User talk:W.carter/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 23

More on Draft:Joanna Angelett

@Chris Oxford: So I'm sort of back again. It wasn't a cold, let's just leave it at that, but at least now I'm out of bed and I wanted something to do so I got to work a bit on the article. "Jerusalem 3000" was not just a jeweler competition, but the 3000-aniversery of Jerusalem in 1996, so that way we got a date for that. I also read the article a bit better and it says quite clearly that the two other exhibitions were in 2009. All this is now added. I also inserted the changes you suggested above. I changed the wording about "The Artist with Significant Achievement" since I found out that it is not an award but the name of a visa permit for her to work in the UK as a non-citizen. I will continue to read through the article and see what else I can dig up. It will soon be ready to move into main. Best, cart-Talk 14:28, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Very good evening, W.carter, Glad that you are feeling better. I am just wondering, how you managed to find all these dates. That is just fantastic, as I spent good portion of time and found only one document, where a Mayor of Jerusalem is saying, that Jerusalem 3000 was celebrated aroung the world from 1995-1996, but I decided, that this is not a precise date for the exhibition and also I could not find proof of the fact, that particularly this exhibition took place in one of these years. But this is excellent, as it looks now totally completed, and all changes are right - now I realized, that this is the name of the visa permit. So, your job is as great as always, and I thank you so much for your help again. All the best. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 20:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, thank you. The sources I found about Jerusalem 3000 all said that it was celebrated in 1996, but since they are very likely using the Jewish calander, 1995-1996 might be more precise. I'll alter it. The other date was in the text as I said. cart-Talk 20:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Chris Oxford: On second thought, we don't have to change the date. :) I remembered that I had seen a mention of another entry for the competition, and that artist had very kindly written the year of the competition as 1996, so all is well. :) cart-Talk 20:46, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Very good evening, W.carter,

Of course, 2009 is there! How could it escape my field of vision? I thoroughly cleaned up my huge magnifying glass and now I also found it. You can see yourself how clear it is. With the date for Jerusalem 3000 exhibition now all is fine as well. So, I think that this part of job is supported by reliable sources completely and done perfectly, as all other ones - great thanks to you!

Magnifying Glass at work.

All the best.

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Chris Oxford: Hahahaha!!! You are quite an artist! Well if you think most things are ok now, I think it's time to move the article to the main space. There are some issues with it that some editors may not agree with entirely, so be prepared for changes once it is there. It may contain too many quotations about her work for some editors, but in the end all articles belongs to the community. Nothing we can do about it. We have done our part in this. cart-Talk 20:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Chris Oxford: So the move is done. Please look at Joanna Angelett. When I fixed a redirect to the article from Joanna Trummer, I found out that someone had tried to create an article about her under that name before, but that that article had been deleted as a promotional article. Let's just hope this doesn't get us into trouble, but at least you have provided proper sources for everything in the article so there should not be any problem. Fingers crossed! cart-Talk 20:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter, That are the news... So, who is the Editor, who wrote this article and who deleted it? What should we do about it? But anyway, if our part of work is done, at least for the moment, then there is the space for a job for other Editors, and they are welcome. Regards, Chris OxfordChris Oxford (talk) 21:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Chris Oxford: There is nothing we can or should do about it. I have no idea who the first editor was, such information is only available for administrators. The only thing I could se was a note saying that a previous attempt to create that article had been made in 2015, but if the material was different this time, then it's ok. And since none of us wrote that article it doesn't matter to us. All of our notes are visible here and on the new article's talk page so anyone can see how we have worked on it. I just wanted to let you know. cart-Talk 21:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter, Oh, that is a relief. But it could have been good to understand which way that editor promoted a person, who is actually notable? Or that was just not right style of language? But, I see it is becoming really late and I am wishing you a good night, and we will see how it's going in coming days. All the best. Regards, Chris OxfordChris Oxford (talk) 22:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Chris Oxford: Such articles always include a lot of the "flowery" and "we are the greatest" language, similar to such things I removed from the article. Here you never cease to be amazed about what people or companies will do to promote their business... Unfortunately. I have read many such articles and tried to fix some of them to contain only the facts. That is why I try to teach you the importance of being neutral and sticking to the facts. After having been here for a while you get kind of cynical, imagine how it must be for those who have been here for ten years or so... Everything they have seen. Good Night for now! :) Be well. cart-Talk 22:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter,

I noticed, that there still no criticism for this article, the same, as it was last time for the article about archaeologist Spathari. After all, I believe that the vast majority of Editors are seeing things from the standpoint of logic and evaluate the articles from this point of view. Of course, if some totally inexperienced Wikipedian could have decided to prove the notability, for example of the same archaeologist Spathari, in the following way (I have read such examples on Wikipedia’s discussions): " " she is a supernaturally talented genius writer, one of 10 cleverest scientists of the world, what enabled her to write dozens of books and sell them successfully, because these books are making readers endlessly happy, as they are incredibly interesting, full of the glorious, unique observations, perfectly illustrated and also not overpriced, what secured them unbelievable triumph" ", then that Editor had successfully prepared the article for speedy deletion as a promotional for sure, despite the fact, that as a matter of fact, she is really notable. And in this case it will be entirely a fault of this writer, and such prehistory probably will mean less than zero for anyone, except this Editor, who just have to take all criticism, learn and carry on, as I guess. (It seems that I’m beginning to speak in verse…) By the way, until I’m not yet got (you see) Shakespearean level and not got drown in the laurel wreaths, I want to say that I’m glad you like my peace of "art" and that it made you laugh. But not all doing the same — and I’m "battling" for my another "masterpiece" with American Wikipedian for quite some time, and will proceed to the last drop of my arguments. But, returning to the article: I went through the text this evening and in its’ very beginning I spotted one phrase, which sound a bit strange for me (but, probably, just for me): "Joanna Angelett is the artist name of Joanna Trummer, is a British-Australian jewellery designer..."

