User talk:Ewhite31/Archive5
2025
[edit]Your submission at Articles for creation: Mere Harrison Lodge has been accepted
[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)B13 Noteability
[edit]I want the page to stay but I don’t know to provide fact-checked history about the B13, except with what I can find. For which parts of the article do you want evidence? Wikis6501 (talk) 15:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- I just got rid of two parts of the B13 under History that don’t have evidence. Wikis6501 (talk) 15:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Wikis6501, I placed the notice stating that it may not meet GNG, particularly because I thought that it didn't meet the second part: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." At the time I was reading it, I only identified one independent source.
- For B13 in particular, I noted that the history had a large section without citations, for example:
- "The B13 route began on October 25, 1921 under the operation of Independent Buses. It was then operated by the Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Corporation years later, before it was sold to the City on June 1, 1940. The original route was between the Cypress Hills station and Seaview Avenue. It was merged with the first B19 route on May 1, 1938, then extended to Ridgewood Terminal around 1947."
- I would imagine some of the detail of this could be from MTA, but there may also be good secondary sources on public transit in Brooklyn more generally that could provide citations and help to establish notability. The Notability (transport) page might be also be a useful resource. Hope this helps! Ewhite31 (talk) 15:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Citations are hard to find. Two of the bus pages that show evidence-lacking history have the tag “citation needed”, and that may have kept the pages from being redirected, so I’m going to add these tags. I live in a working-class family who does not want me to pay for what they think is unnecessary stuff, which may be the only way to get citations sometimes. Where I was able to get evidence I cited it. Capisce? Wikis6501 (talk) 16:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
NPP Reviews
[edit]Welcome to New Page Patrol, and thank you for all the hard work you've been doing! It's great to see new patrollers taking part in the backlog drive! As I'm looking through the logs for some of the top patrollers, I noticed a couple things from your recent reviews that might benefit from a bit more attention as you get started:
- When you're patrolling, it's important to look at the page history, especially if you choose to nominate a page for deletion or draftify as the page history can give you vital information. For instance, you nominated Shackles for A3 because it was blank; however, the page had recently been blanked from a redirect. As such, the best move would be to restore the redirect, which another editor did. On that note, it may also be update your Twinkle settings to add a CSD log. If you do, you can add successfully CSD'ed articles to your backlog count at the end of the month! This also helps you hone your speedy deletion skills.
- I also noticed you marked a few pages as reviewed and tagged them for notability concerns (for example [1], [2]). The general goal of NPP is to ensure new articles meet baseline notability guidelines. If you're uncertain whether a subject is notable, it's best to either move to the next article and/or tag the article without marking it as reviewed.
I know it can feel a bit overwhelming at first, but slowing down to follow the New Page Patrol flowchart can help ensure thorough and consistent reviews. It may also be helpful to start by looking through WP:NPPSORT, where you can look at articles whose notability guidelines you're more familiar with.
If you ever have questions or need a second opinion on a page, don't hesitate to reach out. Many experienced patrollers (myself included!) are happy to help. Thanks again for your work on New Page Patrol! 😊 Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:34, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks @Significa liberdade! Ewhite31 (talk) 13:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Point 1 is very good advice but regarding #2 @Significa liberdade: please refresh yourself on Wikipedia:New pages patrol#Notability. Neither it or the flowchart states that it's NPP's job to "ensure new articles meet baseline notability guidelines"—though individual reviewers may of course choose to do so—and many experienced reviewers (included myself) will tag articles for potential notability issues before marking them as reviewed, and have done for many years. Tagging an article implicitly puts it in a queue for future review for notability, so we would argue there is no reason to keep it in NPP's more time-sensitive queue. – Joe (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Evans pritchard lectures
[edit]Thanks for your suggestion. I like the idea of adding the lectures to the main EP article. Will do when I get a chance. Thanks again david Dz3 (talk) 09:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Women in Red February 2025
[edit]
Announcements from other communities:
Tip of the month:
Suggestion:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 08:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Kervaire–Milnor group
[edit]Hello! I've just seen the template you've added to my article about Kervaire–Milnor groups. Could you please elaborate on what you think needs to be fixed? Since the topic of the article is pretty advanced, but still mostly text instead of formulas, I don't see at all why it is "too technical".
Also in general, how should an article be written to avoid this needing to be fixed? I've already seen articles explaining pretty niche and complicated concepts in higher mathematics very elegant and easy, but were still considered to be "too technical". Samuel Adrian Antz (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Samuel Adrian Antz, my apologies, my original comment when I added that template seems to have been lost. I thought that the lead needed to be edited for a broader readership, following WP:EXPLAINLEAD, which is why I added the template. If there is a way of taking just those first two sentences and expanding them to make it more accessible to the non-expert, that would be awesome.
- More generally speaking, I think that the use of text to explain formulas, etc. in this article is great, and is one of the things recommended in the guidelines that I have linked above. There is also the recommendation to write WP:ONEDOWN - so I imagine this article's topic is at the postgraduate level, therefore, writing for an undergraduate audience for the rest of a higher mathematics article might be a useful way to approach it. Ewhite31 (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
Upcoming expiry of your patroller right
[edit]Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 28 February 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Women in Red March 2025
[edit]
Announcements from other communities: Tip of the month:
Moving the needle:[1]
Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,669 articles during this period! Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk 08:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging
New page reviewer granted
[edit]
Hi Ewhite31, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.
This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:
- Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
- If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
- If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies
You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! – Joe (talk) 08:55, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Joe Roe! Ewhite31 (talk) 12:47, 28 February 2025 (UTC)