User talk:DASonnenfeld/Archive 9
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:DASonnenfeld. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Category:Fisheries conservation organizations
Category:Fisheries conservation organizations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:32, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Forestry and thanks!
It seems that we have some similar interests. Environmental economics is the area of my earliest publications, and I remain engaged in the subject. One recent book I thought you might find of interest (covering some comparatively neglected aspects of environmental/forestry concerns) is Gender and Green Governance by Bina Agarwal.
Additionally, I just joined the Journals project. (I'm active in a number of academic organizations and also edit a scholarly journal.) Finally, I would like to thank you for posting on the talk page of my student, Cristell24. I really like your advice to her as a new Wikipedia user, and with your permission, would like to copy to share with other students. Please advise if you are ok with that. Thanks!
DStrassmann (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi DStrassmann, Thanks for your note. I do very much appreciate Bina Agarwal's work. As a participant in WP:Sociology and also WP:Globalization, I've responded to several of your students, I think. Good to see them getting engaged with Wikipedia; they seem very receptive and appreciative of feedback. You are welcome to share my comments to Cristell24 with others. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:05, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your prompt response. Please don't hesitate to get in touch if you see any of my students headed in the wrong direction. My current biggest student challenge is a student who has created a new article on "Female education and economic development." He is having a hard time with avoiding personal essay format. I had tried to get him to write on a narrower topic or to add a section or sections to another topic. If you have any constructive thoughts, I'd be most appreciative. DStrassmann (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- PS Sorry for not following your talkback instructions. I do not quite follow how the system you propose works. Sorry! I am willing to learn. DStrassmann (talk) 21:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your prompt response. Please don't hesitate to get in touch if you see any of my students headed in the wrong direction. My current biggest student challenge is a student who has created a new article on "Female education and economic development." He is having a hard time with avoiding personal essay format. I had tried to get him to write on a narrower topic or to add a section or sections to another topic. If you have any constructive thoughts, I'd be most appreciative. DStrassmann (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- No worries... Just took a quick look at that article & tagged it for several WP's. I'd suggest that the student ask for feedback from editors at one of them, perhaps WP:Sociology. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! Can any member of a WP tag an article? How is the importance level determined?DStrassmann (talk) 23:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- I fairly routinely tag articles with WPs that I think would have an interest in that article. The more well developed WPs have importance level criteria, e.g.: Wikipedia:WikiProject New York/Assessment#Importance scale. The WP tag should lead you to the criteria, if any... Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Suppose someone tagged an article with say, low importance, and I thought the topic merited medium importance. Could I just change the tag, or is there a process? (Just asking for general purposes.) Thanks! DStrassmann (talk) 23:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- That happens. If there are differing opinions (for anything), the usual protocol is to discuss on the article's talk page. If that does not resolve things, it can and perhaps should be raised for input from other editors at the relevant WP. (Also, it is not unusual for a given article to be more or less important for different WPs.) Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 23:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Suppose someone tagged an article with say, low importance, and I thought the topic merited medium importance. Could I just change the tag, or is there a process? (Just asking for general purposes.) Thanks! DStrassmann (talk) 23:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- I fairly routinely tag articles with WPs that I think would have an interest in that article. The more well developed WPs have importance level criteria, e.g.: Wikipedia:WikiProject New York/Assessment#Importance scale. The WP tag should lead you to the criteria, if any... Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! Can any member of a WP tag an article? How is the importance level determined?DStrassmann (talk) 23:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- No worries... Just took a quick look at that article & tagged it for several WP's. I'd suggest that the student ask for feedback from editors at one of them, perhaps WP:Sociology. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Female education and economic development page advice
Hi, I'm the creator of the Female education and economic development page that you edited a little bit. I'm working on it as part of a class assignment, and am new to Wikipedia so I was wondering if you could give me some help. Mainly my concern is the one raised on the talk page, that the article is too essay-like. I agree that this is a problem and am planning on trying to help fix this. Given the feedback however, my professor has questioned whether the article belongs on Wikipedia or whether I should delete it and work elsewhere. I do have my doubts myself, and given your experience I was wondering if you could weigh in, even if this isn't necessarily your area of expertise.
My rationale for creating the page is that there is a wealth of research on economic development that is not represented on Wikipedia. I had planned to work on a subset of this, creating an article on what factors related to education correlate with economic development; however this would be a substantially-sized page to create, and for the purposes of my assignment I had to do something smaller. Thus in order to get the proper scale, I looked to create an article about one of the bigger areas within education and economic development, hence my page. My thought is that I'm adding information from a significant area of research, but perhaps it is too narrow to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia or alternatively I need to seriously rework my presentation of it. It probably doesn't help that an article on Education and Economic Development doesn't exist yet, as that would bridge my article to what already exists.
