User talk:PimRijkee

Welcome to PimRijkee's talk page. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article's talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or let me know where specifically you'd prefer the reply.

Archives

2009 2010 2011

Hi. You added images to the Whale fall article. You put that two of the images were taken off Southeast Florida. They were actually taken from a whale fall on the Santa Cruz Basin sea floor, south of Santa Cruz Island, in Southern California. There aren't any gray whales off the coast of Florida. SaberToothedWhale (talk) 01:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi STW, thanks for the correction. I am not knowledgeable on the topic of whalefalls, or whales for that matter, and took the images from elsewhere. I guess I followed the data that was supplied at that page. Anyway, thanks for the keen eye. Regards, Pim Rijkee (talk) 09:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys!

Thanks to all of you who have commented on the New Page Triage talkpage. If you haven't had a chance yet, check it out; we're discussing some pretty interesting ideas, both from the Foundation and the community, and moving towards implementing quite a few of them :).

In addition, on Tuesday 13th March, we're holding an office hours session in #wikimedia-office on IRC at 19:00 UTC (11am Pacific time). If you can make it, please do; we'll have a lot of stuff to show you and talk about, including (hopefully) a timetable of when we're planning to do what. If you can't come, for whatever reason, let me know on my talkpage and I'm happy to send you the logs so you can get an idea of what happened :). Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Mud adder, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Iris and Death Adder (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) 10:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all!

Thanks to everyone who attended our first office hours session; the logs can be found here, if you missed it, and we should be holding a second one on Thursday, 22 March 2012 at 18:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. I hope to see you all there :).

In the meantime, I have greatly expanded the details available at Wikipedia:New Page Triage: there's a lot more info about precisely what we're planning. If you have ideas, and they aren't listed there, bring them up and I'll pass them on to the developers for consideration in the second sprint. And if you know anyone who might be interested in contributing, send them there too!

Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PimRijkee,

It has been brought to my attention that it was you who tagged the Ghana Empire article as OR & additional citation needed. I have opened a discussion on the article's talk page here. It would really be nice to read your concerns.

Best Regards, Tamsier (talk) 23:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on article's talk page. Pim Rijkee (talk) 02:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys.

I appreciate this isn't quite what you signed up for, but I figured as people who are already pretty good at evaluating whether material is useful or not useful through Special:NewPages, you might be interested :). Over the last few months we've been developing the new Article Feedback Tool, which features a free text box. it is imperative that we work out in advance what proportion of feedback is useful or not so we can adjust the design accordingly and not overwhelm you with nonsense.

This is being done through the Feedback Evaluation System (FES), a tool that lets editors run through a stream of comments, selecting their value and viability, so we know what type of design should be promoted or avoided. We're about to start a new round of evaluations, beginning with an office hours session tomorrow at 18:00 UTC. If you'd like to help preemptively kill poor feedback, come along to #wikimedia-office and we'll show you how to use the tool. If you can't make it, send me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org or drop a note on my talkpage, and I'm happy to give you a quick walkthrough in a one-on-one session :).

All the best, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Big update on what the developers have been working on, and what is coming up:

coding

• Fixes for the "moved pages do not show up in Special:NewPages" and "pages created from redirects do not show up in Special:NewPages" bugs have been completed and signed off on. Unfortunately we won't be able to integrate them into the existing version, but they will be worked into the Page Triage interface.
• Coding has been completed on three elements; the API for displaying metadata about the article in the "list view", the ability to keep the "patrol" button visible if you edit an article before patrolling it, and the automatic removal of deleted pages from the queue. All three are awaiting testing but otherwise complete.

All other elements are either undergoing research, or about to have development started. I appreciate this sounds like we've not got through much work, and truthfully we're a bit disappointed with it as well; we thought we'd be going at a faster pace :(. Unfortunately there seems to be some 24-72 hour bug sweeping the San Francisco office at the moment, and at one time or another we've had several devs out of it. It's kind of messed with workflow.

Stuff to look at

We've got a pair of new mockups to comment on that deal with the filtering mechanism; this is a slightly updated mockup of the list view, and this is what the filtering tab is going to look like. All thoughts, comments and suggestions welcome on the NPT talkpage :). I'd also like to thank the people who came to our last two office hours sessions; the logs will be shortly available here.

I've also just heard that the first functional prototype for enwiki will be deployed mid-April! Really, really stoked to see this happening :). We're finding out if we can stick something up a bit sooner on prototype.wiki or something.