my version is:

"Joanna Angelett is the artist name of Joanna Trummer - a British-Australian jewellery designer..."

What do you think?

All the very best.

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 18:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, your reflections on the article and was makes some other articles be nominated for deletion are quite right. I'm very gland that you see such differences now. :) As for the sentence, you are quite right, that is a leftover blooper. I have altered it to "Joanna Angelett is the artist name of Joanna Trummer, a British-Australian jewellery designer..." Hyphens like " - " are common in literature but in encyclopedias a normal "," is better. Thanks for noticing it! Best, cart-Talk 19:18, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Part 2.0

Very good evening, W.carter,

Sorry, I couldn’t reply yesterday. Yes, the article looks excellent and context, in comparison with majority of articles about jewellery designers (I checked many of them in Wikipedia’s section "jewellery designers"), sound much more seriously and solid: that is a story without annoying (in such articles), insignificant details about events in personal life. Here the works of the artist are talking — the most important and respectful talk. By the way, when I press the title "jewellery designers", which is at the bottom of the page, I noticed, that some one already made a link to the category of jewellery designers and placed name Angelett to the section Australian Designers and under the letter J.

And I made another interesting observation: I received such a notification, back to December 2015: "Your submission at Articles for creation: Animal Park of the Monts de Gueret has been accepted", but never received the same, not for the article Elisavet Spathari, not for Joanna Angelett; does it mean that the articles, belonging to the categories Archaeologists and Designers not receiving such notifications at all?

I’m thinking about new article about some newly discovered mineral, but not directly at the moment: should do first some several other things. All the best. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 19:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, no great mystery in any of the cases. The link at List of jewellery designers was made by me. You can see that if you click on the "View history" tab and then on the "prev" to the left of my editing summary. When a new article is created, one of the first things is to link other articles to it, otherwise it will be an Wikipedia:Orphan. It's no big deal if the article can't be linked to any other article but it is a huge bonus. So as soon as an article is done, most of us goes out hunting on the WP to see where we can link the new article. BTW, the list is alphabetically by last name and "Angelett" comes first there.

The first article you created was submitted through the "Articles for creation" system. That is why you got such an acceptance tag. Even if you worked together with me on that, I thought it would be best for you to get the experience of such an submission. On the Spathari and this article, I was the one who moved the articles to main space since I figured they met the criteria. Technically, most editors can move an article from draft to main (even you) but it is recommended that more experienced editors do this until you have become more used to writing articles on your own. So I'm sort of responsible for taking the decision that the articles were ready. If you look at the top of my user page you can see an icon that shows that I have been given autopatrolled rights, that means that some admins think I have enough experience and judgment to check my own and sometimes other editors articles to see if they are ready. I know that there are some very experienced editors who always use the "Articles for creation" system even after years of writing, simply because it makes them feel safer. You can also go back to that system any time you like, if you want to be more independent and not have co-writers. This time you only got a note from me saying that the articles were in main. :) cart-Talk 20:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter,

Now I understand. I think, that I was incredibly lucky to meet the maestro, as you are, meaning both, professionalism and personality, and to learn from you plenty of Wikipedia’s secrets with great pleasure and joy, as you always made work with you, by your kindness and good humour, how to say it precisely, yes — a feast of work — as it should be, but happening not too often. Any of my questions found with you a kind and clear answer, and last article was a real great school — all my “citations problems” are gone and I gained confidence, and I think, that we (you) build a great article (I compared it to others — far better), and no, I do not want to continue independently, if it’s OK with you. In several days I’ll be in battlefield with my American Editor, who is trying to prevent me from making a very cheerful and festive thing by strange arguments, which I can’t except, as illogical. So, I must be prepared. Will try to win and bring the trophy, if will survive.

Great thanks.

If you are reading right now — I wish you a very good night sleep.

All the best.

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Chris, that was kind of you. :) I think you are referring to your talk about a new barnstar. If you want to use that barnstar you don't need to make it official as one of the default awards you get when you click on the Wikilove. Many, many editors make their own awards and use them all the time. The easiest way is to just click on the option "Make your own" that you see when you click on the little heart at the top of a page. Some make templates that they can just transcribe to like this one. If other users think it is great and fun, they will notice it and start using it as well, even if it is not among the standard barnstars. One thing you can always count on is that people here do as they please when it comes to fun stuff. ;) If you like it and think it should be spread to other editors, just start using it and see if it gets any attention. I think that is the best way. cart-Talk 09:50, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Very good evening, W.carter, Well, fine...so, let me surprise you with my stunning guess: you have visited the page WikiProject Wikipedia Awards! Today has been a great party: celebrated my best friend birthday; as a consequence, the end of the thoughts creeps away from me, and I cannot fix it properly; sure, tomorrow will do it much better, and now I want just to say - great thanks. Talk to you tomorrow. Very Good Night. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Not just a star...