If you get a chance, thanks for the help, I would really appreciate the feedback of someone with more experience than me! Bwl5 (talk) 19:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Bw15, Thanks for your note and query. I'll give it some thought. In the meanwhile, I would suggest posting a similar question on the article's talk page, plus a short note with a link to that question on relevant WikiProject talk pages. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 19:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you have contributed in the past to Category:global warming. Maybe a way forward regarding my remarks at Talk:Public opinion on climate change would be to really focus on mapping the tree of global warming articles? I don't really know if using the category feature is the best way. But armed with such a map, then everyone interested in discussing the current state of affairs would actually have something tangible to look at and discuss, which would hopefully become a good tool for an evidence-based assessment of the status quo. Does that seem like a reasonable approach to you? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:37, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi NewsAndEventsGuy, Thanks for reaching out & for your suggestion. I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting, though. Where would such a map go (beyond the already-existing category)? If you have not already done so, you might consider raising this with members of WikiProject Environment's Climate Change task force. One thing that I note looking at the Category:Global warming is that there do not seem to be many (any?) articles about particular climate change surveys. Perhaps one step towards what you might have in mind would be to take one of the more well known and/or highly cited surveys and spin off/ develop an article on that survey. It's a big (and interesting) topic; it may be helpful to invite others at the Climate Change task force (or WP:Sociology) to join you. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- A)Well the whole concept of portals/categories/et cetera is all new to me, so I don't know the best place to make such a map.
- B)If I had to choose right now, despite my ignorance, I'd pick Category:global warming
- C)Of course, that already exists, but it has been idle, so I'm suggesting a concerted effort to audit it and add or prune or shuffle around as makes most sense.
- D)As for the task force, I deleted my membership a long time ago when I realized the creature was dead.
- In sum, I'm suggesting a map be made from scratch, or an existing map be carefully audited, and that this be done by eds interested in working to make our collection of articles as useful as possible. Game? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- PS BTW, I'm interested in the _tree_ of global warming articles, not surveys of opinion specifically. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:23, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi NewsAndEventsGuy, Are you thinking of something like this? Where were you thinking of putting it? Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 19:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
| Click on "►" below to display subcategories: |
|---|
- Yes... that's the same page I linked in the title of this thread, and twice in my prior comments. I wasn't thinking of "putting it" anywhere, just having it tuned up so we can all look at it to see how any of these discussions about article scope & title fit in with the rest of our coverage. My belief is that there is an inappropriate amount of overlap, and some articles have become cluttered due to their past use as "catch-alls". See for example, this comment by William M. Connolley (talk · contribs). With a new-and-updated map of the article tree in hand, we could compare notes based on evidence and with a guide based on something more tangible than general impression... that goes for myself too - no slight intended to anyone who has commented thus far. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:50, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Well, more than a page; if you click on the arrow, you see the whole category tree... My suggestion would be to raise this suggestion at WP:Environment, if not the Climate Change task force, and see if you get some takers. I agree that it would be worthwhile making such an assessment. One vehicle for doing this would be a 'work-space' (sub page) under WP:Environment or the Climate Change task force. Thanks for your interest in strengthening this important area of Wikipedia coverage! There is also the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion arena, which includes Wikipedians who are keen on such undertakings. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 19:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing out the arrow, of course, all it does is display the subcategory entries that appear at the top of the full category page. The Environment task force appears to be just as dead as the climate task force, though the category crowd is interesting. If I wish to develop the idea further I'll float it at what I think is the most-watched AGW talk page, Talk:Global warming, which I think you have watch listed. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:08, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Sounds like a plan. WP:Env may be quiet, but you may get interested editors there, too. I may have watched the primary article on the topic at times past, but tend to shy away from high-traffic/ high-controversy articles. Best wishes with your efforts! I do watch the WP:Env talk page, so if, from time to time, you want to post a notice there, I'll most likely see it. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 20:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing out the arrow, of course, all it does is display the subcategory entries that appear at the top of the full category page. The Environment task force appears to be just as dead as the climate task force, though the category crowd is interesting. If I wish to develop the idea further I'll float it at what I think is the most-watched AGW talk page, Talk:Global warming, which I think you have watch listed. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:08, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Well, more than a page; if you click on the arrow, you see the whole category tree... My suggestion would be to raise this suggestion at WP:Environment, if not the Climate Change task force, and see if you get some takers. I agree that it would be worthwhile making such an assessment. One vehicle for doing this would be a 'work-space' (sub page) under WP:Environment or the Climate Change task force. Thanks for your interest in strengthening this important area of Wikipedia coverage! There is also the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion arena, which includes Wikipedians who are keen on such undertakings. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 19:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lewis Mumford may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- * ''The Story of Utopias]'' (1922)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sacred-texts.com/utopia/sou/index.htm |title=The Story of
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:51, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks much
Thanks for your help at Category:Streisand effect, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 19:51, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech
There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:
- List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
- Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
- Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
- Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
- Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.
Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 19:51, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
November 2013 GA Thanks
 | This user has contributed to Erving Goffman good articles on Wikipedia. |
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I thank you for your editorial contributions to Erving Goffman, which recently was promoted to WP:GA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
- Excellent! Thanks for the notification. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 18:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
I reviewed the new Globalization rules. * is not a wildcard in a regular expression. It means match the character before it 0 or more times. I took the liberty of reformatting the regexes. Wildcards are not needed at the end of search terms because partial words are matched by default. \W is used to match at the beginning or end of a word. \w (lowercase w) is used to match a word character (a-z) as in 10 /\wglobali(z|s)ation/ which will match globalization in the middle of a word. (z|s) matches z or s. There is a new tool for testing rules at Wikimedia Tool Labs --Bamyers99 (talk) 00:18, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks very much for your assistance! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 00:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Social inertia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Attitude (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:32, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
From your experience in Wageningen, you might be able to contribute to the new article "International Facility for Food Irradiation Technology".
—Wavelength (talk) 00:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Wavelength! Not too much to add, but an interesting article. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 03:42, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi David – thanks for your edits to this article. I've added a reference for Ari Brynjolfsson where you put a "citation needed" tag. I notice you placed a {{external links}} tag on the article but I'm unsure what you are suggesting I do to address the issue. Did you mean that I should remove all the WorldCat links? Personally, I thought they might be useful. Best regards — Hebrides (talk) 21:49, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Hebrides. Thank you! I've replied with an explanation and a couple of possible avenues to address it on the article's talk page. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 23:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi David – thanks for your edits to this article. I've added a reference for Ari Brynjolfsson where you put a "citation needed" tag. I notice you placed a {{external links}} tag on the article but I'm unsure what you are suggesting I do to address the issue. Did you mean that I should remove all the WorldCat links? Personally, I thought they might be useful. Best regards — Hebrides (talk) 21:49, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited International Day of Forests, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
I think you forgot about your WP:BURDEN when you restored that unverifiable material. I've left a note on the talk page reminding folks. Please don't restore that material unless the edit can comply with policy. Toddst1 (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Syracuse Chiefs may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- present)<ref>Previously known as Alliance Bank Stadium (2005-2013), and P&C Stadium (1997 - 2005)]</ref>
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:10, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Happy New Year DASonnenfeld!
.jpg?lang=en)
|
|
| Hello DASonnenfeld: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 05:03, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
|
WP Sociology in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Sociology for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 02:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- I hope you'll be able to take part in this interview. I think the resulting article will be of interest to ASA/ISA, too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Category:Syracuse, New York disambiguation pages
Category:Syracuse, New York disambiguation pages, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 07:15, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Burma#Copied from Talk:Myanmar -- PBS (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Barnstar award
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| Is hereby awarded to you for outstanding work in adding references to the biography of Walter John Raymond -- Kendrick7talk 05:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC) |
Category:Saint Petersburg disambiguation pages
Category:Saint Petersburg disambiguation pages, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 07:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
genetically modified trees re-titled
Hi DASonnenfeld, thank you for taking time to edit the page 'Genetically Modified Tree', with regards to a specific edit that you made on the 1st Feb I would like to discuss the suitability of the current title of the page. It stands to reason that the title should be singular and I understand why you made the edit but I think that the page would be more suitably named 'Genetically Modified Trees' - Taking as an example a very similar wikipedia topic 'Genetically Modified Crops' uses the plural - I think this is to denote the fact that multiple different species of crop plants are genetically modified and the title encompasses this use. In the same way - the genetic modification of trees occurs with multiple different tree species, such as plums, eucalyptus and poplars. Secondly when Genetically modified tree is typed into google scholar the majority of the papers denote the phrase as genetically modified/engineered trees rather than the singular. For these two reasons I would like to change the title of the page, however I will not go ahead with this without first seeking your permission.
Kind Regards,
Jadedcasio (talk) 15:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Jadedcasio, Thanks for your note. I think the current title is most appropriate for Wikipedia and the article. But you may solicit input from other editors, too. You might consider initiating a discussion on that article's talk page. I do not know if/ how many editors are watching that page or how many comments you may get, though. It may take a while to achieve consensus. Another approach would be to post a request for comment on one or more WikiProject sites, such as WikiProject Forestry, or WikiProject Plants -- directing people to the article talk page discussion on the topic. Hope this is helpful. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Category:Environmental agency disambiguation pages
Category:Environmental agency disambiguation pages, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 06:43, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Coffee
I thought you might be interested in reading a discussion on the topic of the origin of the drink coffee (not the plant) at Coffee. I am not participating in the discussion, but have simply been watching the article. The disagreement is getting to the point where one has said he/she intends to seek mediation. I thought you might have a background in botany and might be able to help resolve the differences, but, even if you cannot do that, you might still be interested in the discussion.CorinneSD (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. A lot of discussion! Sorry, no special knowledge or expertise there. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 12:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)