Archives

1 (December 2007 – June 2009) 2 (July 2009 – October 2010) 3 (November 2010 – March 2011) 4 (April 2011 – August 2011) 5 (September 2011 – April 2012) 6 (May 2012 – December 2012) 7 (January 2013 – July 2013) 8 (August 2013 – December 2013)

Percent Illustrated^†

Percent Articled^†

Percent Start+^†

• Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Progress#Oregon listings

--Another Believer _(Talk) 03:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I have favor to ask, but if you are too busy on wiki or IRL then just let me know. Can you possibly archive the events from WikiWomen's History Month and make an archive page like you did for 2012? This would help me so much in preparing to announce the third year of WWHM. Thanks Jason for considering this :) SarahStierch (talk) 19:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@SarahStierch: No problem! I am juggling a few things at the moment, but I will do this for you very soon. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks. I just expanded the resources section and have to go back to worky things (aka not fun Wikipedia stuff, well, not editing that is :) ). I appreciate it! SarahStierch (talk) 19:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@SarahStierch: I hope this is what you had in mind. I just copied content from the main WW page and pasted it on an archive page for 2013. Feel free to change the tense throughout the text, if you prefer. Also, I was not sure if some of the "upcoming online" content, still on the main WW page, should also be transferred over. Of course, you are welcome to make changes, but at least now a 2013 archive page exists and is categorized correctly. Hope that helps! --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Portlander
	Congratulations on getting another article to the main page! All of the Pacific Northwest thanks you for your edits. I give you this barnstar displaying a famous landmark from the city that owes you so much! Cheers. PrairieKid (talk) 00:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on getting Weather Machine on the Main Page for today! Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:03, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I did not nominate the article for a Main Page appearance, but I'm flattered to see my work featured! --Another Believer _(Talk) 02:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Writer's Barnstar
		In recognition of your writing of wonderful articles (and your encouragement of other editors to do the same), I award you this barnstar. Wikipedia is better for your contributions. Neelix (talk) 02:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, shucks. Thank you, David! --Another Believer _(Talk) 02:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon Weather Machine
Thank you, Jason, for quality articles such as Weather Machine, 10 Songs for the New Depression, lists of Grammy Awards and articles for project Oregon, "always a pleasure to read", for maps, images and a clear user page. - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, Gerda Arendt! --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year AB. :) How are you? Hey I nominated the above article for GA after much expansion. Would you care to take a look and perform a a basic copy-edit please? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:56, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@IndianBio: Happy new year! I made a few minor edits, but the article looks good overall. I changed the way the personnel are displayed, which you may or may not like. Also, in the Howard Stern section, you might want to add another inline citation immediately following his quotes. Great job on the expansion! --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And I really like the way you changed the credits section, much much better. :) —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 16:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, good. Thanks! Let me know when you feel like tag-teaming ArtRave and/or the Thanksgiving special! --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:37, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully this weekend I will be able to start. Will copy them in my sanboxes and then we both can defile them as much as we want. Lol. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is fun. I'll see if I can find anything else. Finetooth (talk) 22:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly for expanding my Roseland Theater article. You might want to help touch up my Antrim Forum article also. I suck at references. Evangp (talk) 00:10, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Evangp: No problem. The article was chosen as a collaboration of the week(/month?) for WikiProject Oregon. It's been a fun one to work on, and User:Finetooth is equally responsible for the expansion. :) --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Voila!!!!!!. Start my lord. . —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 15:28, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• @IndianBio: Sorry for the delay, IndianBio. Thanks for setting up the page. I've been out of town and busy on-wiki with other projects. Is there a reason you prefer to work in sandboxes for existing articles? Just curious. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a problem AB, and yes I do like working in the sandboxes since the usual IP cruft can be avoided and no chance of edit conflicts at all. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:33, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM – Volume III, Issue XII, December 2013 Headlines France report: GlamWiki Toolset; local actions in Rennes Germany report: New year, new GLAM contacts! Sweden report: Old ship and new solutions UK report: UK report for December 2013 USA report: University of Colorado Museum of Natural History; GLAM-Wiki in New York City Open Access report: NISO cites GLAM Newsletter; Adoption of CC BY 4.0; Two years Open Access File of the Day Calendar: January's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:08, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rimsky-Korsakoffee House you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 03:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tragic Lovers you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 03:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pink Martini, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Rimsky-Korsakoffee House you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Rimsky-Korsakoffee House for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 21:22, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tragic Lovers you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Tragic Lovers for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 03:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Civility Barnstar
		I'm very happy to know that humility and knowledge are coexisting in you. You truely have a beautiful mind with a beautiful heart. Thanks for being the way you are. Seabuckthorn ♥ 15:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, shucks. Thank you! --Another Believer _(Talk)

The article Tragic Lovers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tragic Lovers for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on this one too. You seem to be a whirlwind. Finetooth (talk) 17:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Rimsky-Korsakoffee House you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rimsky-Korsakoffee House for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on this one, which was fun. Finetooth (talk) 17:45, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'm addicted to PDX oddities! --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, AB. Although you didn't ask for a reply to your post here last month (now moved to your archive), I always did intend to reply, but I've just had very little time for any Wikipedia editing over the last month (just look at how few contributions I've made this month), especially non-urgent ones or ones taking more than a few seconds. Sorry to disappoint you with my lack of interest in participating. I definitely agree that "having pictures from all times of the year can be valuable". However, photo campaigns that are successful (generate a lot of new photo uploads for Wikipedia) end up, by their very nature, creating a disproportionate amount of content from one time of the year. Although that's not a problem for indoor subjects or campaigns focused on a particular time of year (e.g. Christmas), it is a drawback for campaigns for photos of outdoor subjects such as the Portland Streetcar. In the winter, all the trees are bare of leaves, the sky gray, colors dull, etc. (True, bare trees can actually help in views of certain historic buildings that are heavily obscured by trees, but those are the exception.)

That gives you a little more info. on why I was slightly critical of the timing. However, there's another issue for me – and this one carries no criticism at all, but I figure you might want to know. Although I was a big contributor in the Wikipedia Takes Portland 2013 campaign, I'm generally not going to be interested in additional photo campaigns for this reason: I'm mainly only interested in uploading photos to Commons when there are gaps in coverage, or when I can provide photos that are much better than the existing ones. Although I uploaded 91 images in that NRHP-focused campaign, almost every one of the buildings I photographed were ones that either had no photo available for WP or only one or two relatively poor photos. Except for NRHP-listed Portland bridges (which have additional interest for me, as a bridge fan), I didn't upload large numbers of photos of individual buildings, because the articles (or lists) only needed one or two photos, and I was concentrating on uploading photos which could (mostly) be immediately 'put to use' in a WP article or list. This should not be interpreted as critical of anyone who uploads 30 photos of a single building, not at all, particularly when the photos are high-quality ones such as yours typically are. But that's not something I'm interested in doing. I don't currently see any major "gap" in the photo coverage for the article about the Portland Streetcar (I've already filled any major gaps there), and so I'm not interested in uploading a lot of photos and probably won't upload any right now. SJ Morg (talk) 08:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• @SJ Morg: Thank you for the additional feedback. It is always good Wikipedians' preferences and how they like to contribute to the project. Right now, one photographer and I are having fun putting together these photo campaigns and it is always nice if our work leverages additional participation. Let me know if you have any ideas for photo campaign, or other wiki-activities for WikiProject Oregon. For the month of February, we will focus on the Kenton district and Oregon's coffee culture. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rufus Wainwright: Live from the Artists Den may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [Love Over and Over]]'' (1982). [[Mark Ronson]], who [[Record producer|produced]] ''Out of the Game]]'', is featured on guitar on "Bitter Tears".

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

--Another Believer _(Talk) 22:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orchestral Works by Tomas Svoboda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Celeste (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

--Another Believer _(Talk) 16:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Low Countries as seen from space Hello, Another Believer. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Low Countries Previous selections: Nordic art • Gopher (animal) Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 01:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC) • [reply]

Thank you for the kind words!--Khanate General ☪ talk ^{project mongol conquests} 11:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pleasure to do that article. :) Do you like the song? I did not like it at first but now I do. Have you listened to its pop remix? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit, I am not enjoying the new album very much, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate quality coverage here on Wikipedia. I'll have to check out the remix version. Thanks for spending time on the article, and others! --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I still prefer 4 among all her albums. 4 is just magical for me. This self-tilted album is also good but very sexual. Lol. And by the way, I am not referring to the remix with Azealia Banks and company but to this actually. Such a bop. :D Bye, take care. P.S I will spend more time on that "Partition" article. I really want to do something special with it. Once all the information is present, I will proceed with a major copy-edit. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great! Looking forward to seeing the final product. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey Village High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) That was my first take on the edit as well, but see Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News Photography which identifies this person as the 2008 winner. In my mind, the mention there makes them sufficiently notable that a listing here is not unreasonable. Dwpaul ^Talk 21:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I would still argue that an article should exist before being included, but I suppose a redlinked name might have to substitute in the interim. --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

--Another Believer _(Talk) 22:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Rufus Wainwright - Me and Liza.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 01:05, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

(I think.) --Another Believer _(Talk) 01:15, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Me and Liza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

--Another Believer _(Talk) 17:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• 12george1 (submissions) and TropicalAnalystwx13 (submissions) were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
• WonderBoy1998 (submissions) scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Wikipedia:Featured topics/She Wolf.
• TheAustinMan (submissions) scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
• Igordebraga (submissions) has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables of account creation statistics
• Wikipedia growth article

Thank you so much for your help! Krystalsouth (talk) 22:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Krystalsouth: Thanks for sharing these links, and a bigger THANK YOU for helping to organize the Art+Feminism meetup at PSU. Let's do it again soon! --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:03, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The COTW award from WPOR.
		Thanks for leading the way in last week's Collaboration of the Week! Actually the Collaboration of the Month. Hopefully the article will make GA. Nice work. Jsayre64 (talk) 22:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jsayre64! --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The life sciences involve the study of living organisms Hello, Another Believer. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Life sciences Previous selections: Low Countries • Nordic art Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 02:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC) • [reply]

Thanks for your part in organizing Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland/ArtAndFeminism 2014. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry: Thanks, Lane. The Portland event was very successful. I estimate that we had at least 40 participants over the course of the six-hour meetup. Many articles were created and improved by new, and highly engaged, contributors. I hope we can organize similar events in the future. (Also, your cup of coffee is very fitting, given one of this month's photo campaigns for WikiProject Oregon!) --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Roseland Theater you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 15:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	In recognition of your support and tutoring of the 40 women and men who turned out for the February 1 Art + Feminism edit-a-thon at PSU. We are so grateful and learned so much. Thank you for your time, patience, and enthusiasm. Lradon (talk) 20:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lradon: Thanks so much! I had a great time and would love to help at future events as well. Let's organize another one soon! --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Yes! I second @Lradon. Saturday's Art + Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at PSU was absolutely a success due to your generous teaching and tutoring. THANK YOU! Jrarmbrust (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Jrarmbrust: Wow, thanks so much! I am happy to receive so much thanks for doing what I love. Keep on editing, and let's organize another edit-athon very soon! --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:36, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Roseland Theater you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Roseland Theater for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 17:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, AB, for sharing the credit, and thanks to Seabuckthorn for conducting the review. Finetooth (talk) 17:54, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Finetooth: Of course! Thanks for your work on this article. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Another Believer, I am writing up a story on the ArtAndFeminism meetups from last week for In the Media in this week's Signpost, and was wondering if you could give a brief comment on how it went/future plans with it/success or failure/etc. I am pinging several users in hopes that one will reply by the deadline, which is likely some time tonight. Thanks in advance. Go Phightins! 19:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• @Go Phightins!: I am not sure I have time at the moment to provide summary of the entire campaign, but this link might be helpful: Wikipedia:ArtAndFeminism 2014/Outcomes. I'd be happy to offer a summary of the Portland, Oregon event, if you are interested (or see this section of the Outcomes page). In Portland, I estimate there were at least 40 participants who attended the event, which was six hours long and was held at Portland State University. Nearly a dozen Wikipedia articles were created, and more than twice that number were improved. Participants had many of their questions answered and were supplied educational brochures created by the Wikimedia Foundation. There was great interest in organizing similar events in the future, and I've heard there are already plans to host another arts edit-athon in April. I hope that helps! I would recommend reaching out to User:OR drohowa for more information about the campaign overall. -Another Believer _(Talk) 20:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for creating the new Coffee in Portland, Oregon article, and expanding Wikipedia's coverage about coffee- and Portland, Oregon-related topics. Northamerica1000(talk) 03:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Northamerica1000! Much work remains on the article, but at least it's there for future expansion. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you expand it in time, then you can nominate it for DYK and get some exposure. FYI. (Lihaas (talk) 19:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Thanks for the reminder, Lihaas. I find the DYK process a bit bothersome, so I tend to stay away. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Just left a note on the talk page in regards to the emopty section. (Lihaas (talk) 19:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Thanks. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article CC Slaughters 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/CC Slaughters until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. KDS4444^Talk 04:45, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a copy edit of Roseland Theater. Congrats on the GA. Let me know if you have any questions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed your edits and have no complaints or concerns. Thank you very much for your time and assistance. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This staircase is an impossible object Hello, Another Believer. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Impossible object Previous selections: Life sciences • Low Countries Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC) • [reply]

This Month in GLAM – Volume IV, Issue I, January 2014 Headlines France report: Public Domain Day; photographs Germany report: WMDE-GLAM-Highlights in 2014 Netherlands report: New Years Reception; 550 years States General; Content donation University Museum; Wikipedians in Residence; OpenGLAM Benchmark Survey Sweden report: Digitization; list creation Switzerland report: The Wikipedians in Residence of the Swiss National Library have started their work UK report: Voices from the BBC Archives plus Zoos, coins and Poets USA report: GLAM-Wiki activities in the USA Open Access report: Open Access Media Importer; Open Access File of the Day Calendar: February's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Model of a German SAR-Lupe reconnaissance satellite inside a Cosmos-3M rocket Hello, Another Believer. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Reconnaissance satellite Previous selections: Impossible object • Life sciences Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Evad37 (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC) • [reply]

Please undo your revert. Your statement of "This has been discussed on the talk page; you may discuss further there if you wish" is not true as it was not discussed at all. And I made relevant points on the talk page and no one contradicted me or made a comment so please undo your revert. Thanks! 184.58.24.163 (talk) 21:05, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:The Sound of Music Live!#Musical numbers section. Thanks. --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You apparently did not read my statement as I commented there. Here so you can see:

I don't think it is redundant as it is a remake of the play and not to mention that there are songs that are not included on the soundtrack but are featured in the "show" and it should be noted and what better then having a full list of the musical numbers? 184.58.24.163 (talk) 23:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to point out that both the play's page and the film's page list their musical numbers and this is based loosely off both of them so again how is this redundant? 184.58.24.163 (talk) 23:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one commented or contradicted me so please undo your revert. 184.58.24.163 (talk) 21:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did read your comment. You will see that another contributor also thought the information was redundant. Please keep the discussion of this article on its talk page. Thank you. --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't if no one is going to comment. Thanks. And may I ask how do you intend to mention about the reprises that are in the broadcast but not on the soundtrack? If you do not there needs to be a musical numbers section. 184.58.24.163 (talk) 21:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two people agreeing is not a discussion. Sorry. Your reverting saying it has been discussed is wrong but whatever it is your page do whatever you want it will never get any better as there is missing information like a list of all the songs performed in the broadcast which you keep removing as there are songs not featured on the soundtrack and "further discussion" is not an option if you are going to keep reverting and not make a statement on the talk page so please do not tell me to take it there if you are not willing to discuss it there. 184.58.24.163 (talk) 10:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see the article as mine and I consider the value of your opinion equal to my own. We happen to disagree about the inclusion of certain content, and someone else has agreed with my point of view. Discussions can always continue and content can be returned to the article if consensus determines it should be included. Please keep discussion on the article's talk page and not here. Thank you. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday, March 8 - Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon at the University of Oregon - You are invited!

Come celebrate Women's History Month at the University of Oregon in Eugene, Oregon, on March 8! This event is hosted by the Fembot, in collaboration with ASOU Women's Center, the Center for the Study of Women in Society, the School of Journalism and Communication, and the UO Libraries. Please bring your laptop and be prepared to edit about women and women's history! The event is March 8 2014, from 1-4 PM, at the University of Oregon. You must RSVP here - see you there! SarahStierch (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@SarahStierch: Wonderful! Be sure to send invitations to Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland/ArtAndFeminism 2014 participants. I am happy to ping them via email and Facebook as well. Assuming no work/schedule conflict, I look forward to attending! --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your enthusiastic comments about Louise Bryant. I, too, think it would pass GA without much trouble. Not sure I have the patience and stamina for FA; I can see problems (a GIF for the lead photo, for example), an incomplete bibliography, and disagreements among the biographers that I would rather not spend more time sorting out. I will probably try GA, though. As for Mary's Club, I'm at the end of interesting things I can find in the old Oregonians. I wonder if anyone has written a book about strip clubs that might mention Mary's Club. It would be good to find an RS based far from Portland, but I don't know if one exists. Finetooth (talk) 20:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful (re: Bryant good article nomination and your work on Mary's Club). Thank you. --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VAMOS says "The names of less well-known artists may not be suitable disambiguation terms", and edits like this and this are unhelpful to the reader as the artists are totally obscure. Better to leave them as they are, or if you must tinker, move to "Person (Place statue)". Consistent with what exactly? Johnbod (talk) 17:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: According to Wikipedia:VAMOS#Works_of_art, "If the title is not very specific, or refers to a common subject, add the surname of the artist in brackets afterwards, e.g. Reading the Letter (Picasso). It is generally better to disambiguate by the artist's name than by medium, as there may be other paintings or sculptures of the same name by other artists. If the artist painted several works with the same, or very similar, titles, add the location of the work if it is in a public collection." To me, this means to disambiguate using the artist's last name. I see the bit about lesser-known artists, too. You are welcome to move them back if you think it best. I just prefer works to be disambiguated by artist. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You missed "generally" (I wrote both bits btw). Most artworks with their own articles are by famous or at least well-known artists, but statues of famous people are often or usually exceptions to this. It's not about what you "prefer" but about what readers will find useful, and "(Villani)" is totally meaningless to almost everyone. Thanks very much for the offer to clean up after you, but I think I'll decline. If you wanted to do something useful you should be adding "statue" or "statue by" to many of these. Johnbod (talk) 17:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so we happen to disagree and since I am fine with the artist name being used as a disambiguator, I'll let things be. Thanks. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to be rading here that Donald De Lue is not a famous sculptor? Or even "totally obscure"? Hardly. "statue" or "statue by" is silly in the case of any work by him. Though we (wikipedia) has him with a space between De and Lue nar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]