Dear W.carter,

In the first place I sincerely thank you for your advise, and I certainly will follow it, if other options will not work. Thing is, that if there is criticism of the visual appearance of the star that has been presented , I could easily take it, as I do not think, that I did it as good as the graphic designers will do, and in this case I could be trying to find some one among Wikipedians, who can embody this idea professionally. But there are several different things, which make me to continue these debates: firstly, personally I’m sure, that I’m right about the idea and that the Party Barnstar do not "replicate" the idea of any star, but has its own place among others; secondly, despite the fact that I recognize the supreme favour of debates, as I regard them as a tool, helping to develop the correct point of view, I can accept arguments of an opponent only if they logically justified, if the terms are used with a full understanding of their meaning, and if my answers are not interpreted on the basis of incorrect conclusions, as the result of misunderstanding of the meanings of terms. But the most an unacceptable thing in the debate, is the use as a proof of conclusions, the words, taken in quotation marks, but absent in the text. All that is present. So, I have no choice but answer it. I can’t say, that I’m old-fashioned, but, as I can’t see all new dogmas, as the progressive ones, I’m pretty conservative, and also, or as result of that, I tend to try to fix a welter and the chaotic things, and a decision to take part in debates without knowledge on the subject or right understanding of terminology, I’m perceiving as one of the manifestations of chaos.

Some examples of my objections:

"Also I cannot accept your statement: "something, even as small as a Project", because a project, in many cases, can be a business of a lifetime of its author, and then to be developed for many years by the followers of the project (scientific, humanitarian, environmental) founder. Wikipedia itself is a project and it is not small. I see your statement completely inconsistent with the actual meaning of the term "project" and thus rejection of the Party Barnstar ungrounded.", as it based on wrong understanding of terminology, on incorrect interpretation of my words and a presentation of the words, which I never said, as my own. And I never asked Editors, who completed successfully a certain part of their work and who have been awarded for that PART OF JOB by any of Barnstars, to stop working on Wikipedia projects. All told of course applies to the Party Barnstar, which definitely wasn’t designed to "add a mark" of "this is done" (by the way, in your text phrase "this is done" sound like if it was my words, as the phrase is taken in quotation marks, but it is absent in my text), and my previous texts did not give a reason to read any of my words in this context. I thought, that it is unnecessary to announce the well known law of Wikipedia — "Wikipedia is a work in progress", and to add, that Editors, who received the Party Barnstar are welcome to continue their work on this project/article later, when they will be in possession of more valuable materials; I thought, that it goes without saying and does not need to be mentioned continuously, when dealing with Wikipedians, like in case, when you are talking to Editors about our planet Earth, there is no need to remind them constantly that It is round."

The text above is a draft, needs some work to be done on it and will be expanded a bit, so it will go this weekend or during next week.

I believe that the debates provide the most valuable result, if a significant number of people are involved, and since the page WikiProject Wikipedia Awards suffers from a lack of attention, I’m planning to invite Editors from Tea House to this page to tell what they think. If every body will tell, that it’s not what they want, well, then it will mean that it’s just me who likes it, it’s OK and I’ll use it as a personal award, but I still believe in logic. But we will see. All the very best. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:03, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, many editors here use quotation marks on talk pages to emphasize a word or a expression, so in a sense that is a "misuse" of them, but it is a style of writing. I use it too.

I think the main issue is that you are trying to develop a barnstar for something that do not occur on Wikipedia. I understand that you intend it as a sort of completion celebration when something is done and everybody is happy. In "real life" that is usually when we throw an impromptu party to celebrate with our coworkers. This is not done here, mainly because work here is never finished. We may help each other to reach certain goals, but when that is done the participants usually just thank each other and go their separate ways to continue with other things. The form of Wikipedia is rather academic and restrained, we discuss rather than throw wild cyber parties on talk pages. For a work well done in a group there is already the Template:The Teamwork Barnstar, if someone has helped out much there is Template:Guidance Barnstar and for general good behavior there are Template:The Barnstar of Good Humor and Template:The Civility Barnstar as well as assorted versions of these. (You can find most of them on my page.) Your proposal is well meant, but in this case I think you are trying to fix something that is not broken. Barnstars are usually something that new editors spend a lot of time using, collecting and pondering. The longer you stay at this site, the less interesting they become. You start to appreciate a kind note posted on your talk page much more than a prefabricated template, since that is how real colleagues work.

