User talk:SusunW/Archive 39
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:SusunW. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 35 | ← | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | → | Archive 45 |
DYK for Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková
On 31 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková established the first girls' secondary school in Moravia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková), 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.
valereee (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for another good one! Did you know that I have a tenor in the set, and two articles I reviewed? I would have written about the soprano but she had an article already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda Arendt, it nearly wasn't as it got pulled from the front page queue once before because someone didn't read the discussion on the nomination page. Had it not been for Filelakeshoe's efforts while I was unavailable and on a plane, it would likely not have run. I really, really am discouraged about contributing to DYK and cannot figure out how you stay so positive and contribute there, when so many seem to try to keep stuff from appearing rather than working towards presenting quality material. SusunW (talk) 16:53, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- If you watch the discussions, it's often tedious, but I do it for the subjects. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| Great work on Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková! I found the article fascinating and it is clear how much work went into it. Congratulations on a job well done. :) Ganesha811 (talk) 19:14, 31 October 2019 (UTC) |
- Thank you so much Ganesha811. I appreciate you taking on the review of Sara Braun, as well. So many fascinating women to research and write about, so little time, but I love learning about them while I am writing. SusunW (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- SusunW, yup! I recently came across Mary van Kleeck via the random pages button and found her fascinating, so I was able to dig up some sources to expand the article - she did so much cool stuff. Sara Braun is, I think, even more interesting - I won't have a ton of time until Sunday to finish up the initial review, but I'm looking forward to getting to it! :) Ganesha811 (talk) 19:34, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Very cool. I often come across my "next victim", while writing another article. ;) No rush on the review. I'd rather it be thorough and when you have time to do it, so we end up improving, if things need clarified/fixing. SusunW (talk) 19:45, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- SusunW, yup! I recently came across Mary van Kleeck via the random pages button and found her fascinating, so I was able to dig up some sources to expand the article - she did so much cool stuff. Sara Braun is, I think, even more interesting - I won't have a ton of time until Sunday to finish up the initial review, but I'm looking forward to getting to it! :) Ganesha811 (talk) 19:34, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková
On 25 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Zdeňka Wiedermannová-Motyčková), 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.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 | |
| ... with thanks from QAI |
Thank you for article improvement in October! - I have a peer review open, DYK? Clara Schumann, 60 years of recitals, and what a life! See my talk today for great music that we sang yesterday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
- Every time you ask me for help, Gerda Arendt, it seems I am busy with real world stuff, so today, I took the time to review Schumann. I think I am not good at doing reviews, as it makes me very uncomfortable to be critical, but I hope that it helps. If you have any questions about what I wrote, just ask. And thank you for your constant encouragement. It really does mean a lot. SusunW (talk) 23:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
- First: good wishes for real life! We just sang an outstanding concert! - Next: don't feel obliged, - it's just that my experience with quality articles about women is low, and yours high, and I'd like to profit - for the article. Next: no time stress. She just was in focus for her bicentenary, had the google doole, and still only 7k views that day (but 10k+ with the piano concerto DYK). Going further is an act of defiance ;) - 18 September, - long time to go. Defiance: I was unhappy that Márta Kurtág, another woman who played the piano for more than 60 years - didn't appear on In the news (ITN), because if Márta Kurtág had been an American man, she would have appeared, but she is an Hungarian woman.. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you. You make me smile. I am sorry that Kurtág could not be on ITN. I am 100% in harmony with your statement "I didn't want to create any rule(z), just ignore one or two". It is really hard to write about women. Much moreso than men because even today, the sources are much more sparse. SusunW (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you, and also for the courage to enter the first comments to Clara Schumann's PR! Will reply, but still have a DYK to nominate, after expanding. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
- Your feedback is valuable! Regarding name, there was am RfC. I miss John who insisted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:45, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- I always find it weird when people insist that it is confusing to refer to people by whatever name they used in a period of time. People I went to high school with, call me by the name I used then. If they were good enough friends to continue a relationship, they know the name I use now. No one is confused by how different people refer to me. I know from speaking to many other women, this is the same for them, so I can only infer that it isn't confusing, but is used argumentatively as if it were. I find it totally bizarre for someone who does not know me to refer to me by my first name. Thus, it would never occur to me to refer to a biographical subject in that manner (male or female or non-binary/fluid). Wikipedia gets hung up on so many things that I just don't understand, as they are not logical. I didn't know John, but he and DGG expressed my thoughts on the subject well. SusunW (talk) 16:28, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Agree. That talk and a few similar ones may have driven him away, - so sad. Read his statement if you have time. Or GFHandel's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Today, I am proud of a Márta on the Main page, finally! - Here's my ideal candidate for arbcom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
