Bart lists his appearence on The Daily Show on his website so he must be proud of his appearance. I will grant you the special snowflake...may I reference his website and repost?
On 7 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert A. Baker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On July 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert S. Lancaster, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.
On 11 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George Hrab, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.
I have granted rollback rights to your account. Given you clearly know what you are doing on the anti-vandalism front (as demonstrated here), I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. Rollback lets your revert vandalism quicker and to use anti-vandalism software like Huggle. If you do not want rollback, just let me know and I will remove it. —Tom Morris (talk) 20:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I, Sarah, hereby award Krelnik, with The Original Barnstar for your excellent work about skeptics. I came across a number of your articles via a recent blog and was happy to see the work you've been doing. Thank you for all you do for Wikipedia and free knowledge. SarahStierch (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Funny, several of your fellows said the exact opposite - that adding sources is something they called "independent research". Or is this just wikipedia's way of maintaining a monopoly on editing? 97.107.46.73 (talk) 19:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@97.107.46.73 I think maybe you are confusing the "no original research" rule with the "reliable sources" rule. They are two different, but related things. Wikipedia aims to summarize the knowledge of the world, so to put something in you need to show that fact is accepted as real somewhere in a reliable source. That is usually (but not always) a newspaper, magazine or book. In otherwords, something that has a chain of editorial control and is not, for instance, just someone ranting on a blog. I think MUFON probably deserves to be criticized as in your edit - in other words I agree with you. But it doesn't matter if you and I agree, it only matters if we can show that a reliable source agrees with us. Surely you must be able to find someone somewhere who has written something about this? Find those sources and cite them in the article (help on how to do that here). Good luck. -Krelnik (talk) 19:59, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Krelnik, with regard to the article on Firmage, it's a puffery piece and sadly, people in Utah are getting scammed by this guy. I have located dozens of people online posting reports about Firmage scamming them for money with his fake shell companies. It's sad, but Wikipedia is being used to promote this person with false information that is for the most part self-sourced and self generated. Please consider the victims of this loser and how wikipedia is helping him keep the scam going. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 17:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Criticism of someone can be included in their biography, but it has to be reliably sourced. So do your homework and find some newspapers, magazines or something that are covering this, and you can use those articles to put it in the article. But you can't use blogs and forum posts for this, because they could be bogus and Wikipedia could be sued. --Krelnik (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I am unable to locate a decent news story, though his victims are pushing for someone to write one. I found this : Tyler Riopelle, Chief Technician at Northwest Technologies, Every one at my company was lured into investing 5K apiece through a wire transfer to Utah in April of 2015. We appear to be completely scammed and have not heard anything back except to see a letter describing "Waterfall" which reads like a Ponzi scheme. We have all since filed reports with the FBI. I have not every heard until today reports about this being some free energy anti-gravity scam. Rather it was presented to us as a short term loan to be re-paid in 2 weeks maximum. A Wikipedia page exalting Joe Firmage as the technical creator of the internet and Microsoft was used to assure us that our money was going into trusted hands. There were at least four of us taken for almost 30 grand overnight. I expect more will soon surface. We are all based in Ashland Oregon.[1]. From the looks of things this has been turned over to the FBI and law enforcement by several of his victims. Please note that the Wikipedia bio was used as bait to scam these folks. Maybe someone should Afd his bio and get it off wikipedia as non-notable. Seems he is ancient history. I'll keep looking for some sources. The above text was one of the comments to the linkedin post I referenced. You have to dig around on the site to find all the posts. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 02:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well the AfD probably won't fly because he has a long history of involvement in various industries. Keep chugging away with law enforcement, and try to get a local or regional journalist interested in writing a story. Then you can base Wiki changes on that story. If these comments you found are legit, it sounds like it is just a matter of time before law enforcement gets involved. --Krelnik (talk) 12:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is his arrest record fair game to post in that article with refs? That would be a start, and at least give folks a heads up something doesn't smell right. I called this company in oregon and the guy he scammed don't work there anymore. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It could be, but you could run afoul of the no original research rule if you just link to the raw arrest record and draw some conclusion from it. Better to find a news write-up of the arrest - surely if a known entrepreneur like Firmage was arrested for DUI it was covered in the news? --Krelnik (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a plan. He cannot keep doing this and not get nailed sooner or later. Since he wired the money from some of his victims across a state line it places his scam under jurisdiction of the Feds. I agree with your assessment, sooner or later he will get nailed by them. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I put a photo on the Mackenberg article, I feel guilty about this because it was all your hard work on the article so I didn't really want to interfere but that's the best I could find, feel free to remove/delete it if you don't think it's any good. I do have another but it's not as good as that one. HealthyGirl (talk) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, no problem. I kind of shy away from posting photos that I haven't taken myself, because I see so many of them deleted for various reasons so I sort of have a mental block because of the fear of wasted effort. Thanks for doing this, hopefully this one will be left alone. --Krelnik (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See William Marriott (magician), do you know of his birth-date? Have not been able to find it. You are better at finding this sort of thing so if you have a bit of spare time can you look? It might be a dead-end but worth a try. Thanks a lot. HealthyGirl (talk) 05:05, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I gave it a look, but wow "William S. Marriott" is a super common name from that era, I'm finding too many matches to figure out which one is him. --Krelnik (talk) 13:17, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Adam Cuerden: Nice! I think I saw someone wikilink her somewhere and I thought, "I didn't know she had an English article, hmmm." Now I know why. Had no idea she'd tried to sue Wikimedia! I've been toying with the idea of writing an ebook about the history of woos fighting battles against Wikipedia - if I do it there's another chapter. --Krelnik (talk) 13:06, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I will create an article for this person, he was one of Houdini's agents similar to Mackenberg. Just thought you might be interested. I am currently working on an article for Houdini's lawyer Bernard M. L. Ernst. HealthyGirl (talk) 18:14, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw the talk discussion, I thought it was best to revert the article until the discussion was complete. The person who keeps changing it is unfortunately not participating in the discussion. (Also, they are using unclear edit summaries and changing other things at the same time). --Krelnik (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am in the process of expanding this article. One user had tried to remove the claim these mediums were fraudulent from the lead twice, it is possible he might attempt this again. I have added sources to clarify the sisters were caught in fraud. I believe that information should stay in the lead. 82.132.186.199 (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for work on the Universal Medicine article. As you can see from the talk page/edit history, this page has had numerous issues with disruption. Extra eyes are always appreciated. 79616gr (talk) 08:48, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated. I have the article on my watchlist, and it looked like some user was trying to scrub negative information from the article. After reverting that, I took a spin around the sources to ensure they were all working well so nobody could argue that the information wasn't sourced well. It's frustrating how quickly most news sites expire articles, I'm starting to adopt a personal policy of including Internet Archive links with deadurl=no on CITEs I create myself "just in case". Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 15:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry you feel that this is unsuitable.
I am biting the bullet on this one and publishing my research on arXiv, in the hopes that one day the
scientific community will accept my ideas.
In the meantime am writing an essay for the Parapsychological Association containing some of my ideas, with the data thus far
collected including third party verification that something strange is going on with some laptop BIOS and SPD (e2prom) chips
suggesting that specific hardware failures might not just be random.
Nearly lost a job once because this occured, they literally could not explain how a previously working machine got totally scrambled
but in light of my recent discoveries just proximity of a low level radioactive source to an open case PC could be the actual cause. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.14 (talk) 09:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@185.3.100.14: Thanks for stopping by. Your contributions are certainly interesting. But unfortunately Wikipedia has a policy that all its material must be not just interesting, but verifiable. That means they must be supported by reliable sources (i.e. third parties who have commented, not just the original author of the idea. Usually this means books, magazines or newspapers). On most articles that requires inline citations so the reader can easily see the source of each fact or claim. I think some of the material you are posting would be well suited for a blog, but until there is a significant body of third-party commentary on your ideas I don't think you're going to find a very good reception for them here at Wikipedia. Sorry about that! --Krelnik (talk) 12:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your feedback.
