User talk:Fox/January 2013
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Fox. 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. |
GOCE 2012 Annual Report
Guild of Copy Editors 2012 Annual Report
 The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
|
The Signpost: 31 December 2012
- From the editor: Wikipedia, our Colosseum
- In the media: Is the Wikimedia movement too 'cash rich'?
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation fundraiser a success; Czech parliament releases photographs to chapter
- Technology report: Looking back on a year of incremental changes
- Discussion report: Image policy and guidelines; resysopping policy
- Featured content: Whoa Nelly! Featured content in review
- WikiProject report: New Year, New York
- Recent research: Wikipedia and Sandy Hook; SOPA blackout reexamined
WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - January 2013
| Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:54, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
The WikiProject: Good Articles Newsletter (January 2013)
| ||||
| ||||
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 07 January 2013
- WikiProject report: Where Are They Now? Episode IV: A New Year
- News and notes: 2012—the big year
- Featured content: Featured content in review
- Technology report: Looking ahead to 2013
This Month in GLAM: December 2012
| ||||||
The Signpost: 14 January 2013
- Investigative report: Ship ahoy! New travel site finally afloat
- News and notes: Launch of annual picture competition, new grant scheme
- WikiProject report: Reach for the Stars: WikiProject Astronomy
- Discussion report: Flag Manual of Style; accessibility and equality
- Special report: Loss of an Internet genius
- Featured content: Featured articles: Quality of reviews, quality of writing in 2012
- Arbitration report: First arbitration case in almost six months
- Technology report: Intermittent outages planned, first Wikidata client deployment
GOCE mid-drive newsletter, January 2013
| Guild of Copy Editors January 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
We are halfway through our January backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 01:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
|
Grace Park
Hi, I've got a question on this edit, removing the statement of the birth name "Jee Un Park". To the extent you are permitted, can you disclose what was in the OTRS ticket? The birth name that was removed is supported by the cited source Gale Biography in Context; which is generally regarded as reliable. If it's not reliable, that's something I'd like to know. Although I'm the editor who added the birth name based on that source, I'm much more interested in having the article correct than including the name. TJRC (talk) 01:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hi there, TJRC. The ticket is from Park herself and within it she says she has no idea where the error has come from but that it has been replicated in numerous places. In this case I felt it was better to defer to the person herself - I don't know where Gale lies on this, but myself and a fellow admin have had a look at the source and you're right, it does use the Korean name. I'm honestly not sure what the best course of action here is; Wikipedia tends to prefer to repeat sources, but in this case it looks like the source is false. Strange one... — foxj 02:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the follow-up. I'll be a little more skeptical of Gale in the future. TJRC (talk) 02:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Miles Jacobson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Barbican (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) 11:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
AFT5 newsletter
Hey all; another newsletter.
- If you're not already aware, a Request for Comment on the future of the Article Feedback Tool on the English-language Wikipedia is open; any and all comments, regardless of opinion and perspective, are welcome.
- Our final round of hand-coding is complete, and the results can be found here; thanks to everyone who took part!
- We've made test deployments to the German and French-language projects; if you are aware of any other projects that might like to test out or use the tool, please let me know :).
- Developers continue to work on the upgraded version of the feedback page that was discussed during our last office hours session, with a prototype ready for you to play around with in a few weeks.
That's all for now! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 January 2013
- News and notes: Requests for adminship reform moves forward
- WikiProject report: Say What? — WikiProject Linguistics
- Featured content: Wazzup, G? Delegates and featured topics in review
- Arbitration report: Doncram case continues
- Technology report: Data centre switchover a tentative success
Train2Game
Err, Foxj? Do you really think you should be doing major article renovations while the article is fully-protected for edit warring? That's generally considered very much not kosher. — Coren (talk) 16:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- To restate what I said on IRC: What a load of bullshit. — foxj 16:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but it's generally agreed-upon bullshit. That said, I think your changes were sane, but they need to be discussed on the talk page. — Coren (talk) 16:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not interested in having to get my changes screened potentially by conflicted sockpuppets, thanks. — foxj 16:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but it's generally agreed-upon bullshit. That said, I think your changes were sane, but they need to be discussed on the talk page. — Coren (talk) 16:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Discussion on the AFT5 Request for Comment
Hey Fox - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 January 2013
- In the media: Hoaxes draw media attention
- Recent research: Lessons from the research literature on open collaboration; clicks on featured articles; credibility heuristics
- WikiProject report: Checkmate! — WikiProject Chess
- Discussion report: Administrator conduct and requests
- News and notes: Khan Academy's Smarthistory and Wikipedia collaborate
- Featured content: Listing off progress from 2012
- Arbitration report: Doncram continues
- Technology report: Developers get ready for FOSDEM amid caching problems