User talk:MinervaK

GREETINGS VISITORS: I'm a rebel, so I prefer to have new sections posted at the TOP of this page rather than the bottom. Discussion within sections can go top-to-bottom as usual. Thanks! MinervaK (talk) 23:40, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011 query

Hi I finally answered your query on Talk:Shawnee. Regards, Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 05:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

Hello Minerva.

As you write the Cornstalk article and others, you'll want to review the guideline WP:Identifying reliable sources. Some of the sources you've used so far don't really qualify as reliable sources. The best sources for a subject like this are those written by modern historians who have had work published in peer-reviewed journals. We cannot use web sources such as this one, though they can be used to discover other sources. Ohio History Central is a questionable source; use the sources they cite instead. Many academic historians consider the books by Allan Eckert to be unreliable historical novels, so you'll want to steer clear of those for Wikipedia purposes. Very old sources such as Foote and Howe should be used with caution, if at all.

How to find the good sources? One good way is to start with an encyclopedia article written by a noted historian and published by a university press. These articles will often point you to additional reliable sources. You'll want to use Cornstalk's entries in American National Biography and American Indian Biographies. And check out Council Fires on the Upper Ohio by Downes (somewhat old) and The Shawnees and the war for America by Colin G. Calloway.

This may seem daunting, but it gets easier. Distinguishing reliable sources from unreliable ones is a skill that most new Wikipedians must learn. Let me know if you have questions. Cheers! —Kevin Myers 18:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Kevin -- I'm working on the article off-line and hope to have an updated bibliography ready soon. I wrote to Eckert to see if he'd tell me where he got the info about the young Cornstalk at Greenbrier Creek in 1727 -- haven't heard back from him yet. Would be nice to find something usable there. I actually have a copy of Calloway, I agree it's a good resource. Downes was written in 1969 (? I think) -- just curious why it's seen as more reliable than more recent stuff? MinervaK (talk) 18:29, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. to Kevin -- what's your opinion on the Draper manuscripts? Useful in this case or not? It's a lot of stuff to plow through, and not sure it's worth it. Thx MinervaK (talk) 18:56, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Downes actually wrote his book back in 1940. He was a generation ahead of other white historians, and perhaps the first to drop the term "savages" when referring to American Indians. His book is somewhat outdated, but was cited as the standard source by other academic historians for half a century afterwards, and is sometimes still cited. He's not more reliable than more modern academic historians like Calloway, John Sugden, or Richard White, but is still more "reliable" (by Wikpedia's definition of the term) than Eckert or amateur history on the Internet.

The Draper manuscripts are important, but we cannot use them as a major source on Wikipedia, per WP:PRIMARY. The manuscripts are a collection of primary sources and recollections, some of them reliable, some of them not. We have to rely on historians to sort out which documents are reliable and which are not. But you can cite Lyman Draper's short biography of Cornstalk, which was the best of its era. —Kevin Myers 19:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whew, I think I may have really misinterpreted how to use sources here... just went back and reverted parts of the Cornstalk page to remove inappropriate edits I'd previously made based on primary sources. Spent too many years writing papers for graduate school. Thanks for the guidance -- MinervaK (talk) 01:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, writing on Wikipedia is more like being a reporter than a historian. Basically you're a reporter, and the historians (rather than the primary sources) are your main sources for the story. It took me awhile to figure that out. But you can use primary sources sparingly, often to get the full quote of something partially quoted by a historian. As long as you're not interpreting the primary source yourself, don't be afraid to quote from them a little bit. —Kevin Myers 01:55, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for ME!

MinervaK (talk) 07:54, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gil Birmingham page

Thank you kindly MinervaK, your co-operation has been greatly appreciated. Keep up the good work, and happy editing. :) -- WikHead (talk) 04:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Thank you very much for the kitten :) This one is extra special to me as he looks just like a tiny version of my kitty and best friend Gus, who sadly got out of the house on June 1 and never came back home. My talk page will forever keep little Gussy fresh in my thoughts. -- WikHead (talk) 07:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear about Gus. We have four cats and they are like my little brothers and sisters. MinervaK (talk) 08:11, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello MinervaK. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 01:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alan Tafoya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alan Tafoya 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/Alan Tafoya 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. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Cornstalk by Sherman.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Cornstalk by Sherman.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 12:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shawneeflagsmall.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shawneeflagsmall.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 12:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]