Archives

/Archive1

Regarding the 2009 Honduran coup d'état page - your comments on my talk page are well-taken. If I had disagreed with your move, I would have complained on the discussion page; my concern was just fairness regarding classifying things as "theories" in the first place.

Also, "analytic theories" actually sounds better as a heading. Zachary Klaas (talk) 16:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind comments on the talk pages of the article about the coup. I noticed you also commented on my wife's blog ( http://hondurascoup2009.blogspot.com/ ). Rsheptak (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I knew more and could add more of substance but at least I'm learning. I've been reading Thomas Anderson’s The War of the Dispossessed, which I am finding enlightening background, a suggestion I picked up from (http://hermanojuancito.blogspot.com) Keep safe. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 17:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I answered your question on my talk page Jules Siegel (talk) 00:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Currently working on eliminating that system because it makes the article look unprofessional.(Zaxby (talk) 23:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah its cool. Do whatever you like. Its just fine with me.(Zaxby (talk) 00:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

		The Barnstar of Liberty
		You are hereby awarded this Barnstar of Liberty for the nice job on creating the well-cited biography on Samuel Wilbert Tucker - a significant contribution to the coverage of the American Civil Rights movement. Please keep up the good work! Toddst1 (talk) 16:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Samuel Wilbert Tucker, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

NW (Talk) 17:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]

16:49, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

And again...

JamesBWatson (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And for perhaps teh last time...

JamesBWatson (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from User talk:Rich Farmbrough in case anyone else wants to comment or revert)

Would you have any objections to changing Template:Portal/Images/Connecticut from "Flag of Connecticut.svg" to "Seal of Connecticut.svg" which is what the old PORTAL_IMG parameter was in {{WikiProject Connecticut}}? I think it adds a little visual interest to the project banner since the flag is already used as the main image. I'd do it myself, but 1) the page is protected and 2) I'd be afraid of breaking everything. Thanks.Abby Kelleyite (talk) 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection, I will make the change. (I think there's a lot to be said for using seals as far as icons are good anyway.) Obviously the change can be reverted if it causes problems. Rich Farmbrough, 20:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

(copied from Wikipedia:Media copyright questions so I don't lose it)