- I always find it weird when people insist that it is confusing to refer to people by whatever name they used in a period of time. People I went to high school with, call me by the name I used then. If they were good enough friends to continue a relationship, they know the name I use now. No one is confused by how different people refer to me. I know from speaking to many other women, this is the same for them, so I can only infer that it isn't confusing, but is used argumentatively as if it were. I find it totally bizarre for someone who does not know me to refer to me by my first name. Thus, it would never occur to me to refer to a biographical subject in that manner (male or female or non-binary/fluid). Wikipedia gets hung up on so many things that I just don't understand, as they are not logical. I didn't know John, but he and DGG expressed my thoughts on the subject well. SusunW (talk) 16:28, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you. You make me smile. I am sorry that Kurtág could not be on ITN. I am 100% in harmony with your statement "I didn't want to create any rule(z), just ignore one or two". It is really hard to write about women. Much moreso than men because even today, the sources are much more sparse. SusunW (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
- First: good wishes for real life! We just sang an outstanding concert! - Next: don't feel obliged, - it's just that my experience with quality articles about women is low, and yours high, and I'd like to profit - for the article. Next: no time stress. She just was in focus for her bicentenary, had the google doole, and still only 7k views that day (but 10k+ with the piano concerto DYK). Going further is an act of defiance ;) - 18 September, - long time to go. Defiance: I was unhappy that Márta Kurtág, another woman who played the piano for more than 60 years - didn't appear on In the news (ITN), because if Márta Kurtág had been an American man, she would have appeared, but she is an Hungarian woman.. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Sara Braun
The article Sara Braun you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Sara Braun for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 23:41, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Rosika Schwimmer
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rosika Schwimmer 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 Fiamh -- Fiamh (talk) 00:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Rosika Schwimmer
The article Rosika Schwimmer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rosika Schwimmer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Fiamh -- Fiamh (talk) 08:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- Fiamh, thanks! That was really fast. Appreciate the review. SusunW (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for your DYK review of Catriona Ida Macleod! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 18:24, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- You are very welcome, QuakerSquirrel. Enjoyed reading the article. SusunW (talk) 18:55, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.
Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.
The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.
Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
A cup of coffee for you!
|
Thanks for your development of the inclusion criteria for academics at Wikipedia:Draft rewrite of Notability (academics). I am also working on this issue at d:Wikidata:Scholia. I think you have the right idea about the direction of the future. I told your collaborator Megalibrarygirl the same thing. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:41, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
- Thank you, Bluerasberry. It is difficult to change wikipedia guidelines in the direction of knowledge equity. Maybe someday, we'll make progress in that direction. At present, it seems only possible to have discussion, which may change a few minds, but has not yielded and real policy change. SusunW (talk) 16:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Feminist organization
Hello! I know there is never a shortage of topics to write about...but if you are ever looking for a feminist organization to expand, I recently came across the Women's Equity Action League. I don't know much about its history; it appears to had been a relatively short lived effort. Thanks for all you do to foster the inclusion of women on Wikipedia! Best, TJMSmith (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- TJMSmith, I'll look at it and see what I can do. SusunW (talk) 21:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- I was able to remove the tag for sourcing at any rate ;). Lots of available RS. If I have time tomorrow, I may work on it a bit more. SusunW (talk) 23:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- TJMSmith, I think it is respectable now ;). Thanks for pointing me in that direction. They actually did some really amazing stuff, in spite of taking a "head in the sand" approach to so many women's issues. Man I wish that bot that moves the authority control stuff to Wikidata was still working. SusunW (talk) 18:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- It's certainly a more informative article. I had a feeling expanding it would generate more red links to notable women. I added the identifiers to Wikidata...but a bot would be even better. Thanks Susun! TJMSmith (talk) 18:26, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- TJMSmith, I think it is respectable now ;). Thanks for pointing me in that direction. They actually did some really amazing stuff, in spite of taking a "head in the sand" approach to so many women's issues. Man I wish that bot that moves the authority control stuff to Wikidata was still working. SusunW (talk) 18:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- I was able to remove the tag for sourcing at any rate ;). Lots of available RS. If I have time tomorrow, I may work on it a bit more. SusunW (talk) 23:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- TJMSmith, I'll look at it and see what I can do. SusunW (talk) 21:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Copy edit of Annie MacDonald Langstaff
Hi, SusunW! I did some light copy edit on Annie MacDonald Langstaff. Here are a couple tiny notes ahead of the GA review:
head partner Samuel William Jacobs, K.C.
What doesK.C.
mean? If it's unimportant to the article, it could probably be omitted.That year [] became the first woman to serve as a court stenographer in the June Special Session of the Montreal Criminal Court.
Missing the subject here.
Great article and an interesting read! – Reidgreg (talk) 17:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Reidgreg K.C. is King's Counsel, I've included a link, very well-known distinction in the period. Good catch on the lack of a subject. A prior edit changed the sentence from "Langstaff graduated in 1914 with a Bachelor of Civil Law, as first in her class in both criminal and company law, finishing fourth overall with first-class honours and that year became the first woman to serve as a court stenographer in the June Special Session of the Montreal Criminal Court" to the less run-on format that is there now, but in the process, eliminated a subject. Thanks! SusunW (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Ah, I'm always embarrassed when I make a slip like that. I really should have checked his linked biography for King's Council. BTW, I'd remove the 'full point' between K and C (MOS:ACRO). – Reidgreg (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Reidgreg, I am never embarrassed when I make a mistake. In my mind, the millions of times we do something right teach us nothing, but when we make an error, it allows us to grow. I embrace my screw ups, though admittedly, I must investigate the root of them so that I know how it happened :). Glad to take your advice on the punctuation of KC, have no idea how it is typically expressed. SusunW (talk) 18:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- It can be surprising that the English language has only practices, not rules. Hence, differing styles. You shouldn't have to concern yourself with most of the MOS, I just like to see articles get that polish after all the difficult content work is done. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Reidgreg, I am never embarrassed when I make a mistake. In my mind, the millions of times we do something right teach us nothing, but when we make an error, it allows us to grow. I embrace my screw ups, though admittedly, I must investigate the root of them so that I know how it happened :). Glad to take your advice on the punctuation of KC, have no idea how it is typically expressed. SusunW (talk) 18:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Ah, I'm always embarrassed when I make a slip like that. I really should have checked his linked biography for King's Council. BTW, I'd remove the 'full point' between K and C (MOS:ACRO). – Reidgreg (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Reidgreg K.C. is King's Counsel, I've included a link, very well-known distinction in the period. Good catch on the lack of a subject. A prior edit changed the sentence from "Langstaff graduated in 1914 with a Bachelor of Civil Law, as first in her class in both criminal and company law, finishing fourth overall with first-class honours and that year became the first woman to serve as a court stenographer in the June Special Session of the Montreal Criminal Court" to the less run-on format that is there now, but in the process, eliminated a subject. Thanks! SusunW (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
December events with WIR
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge award
|
The Bronze Maple Leaf Award | |
| This maple leaf is awarded to SusunW for writing the biography Annie MacDonald Langstaff during the third year of The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 20:09, 26 November 2019 (UTC) |
Also, good luck with the GA review! – Reidgreg (talk) 20:09, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for your work on Catriona Macleod! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 01:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- No problem QuakerSquirrel She easily passes PROF and it was a pretty simple fix to find a couple more references. SusunW (talk) 05:19, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
In appreciation
|
The Featured Article Medal | |
| By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of your working long and hard to bring a large, complex and important article to featured status. Impressive. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC) |
- Gog the Mild You know as well as anyone, that that would certainly have never happened without your nurturing me along (okay, and sometimes prodding me ;) gently). I cannot say enough how much I learned from the process and I thank you profusely for all of the coaching and support you have given since the article was first conceived a year ago (11 months). Along the way, you also introduced me to a bunch of editors I would probably never have encountered before, as well. It truly does take a village to grow a wp editor and I am very appreciative of you and your help. SusunW (talk) 18:19, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
- Congratulations, SusunW! Great effort. And well done to Gog for offering a helping hand. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:46, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- And thanks to you both for reviewing it twice. So, Peacemaker67, I'm curious, is pacifism part of military history or not? My husband and I have debated this for days. SusunW (talk) 04:58, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- No worries, it was a pleasure. I think there is definitely a thread of pacifism amongst some veterans, perhaps due to having seen the brutal realities of war, knowing that it rarely solves anything, and not wishing it on others. Not true pacifism, I suppose, but a reluctance to engage in war unless absolutely necessary. The number of Australian Vietnam veterans who demonstrated against the Iraq War is an indication of that sort of view. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- So far as MilHist is concerned, pacifism is included, as are all of the anti-war movements. Although tagging of them seems to be patchy. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:37, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
- No worries, it was a pleasure. I think there is definitely a thread of pacifism amongst some veterans, perhaps due to having seen the brutal realities of war, knowing that it rarely solves anything, and not wishing it on others. Not true pacifism, I suppose, but a reluctance to engage in war unless absolutely necessary. The number of Australian Vietnam veterans who demonstrated against the Iraq War is an indication of that sort of view. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- And thanks to you both for reviewing it twice. So, Peacemaker67, I'm curious, is pacifism part of military history or not? My husband and I have debated this for days. SusunW (talk) 04:58, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- Congratulations, SusunW! Great effort. And well done to Gog for offering a helping hand. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:46, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
You are now eligible to apply for a Four Award and a Triple Crown. Can I encourage you to do so?
PS What are you nominating next for FA? You have plenty of quality articles to choose from. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:37, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
- LOL, Gog the Mild. I have hardly caught my breath from the last one. The discussion came up because I was working on Rosika Schwimmer, an important suffragist from Hungary, internationalist and pacifist. She ended up being a "woman without a country" and impacted US immigration law. Had war never existed, her career would have taken an entirely different trajectory, so it seemed to me that at the very least, military history applied, but my husband argued that it was the opposite of military history, i.e. anti-military. (We love debate :)! ) Not sure what might be my next target, am currently trying to finish up a Japanese pacifist, turned supporter of Japan's WWII expansionism. As I've never heard of the above two awards, will have to look at the links. I also have about 8 articles nominated for GA, so am hoping to clear out that queue a bit. SusunW (talk) 21:57, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
No sympathy from me - I currently have two articles at FAC and hope to have to have a third up by the end of the week. The area you work in needs more visibility and recognition. (You know that I realise. (Or even: I realise that you know that.))- I shall attempt to press a definitive answer out of the MilHist team.
- Fascinating: the next year the Nobel peace prize went to a local hero of mine, Philip Noel-Baker, MP for the place I live.
- Get your applications in. I shall personally fast track them.
- Want to pick one of those GANs for me to have a look at? Preferably the one most likely to go on to FA.
- Gog the Mild (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
- Oldest to newest nominations pending: Marie Rennotte (Belgium/Brazil), Annie MacDonald Langstaff (Canada), Nino Tkeshelashvili (Georgia), Maria Grzegorzewska (Poland), Martha Watts (US/Brazil), Thung Sin Nio (Indonesia/The Netherlands), Alma Sundquist (Sweden), Marie Lang (Austria). Mine usually linger for a while because I tend to do international women, thus not a lot of English sourcing, so I indicated their places of origin. If you want to take one on, that would be lovely. Rennotte, seems to me to be FA material, but what do I know? By the way, I did the 4 Award thing, but I am not sure what the triple crown is. It's pretty confusing to me. What's the criteria? SusunW (talk) 22:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
- My congratulations too, Susun, for all your efforts on Inter-Allied Women's Conference. It's now something of a masterpiece for covering the influence of women in the period covered. November 11 was certainly a good date for it to receive recognition. Now it remains to be decided when it should be featured on the main page. Any ideas?--Ipigott (talk) 15:51, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Ipigott. I truly could not have done it without the support of many. Specifically, your continued indulgence of assisting me with copyediting and translation "services" on almost every article I write, gives me the freedom to work on subjects I might not otherwise tackle. I don't know when would be the best date, but possibly for its 101st anniversary, Feb. 10th? Maybe by then Adam Cuerden will have finished restoring the lead photograph, which would be lovely. SusunW (talk) 16:00, 14 November 2019 (UTC)clear
- Should have. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 15:25, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Yay! Adam Cuerden. Want a Puerto Rican suffragist for your work? SusunW (talk) 15:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Sure! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 05:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Just finished an article about Milagros Benet de Mewton, Adam Cuerden. I love the first photo because that dress is to die for, but the original image is probably not stellar to work from. The other one, though, is from the LOC. SusunW (talk) 05:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Kinda caught up in a few holiday things, but I WOULD like to get four more images by the end of the year for an even 100. I'm going to try... Might have to do a couple easier ones to make sure I get the number up there before the 20th, after which they'd promote in the new year. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 11:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- Just finished an article about Milagros Benet de Mewton, Adam Cuerden. I love the first photo because that dress is to die for, but the original image is probably not stellar to work from. The other one, though, is from the LOC. SusunW (talk) 05:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Sure! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 05:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Yay! Adam Cuerden. Want a Puerto Rican suffragist for your work? SusunW (talk) 15:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Should have. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 15:25, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Ipigott. I truly could not have done it without the support of many. Specifically, your continued indulgence of assisting me with copyediting and translation "services" on almost every article I write, gives me the freedom to work on subjects I might not otherwise tackle. I don't know when would be the best date, but possibly for its 101st anniversary, Feb. 10th? Maybe by then Adam Cuerden will have finished restoring the lead photograph, which would be lovely. SusunW (talk) 16:00, 14 November 2019 (UTC)clear
Four Award
|
Four Award | |
| Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Inter-Allied Women's Conference. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC) |
Woo! Pretty. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:05, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Well now that was all you, Gog the Mild. I didn't even know such things existed. Do you perchance have a minute to spare to "Britishize" (or is that Britishise?) Women's suffrage in India? Though Indian English is different, it does typically follow British spelling. If not, no worries. SusunW (talk) 16:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Done, as you have noticed. It seems a bit low on images, maps, graphs etc; but pretty good. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Working on that, Gog the Mild. It's really hard. Mostly what you get on the net are British women of Indian descent who were involved in the British suffrage struggle. I have actually found two images of Indian suffragists in India, but cannot determine if they were published. Given that one is of the Montagu delegates and the other is of most of the women from the Constituent Assembly, they can be dated and are free in India, but whether they can be used in the US depends upon publishing. I have a friend in Mumbai who is trying to help see if more images are available on that side of the pond and if these two were published. Hadn't even thought of maps. That would be helpful, as a visual of the differences in the Raj provinces and princely estates (around 600 of them) will explain the magnitude of what women had to accomplish to gain their political rights. SusunW (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes. I had a quick scratch round and couldn't find anything. Some lovely maps in Women in India. but not one on suffrage. You could post a request at the Map Workshop Gog the Mild (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for that Gog the Mild. Was looking at this one, but [1] it has far too much detail (rivers, mountains, deserts, well, lines) for my purposes. Hard to see which provinces and kingdoms were where. It may be that I need them to make it less busy, but maybe there is already such a thing. So I'll search for bit. SusunW (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- File:IndianEmpireCeylon1915.jpg? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- You totally rock! SusunW (talk) 17:17, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Very true. Or File:British india.png? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:20, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- (though I would prefer a }:) as you are indeed devilishly awesome). I was looking at the 2nd one when you posted your first find. It, however, doesn't include Burma, which was definitely part and the colors of your 1915 find, seem easier to delineate to me. SusunW (talk) 17:24, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Happy to be of service ma'am. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:57, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Very true.
- You totally rock! SusunW (talk) 17:17, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- File:IndianEmpireCeylon1915.jpg? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for that Gog the Mild. Was looking at this one, but [1] it has far too much detail (rivers, mountains, deserts, well, lines) for my purposes. Hard to see which provinces and kingdoms were where. It may be that I need them to make it less busy, but maybe there is already such a thing. So I'll search for bit. SusunW (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes. I had a quick scratch round and couldn't find anything. Some lovely maps in Women in India. but not one on suffrage. You could post a request at the Map Workshop Gog the Mild (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Working on that, Gog the Mild. It's really hard. Mostly what you get on the net are British women of Indian descent who were involved in the British suffrage struggle. I have actually found two images of Indian suffragists in India, but cannot determine if they were published. Given that one is of the Montagu delegates and the other is of most of the women from the Constituent Assembly, they can be dated and are free in India, but whether they can be used in the US depends upon publishing. I have a friend in Mumbai who is trying to help see if more images are available on that side of the pond and if these two were published. Hadn't even thought of maps. That would be helpful, as a visual of the differences in the Raj provinces and princely estates (around 600 of them) will explain the magnitude of what women had to accomplish to gain their political rights. SusunW (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Done, as you have noticed. It seems a bit low on images, maps, graphs etc; but pretty good. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IndiaPolitical1893ConstablesHandAtlas.jpg){kind=link}
Giving thanks
 | |
| Cassia javanica, Torremolinos | |
|---|---|
| ... with thanks from QAI |
Happy Thanksgiving! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- I am thankful for you Gerda Arendt. One of many things I have to be thankful for this year, is the amazing encouragement you give. SusunW (talk) 16:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you, blushing ;) - Don't miss the happy image of an inspirational event, last one for Colin Mawby. It is great to have known hime. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, four award! When should that appear for TFA, 10 February 2020? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda Arendt. I have no idea, but yes, I asked if it could be on the anniversary date in February. SusunW (talk) 17:33, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't know where you asked, but I did here: WP:TFARP. IWD would be an alternative. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Der Ring in Minden finally appeared today, - my opera experience of the year. Part of the hook, "... to listen to the music at the end", would be a good motto ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's really cool that you were able to do so many articles/hooks about the same opera. Impressive body of work. SusunW (talk) 14:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Well, four nights of together almost 20 hours of music and action, - that's a lot! (... and my brother played the very beginning when the double bass players start alone with the lowest possible note on which all else is built). There were more articles before (including Dara Hobbs), and two have not yet appeared (Heiko Trinsinger and Julia Bauer), and today I plan to write about the woman who made it all possible. That will probably go to AfD but she deserves at least a try ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's really cool that you were able to do so many articles/hooks about the same opera. Impressive body of work. SusunW (talk) 14:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda Arendt. I have no idea, but yes, I asked if it could be on the anniversary date in February. SusunW (talk) 17:33, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, four award! When should that appear for TFA, 10 February 2020? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Peace Dove
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 ☎ 17:03, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I love this message, so very apt in the holiday time when people tend to get involved in the stress. I wish this message for all of our todays and tomorrows. Thank you so much Buster7 same to you and yours. SusunW (talk) 17:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Sara Braun
On 14 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sara Braun, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that along with her business partners, philanthropist Sara Braun (pictured), one of the first businesswomen in Punta Arenas, Chile, was involved in the genocide of the Selk'nam people? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sara Braun. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sara Braun), 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.
— Amakuru (talk) 05:08, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for that article! - I have a rather general question on a FAC: how much background? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
- Please see Talk:Sara Braun. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:20, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
TFA
Hi Susun. You can now formally nominate Inter-Allied Women's Conference for TFA, here - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests - under Specific date nominations. It should be straight forward, and your blurb is written. But ping if you find it confusing or daunting. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:43, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- Unless you want to propose for IWD ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, @Gog the Mild and Gerda Arendt:, but I haven't had internet access for the last week. However, that said, I am now a grand-aunt, woo hoo! I thought Gerda already nominated it here or is that something different? Limited time probably until after the first of the year, but I'll be around. SusunW (talk) 14:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Woo hoo! indeed . Yep, it's different; note the "pending" on the end. Needs cutting and pasting to the page I linked. Let me know if you would like me to do this for you. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:18, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- But Gerda is correct. 8 March would be good. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:20, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- I would love you to do it for me Gog the Mild and thank you so much for asking that. We all know my technical limitations ;). And it doesn't matter to me if it's February 10th or March 8th, but perhaps the 2nd date would get more traction? SusunW (talk) 15:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- The first step for that would be to move it in pending, to reserve the date. It was free when I last looked. Yes? Who? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- I was bold and moved it in pending, because a woman was nominated for 9 February. A TFA nom can be made as soon as 8 Febr is scheduled (1 month in adveance that is). You can watch-list the red link right now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Either date is a shoo in. 8 March is not yet taking requests, just expressions of interest. I am minded to move the article there. Ah, Gerda has already done so. All good. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:32, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks to you both. :) SusunW (talk) 17:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Either date is a shoo in. 8 March is not yet taking requests, just expressions of interest. I am minded to move the article there. Ah, Gerda has already done so. All good. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:32, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- I would love you to do it for me Gog the Mild and thank you so much for asking that. We all know my technical limitations ;). And it doesn't matter to me if it's February 10th or March 8th, but perhaps the 2nd date would get more traction? SusunW (talk) 15:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- But Gerda is correct. 8 March would be good. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:20, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Woo hoo! indeed
- Sorry, @Gog the Mild and Gerda Arendt:, but I haven't had internet access for the last week. However, that said, I am now a grand-aunt, woo hoo! I thought Gerda already nominated it here or is that something different? Limited time probably until after the first of the year, but I'll be around. SusunW (talk) 14:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Congratulations on becoming a grand-aunt. Is the newborn a grand-niece or a grand-nephew? (Actually the term grand-aunt was new to me. I've always called it great-aunt but that's probably British English.)--Ipigott (talk) 18:06, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ipigott She's an adorable 3-week-early girl. SusunW (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Congratulations, SusunW. Such lovely news about your great-niece. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:27, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Rosiestep, pretty over the moon about it. SusunW (talk) 20:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Congratulations, SusunW. Such lovely news about your great-niece. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:27, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ipigott She's an adorable 3-week-early girl. SusunW (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
One more suffragist article is on its way!
Hi Susun -- I just wanted to let you know that I am finally (really) working on one last suffragist article (Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti), which I intend to nominate before the end of the year. So please don't feel that you have to rush with "Women's suffrage in India". :-) I've been having a hard time finding space in my life for Wikipedia editing this year (work has eaten up most of my time and energy), but I'm always inspired by the excellent efforts I see from you, Ipigott and others. I hope you enjoy the holidays, Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Alanna the Brave. Hope you have a lovely holiday too. The India article is finished except for photos, but with the protests going on there my friend hasn't been able to access the library which may hold the images we need. Obviously they can be added "after-the-fact" but I'd rather have them from the get-go, so am glad you are able to find time for Ransome-Kuti. Hope you have the time you need to work on it. SusunW (talk) 21:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Joy Harjo
Hi Susun. I've just been listening to an inspiring interview with Joy Harjo on BBC Outlook (starting around 26.30). As she comes from your part of the world, I was wondering whether you would be interested in improving her biography. As the first ever native American poet laureate, it seems to me she deserves special attention. No rush on this, of course. Just let me know if you're interested.--Ipigott (talk) 07:20, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- Fascinating interview, thank you Ipigott. Will see what I might be able to add over the next few weeks. SusunW (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Rosika Schwimmer
On 24 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rosika Schwimmer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1929 Rosika Schwimmer (pictured), a woman over 50 and thus ineligible to take up arms in the U.S., was denied citizenship by the Supreme Court for pacifism and became stateless? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rosika Schwimmer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rosika Schwimmer), 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.
— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Good luck
Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはSusunWたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 03:09, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Miraclepine. Wishing you and yours a lovely holiday season and a wonderful new year. SusunW (talk) 18:31, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you ...
 | |
| missing Brian |
... for improving article quality in December! There's a peer review open for Clara Schumann (4 women on DYK today!) and a FAC for Jauchzet, frohlocket!, DYK? We miss Brian who would have helped. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:59, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- Let's go for vision 2020! - Congrats to EotW! - I received notice that I'm #3 of being thanked, - thanke you for contributing greatly to that figure ;) - I'll keep it high up on my talk, with an outline of project goals: psalms - fix translations - polish recent deaths. Too many of those, two as I write this, Peter Schreier and Harry Kupfer. Let's go ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:09, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Editor of the Week
|
Editor of the Week | |
| Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your outstanding article creation. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Gog the Mild, User:Girth Summit and User:Buster7 have submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
- Veteran editor SusanW has started a staggering number of quality articles, including 187 DYKs, 40 GAs and recently their first FA, virtually all of them aimed at increasing the representation of women on Wikipedia. Amazingly, their FA – on an important topic – was created from scratch less than a year ago and researched from recently uncovered documents - some barely in the public domain. A pre-eminently qualified teacher of the Art of Creating WP articles. The most modest and unassuming of Wikipedians, yet a tireless and skilled researcher. Knowledgeable, extremely productive and supportive, and keen to pass on praise and knowledge. Effusive in their appreciation of suggestions, assistance or assessments, they shy away from the more bruising aspects of Wikipedia. We think that a second EotW would be a fitting recognition of their continuing efforts.
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
|
|
|
|
| A driving force at Women in Red |
| SusunW |
| Editor of the Week for the week beginning December 22, 2019 |
| Veteran editor of a staggering number of quality articles, including 187 DYKs, 40 GAs and recently their first FA. A pre-eminently qualified teacher of the Art of Creating WP articles. A modest and unassuming Wikipedian and a tireless and skilled researcher. Knowledgeable, extremely productive and supportive, and keen to pass on praise and knowledge. Effusive in their appreciation of suggestions, assistance or assessments. |
| Recognized for |
| increasing the representation of women on Wikipedia. |
| Submit a nomination |
Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 14:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild, Girth Summit, and Buster7: Thank you all so much, I am humbled by all of your comments. What a lovely holiday gift, especially in *this* year, as some of you know the real world things that have pressed on me. It is my honor to have worked with each of you in our collaborative efforts. SusunW (talk) 22:57, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
- You're super welcome - it couldn't have gone to a more deserving recipient. Happy holidays, I hope your family are all doing well. (By the way, I've kicked off the FA review for MMG - I'll try to keep on top of everything, but if you do have any time and want to take a look, your help is always appreciated!) GirthSummit (blether) 16:42, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
It's such a lovely thing to get - Congratulations. You totally deserve this. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 12:26, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks Antiqueight it is lovely and truly it came at a time when I needed encouragement. Wonderful how the world works like that :) SusunW (talk) 14:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Thung Sin Nio
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thung Sin Nio 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 Ajpolino -- Ajpolino (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks Ajpolino really appreciate your review. SusunW (talk) 18:11, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Thung Sin Nio
The article Thung Sin Nio you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thung Sin Nio for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ajpolino -- Ajpolino (talk) 18:41, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Excellent work! I see you have several other nominations in the WP:GAN queue. As you can tell, GAN is severely backlogged, with sometimes 6+ months from nomination to review. This is a major problem for the process since nominators might lose access to sources or lose interest by the time a reviewer signs up. If you've got the time/interest, please consider taking on some reviews to help others improve content here (plus fewer reviews in the queue means folks will get to review your articles more quickly. A win-win). If not, no worries, we'll dig ourselves out eventually. Thanks again for the interesting read. Have a great weekend! Ajpolino (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Wow, thanks Ajpolino. Appreciate the review. Yes, I think now I am down to 8 others ;). I am terrible at reviews, so am just really patient and very appreciative of those who review. SusunW (talk) 21:20, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
lack of neutrality of SandyGeorgia in the Sara Braun article relative a Selknam Genocide
I put a warning to his user, suspicious Conflicts of interest and lack of neutrality of SandyGeorgia in the Sara Braun article: User_talk:SandyGeorgia#Stop_to_denial_the_relation_of_Sara_braun_with_selknam_genocide Please take a action. --Fitmoos (talk) 19:28, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
- Fitmoos, I am sorry, but I am not sure what "action" you want me to take. You are having a content dispute with another editor on an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. I have no authority over the article, your actions, nor SandyGeorgia's, and certainly no authority to resolve your dispute. I have often found that if editing an article causes me emotional distress, it is probably me, not someone else who lacks the neutrality to edit and I try to look at it with fresh eyes from the other person's perspective. I am not saying that is what you should do, or what is happening in this case, rather I am simply telling you how I do things and avoid conflicts. Please try to collegially resolve your dispute without involving others. SusunW (talk) 21:59, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
I requesting to SandyGeorgia to write herself the section, with her words and point of view. But , she don't wants nothings. She only wants to delete all references about the controversy. --Fitmoos (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2020 (UTC)