There, now you have my point of view to think about as well. Cheers, cart-Talk 22:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Very good evening, W.carter,

Yesterday, when I received your letter, I started my reply several times, but then decided, that you are right, and I need to think about what you said properly. You know yourself, that your opinion is important for me, and I took step back and attentively overlooked the picture: I agree, that prefabricated template is less appreciable, than good live note: when in "real life" I’m getting a greeting card with standard text and signature at the bottom it does not make me fantastically happy. Of course the Editors’ communication style should be pretty much an official one, but it never shall be preformed in rough style, which irritated me a bit in replies of my new opponent — probably I fill mistakenly that good nice European style of communications is natural and universal for anyone around the globe, but all my experience with my colleagues from around the world is saying me, that the law of politeness is appreciable by all people with self-respect, irrespective of any of their differences. And there is another example, where I tried to give my opponent a chance to understand, that such approach is right: "Here I would like to stress, that the work of the Editors is totally voluntarily one and, sure - you know from your own experience - not always a very easy one, so the bright approach (politeness, sense of humour) to this job is creating a good mood, what is always helpful for any kind of work, including the most serious and responsible ones, and a Party Barnstar is one of the sparkles, which I’m offering to add to many already existing ones in Wikipedia, which all together are giving more of liveliness and vivacity to the Wiki space."

But it is possible that it just seemed to me like that, but in reality it was OK. I really worked too much during the last 5 years and feel for a long time already, that I should take a good break.

In the text, which was minted as reply to my opponent, I wrote in regards to the another point the following:

"All Barnstars are given not for the job, which the Editors just imagined and planed to do, but for the completed part of the job, which they can continue, if they are willing to do so. From your statement: "I'm not totally on board with a barnstar that awards 'completion' after all Wikipedia can never be finished." - it is possible to make only one only conclusion: Barnstars (which should be given for accomplishment, achievement, what can’t be reached without completion of a certain part of the work, as without completion impossible to achieve accomplishment) can’t award completion of any part of work, as the Wikipedia paramount concern is to keep work in progress and it can’t except completion of any kind, and even if the one of the Editors or group of them, achieved their goals and completed their part of job, this work has no right to be awarded, because it is completed, but it can’t be completed because the rule is saying, that work can newer be completed fully, to encourage other Editors to add their valuable contributions, but when they will do and will complete their part of job, they also can’t be awarded due the same reason, what finally means that there is no place here for such things as Barnstars, as every next Editor inevitably will complete his/her part of contribution to the collective job and, according to your statement, will automatically loose the right to be awarded by any kind of Barnstar not during their life time and not later, as "after all Wikipedia can never be finished." My point is, that All Barnstars have been given for the completed by Editors part of the job, for help, which they provided already. And what about the situation, when the nominated article have met the criteria for featured articles? This is totally completed action, and there is something here for sure, what should be celebrated by all participants in the creation of the article, isn’t it? "

——————————————————————————–

So, I decided to familiarize you with this text, just to give you an idea, what I thought about this star and its place in Wikipedia.

But I want to assure you that Party Barnstar certainly hasn’t been designed as the invitation for Wikipedians to start express their joy in somnambulistic spontaneously individual style of cyber parties! I was very cheered by this assumption, but the mission of this Star —– an invitation to celebration of completely traditional style — very much as a family birthday celebration, what is brightly stressed by its design.

Your example with The Teamwork Barnstar (which I did not notice myself) convinced me more, than all combined statements of my opponent: he needed just to mention this one, rather than the Original Barnstar, etc.

I believe, that even if I win the attention and support on Tea House and Party Barnstar will be approved, it will mean, that this star will rise on my opponent's bones it will be already not a Star of Joy, but the Star of Schadenfreude and I do not like it.

And I thank you for this advise very much, as it stopped me to jump over obstacles that do not exist.

So, I’ll let him know, that I examined the matter of discussion and decided to leave Party Star, as my own award, as I found The Teamwork Barnstar, which convinced me sufficiently to do so.

Now I’m trying to find a nice mineral to write about.

Great thanks again.

All the best. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 20:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter, This Star is shining and coffee tastes great. Will have one cup and will relax. Great thanks. Very Good Night. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:29, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Captain Barnstar

Dear W.Carter, the Captain Star is my present to you for the incredible help, which you are providing with kindness, good humour and friendliness to many new Editors. This is a simple sketch with simple symbolic, but with a sensual gratitude and respect.

Regards, Chris Oxford.

Captain Barnstar.

Captain Barnstar. Star is awarded to experienced, knowledgeable Wikipedians - Pilots Captains, who are constantly, with friendliness and dedication helping new Editors to learn how to fly with confidence in Wikispace. Chris Oxford (talk) 19:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Chris, that was very kind and extremely thoughful of you! Much appreciated. cart-Talk 09:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)

ISS-40 Coastlines of the southern Baltic Sea

Perhaps something you might be interested in contributing to? Cheers! Yakikaki (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Yaki! I'll look into it. :) I thought about you some time ago when I saw this photo on Commons, since it includes much of the areas that you are interested in. Cheers, cart-Talk 19:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh, it's a beautiful picture! Look at all those lakes in the sunshine! :D Yakikaki (talk) 19:57, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Can I steal a few ideas from you?

Hey Cart! I'm thinking of re-making my userpage and am looking at yours for inspiration. Is it OK if I steal some (many) ideas from you? I don't want to intrude on your design, so I'm totally OK if you prefer not to! Yakikaki (talk) 15:02, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey Yaki! You can "steal" as much as you want of my design and ideas! You are not the first. I'm just really flattered that people find my design so useful they want to purloin (love that word) it. And if you have some trouble with the coding, just 'ping' me and I'll see if I can help you out, but I think the design is pretty straight-forward. Looking forward to seeing the result. Cheers, cart-Talk 15:09, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I'll see what I can manage...! ;) Ciao for now, Yakikaki (talk) 15:11, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

A favor: Radio Studio 54 Network improved in Swedish.

Good evening from Calabria, I'm writing to say hello and know how you are. Beyond this to ask you a little bonus, I saw that you are a skilled and experienced translator, as well as a brilliant mind. I ask the courtesy to help me improve in Swedish article on the Calabrian radio station, well known abroad thanks to Italian and Calabrian diaspora in Europe and the world. Right and not more than 10 minutes of your precious and little time. Then I will have the pleasure and honor to tradurti whatever you want in Italian, Sicilian and other Italian dialects on Wikipedia, of course I would also honored to work with you in the drafting of articles in Swedish, both I and my colleague Italian, proficient in Portuguese. The honor would be all ours. well, waiting for a certain and your nice answer, I thank you in advance with all my heart and hope to be working with you. I space on various issues, then you have found the right person if you accepted. Greetings from Calabria.--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 15:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino, thank you for your request. With that much flattery there is always bound to be a catch and I see what it is. The article you are talking about is not exactly up to standards, it needs a lot of work here on the English Wikipedia before it is ready to be translated into any other languages. As soon as you, or someone else have provided it with proper references and made it more into an article than just a list of event, I'll be happy to translate it into Swedish for you. Same goes for any other articles you want to have translated into Swedish: Make sure they are okay here first. Best, cart-Talk 15:27, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Good evening again,

well, I thank you that you give me aid. Now I ask you a favor if you want and you can. Could you kindly translated into Swedish the Ursula Karven page? just and no more than 10 to 15 minutes of your precious time. Then I translate wholeheartedly an article of your interest in Italian and Sicilian. For now, I thank you in advance for your help and cooperation you give me. a hug from Calabria.--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 14:52, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino: Hello again. That new article have the same problems as the first article. It is already tagged with needing references and it is written in the same undesirable list format as the first one. I have no idea why you are so keen on having these articles translated into Swedish, but I will not translate bad and unreferenced articles, so please fix up these first before you come with another suggestion, I'm not sure you understood this the first time I wrote it. As for you translating articles into Italian, I have no preferences and no agenda to push in this. There are over four million articles on this English Wikipedia that needs translating into Italian, please take your pic and get to work with any of those. And don't send me any hugs. I'm not in the habit of accepting such from unknown Italian men. cart-Talk 16:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

New Barnstars.

Gems and Jewellery Barnstar.

Mineralogy Barnstar.

Dear W.carter,

I need your advise: thing is, that I decided to learn more about Barnstars and looked at all of them for some time, and during this process I suddenly realized that there are no such Barnstars, as the ones, that awarded contributors, who have significantly expanded and improved the articles about gems and jewellery (like the title of the British magazine "Gems and Jewellery") and also about Mineralogy (by the way, recently I made there some small contribution). And there are plenty of perfect articles on these subjects (just one example — the article Diamond, which is a featured article) but there are no Burnstars in the category Topical Barnstars, which awarded the Editors, who make the good contributions to the related pages of Wikipedia. I found even such Barnstar, as The Wine Barnstar : "The Wine Barnstar may be awarded to those who make outstanding contributions to articles on wine or wine-related subjects. Introduced by Murgh on February 3, 2009 ."

But subjects, mentioned above have no less importance, than wine, I presume, but Barnstars which are awarded for contributions in articles about them are absent, or I just can't find them? Do you personally know any of existing Barnstars, which award contributors to the articles about Gems, Jewellery and also Mineralogy? I made a sketches for the Barnstars, intended to award contributors to the articles about Gems and Jewellery and Mineralogy, and I’m sending these sketches for your observation. So, what do you think about my new incursion on Barnstar’s space?

All the best.

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 20:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, barnstars for different projects or subjects tend to be developed at the same time as a project is developed, when people are working on it and feel the need to start thanking each other. I have not been very active on any of the projects you mentioned above. The only articles I have done there are Lesedi La Rona and those about Harry Winston and his company Harry Winston, Inc., but from what little I have seen of that corner of the WP, it is not a very active part. Even renowned brands with very rich history such as Cartier (jeweler), Tiffany & Co., Graff Diamonds and Bulgari have very poor articles. This may reflect why there is no barnstar yet for this project. You are welcome to fix one if you like but I honestly think the designs you have provided here are not in line with the rest of the barnstars. Barnstans here usually have a sort of icon-like design based on the original barnstars. This is so that they will be recognized as part of the WP system and fall in line with other sorts of computer graphics. The ones you have presented here are more of an art form and they are a bit hard to read, especially the mineralogy star. I'm not even sure I understand it. Also, engagement rings are not such a good idea, offering such to another user may be taken the wrong way. ;) You need to come up with some sort of cleaver idea, almost bordering on a pun to make this work. Also keep in mind that the design needs to be rather clean and simple. Something that popped up in my head was a kind of diamond encrusted barnstar, like these: . Or you could play around with the crystals of minerals, I mean five of these or these and you got yourself a barnstar. :) Keep working on the design! Best, cart-Talk 19:49, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter,

