderately strong indication of possible close paraphrasing, *unless* the rest of the article is like that too, in which case the odds are evenly distributed between the author being a formal writer, a non-native speaker, or a bad writer, depending on what the oddity in the language is.

This all means that in some cases I don't want a random sample; I want to bias the selection toward certain types of spotcheck.

Thanks for working on this -- I can see it being pretty useful once you get it a little further along. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the comments. Yeah, dealing with non-existent titles in a useful way is probably #1 on my to-do list. RoySmith (talk) 02:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply