| Revision as of 10:33, 31 March 2015 editLenore (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users825 edits →Automated revert← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:27, 31 March 2015 edit undoRolandR (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers32,327 edits →Automated revertNext edit → | ||
| Line 162: | Line 162: | ||
| Sorry, I reverted back because the section is essentially POV, for the reason I've previously described in the last edit and I've repeated in this one. Regards. <small>] (])</small> 21:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | Sorry, I reverted back because the section is essentially POV, for the reason I've previously described in the last edit and I've repeated in this one. Regards. <small>] (])</small> 21:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :a woman who reports being raped is not a rape victim. these infos are tendentious. please stop your vandalisms <small>] (])</small> 10:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | :a woman who reports being raped is not a rape victim. these infos are tendentious. please stop your vandalisms <small>] (])</small> 10:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::My edits are certainly not ]; maybe you should read the page to see how Misplaced Pages uses the term. And my starting point is to take seriously allegations of rape, not to follow a repressive regime in stigmatising and criminalising the complainants. <span style="font-family: Papyrus">] (])</span> 11:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:27, 31 March 2015
 Archives | ||||||||||||||||||
Index
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing First Search engine, RolandR.
Unfortunately MrX has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:
I'm unreviewing this so that other new page patrollers can review it.
To reply, leave a comment on MrX's talk page.
Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue
Volume 1 Issue 3, December/January 2013
(Sign up for monthly delivery)
Happy New Year, and welcome to a special double issue of Books & Bytes. We've included a retrospective on the changes and progress TWL has seen over the last year, the results of the survey TWL participants completed in December, some of our plans for the future, a second interview with a Wiki Love Libraries coordinator, and more. Here's to 2014 being a year of expansion and innovation for TWL!
The Misplaced Pages Library completed the first 6 months of its Individual Engagement grant last week. Here's where we are and what we've done:
- Increased access to sources: 1500 editors signed up for 3700 free accounts, individually worth over $500,000, with usage increases of 400-600%
- Deep networking: Built relationships with Credo, HighBeam, Questia, JSTOR, Cochrane, LexisNexis, EBSCO, New York Times, and OCLC
- New pilot projects: Started the Misplaced Pages Visiting Scholar project to empower university-affiliated Misplaced Pages researchers
- Developed community: Created portal connecting 250 newsletter recipients, 30 library members, 3 volunteer coordinators, and 2 part-time contractors
- Tech scoped: Spec'd out a reference tool for linking to full-text sources and established a basis for OAuth integration
- Broad outreach: Wrote a feature article for Library Journal's The Digital Shift; presenting at the American Library Association annual meeting
The Signpost: 25 February 2015
- News and notes: Questions raised over WMF partnership with research firm
- In the media: WikiGnomes and Bigfoot
- Gallery: Far from home
- Traffic report: Fifty Shades of... self-denial?
- Recent research: Gender bias, SOPA blackout, and a student assignment that backfired
- WikiProject report: Be prepared... Scouts in the spotlight
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 10
The Misplaced Pages Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
- New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
- New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
- TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 March 2015
- From the editor: A sign of the times: the Signpost revamps its internal structure to make contributing easier
- Traffic report: Attack of the movies
- Arbitration report: Bradspeaks—impact, regrets, and advice; current cases hinge on sex, religion, and ... infoboxes
- Interview: Meet a paid editor
- Featured content: Ploughing fields and trading horses with Rosa Bonheur
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 March 2015
- Special report: An advance look at the WMF's fundraising survey
- In the media: Gamergate; a Wiki hoax; Kanye West
- Featured content: Here they come, the couple plighted –
- Op-ed: Why the Core Contest matters
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Andes
Just curious why the update to other_name edit on Andes keeps being reverted. I'm probably just not familiar with the subject enough to know why that's wrong. — Strongjam (talk) 00:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree I know that topic and I am not making bad edits These are not distruptive edits and I can make them.TheWhovoanBoss (talk) 00:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- If you think "The Andes Mountian (sic) Range" is an alternative name for the Andes, please cite a reliable source confirming this. RolandR (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- I can't believe I didn't see the misspelling. Anyway, I'm not sure I see the need for it anyway. — Strongjam (talk) 01:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Type 1 error example
The example is weird, because Type 1 error occurs when the null hypothesis is true, but the data turns out to reject the hypothesis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnylioltu (talk • contribs) 03:06, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Query
Hello RolandR, You left a message and undid some of the edits that I did for Kathy Freston. I am a bit confused on all of this as she has been divorced from Tom Freston for over a year (there is not an article on this, but if this page/site is about accuracy, then the update should be left), her birthplace is incorrect on the page as it is Greenville, not Atlanta, and the information currently on the page " Tom Freston was largely responsible for her visibility, as Kathy Freston has no formal training or expertise in nutrition or biology. Tom was an executive at Viacom in charge of MTV Networks until 2006" has no citation or reference either and is all hearsay and therefore not credible, if you are saying that what I wrote is the same definition.
I have emailed Ms Freston on the past and got the response from her, "tried to share my life’s experiences that led me to this journey in my books. I don’t have any special education or especially relevant background, beyond the fact that I’ve found these topics to be engrossing. I've become somewhat of an obsessed researcher on the subject of plant-based food and all its healthy repercussions!" so that would seem to me to be a better source then someone else's apparent gossip, as stated in the current page.
It seems a bit shady to me that there is all this talk of her ex-husband, especially skewed in his direction, coming from articles written about him, on her page. I feel her page should be about HER and his articles can go to his Wiki page.
The Charlie Rose link is no longer active so why was it restored? This makes no sense to me and I am not sure of your interest in all of this?
Thank you, Walt P.Waltypete (talk) 22:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- The text you added had no source, and is unacceptable in a biography of a living person. An email that you claim to have received from the subject is unfortunately not considered a reliable source. If you think that other material in the article is also inadequately sourced, please remove it, or ask for a better source; but the existence of unacceptable material in an article does not authorise the addition of further such material. RolandR (talk) 00:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 March 2015
- From the editor: A salute to Pine
- Featured content: A woman who loved kings
- Traffic report: It's not cricket
.
A New category BORN ON A TOTAL SOLAR ECLIPSE
Dear Roland, wait a little please, I'll give you a link from the NASA Web site! Rohlinae (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsearch/SEsearchmap.php?Ecl=18510728 This is the source! The day of birth of Samuel Sachs for example Rohlinae (talk)
- Nobody is questioning whether he was born on the day of an eclipse. The issue is, is that significant? You can only include this if a reliable source makes the connection. Otherwise, your own linkage is considered unacceptable synthesis, and is not allowed in Misplaced Pages.
- Your further comment, complaining that I have not responded within five minutes of your original comment, is also unacceptable, and I have removed it. RolandR (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Ok, maybe you are right! Thank you for your reply! Astrology is not a science I know, but this is an interesting fact to create a new category to facilitate the search of the people born on a total solar eclipse day. It's so interesting to know it, why not? Like in Ancient Greece for example the fact of birth on such a day was considered very important. Rohlinae (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:26, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation adopts open-access research policy
- Featured content: A carnival of animals, a river of dung, a wasteland of uncles, and some people with attitude
- Special report: Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year 2014
- Traffic report: Oddly familiar
- Recent research: Most important people; respiratory reliability; academic attitudes
Automated revert
Sorry, I reverted back this rollback because the section is essentially POV, for the reason I've previously described in the last edit and I've repeated in this one. Regards. Lenore (talk) 21:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
- a woman who reports being raped is not a rape victim. these infos are tendentious. please stop your vandalisms Lenore (talk) 10:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- My edits are certainly not vandalism; maybe you should read the page to see how Misplaced Pages uses the term. And my starting point is to take seriously allegations of rape, not to follow a repressive regime in stigmatising and criminalising the complainants. RolandR (talk) 11:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)