I'd like to use either or both of the photos at the Alexandria Library's web page [1] in the article. The page says: "Photo images appear courtesy of the Alexandria Black History Resource Center" but correspondence with both the library and resource center/museum appears to indicate that neither one is the copyright holder. One photo, according to everyone I have talked to, is a 1939 newspaper photo from an undetermined newspaper. The other was apparently given to the Black History Museum by the family, for whom no one seems to have any contact information. The latter photo looks like a promotional shot but I do not know enough about these things to determine if it would be appropriate for non-free fair use (Mr. Tucker is deceased). I have similarly had no luck with tracking down the copyright holders of the photos at the Tucker School's website [2]. Any/all help would be appreciated. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 16:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Upload, but treat as fair use until you can ascertain their status for certain. Make sure you comply with WP:NFCC, read up on WP:FURG. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Remember, even though a school closes or someone dies, someone still owns the copyrights on their images. They may not even know they do, but they do. Also I suggest running phrases from that newspaper article through Google ...--Wehwalt (talk) 19:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of El Corte River at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Rlevse • Talk • 22:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AbbyKelleyite Thank you for pointing out to a particular editor the incivility of his/her edits. I have to say I find this editor's behaviour particularly trying. It seems to be highly opinionated and aggressive. The naiivity of expression suggests a certain immaturity and he/she seems unwilling to take note of other editor's comments. Here is another example! [3]. The person has gone off on a complete red-herring about CLarks views on cavalry - a point was only included originally in connection with tit-for-tat reviews between Clark and Anglesey. Regards Motmit (talk) 16:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should pay more attention to Motmit's edits more than mine. My was response was to his wanton deletion of cited information. Perhaps you should ask him to stop removing information without any justification? And his absurd complaint demonstrates only his own ignorance - deleting data which seems to be beyond the relms of his understanding first, rather than sensible discussion is blatant provocation. He made no attempt to engage me other than to delete my edits. To the contrary, I think it is he that needs to grow up. He should treat others' edits with the respects he demands. Or is that too much 'naiivity of expression' for him? Dapi89 (talk) 16:53, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QED Motmit (talk) 16:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Under the circumstances, that really is a silly response. Dapi89 (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page is not really the appropriate forum for dispute resolution. See WP:EDITWAR for more info. Dapi89, my comment on your talk page was with particular regard to edit summaries, as they cannot be edited or deleted, as noted in WP:CIVIL. Motmit, I do not think it is helpful to use phrase like "naivity" in resolving your disagreements. On the underlying disputes on the merits, I take no position. Carry on reaching consensus and regards to you both. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 17:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. I shouldn't have responded to childish baiting. Sorry. Dapi89 (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is funny. The El Corte River article got me interested in the Selva Zoque rain forest. I started an article on that, and decided to nominate it for DYK, partly to trigger review because I am not entirely comfortable that it is neutral enough. Then this morning, quite by accident, I saw that El Corte was well on its way through the DYK process. I had noticed that you were improving the El Corte article, but not that you had nominated it. So much for the Selva Zoque DYK!
Aymatth2 (talk) 14:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from DYK) *My apologies if I caused any problem by having nominated Aymatth2's El Corte River article (I'd hoped it would be a pleasant surprise). I hope the Selva Zoque article can also be featured; it looks great. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 15:58, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem whatsoever. None at all. This is great. I just had to laugh when I saw it. There is something childishly satisfying in seeing an article going quickly from speedy delete to DYK, and I hope I never get so serious as to not enjoy this kind of thing. I seem to be on a roll now doing geo-stubs in Oaxaca, e.g. Cerro de Oro Dam and soon-to-be-expanded Sierra Juárez, Oaxaca. Maybe we can flood DYK with Oaxaca articles. Oaxaca Awareness Month! Aymatth2 (talk) 16:18, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had much the same feeling about the amazing turnaround from speedy deletion. The stub shouldn't have been tagged for speedy deletion in the first place (but the people defending Wikipedia from the tidal wave of inflowing spam have to learn too and the reviewing admins catch most of the errors as far as I can tell). I'm looking forward to reading all the Oaxaca articles. This place can certainly use better coverage of the non-english-speaking parts of the world.Abby Kelleyite (talk) 16:31, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Citation Barnstar