I am also trying to isolate the mechanism involved, seems that my research could actually have practical applications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.61 (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Probably relevant, the method I obtained this information refers to a classified document leaked on Wikileaks (ie takedown of "hostile" over US airspace) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.57 (talk) 06:14, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was literally just reading that Mythbusters edit, trying to figure out what they meant. I figured "exepull" meant example, saying electrocutions was confirmed even though it had mixed data. PUNKMINKIS (CHAT)14:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am glad to notice your contributing in a few National Register of Historic Places topics in Georgia, and especially glad to see your adding full references to the NRHP documents (sometimes labelled "Registration" and sometimes labelled "Inventory-Nomination") in a couple articles, including at Bibb City, Georgia, to which Bibb City Historic District redirects. I agree with your redirection there, as I find, deep in the NRHP document, that indeed the historic district covers the entire Bibb City. But hey, when adding full NRHP document reference, don't delete any reference to the NRIS database. It's a small technical point, but the NRHP nomination document for a place usually cannot document that the place was listed on the NRHP, because it is an application, in advance. The NRIS database does document date of listing and the reference number assigned at that date. And, where the NRIS reference is used supporting a NRHP infobox, usually all the information in the NRHP infobox is from NRIS, i.e. NRIS is the actual source. You should be aware of NRHP-related resources at wp:NRHPhelp and the fact you're welcome to post at wt:NRHP, whether or not you join WikiProject NRHP, where you'd be very welcome.
Anyhow, I have been enjoying expanding existing Georgia NRHP articles and creating new ones, cooperating some with User:Bubba73 who has been contributing lots of great photos, for several months. Bubba73 and i have both been watching the approximately-weekly-updated graphics at wp:NRHPprogress. And I have been learning a lot of random Georgia history. :) Keep up the good work! cheers --doncram17:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Doncram: Ah, thanks for clarifying that. I guess I've been super lucky, because every one of the scanned PDFs of Georgia NRHP documents I've looked at in my travels includes not only the application but also the certification page with the admission date. Based on that and the way that NRIS template just links to a search page, it seemed kinda tedious to me for verifying facts. ("Dear reader: You can verify this here, but hope you punch in the right search term!" ha.) But good to know not all NRHP documents are created equal - I suppose I might have guessed that. Incidentally I just posted my latest opus you might find interesting at Ellamae Ellis League, a Georgia architect of note. --Krelnik (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, wow, that architect article looks great. As you noticed, i created Shirley Hills Historic District, which I will add more to later, and then i have gotten bogged down in creating Dennis & Dennis. I get antsy and can't keep at any one article very long. About Ellamae Ellis League House (currently a redlink), which I see is discussed at wt:NRHP, i think you should go ahead and make it clear that it is being covered in the architect article in part by setting an anchor ({{anchor|Ellamae Ellis League House}}), then redirect to there (redirect to Ellamae Ellis League#Ellamae Ellis League House), unless/until you or anyone else feels it needs a separate article (i would also encourage any NRHP editor to go ahead and create a separate article if they are really expanding the coverage). Or go ahead and start a separate article now. I would have created the redirect but I don't want to be the "creator" of the article, if/when the redirect is expanded into a separate article. :) --doncram23:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Doncram: Good idea, I went ahead and created the anchor and the redirect so existing redlinks to the house will take you to the infobox in her bio. We can manipulate to make it better going forward, but at least clicks get you somewhere useful now. I know the feeling about getting distracted, I went down several rabbit holes cleaning up articles I found while working on League. --Krelnik (talk) 00:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article looks great but it will take some time for me to go through it at the level that it deserves. I was amazed to see your 2 woman's bios for each man's project on your user page. I think I'll go check out my on contributions and see how well I fit, not well I'm afraid. Perhaps one of us can suggest it to a larger group? Thanks for all your work. Smallbones(smalltalk)18:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Smallbones: Thanks! Yeah, it's going to be a challenge - especially since I loathe writing true stubs and then having to fight the inevitable AFD attempt. As you can see from my League biography I often try to source articles I create to the point where it sort of says, "I dare you to question this person's notability!" But that is very time consuming of course, it took me about two weeks of spare time to write League. --Krelnik (talk)
You are correct. I spotted the numbers on two ordinary links in that last section and mistook them for the source of the references at the bottom of the page. (If later comments do not add new references, I think it is sometimes easier if the reflist-talk template stays above those later comments, but it's normal for it to go at the bottom of the section.) Thanks for fixing it. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs)23:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I'm responding to your message to me at bwolozin@gmail.com. Yes! You were indeed correct that I wrote the article myself. I was on a phone conference call on Tuesday (yesterday), and someone told me that there was a Wikipedia entry on my, which admittedly shocked me. However, they told me that it was only one sentence long - apparently put up by someone at AAAS. So I decided to expand out the entry, but wasn't aware of the rules and regulations of Wikipedia. I actually had been aware a bit about editing Wikipedia because a Wikipedia person told me about Wikipedia parties at scientific meetings where people get together to provide information and references for wikipedia entries. I'm thinking of trying this for my courses.
