Jump to content

Draft talk:Wikimedia New York City

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

I feel positive to see the creation of this draft article! As a board member, I cannot contribute to writing it. Here is the chapter's press collection: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Press

Also, I wonder if there are any sources that mention that WMNYC is an independent non-profit, separate, but supported by, the WMF? This is a distinction many folks don't realize. Wil540 art (talk) 16:06, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If others are interested in collaborating, we might consider copying over the list of sources and striking them as they are folded into the article (or deemed unreliable for verifying claims on Wikipedia). ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:39, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: There is an ongoing discussion about this draft article on the Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Discord. - Wil540 art (talk) 16:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Wil540 art The page has been moved into the main space. Some clean up may be needed at Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikimedia_New_York_City and I very much welcome article improvements. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...or not... ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't participate in the Discord discussion and didn't even know it existed. But this article isn't ready to go yet. These are passing references being cobbled together. WP:THREE is a good principle here - I'd want to see either three secondary sources somewhat on this topic, or one really good secondary source specifically on this topic. Take [1] for example - Wikimedia NYC is mentioned on one line as a conference partner. That's it. That's nearly worthless as a reference - certainly for an individual person, that'd mean, well, nothing. What I'd be looking for is something like a newspaper article about Wikimedia NYC, not about an event that WM NYC participated in or organized that just acknowledges its existence. SnowFire (talk) 15:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just to strawman some... let's pretend this article is at AFD and we need to marshal evidence that even hardcore deletionists agree is fine. We're looking for something about Wikimedia NYC, not just a quote of Pharos or Megs + a mention that they were president of WMNYC at the time. And while side sources can be fine for fleshing out an article, we're looking for strong sources that show notability here, so the bar is higher.
      • Sources that attest an event happened, passing reference, nothing really learned about WMNYC: [2] [3], [4], [5] , [6] , [7] (no direct reference here at all!), [8] , [9] (also a primary source), [10] , [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. I don't have access to [17] or [18] but I suspect it's in the same category.
      • Sources that attest an event happened but at least go into some detail: [19], [20] .
      • Sources good if we ever make an article on Pharos: [21], [22] .
      • Sources good if we ever make an article on Megs: [23] .
      • Source that actually says something about WM NYC: [24].
        • “We enjoy spending time together and enjoy doing this work. For the most part, those gatherings are really joyful experiences,” Wacha said, adding that in prior years, Wikipedia community members have hosted incredible dance parties. Then again, the Wikimedia New York City organization has occasionally encountered examples of highly abusive behavior, such as violations of a user’s personal space or user space (for example, turning an editor’s personal userpage into a wall of shame) and doxing (revealing personal information about an editor).
    • So we basically have one source that gives us one paragraph about WM NYC, the Slate article above. That's not enough. (Although who knows, maybe this indicates Pharos & Megs are notable, since they get quoted a lot and interviewed.) SnowFire (talk) 18:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Press

[edit]

Copy of sources listed at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Press:

Collapsed list of sources reviewed for this draft

Not all of these sources are appropriate for verifying claims on Wikipedia. Please strike entries and/or leave comments above as sources are folded into the article or deemed inappropriate. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at WP:RM/TR

[edit]

The following discussion which took place at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests is pasted below for reference (permalink). Adumbrativus (talk) 00:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draft:Wikimedia New York City → Wikimedia New York City (currently a redirect instead to Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC) – move into main space over redirect --Another Believer (Talk) 14:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • This doesn't seem non-controversial. I'd certainly reject this article if it was at AFC - stuff like [25] or [26] are passing references not primarily on the topic. They're "events / things to do this week" type stories not primarily about the group. There needs to be a strong secondary source about the group itself, not about events organized by it. (Disclaimer: I am a member of Wikimedia NYC, but opposing just myself, not as an official action or anything.) SnowFire (talk) 14:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • To the extent that this is sort of an AFC move-to-article-space request, I've posted an analysis of the current sourcing of the article in this diff, for support of my above contesting. SnowFire (talk) 18:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      @SnowFire: Drafts cannot be nominated at WP:RM, so it's not that helpful to contest the move except to check if the requester is sure. Another Believer can just paste his changes to Wikimedia New York City, at which point you would need to nominate it at WP:AfD or otherwise get a consensus in order to redirect it. See WP:ATD-R. SilverLocust 💬 08:50, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • @SilverLocust: I'm familiar. I'm also saying that per NOTBURO, if someone nominates an article unready for main namespace anywhere, it's valid to contest it, even in an unusual location. Let's avoid a stressful AFD and get a well-sourced article first, then do an uncontroversial move out of draftspace. (This is basically the equivalent of AFC rejects - yes, an editor in good standing can stick them into the main space anyway, but it's a lot better to solve the issues first, unless the AFC reviewer was clearly out of step.) @Another Believer: It looks like SilverLocust is asking for your input. I'm not trying to "threaten" you or anything, but per above, I'd strongly recommend waiting here, the article is not that close to showing notability currently. Would you be willing to withdraw for now and wait? SnowFire (talk) 12:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        Well, there's no point in moving to the main space if you are you just going to flag it for deletion. I was looking for collaboration but I'll turn my focus elsewhere for now. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ideas on structure

[edit]

If I was putting together this article, and obviously I shouldn't be, it would be organized around program series like Wikipedia Loves Libraries and Wikipedia Loves Art (in our earlier history, good academic sources for both of those), Wiknic, WCNA, Wikipedia Day etc, rather than whatever happened on individual days a particular reporter happened to notice us. All of these program types more or less started in NYC. Pharos (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pharos Great suggestion, thanks! I'm still in the process of reviewing sources above and adding content to the article, which currently presents information in chronological order. However, as the article is expanded, I'd support creating subsections for Wikipedia Day, etc, as you suggest. I invite others to help out! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:57, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk:Wikimedia_New_York_City&oldid=1281475677"