		For adding refs to the article on Baatara gorge waterfall. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) Abby Kelleyite (talk) 17:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Syngmung (talk) 15:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - no problem - I am enjoying your work on the article. In response to your other issues you raised I think there are a few points. Firstly the "some" is needed because "the revisionists" can't be said to represent the totality of historical scholarship on WWI - they seem to be a group from a couple of universities in England with strong links to Shrivenham etc. The Strachan article identified other historians who think differently - eg Travers [4]. Secondly much more is being ascribed to Clark's book than he acually wrote. "The Donkeys" only dealt with the first year of the war when the BEF was wiped out. Chief donkey was French who was sacked at the end of it. Clark felt the BEF situation was ignored by historians who were more concerned with the Somme and later battles. This aspect is probably now more mainstream and covered by later historians so Clark does not need to be quoted. The revisionists meanwhile get themselves into knots over this period and blame Clark for perceptions on later events which he did not write about. They also report "The Donkeys" inaccurately - for example no where does Clark accuse the generals of an obsession with cavalry - in fact he criticises them for wasting the advantage of cavalry at a key point. Thirdly I have yet to find a clear concrete criticism of Clark's main text. There are plenty of unsubstantiated dismissive comments about the book and alot of complaints about the point of view but the main attack revolves entirely around the misattribution of the quotation. I wish I could find something of substance that people object to. All interesting stuff. Here is a website that seems to support Clark [5] while here is another that includes what seems a strikingly familiar attack from a predictable quarter [6]. Regards Motmit (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Awarded to AbbyKelleyite for starting and improving a number of WikiProject Connecticut pages, particularly in the Bridgeport area. Thanks! Markvs88 (talk) 20:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's a labor of love. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 20:41, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I misunderstood the concept of linking to and from other pages, so in that respect I see your point about the COI, and I see that those links have been deleted. Anything further so that I can delete your notice from blackpast.org? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwgarner (talk • contribs) 19:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One, as per WP:COI, "Editors with COIs are strongly encouraged to declare their interests, both on their user pages and on the talk page of the related article they are editing...." Two, lines like "When it became evident that the site was providing a much-needed resource on African American history" sourced only to the organization's own web page look like promotion/advertisement's and fail WP:NPOV. Try to source only to 3rd party disinterested sources. Make those kinds of changes and I, or another disinterested editor, may remove the template upon review. But if you do have an affiliation/relationship with the organization you should really consider not writing about it at all on Wikipedia and contributing to other Wikipedia articles. Regards. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 20:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have suggested at Cwgarner's talk page that the editor more thoroughly review the COI guidelines as they relate to his/her involvement in the Blackpast.org article. Cheers. Taroaldo (talk) 20:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for providing clarity. I'll go through the text and see what can be amended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwgarner (talk • contribs) 21:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to your statement on the BlackPast.org discussion page. Cwgarner (talk) 22:36, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I believe you misunderstood what I meant when I said I needed to get back to income-producing work. What I meant was I had to stop tinkering around with the Wikipedia article and return to my own REAL work. I think you interpreted it as working for BlackPast.org, which of course I do not do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwgarner (talk • contribs) 22:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I missed seeing that comment on your talkpage until now. And no, I have no reason to doubt that your contributions to blackpast.org are pro bono as you have said. There's a nice feature called "talkback" that I only firts started using recently myself that ensure that someone will be alerted about a comment you add on your own talkpage. If you go their talkpage and add an entry: {{talkback|yourusername|topic entry}} they'll get a notice alerting them to look at your talkpage. Regards, honestly. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 15:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Achavath Achim Synagogue at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Seaside Park (Connecticut) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NortyNort (Holla) 09:05, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply on my talkpage about making links to our article from articles that use BlackPast.org in their reference sections. So I noticed that hyperlinks appeared in my article on words like Facebook, University of Washington, Drupal, Dreamweaver, non-profit, marketing, and the like. This was done automatically, so I'm wondering what the process is for this. Perhaps there is a way of automatically hyperlinking references to BlackPast rather than going in to each article and creating a "See Also" link, which would also require regular maintenance as new references appear. Thanks, and you'll notice that I've changed my signature to GreeneJeans 14:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreeneJeans (talk • contribs)