Anyway, I'm happy to have you edit what I wrote, or to do anything else (for instance, I work at Boston University, and could have someone else at BU edit the entry.) Just let me know what you think is best. Thanks in advance. Ben Wolozin, bwolozin@gmail.com (aka BrainMan2017). — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrainMan2017 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yo. Some lovely pages appearing in Women in Red campaign. In other news, that guy is the pits. Is there no one around here who would take exception to threats and libel? His Twitter is full of ##it Jfderry (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2018 (UTC)Jfderry[reply]
@MrLinkinPark333: Oh cool. I'm very slow on some of my article projects, I must admit. I do have some sources and stuff on her squirreled away in Evernote, I'll see if I can throw a few sentences into your draft if you don't mind. I also live in Atlanta and I think she still lives here, so its possible I could go get a photo of her if needed. (I've never met her, but I'm a member of the Atlanta Track Club which operates the Peachtree Road Race. I actually stumbled on her as a possible article subject because the Track Club has a quite striking black and white photo of her at one of the 70s or 80s era Peachtrees that they sometimes put up at events). --Krelnik (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
On 28 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lometa Odom, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that as a high school basketball player, Lometa Odom set the Texas single-game scoring record of 78 points in 1951? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lometa Odom. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lometa Odom), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 9 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rose Connor, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that architect Rose Connor found in 1958 that only one percent of registered architects in the U.S. were female, and seven states had no female architects at all? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rose Connor. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rose Connor), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 15 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Agnes Ballard, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that architect Agnes Ballard(pictured) once said she designed "apartments, residences and hot dog stands"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Agnes Ballard. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Agnes Ballard), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
You have made three errors today which I will now point out.
First: you were changing from English (6' 6") to Metric units (2m)- this is English Wikipedia. There's a way to do it that accomodates both.
Second: But more importantly you were not only not supplying a source, but in some cases you were putting in a height that contradicted the source that was there. All information on Wikipedia must be verifiable, so if you want to put in someone's height you need to find a good news article (not a blog post or Twitter link) that has the info in it.
Third: Do not threaten other editors. We try to remain civil here, perhaps if you had ASKED me why I reverted your edits you'd have learned something? --Krelnik (talk) 11:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I made a good faith effort to find a new link by navigating the target page and failed. I'm glad that you found a new link but you could be less condescending about it, and right after the guy who left me the vandal message. 93.136.184.51 (talk) 19:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry it sounded condescending. I literally clicked on the old link, and pasted Moberly-Jourdain into the search box on that site and the correct URL popped right up. --Krelnik (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On 19 August 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ruth Blair, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when Georgia was given Rhodes Hall as a state archives building, the donor asked that it always be occupied, so state historian Ruth Blair(pictured) moved into the house herself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ruth Blair. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ruth Blair), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
For reasons I have forgotten I came across an 1896 quote from Amy Tanner about comparing the variability of interests of men and women.doi:10.1037/h0068394 She wrote "The real tendencies of women can not be known until they are free to chose, any more than those of a tied-up a dog can be." JSTOR3173639, page 785. While trying to see how I could inveigle this into the article I found you had started an improved draft with possible DYK in mind. Might this snippet help DYK? Best wishes. Thincat (talk) 15:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taner Edis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
Thanks for reverting my edit, I am sure you did not go to the sources and check an accurate translation of the native sources. This shows me how useful Wikipedia is without my contributions. How accurate, precise and honest it is.
