Kenirwin

Hope you're well :) Feel free to leave me a note if you have any questions. Whether I'll be able to answer them or not is another story! hugs, -- phoebe 05:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

there's a comic book author who writes about the history of science who is also a librarian?!? why didn't I know about this earlier? --phoebe 06:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ken, This article is superb. Really. It's wonderfully written, well referenced, in proper style (!) and about a compelling subject. You should get a first-article award or something :) The only things I did was link some more of the terms (how much to link is sort of a personal preference; not going overboard is good but linking proper nouns is also good); and I took out the awards information from the bibliography and put it in its own section so the bibliography would be a little cleaner; again, this is kind of a personal-preference call and one could go either way. I also changed the 'other links' header to be 'external links', which is standard terminology. The only thing I'd suggest is if you have specific sections you can footnote from some of your other sources, go ahead and do so, since that is really the kind of thing you have to have the original sources in hand to do. And, of course, if the other books have isbns include those; but I figure you know that already & would if they did. All in all though, this is excellent work. Congratulations. Now you, too, have the ultimate time-wasting hobby! (just keep telling yourself you're making the world a better place) :) --phoebe 07:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

In Patrick Stewart (soldier), the version you mention ([1]) has the inline link, but for some reason I couldn't get it to appear correctly in the "References" section. I wanted just the title to show, not the URL in brackets. That wouldn't work, and I didn't know why, and I lost patience, so I just put the link (appearing correctly) in the "References" section, with no inline link. It's the article by Sean Whaley. The title should make it clear which passage it supports. An inline link would be better, though, if it can be formatted properly.

By the way, I'm pretty sure the symbol does NOT appear on Stewart's tombstone. I think there's a "memorial wall" that has a plaque for each veteran buried in the cemetery. Stewart's space was blank until the recent installation of the plaque with the Wiccan symbol. JamesMLane t c 17:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Dan Stroeh, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. A1octopus 18:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hey there! Thanks for the sweet note. I had a lovely weekend: I was in Montreal going to RecentChangesCamp. :) cheers, -- phoebe/(talk) 19:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hey, Kenllama, I saw on Phoebe's page that you're wondering how to do ibid. on Wikipedia. Short answer: you don't. Wikipedia:Footnotes#Citing_a_reference_more_than_once has more info. I'll bet there's a technological solution waiting to be implemented here, though. It's definitely a nuisance repeating the same book info just for a changed page number. --Ben Kovitz 20:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

aha! Ben beat me to it. Thanks, Ben :) -- phoebe/(talk) 22:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Did I reply to your question already? I don't think I did. There's not a good way to do "ibids" that I know of, unfortunately. References with the ref tag are auto-numbered, so if one gets moved it's not a big deal. This is good for wikitext, but does mean that they aren't tied to each other in a way that would permit ibids. I usually cite out the full reference the first time I use it with the <ref> tag, then in subsequent refs will just use academic style -- <ref> Taylor, p. 3.</ref>

It looks like you already know about <ref name="taylor"> Taylor, big book of wikis</ref> and <ref name="taylor"> formatting, but this is good if you don't care about citing specific pages.

Bah! Something to spec out and/or code for future versions. -- phoebe/(talk) 22:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I didn't get a chance to read your email before leaving for work this morning, but C. said you'd sent me something about Wikipedia. Feel free to ask me anything here, or just wait for the inevitable email... -- nae'blis 16:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Kaisariyah, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I found User:Kenllama/ERM and Electronic Resource Management System while creating VITAL/VTLS and will be writing articles about the other systems, especially those used in Australian Universities. I'll likely be expanding this mainspace page soon, but thought you would like a chance to merge in your user space info first. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi John -- thanks for thinking of me with regard to the ERM article. I've never gotten around to working up an article, and am not likely to soon. If there's anything you want to cadge from it, feel free! Thanks! Kenllama/(talk) 01:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

It is curious that you dont think your userpage is "ready", yet the page Electronic Resource Management System is less informative. A few times I have found that has happened to me to. I think the moral of the story is to push pages into mainspace as soon as possible. I've just moved Research Quality Framework into mainspace, despite it being a mess...

After my post last night, I thought perhaps we could move your page into mainspace as Electronic Resource Management, and then redirect it to Electronic Resource Management System (or tag them both with merge tags, and see what happens), so then your contributions are within the main body of content, and I can then re-use your work without any GFDL concerns. --John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

John -- I've worked over my page a bit and incorporated it into Electronic Resource Management System. (The whole History section was just copy-and-paste from the DLF report. I've condensed and paraphrased it so it's much shorter now.) The "Features" section is also very-little-changed from the original source. If you want to have a whack at paraphrasing it a bit (or perhaps mixing it up with content from other sources), I'd be grateful. (The original text is not online, unfortunately; that came from a conference presentation I happened to have attended.)

