Jump to content

User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2022/02

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

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Saturday Feb 5: ONLINE Met Afrofuturist edit-a-thon (and monthlong campaign)

[edit]
February 5, 12-2pm: ONLINE Met Afrofuturist edit-a-thon

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for a virtual Metropolitan Museum of Art edit-a-thon Saturday afternoon (12-2pm) with partners AfroCROWD and Black Lunch Table. To join the livestream from your computer or smartphone, just watch at this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

Our focus will be on the exhibition Before Yesterday We Could Fly inspired by Seneca Village, and featured art, artists, history and culture of the African diaspora.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

We are also running a Met Afrofuturist chat channel on our Wikimedia NYC Discord server for the whole monthlong campaign.

12:00pm - 2:00 pm livestream via YouTube

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 05:30, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

21:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC: Strategic Planning Survey for our community
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

Hi Wiki-Yorkers,

We are reaching out as part of our community-building efforts at Wikimedia NYC. Our regional group is engaged in a strategic planning process to sharpen our strategy for the next three years, and we would like your input. Given your connection to us and your experience with Wikimedia NYC, I would be grateful if you would be willing to share some of your perspectives and insights as we think about our next chapter.

Attached is an anonymous survey, which will remain active until February 28. Responses will go directly to Barretto Consulting and the Wikimedia NYC board will receive responses in aggregate and to identify cross-cutting themes. Please take some time to answer it and share your thoughts with us.

Fill out our Wikimedia NYC survey!

Thank you so much. We appreciate all your ideas and community spirit.

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 18:37, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

19:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Bach cantata

[edit]

You didn't read the article. It's not Cantatas (Bach), so the analogy to Chopin's Etudes doesn't work. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) [[Cantatas (Bach)]] would have to be changed from a redirect to List of Bach cantatas to the desired title. Matters like that, which sometimes require deletions, have previously been sorted out by user-friendly administrators. Mathsci (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

only that the article we talk about is NOT about Bach's cantatas, but that seems not to matter - (sorry for shouting) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't the article a general introduction to the cantatas of JSB, incorporating a list of cantatas by BWV numbers? Since introductory surveys like that already exist in WP:RSs (Dürr, Whittaker, Cantagrel, ...), that article only has to summarise those sources. In the case of Grove online and the entry for JSB, Section 13 is about "Cantatas" (excluding Oratorios and Passions) and is written by Christoph Wolff: it's long, detailed and an excellent source, but not used for the article, which is a shame. Mathsci (talk) 19:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn't. The list is at Cantatas (Bach), which is fine. Bach cantata - and I said so in the RM - was meant to be a better link for one of those cantatas than cantata, which is a detour. It was written back in 2010, and I barely remember. Better sources would be lovely. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: I don't see what the difference is? It's not like there's a type of composition called "Bach cantata", which anyone can write, e.g. like a Fourier transform could be applied by any mathematician/engineer, not just Joseph Fourier himself. "Bach cantata" seems to mean nothing more than a cantata written by Bach. The only difference, it seems to me, is that there is a special term in German called Bachkantate, but I don't see why that should change the way we name the English article. -- King of ♥ 19:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Repeating: we have two articles in both German and English, de:Bachkantate = Bach cantata, about the term, and de:Liste der Bachkantaten = List of Bach cantatas, listing them all. (In English, we have many more by now.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because of linguistic differences, it is not a requirement that articles in different Wikipedias necessarily correspond one-to-one. For example, French Wikipedia doesn't even have an article on Lunch. -- King of ♥ 21:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for my first statement above. I didn't read the article recently, which was massively changed, including addition of a list, by Francis Schonken. I don't know what to do with two parallel lists, - help wanted. And I understand that you, Mathsci, can't help because of the interaction ban with FS. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts:: your comments about "Cantatas (Bach)" have been very helpful. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 00:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:MCQ § Possible Flickrwashing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi King of Hearts. Would you mind taking a look at this? -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
File:15th AB LH officers.jpg and File:WOs & Sgts Mess 19th AD.jpg are also licensed as non-free and are being used in South Alberta Light Horse. The former is claimed to have been taken in 1925, and the latter in 195u8. Perhaps the 1925 one is also {{PD-Canada}}? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, any Canadian photos taken before January 1, 1946 can be transferred to Commons, no questions asked. -- King of ♥ 07:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarying things. Would you mind taking a look at File:15th AB LH officers.jpg to check whether I converted the license correctly? The also appears to be an older version that most likely was deleted per WP:F5. Perhaps this is a better quality version that can now be restored since the file is no longer licensed as non-free content? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Yeah, looks like in a lot of cases it'll have to be carried out by an admin to ensure the highest-resolution image possible. -- King of ♥ 04:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again for taking care of this. I going to assume that the 1953 photograph needs to continue to be treated as non-free for Wikipedia purposes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I'm actually not sure how to deal with expired Crown Copyright photos from Canada. If this photo is Crown Copyright, then it would be PD in Canada, but not before the URAA restoration date in order to be PD in the US. However, on c:Template:PD-UKGov it is indicated that "HMSO has declared that the expiry of Crown Copyrights applies worldwide", though it is unclear whether this applies just to UK works or works from the entire Commonwealth. -- King of ♥ 05:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

February 23, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or the talk page.

7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team 19:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2022

[edit]

I see that this article is deleted, yet it would typically sit equally with the articles for the sister water authorities as shown at Category:Water_companies_of_Victoria_(Australia). What oversight has taken place to class one water authority less notable than another? $1.5 billion in assets you would think make it notable. What needs to happen here? 203.14.161.122 (talk) 03:13, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OSE. Just because those other articles exist, doesn't mean that this article should. There are three possibilities here: 1) the other articles have received more coverage in reliable sources to meet the notability guideline; 2) the other articles are just as non-notable, it's just that nobody has bothered to nominate them for deletion yet; 3) coverage of Central Highlands Water has increased since 2019 enough that it now warrants an article. -- King of ♥ 04:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Or 4) the decision to delete was ill-informed and short-sighted. Typically you will see that these the cities with the newspapers are those that have the water authorities written about them. They are not less notable, they are just less relevant to the big metropolitan newspapers so it is that typical big place bias, and reflected in the lack of available sources, not lacking in notability. Same function, same notability. 203.14.161.122 (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And looking at Category:Water companies by country it all seems troublesome to target one article which is similar in scope and nature to many others. It seems a very narrow view by one person making a nomination is not seen in light of similar context, so may be the RfD process is not truly reflective of a consensus. 203.14.161.122 (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)