I did notice the username change and I think that was a good idea for your own privacy. I also requested that those old versions of the talk pages with identifying information be "oversighted" so no one will be able to see them, so hopefully that will happen soon. Once again, please accept my apology. On the links, I added the wikilinks in your article to things like Drupal that people might not know or Facebook which is popular now, but who knows in 5 years. There is a tool for making suggestions on links, I think it basically searches for instances of a search string, but I'm not familiar with any automated method for actually adding them. That doesn't mean there isn't one, just that I don't know. I've only added them manually. WP:TOOLS may provide some more info. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I will find a few relevant articles that have referenced BlackPast and make the internal links manually, then. I do have one question: when I created the entry, I neglected to capitalize the "P" in BlackPast.org's headline (currently is Blackpast.org, should be BlackPast.org). I don't believe I am able to make that change on my own. I think it requires an administrator. Do you know the process for this?

I think you could have done it (i.e. your account has been around long enough), but just in case, and because it was easier than explaining how, I moved the page to BlackPast.org. Blackpast.org will still redirect to it. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 14:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks so much! I am still trying to track down other independent sources to confirm the information that is based solely from the organization's website. There probably are some articles in local (Seattle) publications, but I don't live in that area, so I need to make further contacts. GreeneJeans 19:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles 07:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you would find the rollback flag; see WP:ROLLBACK useful, just say so, and I'll turn it on. Your head seems to be screwed on the right way around from what I've seen. Courcelles 07:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for saying so. I haven't asked before but rollback would be useful for dealing with clear vandalism, so I would like to take you up on that offer. I will endeavor to use it only for good. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Happy editing. Courcelles 17:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Mary and Eliza Freeman Houses/Little Liberia and Hard Scrabble at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NortyNort (Holla) 08:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Courcelles 18:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Courcelles 18:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, your nomination of Seaside Institute at DYK was reviewed and comments provided. --NortyNort (Holla) 09:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for considering me, currently i am facing problems for my article as "non notable structure" and its subject to deletion, I have no idea how wikipedia classifies a noticabl structure, Please help me... MalluMax 17:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello MalluManMax. I would have liked to see you be given some more time. The best thing you can do now for Kalarickal Temple is to add source information. It would be best if it is in English but even non-English sources that demonstrate the notability of the temple would be an improvement. For instance, do you know if it is the temple mentioned in this google books link: Fairs and Festivals of India: Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Kerala, Lakshadweep, Pondicherry, Tamil Nadu? Add any source information you have into the article. Don't worry too much about formatting for now, people will help you with that. I won't be here much longer today but the deletion discussion will go on for a week so don't stress out too much over time pressure. There is more detailed information available at WP:N but I would recommend focusing on adding sources rather than on deciphering policy right now. Regards. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 17:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Abby,

I am 100% sure that, their will be no online references for the place to give some valuable information, infact i know the place and nearby temples...The worship is being covered around 5000 peoples living on village called onakkoor. What can i do if there is no online references available... I can post some more photographs if it helps..MalluMax 17:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Sources do not have to be online, though it is easier for people to verify them if they are. Has the temple been written about in books and/or newspapers? More detail on reliable sources can be found in WP:RS. If it really hasn't been covered in reliable sources, the article would not be appropriate for Wikipedia, though perhaps some mention of it and/or the picture(s) might be appropriate in the article about the town. Where did you get the information from about: "It is believed that the old structure of the temple was built before the 16th century"? Was that from a book or newspaper story, perhaps? And is the annual festival you mention something that has been covered in newspapers? Abby Kelleyite (talk) 18:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that, this cannot be included on wikipedia, if it need references i need to travel to the place to take all the newspaper details, The term 16th century is not came from a book or news, its from old peoples mouth only (Those who born there and living there at the age of 70) Currently i am away from the place, But sure i can show the area to you using several sources.. Unfortunately google changed their map to 2010 version, So its quite difficult to see the place...

Wikimapia

Google Map

Thanks for all the helps Abby,

MalluMax 18:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mallu Man Max (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the map links Mallu Man Max. It is very enjoyable to me to learn about places I do not know much about. What might be best would be to have the article moved into your userspace until you are able to collect source information. If you go to the article deletion discussion and request to have the article "userfied" WP:USERFY so that you can collect source information, I'm sure an administrator will be happy to do that for you. Then you can work on it at leisure and consider moving it back to mainspace later once you have sources and are more familiar with notability policy. The deletion discussion is here. Remember to sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~ so people know it's you and when you commented. I'm glad if I could be of any help and hope you enjoy editing here. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 18:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of WikiProject Connecticut, you are invited to participate in the WikiProject Connecticut AUTUMN 2010 Photo Contest! Rules: You must take the picture yourself; adding public domain pictures (i.e. postcards from pre-1923 that are on a website) will NOT count. The picture cannot already exist on Wikipedia, in Commons, etc. The picture must be of something notable for a CT rated article and be of decent quality. You may not add more than 5 pictures to any one article during the contest. All photos must be uploaded and added to their articles. If it wasn't added to the article and titled, it doesn't count. All submissions must be made after 12:00 UTC (8:00 AM EST) on September 15th, 2010 and no later than 23:59 UTC (7:59 PM EST) on October 31st, 2010. Everyone who adds 15 pictures will earn a barnstar, and the editor who adds the most pictures will earn a special unique barnstar! To enter the contest, . Thanks for your attention and good luck! –Grondemar 04:14, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a suggestion but you might wish to consider, per WP:RFC, adding "RFC" to the section title hosting the discussion. Rgds JakeInJoisey (talk) 14:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AbbeyKelleyite! An article you have created or edited is up for deletion debate. Please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Moore (EITC). --Kudpung (talk) 00:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Samuel Wilbert Tucker you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Samuel Wilbert Tucker for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Aaron north (T/C) 22:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AbbyKelleyite! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 20:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	New England Wikimedia General Meeting
	The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future! Potential topics: What is a Wikimedia chapter and should we work towards one? Planning of regular Boston meetups (any other New England cities?) Planning for upcoming coordinated events (Wikipedia Love Libraries, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiknic, etc.) Outreach to universities (WikiProject Academical Village) and cultural institutions (GLAM) Wikimania DC is this summer. Your ideas!
	Sunday, April 22 1:30 PM – 4:30 PM	Conference Room C06, Johnson Building, Boston Public Library—Central Library 700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

---

Message delivered by Dominic at 08:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.[reply]

U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!

Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:05, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 09:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NE Meetup #4: January 18 at MIT Building 5

Dear Fellow Wikimedian, You have been invited to the New England Wikimedians 2014 kick-off party and Wikipedia Day Celebration at Building Five on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus on Saturday, January 18th, from 3-5 PM. Afterwards, we will be holding an informal dinner at a local restaurant. If you are curious to join us, please do so, as we are always looking for people to come and give their opinion! Finally, be sure to RSVP here if you're interested. I hope to see you there! Kevin Rutherford (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited!

New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Wikipedia edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston, Northampton, South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page. Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk)

NE Meetup #5: April 19th at Clover Food Lab in Kendall Square

Dear Fellow Wikimedian, New England Wikimedians would like to invite you to the April 2014 meeting, which will be a small-scale meetup of all interested Wikimedians from the New England area. We will socialize, review regional events from the beginning of the year, look ahead to regional events of 2014, and discuss other things of interest to the group. Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested. Also, if you haven't done so already, please consider signing up for our mailing list and connect with us on Facebook and Twitter. We hope to see you there! Kevin Rutherford (talk) and Maia Weinstock (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Adrianne Wadewitz edit-a-thons in Southern New England

As you may have already heard, the Wikipedia community lost an invaluable member of the community last month. Adrianne Wadewitz was a feminist scholar of 18th-Century British literature, and a prolific editor of the site. As part of a worldwide series of tributes, New England Wikimedians, in conjunction with local institutions of higher learning, have created three edit-a-thons that will be occurring in May and June. The events are as follows: May 21st at Northeastern University's Snell Library, in the Digital Scholarship Commons on the second floor May 22nd at Brown University's Rockefeller Library, in the Digital Scholarship Lab June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand We hope that you will be able to join us, whether you are an experienced editor or are using Wikipedia for the first time. If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!

After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested: Cape Cod Wiknic and Photography Blitz on June 14th in Barnstable County, with complete travel reimbursements available for those who participate Adrianne Wadewitz Memorial Edit-a-thon on June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand 3rd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, which will feature at least one guest speaker, and possibly many more Although we also aren't hosting this year's Wikimania, we would like to let you know that Wikimania this year will be occurring in London in August: Wikimania 2014 in London If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!

After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested: Cape Cod Wiknic and Photography Blitz on June 14th in Barnstable County, with complete travel reimbursements available for those who participate Adrianne Wadewitz Memorial Edit-a-thon on June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand 3rd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, which will feature at least one guest speaker, and possibly many more Although we also aren't hosting this year's Wikimania, we would like to let you know that Wikimania this year will be occurring in London in August: Wikimania 2014 in London If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.[reply]

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You are now listed as missing. Should you ever return or choose not to be listed, you are welcome to remove your name. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday July 16, 1-5pm: New England Wiknic

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" at John F. Kennedy Park, near Harvard Square, Cambridge, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck. Sunday July 16 New England Wiknic (also on Facebook) 1–5pm - come by any time! Look for us by the Wikipedia / Wikimedia banner! We hope to see you there! --Phoebe (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!