So far, I'll I've done is tip my content into the article; I've not done anything with the as-yet-vacant Electronic Resource Management page. I'd be glad for you to do whatever you want with the pages at this point! Kenllama/(talk) 15:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a heap. I'll do some heavy revising and expanding over the next few days, and will ping you when I'm done. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 21:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

--Dravecky (talk) 07:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I reverted because the editor was adding hundreds of external links to the Bomb magazine website which seemed like spamming to me. Feel free to discuss it on the talk page of the article or add the link again if you feel strongly about it. All good wishes . Teapotgeorge^Talk 16:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

YES...Incorporate any useful info into the article and add the interview as a reference rather than as an external link....much better. Teapotgeorge^Talk 20:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Kenllama. Thank you for your message. You will find a good bunch of references on Eusebia on Google Books [2]. For the "Eusebia" used by Ashoka, you can look at Edicts of Ashoka, and the direct content and translation of the edict here: File:AsokaKandahar.jpg. Cheers PHG (talk) 13:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yay! :) If you want your signature to display with spaces, here's how. Cheers, -- phoebe / (talk to me) 20:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I don't know. I'll ask next time I see him... Hobit (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I just wanted to say hi! I'm working on a presentation about librarians & wikipedia, and it made me think of you. Glad to see you're still editing. Cheers, - phoebe / (talk to me) 02:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the new ref. It states that Fornes won 13 Obies, but I can only count 9. Can you find any references that clear this up? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

I think you're right. The Obie website only lists 9, so I'm going to use that citation instead and revert the number. Thanks Kenirwin/(talk) 12:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for clearing that up. If you look at Fornes' article, you can see several places where it says "citation needed". Do you have references for any of that information? If you can add any references in those places, it would be a big help! Thanks very much! -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

I picked off one easy one, and I'll see what else I can do. -- Kenirwin

Good one. Any others you can add would be great! You can automatically sign your talk page messages with four tildes like this: ~~~~ Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I was just browsing the education pages and saw that you're working on a class this term... hope it's going well :) Aside from WMF stuff, my big project is working on WP:UCD. Got any agriculture articles you need references for? :) -- phoebe / (talk to me) 20:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, Ken, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to have another librarian ready to help out. I hope you will also help to reduce the gender gap by creating more women's biographies. Let me know if ever you need any help or experience any problems. You are of course also welcome to contribute to our WiR talk page. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:03, 17 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Stepmother (play), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West End (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 11:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 23:03, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Coffee Trader, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Futures (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 10 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

I was participating in Asian Month, trying to get my new article over 300 words and I saw a familiar face in the list of editors who had contributed. Hello! Jessamyn (talk) 04:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Mary Jobe Akeley at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 18:28, 5 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Gail Skoff.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Keep up the good work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 06:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Gail Rubin.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thank you for your informative new article on Gail Rubin.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 21:28, 31 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Photo of Mary Jobe Akeley, 1930.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:33, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Lorna French.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Most of the content currently in the lead should be moved to new sections in the body of the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Rosguill: -- thanks review the article and for alerting me to this problem; I've updated the article structure to comply with your suggestion. Thanks! Kenirwin/(talk) 21:09, 4 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Chelsea Marcantel.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MainlyTwelve}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

MainlyTwelve (talk) 16:12, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

@MainlyTwelve: Thanks! Kenirwin/(talk) 16:19, 22 March 2019 (UTC) .Reply

Hello, Kenirwin,

Thanks for creating Jessamyn Stanley! I edit here too, under the username Citrivescence and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Please edit the language as best you can to adopt a more encyclopedic tone. See WP:MOS for reference.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Citrivescence}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Citrivescence (talk) 03:27, 31 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Antonia Franceschi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Icewhiz (talk) 07:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Schazjmd: - Thanks! I loved the book and came back to the Wikipedia page a while back and realized how much better it could be. I'm glad you appreciated it. Kenirwin/(talk) 02:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Just a quick note to say that a CSD can only be honoured if every revision of the article meets the criteria (eg: imagine somebody walking up to an established article and replacing it with a copyvio). As the page started life as a redirect to Fortune telling fraud, we can always revert to that. I was thinking of sending it to AfD, but I've replaced the article with a disambiguation page, which seems to make the most sense. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:32, 25 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Ritchie333: - thanks; I wasn't familiar with that wrinkle, though it makes sense. I agree that a disambiguation page seems like the right answer.Kenirwin/(talk) 20:42, 25 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for creating Leora Tanenbaum.

User:Rosguill while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Keep up the good work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

May I suggest a snappier hook for your DYK nomination. "that sculptor Alice King Chatham used plaster casts to design custom-fitted oxygen masks and helmets for Project Mercury astronauts?"

I know she did more than that but mentioning the Mercury mission will draw people in and focus the hook on the most interesting aspect of her career.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:15, 12 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Coffeeandcrums -- I think that's a fine idea.

  Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Alice King Chatham at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 02:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Robyn Benincasa at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:06, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 18 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

--Rosiestep (talk) 06:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

Thanks for creating Bullet Journal.