You are absolutely right: the articles from this category sometimes have surprisingly poor quality, both in an informative and illustrative respect: when I have had a look at Jewellery Design and saw that pencil drawing and also the item, I was amazed by the fact, that they have been selected, while so many nice and professionally done ones exist. Visited your article and read about Harry Winston with great interest: I new the name, but was not familiar with all these interesting details. Thank you. And Lesedi La Rona is worth to be in the article — what a fantastic diamond! About my Barnstars (you probably already noticed my slight fixation on this subject) — it was actually not a final design, but just a very rough sketch. But I have noticed myself, that Mineralogical Barnstar looks a bit like starfish and that the mineral specimens (on the surface) are unclear and not very expressive and are too numerous. I truly like your idea to use single amethyst crystal — it looks like little light and I will work on this design, to make it look good, but I have to write who is the author of the idea. But my Jewellery Barnstar... is a real disaster. I picked up these engagement rings just because it was the only rings image in my graphic programme, without a realization of the fact, that it can bring confusion due to the possibility of the revolutionary approach to the perception of this award. So, better I will continue to work on Mineralogical Barnstar only (at least at that time). I shall say, that when I recalled your remark during this day, I laughed and smiled at the most inappropriate moments.

Will be back with a brand new Mineralogical Barnstar. Great thanks.

All the best.

Regards, Chris Oxford. Chris Oxford (talk) 20:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Rock-Olga

On 28 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rock-Olga, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that singer Rock-Olga (pictured) recorded an album in 1972 using ABBA members Agnetha Fältskog and Anni-Frid Lyngstad as backing vocalists? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rock-Olga. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rock-Olga), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 September 2016

• News and notes: Wikipedia Education Program case study published; and a longtime Wikimedian has made his final edit

• In the media: Wikipedia in the news

• Featured content: Three weeks in the land of featured content

• Arbitration report: Arbcom looking for new checkusers and oversight appointees while another case opens

• Traffic report: From Gene Wilder to JonBenét

• Technology report: Category sorting and template parameters

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

my apologies as well as a favor if you can

Hello and good Saturday, I'm writing to say hello and know how you are. Beyond this to excuse me if I'm able to look like an idiot to you, I'm really sorry. Having said that I proceeded to ask for help regarding Ursula Karven page, a user has helped me to improve it in a flash. Now would you be kind enough to help me translate it into Swedish? just and no more than 10 minutes of your precious time. I really thank you for what you will do for me. Greetings from Calabria--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 11:18, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

@Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino: I see that you have added some references to it but not enough. Everything needs to be referenced and the style is still the same undesirable list form. It is still not good enough to be translated. Also translating it properly when it is ready would take considerably more than 10 minutes. Why are you so anxious to get this translated to Swedish? I can see no compelling reason for it and I suspect that you only hooked onto the idea since you saw my name on a talk page we both visited. Your editing history indicates that you do these odd requests when you come across a user who is a translator for whatever language they know. cart-Talk 11:43, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

SpaceOps box removal

Dear W.carter, I have added no an independent (press-) link "Aeromorning" talking about SpaceOps conferences 2016 and announcing SpaceOps Conference 2018. Would this satisfy the "independent requirement" to remove the box?? (it is Ref# [13] on the SpaceOps page. Cheers, Joachim

<ref>"Aeromorning". www.aeromorning.com/blog/de-daejeon-2016-a-marseille-2018-cnes-partenaire-puis-organisateur-de-spaceops. Retrieved 5 October 2016. ICare82 (talk) 18:09, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi ICare82, unfortunately there is nothing you can do about that article to make that tag go away. It sits there only because of your previous involvement with that organization. Anything you add to the article will only strengthen the tag. It will stay until an editor who's had no involvement whatsoever with SpaceOps comes along and add a significant amount of material to the article and then have it reassessed by someone. My advise to you is to just drop that article. It is what it is for now, tag and all. cart-Talk 19:19, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

• News and notes: Fundraising, flora and fauna

• Discussion report: Cultivating leadership: Wikimedia Foundation seeks input

• In the media: A news columnist on the frustrations of tweaking his Wikipedia bio

• Technology report: Upcoming tech projects for 2017

• Featured content: Variety is the spice of life

• Traffic report: Debates and escapes

• Recent research: A 2011 study resurfaces in a media report

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:27, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Science shows Wikipedia is the best part of the Internet

"Science shows Wikipedia is the best part of the Internet" schreibt die The Washington Post.

Dazu gehört ja auch Deine Arbeit, das sie "the best part of the Internet" ist. Danke.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 04:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Maxim Thanks for the link. That was uplifting to read I the midst of everything going on in the world right now. Hope you are well and see you around! cart-Talk 09:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Archo Chato at the Santo Domingo church

Cart, thank you for your review of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:El_Arco_Chato_de_la_Iglesia_de_Santo_Domingo.jpg. My son (he took the picture) and I are new to wikimedia and I would like to know about two of the point that you mention in your review:

• 1. Need a description, it would be nice with the following description: Archo Chato at the Santo Domingo church? Where we write the description?
• 2. Better categories: how we assign categories to the image?

Thank you for your help.

Rogelio Rogelio Moreno Gill (talk) 13:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Rogelio Moreno Gill, I'm just writing here to let you know I have seen this. I am at work right now, but tonight when I get home I will answer your question in full. Best, cart-Talk 13:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello again Rogelio Moreno Gill. Since this concerns Wikimedia Commons, I have left you my answer on Daniel's talk/discussion page there at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Vazquitopty to get all the links and things right. Wikipedia and Commons interact with each other, but they are two sites who work sort of independently, so Commons matters should be discussed there and we can continue this conversation on Daniel's page. Best, cart-Talk 20:04, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

Hope you have a safe and enjoyable night! I presume that the stockpiles of Gotlandsdricka hidden throughout Sweden (much to the Government's horror) have already been accessed and distributed? Ceannlann gorm (talk) 21:00, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Come to think of it, you'll be able to celebrate it twice, if I'm not mistaken. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 21:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Since no one here is absolutely sure when to celebrate it, we make it easy on ourselves and party an entire week! ;) cart-Talk 21:14, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Work is done.

The Mineralogy Barnstar is awarded to appreciate the contributions of users to the coverage of mineralogy subjects on Wikipedia.

Dear W.carter,

I have tested plenty of combinations of colours for the Mineralogy Barnstar, which could be compatible with the colour of amethyst crystal in the centre, and I have chosen this version, as a golden colour on the points matched with the colour of the crystal’s base, and red colour isn’t in conflict with purple. Colours like blue or green will kill purple, and multicolour design of the points will be too busy and will divert attention from the mineral.

I used as a base the Original Barnstar and kept its outlines in focus and as close as possible to the original.

If you think, that this design appropriately represents the idea, I would like to make the following description: Author of idea of design is W.carter, idea of creation of Mineralogy Barnstar introduced by Chris Oxford, author of the photo is Parent Géry.

Recently I sent to the Ministry of Culture of Greece following email: Dear Sir/Madam, I’m Editor of Wikipedia, and I created in Wikipedia article about Elisavet Spathari — a Greek archaeologist, author and Honorary Director Emeritus of Ministry of Culture in Greece. To make the article Elisavet Spathari complete, I need more information. For example it will be helpful to have some articles about her work, published in the Magazines or newspapers, her photo or/and photos of the archaeological sites, where Elisavet Spathari has been working, about projects in which she participates, etc. If Elisavet Spathari can contact me, by provided email personally, and supply me with an additional information about her present work, it will be greatly appreciated.

Thinking to sent the same request to Angelett Gallery, and also to Monts de Gueret Animal Park Museum for some “historical” photos and news; I personally found a couple of good links and made these additions today:

http://www.wolf.org/wow/world/?gclid=CLjG4qeD6s4CFQfhGwodDq4KOQ

https://euronatur.org/endangered-species/wolf/wolves-in-europe/?gclid=CPPl8cmE6s4CFTYW0wodLDALAg

I decided to try to transform at least one of the articles, started by me, into a good one; the same I’m trying to do to the Mineralogy, and if additionally, new Barnstar will be excepted this time - it will be just great.

All the best.

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:02, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris, the barnstar looks very good. Well done! You balanced the colors very nicely and the amethyst crystal in that dark center looks almost like the geodes where they are found. I don't think you need to give me any credit in the whole thing, I just gave you a few pointers and then you did all the rest yourself.

It is good that you want to improve the articles you have started but it might be hard to get some of them to GA level since so little is written about the subject. GAs usually require a bit more written material and documentation. On the other hand, getting an article like Mineralogy to GA is also hard since it is such a wide and encompassing area and it will require a lot of writing. You could compare it with Biology a similar article which already is a GA. Best, cart-Talk 09:48, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter, Thank you for good words in regards of the Barnstar Mineralogy. I will upload it for a discussion next week.

Sure, that the task to reach a good article title requires a really great work, what includes an ability to make it perfect in every respect. I do not think, that it will be possible for me to achieve it in a couple of months, but I will just advance this job when and how I can; so, at some point, it will give a good result, I hope;

Probably other Editors will also add some materials as well.

But for now I will prepare my another Barnstar for debut and debate. Great thanks again. Will be in touch. All the best. Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Dear W.carter,

I’m back with 5 “supports” to Mineralogy Barnstar — have no idea is it enough or not, but that is what I got at the moment.

Also, in one day (do not know, if any connection) I got “spooky Halloween email” and a flu.

When it (the last one) will become a bit easier, will take couple weeks off, and will go to enjoy The Nature — good, that It still exists.

Later will try to sent request to Angelett Gallery, but The Greeks Ministry of Culture and Administration of Gueret animal Park are keeping silence stoically.

Moreover, there is no sound of the “Battle for the Star”: no opposition yet; but that is at least a positive silence.

All the very best.

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

• News and notes: Finally, a new CTO; trustee joins Quora; copyright upgrade impending

• In the media: Washington Post continues in-depth Wikipedia coverage

• Wikicup: WikiCup winners

• Discussion report: What's on your tech wishlist for the coming year?

• Technology report: New guideline for technical collaboration; citation templates now flag open access content

• Featured content: Cream of the crop

• Traffic report: Un-presidential politics

• Arbitration report: Recapping October's activities

• Recent research: Why women edit less, and where they are overrepresented; article importance and quality; predicting elections from Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, W.carter. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I finished my project now I am back

What did I miss?--NetworkOP (talk) 21:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@NetworkOP: Oh nothing much, some terrorist attacks, a presidential election, some crazy Nobel Prize and a couple of dead singers... you know same old, same old... So, what are your plans? cart-Talk 21:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I really wanna meet some new guys on Wikipedia, you know, hardcore editors. Can you introduce me, or at least give me some contracts. I think I'll learn something. I'll reveal what I've really been doing when I am ready.--NetworkOP (talk) 22:09, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@NetworkOP: Well if you are looking for a real shark tank where the editors are razor sharp and there is no mercy, you should spent some time at WP:ITN. No-one introduces anyone here, you just dive in where the action is and start working. I suggest you start with just reading through the flow at WP:ITNC See how it works and after a while start voicing your opinion on what should or shouldn't be posted. That way you get connected to all the hottest articles on WP and if you are lucky you can help out and get an edit in between three edit conflicts as everyone rush in to get the article up and running as news flow in from media. Working on such articles require real skills and some of those active there are journalists IRL and as hardcore as you get.

I'm there from time to time and I've even managed to get some articles up in that section on the front page and it's certainly a rush. At the moment I'm really busy with another project (not Wikimedia related) so I'm not so active here, but that other project is also done on online so I'm at the keyboard most of the time if you need some help.

Take a look at ITN and see what you think. If that was not what you had in mind we'll see what else we can come up with. cart-Talk 22:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I said I want to meet hardcore editors, not dive the shark tank already.--NetworkOP (talk) 22:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@NetworkOP: OK, so would you like me to introduce you to an editor who always have lots of projects going on, starting new groups, getting people to work on articles related to different subjects and who has writted more articles than anyone here on Wikipedia? He also has a great sense of humor and knows everyone and is respected by the entire community. cart-Talk 22:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Exactly--NetworkOP (talk) 22:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@NetworkOP: Okay then: Dr. Blofeld, it's been a while and I hope all is well. I have an editor here who is interested in meeting the best of the best here on WP, and you're it. I was asked to handle the introduction, the rest is up to you guys. Best, cart-Talk 22:52, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I thought you were gonna introduce me to the two people who got married in Wikipedia :)--NetworkOP (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh there are plenty of love affairs here but only one Dr B, and you wanted a really good editor for your project so be nice and behave now. ;) cart-Talk 23:03, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

• News and notes: Arbitration Committee elections commence

• In the media: Roundup of news related to U.S. presidential election and more

• Blog: The top fifteen winning photos from Wiki Loves Earth

• Gallery: Around the world with Wiki Loves Monuments 2016

• Featured content: Featured mix

• Special report: Taking stock of the Good Article backlog

• Op-ed: Fundraising data should be more transparent

• Traffic report: President-elect Trump

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Christmas Tree.The Tree that can turn darkness into Starlight.

Dear W.carter,

I liked so much your polar bear, glowing in the dark (both, the design and the idea behind it) that I have continued this thought by making a Christmas tree of ice; I illuminated it from within and then applied an effect.

Merry Christmas and a Very Happy New Year!

Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 13:27, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank You, and a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you too! :) cart-Talk 13:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 December 2016

• Year in review: Looking back on 2016

• News and notes: Strategic planning update; English ArbCom election results

• Special report: German ArbCom implodes

• In focus: Active user page filter prevents vandalism and harassment

• Op-ed: Operation successful, patient dead: Outreach workshops in Namibia

• In the media: In brief: Coverage of gender gap initiatives, banner fundraising, and more

• Featured content: The Christmas edition

• Technology report: Labs improvements impact 2016 Tool Labs survey results

• Traffic report: Post-election traffic blues

• Blog: Wiki Loves Monuments contest winners announced

• Recent research: One study and several abstracts

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Jul!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2017!

Hello W.carter, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2017. Happy editing, Ceannlann gorm (talk) 16:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Is it just my imagination, or is this yet another double holiday that ye have? ;)

And a very Happy Holiday to you too. Unfortunately no, we just celebrate on another day (today) and nap and eat good food the following two days. Cheers, cart-Talk 16:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Ceannlann gorm has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

By the way, I suspect that the Reindeer Union may have a thing or two to say about this. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 17:16, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Why? Most authentic Norse steed I've seen. The original was a horse though, called Sleipnir. cart-Talk 17:37, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Knock knock.

Happy new year, W.carter!
Agastya Chandrakant (talk) 19:55, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Well hello Agastya, it's been a while. Thank you so much for you note and a Happy and Prosperous New Year to you too! I hope you are well and have exciting plans for 2017. See you around, cart-Talk 22:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2017

• From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost

• News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?

• Interview: What is it like to edit Wikipedia when you're blind?

• In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more

• Featured content: One year ends, and another begins

• Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases

• Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new

• Technology report: Tech present, past, and future

• Recent research: Female Wikipedians aren't more likely to edit women biographies; Black Lives Matter in Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Caxcis / Charon systems compromised?

Looks like interesting times continue. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 22:33, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Yep, surströmming is lethal. It is only when the pressure inside the can has built up so that the can is bulging that you know it is ready. ;) The mere threat of using such countermeasures should deter any IT-terrorist. cart-Talk 12:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Henri Beau

Hello! Your submission of Henri Beau at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC)