User talk:Scarpy/Archive 20

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

• From the editor: New for the Signpost: Author pages, tag pages, and a decent article search function

• News and notes: Foundation update on fundraising, new page patrol, Tides, and Wikipedia blocked in Pakistan

• Section 230: Twenty-six words that created the internet, and the future of an encyclopedia

• Disinformation report: Wikipedia on Santos

• Special report: Legal status of Wikimedia projects "unclear" under potential European legislation

• In the media: Furor over new Wikipedia skin, followup on Saudi bans, and legislative debate

• Op-Ed: Estonian businessman and political donor brings lawsuit against head of national Wikimedia chapter

• Opinion: Study examines cultural leanings of Wikimedia projects' visual art coverage

• Recent research: Wikipedia's "moderate yet systematic" liberal citation bias

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Organized Labour

• Tips and tricks: XTools: Data analytics for your list of created articles

• Featured content: 20,000 Featureds under the Sea

• Traffic report: Films, deaths and ChatGPT

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia US Mountain West online meeting

Wikipedia users in the United States Mountain West and High Plains will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 14, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the history, articles, or photographs of our region is encouraged to attend.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

• News and notes: Terms of Use update, Steward elections, and Wikipedia back in Pakistan

• In the media: Arbitrators open case after article alleges Wikipedia "intentionally distorts" Holocaust coverage

• Disinformation report: The "largest con in corporate history"?

• Essay: Machine-written articles: a new challenge for Wikipedia

• Tips and tricks: All about writing at DYK

• Featured content: Eden, lost.

• Gallery: Love is in the air

• Traffic report: Superbowl? Pfft. Give me some Bollywood! Yours sincerely, the world

• From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 years ago: Let's (not) delete the Main Page!

• Cobwebs: Editorial: The loss of the moral high ground

• Humour: The RfA Candidate's Song

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Colorado Collaboration invitation

WikiProject Colorado

WikiProject Colorado invites you to participate in our current collaboration to locate and document the following two original 1861 Colorado Territory county seats:

• Parkville, Colorado, the original county seat of Summit County, Colorado.
• San Miguel, Colorado, the original county seat of Costilla County, Colorado.

If you have any questions, please contact User:Buaidh (talk or e-mail).

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Wikipedia:Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

• News and notes: What's going on with the Wikimedia Endowment?

• Technology report: Second flight of the Soviet space bears: Testing ChatGPT's accuracy

• In the media: What should Wikipedia do? Publish Russian propaganda? Be less woke? Cover the Holocaust in Poland differently?

• Featured content: In which over two-thirds of the featured articles section needs to be copied over to WikiProject Military History's newsletter

• Recent research: "Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the Holocaust" in Poland and "self-focus bias" in coverage of global events

• From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Ca

I noticed you helped rewrite an article on Cocain Anonymous could you help me on an article with a very similar topic Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 11:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Need help and I noticed this was one of your things you write about I’m really hoping I can get some help with this. Thanks in advance

Draft:Drug Addicts Anonymous (DAA) Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 11:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey Andrew. I got asked a similar question maybe a year ago. I'm willing to help, but we'll struggle with notability concerns. See my reply here (which more or less also applies to what we're working with in the DAA case): User_talk:Scarpy/Archive_19#Creation_of_articles_for_12-step_fellowships. Relevant text reproduced below.

The long and short of it is that for most things on Wikipedia (with some exceptions where it's more strict) the topic of an article should meet the Wikipedia general notability guideline (see WP:GNG). Basically the standard is to have the topic mentioned in non-trivial ways in publications that meet Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sources (WP:RS). Non-trivial, in this case, would be more than, say, mentioning Gaming Addicts Anonymous amongst other groups; it should at least be be several paragraphs about the group, ideally whole articles. This isn't an exact science, and in cases where there's not an abundance of material on a topic, you may find the people contest the notability of that topic and therefore a Wikipedia article about it. The best places to start are Google Scholar, Google Books and Microsoft Academic. Luckily with most twelve-step groups, you'll find they're easy to search for because their names are pretty unique. So if you search these three sites, there's some sources that at first glance look promising [1] [2] [3]. Most (but not all) of the results there will be scholarly journals or books from reputable publishers. The next place to look would be news sources that are green on this list: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources. From there, it would be looking for other periodicals with a reputation with fact-checking and accuracy that may not be on the list. You'll want to assiduously avoid using material from Gaming Addicts Anonymous about Gaming Addicts Anonymous (or from forums, or blogs, or those kinds of things) the situations were you can use those are exceedingly rare.

If you repeat those searches for "Drug Addicts Anonymous" what do you see? - Scarpy (talk) 12:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply and yes that makes total sense about what we need to achieve I’ll look at what reliable sources I can get and appreciate the balance that we need to strike. I did notice the CA article didn’t have loads of sources. Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

My bigger problem is that I’m new at this and it can be hard to get it correct so thanks again I’m in need of some support or whatever you can offer. Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

There is a lot about NA on all of those searches but it’s as DAA is a newer fellowship it has less sources I would imagine Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 12:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/search/?q=Drug%20addicts%20anonymous Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 14:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=drug+addicts+anonymous&btnG= Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 14:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to bug you do you need me to do anything I know you said you would help what do I need to do Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Andrewsmith12345: I'm going to sound harsh, but if you want my help here you need to meet me halfway. In a differently life (10 to 15 years ago), I basically would go through and just do this for people. But I'm an old man now with less free time. So you're going to have to keep up. Please pay attention, and if something doesn't make sense ask specific questions. When I link something, I'm linking it because you need to read it to understand what I'm talking about. If you haven't done that for previous material, go back and do it. If I get the sense that you're not doing that, I'm going to bail here because I'm not going to repeat things that already exist and are explained in detail in Wikipedia documentation. I'll answer specific questions (like if you read those and something doesn't make sense to you). I'll help clarify things. But I don't have time to handhold.

The draft article you wrote got nixed because it wasn't predominately based on what Wikipedia calls reliable sources (WP:RS -- READ THIS). It was all self-published or non-scholarly sources (again, using Wikipedia's definitions of these terms) and therefore was deemed a non-notable topic (see WP:GNG -- READ THIS).

If you want that article to stick, you need to find reliable sources discussing Drug Addicts Anonymous and write the article predominately citing those sources. Ideally you'll want five or more, you might be able to make it work with like three.

Like I said, start with the Google Scholar and Google Books (READ BOTH OF THOSE, AND UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN DIFFERENT GOOGLE SEARCH PORTALS), go through the search results there and identify which of those articles or books is discussing Drug Addicts Anonymous with sufficient depth. Sufficient depth meaning, ideally, whole articles, whole chapters discussing DAA. If not that, there should at least be several paragraphs dedicated to it. You will have to go article by article and book by book. (I know I mentioned Microsoft Academic previously, but it looks like something awful happened to their search algorithm recently, so skip that for now.)

Search like this, with quotes, to find articles with the exact phrase: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22drug+addicts+anonymous%22&btnG=

You'll need to go article by article to see which ones are relevant and discussing DAA in sufficient depth.

Then go to Google Books and search for the exact phrase with quotes: https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=%22drug+addicts+anonymous%22&num=10

If the search results don't include a preview with a snippet of text, then it's probably a false positive.

If you can find say, five good sources between the two of those, you probably have enough to show that Drug Addicts Anonymous is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. If you're having problems getting to the full text, follow Gwern's tips.

Something showing up in either of those search results doesn't 100% mean it's a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards. It could be a self-published book or something that looks superficially like a scholarly article, but isn't. You'll still need to check. If you have specific questions there, I'll help you with those.

If you don't have five sources after going through those results, then you've go to start looking through other periodicals. That's harder.

You can start with a Google News search, again for the exact phrase, like so: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=nws&q=%22Drug+Addicts+Anonymous%22+-wikipedia&tbs=ar:1

With results, you have an additional matching exercise to do. Ideally you want to find things that are green or yellow in Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources (READ THAT). If they don't appear there, but you have reason to believe it's a source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, you can ask on or that noticeboard, or I'll be happy to help you with those.

I know that's lot of information, but once you get familiar with how Wikipedia defines notability and how that relates articles, you're basically good to go. - Scarpy (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

12 step fellowship help

Iv noticed the comment above. Do you know why Drug Addicts Anonymous is not on Wikipedia. Pazzauk (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

@Pazzauk: - I'm sorry homie, I'm really trying to help out here. But, look, if you've carefully read my responses above and can't figure this out, I can't help you. Maybe try WP:HELPDESK. In general, if want to contribute here, you need to take the time to carefully read all of the relevant documentation. It's all there, but no else can read it for you. You've got to take the time to make sure you understand it. - Scarpy (talk) 19:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I don’t get it so if your being harsh or not is irrelevant If I knew how to do it I wouldn’t have posted in here. Thanks for the reply anyway Pazzauk (talk) 20:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Good luck. - Scarpy (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Pazzauk (talk) 20:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Scarpy, your time is being wasted by these socks and our time, as volunteers, is the most precious commodity here. Each one of these socks has posted on multiple user pages asking the same things and every time they do, it is just more wasted time. My best suggestion is not to indulge them and report to an admin and/or SPI. S0091 (talk) 21:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Am 100% with you. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Drug Addicts Anonymous - Scarpy (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Maybe they will get that what they want is not going to happen here and the more disruption they cause only means action will come more quickly. Thanks for filing the SPI and everything else you do. S0091 (talk) 21:28, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

• News and notes: Wikimania submissions deadline looms, Russian government after our lucky charms, AI woes nix CNET from RS slate

• Eyewitness: Three more stories from Ukrainian Wikimedians

• In the media: Paid editing, plagiarism payouts, proponents of a ploy, and people peeved at perceived preferences

• Featured content: Way too many featured articles

• Interview: 228/2/1: the inside scoop on Aoidh's RfA

• Traffic report: Who died? Who won? Who lost?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Neuroticos Anonimos.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Neuroticos Anonimos.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Colorado collaboration

WikiProject Colorado

We wish to thank everyone who contributed to our two prior Colorado collaborations to document the Amache National Historic Site and our three lost original county seats of Parkville, St. Vrain, and San Miguel. We invite you to help with our new collaboration to document the seven following former county seats:

• California Ranch, Colorado near Franktown – Douglas County seat 1864 to 1874
• Dayton, Colorado near Twin Lakes – Lake County seat 1866 to 1868
• Hahns Peak, Colorado – Routt County seat 1878 to 1912
• Lourette, Colorado – Lake County seat 1863 to 1866
• San Juan City, Colorado – Hinsdale County seat February 10, 1874 to 1875
• Ula, Colorado at 38.1500°N 105.5019°W / 38.1500; -105.5019 – Custer County seat March 9, 1877 to 1878
• Wason, Colorado near 37.8931°N 106.8428°W / 37.8931; -106.8428 – Mineral County seat March 27, 1893 to 1893

If you have any questions, please contact  Buaidh  talk e-mail

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Wikipedia:Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)