I appreciate there may be questions or suggestions where I've said "I'll find out and get back to you" and then, uh. not ;p. I sincerely apologise for that: things have been a bit hectic at this end over the last few weeks. But if you've got anything I've missed, drop me a line and I'll deal with it! Further questions or issues to the usual address. Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PimRijkee. You have new messages at Wimbi's talk page.
Message added 12:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

mabdul 12:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are only very rare situations in which a secondary source would be preferable to a primary one. One example would be where a piece of research is referenced in a review of the literature. An article in Reuters, the NY Times or the Readers' Digest would be of little value, since the journalist would almost certainly not understand what he or she was writing about in any depth. This is one of the reason why Wikipedia articles are so unreliable: the editors resist all attempt to correct mistakes and favour authority over accuracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TopGarbageCollector (talk • contribs) 08:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes struggle with adding sources to an article that I either strongly disagree with or I know are factually incorrect. That is why we generally add more than one source if the claim is a controversial one. Primary sources only invite to be interpreted: this is not our goal so they are to be avoided, or used only as a supporting source. Good luck with the editing, try and steer away from controversies when you first start out, makes for a much nicer experience I have found. Pim Rijkee (talk) 09:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Rahim Singh

Thanks for the encouragement, This article seems to have a contentious history. I am trying to walk the tightrope between his believers and detractors as per Wiki policy. Please keep on reviewing the work and advising. I need to post a few pics of which I have the copyright,Please advise me how to do that.Realnews7 (talk) 08:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put the page on my watchlist, but give me a heads-up if issues arrise anyway. Re the copyrighted images: photos are very valuable to Wikipedia, but you will have to release the picture under a different license (no copyright):

• To the public domain
• Under a Creative Commons licence (conditions for the preferred CC-BY-SA 3.0here, othershere).
• Under fair use. This will retain the copyright, but has very limited usability and is not preferred.

So think about what you want and head over to Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia's file database; upload the image there. You can read how to insert the photo in your article after uploading it on Commons here. Let me know if it works. Pim Rijkee (talk) 09:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a tonne, For your support.I have started work on another article , but some funny guys have issues with Ram Rahim's name.Just advice me , what should be done. I thought everyone is entitled to having his name! Thanks for your patience, Regards, Realnews7 (talk) 12:07, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Had some trouble finding what controversy you were referring to, but found it here. User:MatthewVanitas raises the proper points and I can highly recommend following up on them, as I see you already started doing. I am not an expert on naming conventions, but a quick glance at the relevant guidelines show that MatthewVanitas is right. Ditch the honorifics in the text and make sure you read the guidelines I just linked you to: that should take away many of the doubts. Articles related to religion can be quite controversial, so as a tip: leave you personal beliefs at the door and read the rules, this makes the article better at informing the readers about the person you feel positive/negative about. Good luck! Pim Rijkee (talk) 05:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pim I know what you are talking about but I get frustrated when power hungry editors just undo a very valid point which HAS references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VinDibs (talk • contribs) 10:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pim,

Thanks for your feedbcak, very helpful! I have now updated the references and hope that it's OK. Regards Ld (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Ld, I have been a bit busy. The formatting of the references looks good. I have added the additional links you added below the references to a section External links, as they should be. But you need to cut down on the amount:

• Pick 3 maybe 4 for this article length that add the most
• Format them in the same way as references. That is, no bare URLs but with writer/name/publisher etc.
• Remove the rest of the links - check here for rules on external links.

Someone else reviewed your submission as well, and had valid points. I removed the 'semi-famous' claim as it does not really mean anything, and the references speak for themselves. Also, the reviewer noted that some of the sources were just articles written by the subject. Preferably, you quote a source were someone other than the subject acknowledges the claim about the subject (e.g., you quote the marathon article after claiming he covered the marathon. Ideally, you quote an article that someone else wrote on the marathon coverage done by the subject). But, there are some proper sources in there, enough to establish notability I am sure. Please update the entry and give me a heads-up if you want me to have another look, you're doing great. Regards, Pim Rijkee (talk) 05:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PimRijkee,

Youre welcome. And I read the source on this and Im pretty sure its wrong too and heres why:

Ralph the Dog has been the Official mascot for the Calgary Stampeders for over 35 years. That is even stated on The Calgary Stampeders Wikipedia page Unfortunately I couldnt find out what year this was posted but that puts his origin at no later than 1977. There is also no mention on that page of either the Stampeders having a second mascot (besides Quick Six the Horse) or of it being Harvey the Hound. The Flames didnt even move to Calgary til 1980 and, as stated on this page, Harvey the Hound was created in 1983, long after Ralph the Dog had been established as the mascot for our football team. I contacted Mr Kelba via twitter and his response was that while Harvey the Hound "worked many Stampeders games" he was never considered their "mascot" and was created for the Flames and not for both the Flames and the Stampeders

In researching this I have found a few other places on the net that proclaim he was a mascot for the Stampeders too but in the instances where a source was cited it was linked back to Wikipedia.

I hope this is sufficient evidence :)

Wil

Wdhiii13 (talk) 20:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	I thank you, my good Sir and my most learned friend. — 99801155KC9TV (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey PimRijkee :). A quick update on how things are going with the New Page Triage/New Pages Feed project. As the enwiki page notes, the project is divided into two chunks: the "list view" (essentially an updated version of Special:NewPages) and the "article view", a view you'll be presented with when you open up individual articles that contains a toolbar with lots of options to interact with the page - patrolling it, adding maintenance tags, nominating it for deletion, so on.

On the list view front, we're pretty much done! We tried deploying it to enwiki, in line with our Engagement Strategy on Wednesday, but ran into bugs and had to reschedule - the same happened on Thursday :(. We've queued a new deployment for Monday PST, and hopefully that one will go better. If it does, the software will be ready to play around with and test by the following week! :).

On the article view front, the developers are doing some fantastic work designing the toolbar, which we're calling the "curation bar"; you can see a mockup here. A stripped-down version of this should be ready to deploy fairly soon after the list view is; I'm afraid I don't have precise dates yet. When I have more info, or can unleash everyone to test the list view, I'll let you know :). As always, any questions to the talkpage for the project or mine. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:22, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey PimRijkee! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all. Some quick but important updates on what we've been up to and what's coming up next :).

The curation toolbar, our Wikimedia-supported twinkle replacement. We're going to be deploying it, along with a pile of bugfixes, to wikipedia on 9 August. After a few days to check it doesn't make anything explode or die, we'll be sticking up a big notice and sending out an additional newsletter inviting people to test it out and give us feedback :). This will be followed by two office hours sessions - one on Tuesday the 14th of August at 19:00 UTC for all us Europeans, and one on Wednesday the 15th at 23:00 UTC for the East Coasters out there :). As always, these will be held in #wikimedia-office; drop me a note if you want to know how to easily get on IRC, or if you aren't able to attend but would like the logs.

I hope to see a lot of you there; it's going to be a big day for everyone involved, I think :). I'll have more notes after the deployment! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :)

A couple of new things.

First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.

On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome.

Hey PimRijkee. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :).

We're (very shortly) closing down this development cycle for Page Curation. It's genuinely been a pleasure to talk with you all and build software that is so close to my own heart, and also so effective. The current backlog is 9 days, and I've never seen it that low before.

However! Closing up shop does not mean not making any improvements. First-off, this is your last chance to give us a poke about unresolved bugs or report new ones on the talkpage. If something's going wrong, we want to know about it :). Second, we'll hopefully be taking another pass over the software next year. If you've got ideas for features Page Curation doesn't currently have, stick them here.

Again, it's been an honour. Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a tribute.

Anyway. You're getting this note because you've participated in discussion and/or asked for updates to either the Article Feedback Tool or Page Curation. This isn't about either of those things, I'm afraid ;p. We've recently started working on yet another project: Echo, a notifications system to augment the watchlist. There's not much information at the moment, because we're still working out the scope and the concepts, but if you're interested in further updates you can sign up here.

In addition, we'll be holding an office hours session at 21:00 UTC on Wednesday, 14 November in #wikimedia-office - hope to see you all there :). I appreciate it's an annoying time for non-Europeans: if you're interested in chatting about the project but can't make it, give me a shout and I can set up another session if there's enough interest in one particular timezone or a skype call if there isn't. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey PimRijkee :). I'm dropping you a note because you have signed up for the Notifications, or Echo, newsletter.

If all goes according to plan, we should be launching Echo on en-wiki either tomorrow, or next Tuesday - I'll drop a followup tomorrow when we know what's happening. Should the launch succeed, we'll begin the process of triaging bugs and gathering feedback on what features work, what cause problems, and what we should do next; I hope you'll help us out on these fronts by leaving any comments you might have on the talkpage.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey PimRijkee; Kaldari has finished scripting a set of potential replacements available to test and give feedback on. Please go to this thread for more detail on how to enable them. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 15:33, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi PimRijkee! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 20:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Euthanasia Coaster.jpg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

You are subscribing to the Notifications newsletter on English Wikipedia.

That newsletter is now replaced by the monthly and multilingual Collaboration team newsletter, which will include information and updates concerning Notifications but also concerning Flow and Edit Review Improvements.

Please subscribe!

All the best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PimRijkee. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PimRijkee. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]