Abdphysics (talk) 19:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit did not add any sources for me to check, in English or any other language. You changed the word "mullah" to "sorcerer" in several cases. There is such a thing as a mullah, there is no such thing as a sorcerer. --Krelnik (talk) 15:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello - my name is Susan Gerbic (Sgerbic) and I'm writing to you because at some point you joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism. This might have been months ago - or even years ago. With the best of intentions the project was created years ago, and sadly like many WikiProjects has started to go dormant. A group of us are attempting to revitalize the Skepticism project, already we have begun to clean up the main page and I've just redone the participant page. No one is in charge of this project, it is member directed, which might have been the reason it almost went dormant. We are attempting to bring back conversations on the talk page and have two subprojects as well, in the hopes that it might spark involvement and a way of getting to know each other better. One was created several years ago but is very well organized and a lot of progress was made, Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skeptical organisations in Europe. The other I created a couple weeks ago, it is very simple and has a silly name Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skepticism Stub Sub-Project Project (SSSPP). This sub-project runs from March 1 to June 1, 2022. We are attempting to rewrite skepticism stubs and add them to this list. As you can see we have already made progress.
The reason I'm writing to you now is because we would love to have you come back to the project and become involved, either by working on one of the sub-projects, proposing your own (and managing it), or just hanging out on the talk page getting to know the other editors and maybe donate some of your wisdom to some of the conversations. As I said, no one is in charge, so if you have something in mind you would like to see done, please suggest it on the talk page and hopefully others will agree. Please add the project to your watchlist, update your personal user page showing you are a proud member of WikiProject Skepticism. And DIVE in, this is what the work list looks like [2] frightening at first glance, but we have already started chipping away at it.
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Participants page has gone though a giant change - you may want to update your information. And of course if this project no longer interests you, please remove your name from the participant list, we would hate to see you go, but completely understand.
i was curious so i checked out your page and it's pretty cool how much you've done for wikipedia and how passionate you are about sharing knowledge :D thank you for all you've done
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Saunders (skeptic) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Women in Religion have a monthly virtual edit-a-thon and the next session is December 2nd 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. CST. For Zoom meeting details, contact Dzingle1 or RosPost. Women in Red members are welcome to join the Zoom Meeting here
Tip of the month:
Think of rewarding contributors, especially newcomers, with a barnstar.
Hey, I'm reaching out to you because years ago, you were attending local meetups. Next week, a group of WMF staff members, specifically the leaders and many managers from the Product and Technology department, will meet in Atlanta. Would you be able to join us around afternoon/dinner time? SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 23:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh hey there, I didn't see the notification for this until now. Yes I'd be interested in this meeting, I work from home and have a very flexible schedule. Let me know when it would be, assuming I haven't missed it already. -- Krelnik (talk) 13:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Krelnik. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
When creating biographies, don't forget to use Template:DEFAULTSORT. Accessible from "Wiki markup" at the foot of the page being edited, it allows categories to be listed under the subject's family name rather than their first or given name.
Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,269 articles during this period!
21 Apr 2025: 20.090% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,061,363; 414,126 women)
24 Mar 2025: 20.070% (2,057,083 bios; 412,857 women)
Tip of the month:
Those of you who experience harassment while trying to create or improve articles about women are welcome to bring your problems to our attention on the Women in Red talk page.
Who are the most overlooked and interesting Women in Red? We've no idea, but we're putting together our list of the 100 most interesting ex-Women in Red. We are creating the list to celebrate 10 years of Women in Red and we hope to present it at Wikimania. We are ignoring the obvious, so do you have a name or subject we should consider? Can you suggest a DYK style hook? If you are shy about editing that page, you are welcome to add ideas and comments on the talk page.
Every language Wikipedia has its own policies regarding notability and reliable sources. Before translating an article from one language Wikipedia into English Wikipedia, research the subject and verify that the translated article will meet English Wikipedia's policy requirements.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Request to overturn administrator's decision". Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