User:Citrivescence while reviewing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Please edit the text to adopt a more encyclopedic tone. Thank you!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Citrivescence}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Citrivescence (talk) 22:23, 31 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Citrivescence: - Hi, thanks for your feedback. Re-reading the article, I found the History section to be a bit chatty and have tried to make it more encyclopedic in tone. If there are other areas you saw as needing some work on tone, I would welcome some more specific direction. Thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 01:21, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Kenirwin: No problem. Thank you for creating the page! Citrivescence (talk) 14:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Citrivescence: - did my edits accomplish what you were looking for? If so, one of us can take down the Tone note; if you think there's still more to do, I'd be interested in knowing what in particular it needs. Thanks! - Kenirwin/(talk) 20:11, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Kenirwin: Yes, thanks for making those edits. I have removed the tag. Citrivescence (talk) 13:55, 3 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Citrivescence: - Thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 15:34, 3 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Kenirwin, were you planning on returning to your review here, now that a new hook has been proposed per your request? If you do, please note that a QPQ will be required by the nominator, who has over five prior DYKs. (If you weren't planning on returning, please let me know, and I'll see about finding it a new reviewer.) Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:04, 5 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Sure - I can go back to that. -Kenirwin/(talk) 15:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

I have created an article about the distinguished modern American playwright, Arlene Hutton, whose work I admire. However, I had tried to include as much information about the subject as I could find, resulting in an article that I myself find to be both too long and overly detailed, with perhaps some subjective language. As a result, the article received several tags from another editor, which I would like to get rid of. Two of these are as follows:

“This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience. (March 2019)”

“This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. (March 2019)”

(Although the tags were put on in March, I have only had time to deal with the situation now.)

I feel that the article needs an objective eye to review and improve it. Since you are a highly experienced editor, and have worked on articles about women playwrights, I thought I might turn to you to examine the article as it is and edit it as you deem fit. If you then feel that the problem has been dealt with, you may remove the tags. Please let me know if you would be willing to do this.

In any case, thank you very much for your time.

Dylanexpert (talk) 21:30, 5 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Dylanexpert: - thanks for thinking of me. i'll have look and see what I can work on in the next day or two. I'm always glad to see improved coverage of women playwrights in Wikipedia! - Kenirwin/(talk) 03:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Dylanexpert: - one thing you might consider is creating separate articles for some of the plays and including briefer coverage in the main article. What might seem like excessive detail in an author article might be appropriate in an article on the play itself. Also, the tags at the top of the article suggest you might have been hired to write the article; I don't know if there's any formal method for addressing that, but can you verify that you are writing solely from your passion for the topic and not for pay? If so, it would be good to make such an assertion on the talk page for the article. I'll keep looking at the article over the next few days and let you know if I have other ideas too. -Kenirwin/(talk) 03:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for agreeing to look over the article. I very much appreciate it. I'll look into ways of dealing with the problem you mention with the third tag and also whether there should be separate articles for individual plays. Again, thank you!

Dylanexpert (talk) 11:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing. Here are a few concrete suggestions:

* Most of the direct quotes from her ("As she put it...") should go -- those deviate from the encyclopedic style, and they do not contribute much to understanding about her.

* Some of the sources are not quite up to Wikipedia standards. It's super tempting to use sources like her bio from Ensemble Theatre or an alumni profile from a school, but those are less journalistic than our preferred sort of sources. The bio in particular is likely something that she or her agent wrote, and thus deviates from the WP:V and WP:NPOV. I might be interesting to see what from the article falls away if you disallow those sources or use them very little.

In general, I think you've got a good article in there, but it will want some tightening up. Good work. -Kenirwin/(talk) 01:45, 7 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the kind words. With your permission, I will place your comments on the article's talk page to justify my changes and allow me to eliminate the two tags. As for her biographical information, I see your point, but on the other hand, it's rather hard to find "journalistic preferred" sources for biographical material on a playwright who is not a celebrity. However, I will remove as much of the other biographical material as I can. Again, thanks for your time and patience.

Dylanexpert (talk) 14:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Dylanexpert: -- I appreciate how hard it is to find good sources for less famous playwrights. Wikipedia's policy take on this is to include less information if you can't get it from more reputable sources. I would suggest thinning the article based on sources that you can feel more confident about, and then linking to the less-reputable sources as "Further reading". I know it hurts to do that, but I think that's what's needful to clear the tags. - Kenirwin/(talk) 19:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Tiamats Wrath.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

  Hello! Your submission of Blind Injustice (opera) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SL93 (talk) 22:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Kenirwin, it's been over three weeks since you responded there, but you haven't yet followed up on it. I hope you'll be returning to the nomination, but it will need to be soon if you wish to continue pursuing it. I hope you return to editing soon. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi Kenirwin, thanks for responding on 23 September. I made a further comment on 28 September - I'm wondering if you have offline or otherwise hard to access sources for some of the information, including the timing of the workshops, composition, auditions, etc, as well as the musical numbers? If you do, it would be great if you could add it/them to the article. Cheers, RebeccaGreen (talk) 03:28, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

--Rosiestep (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 23 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 20:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 16:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 14:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 18:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 21:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 18:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 16:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Rosiestep (talk) 01:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:30, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

  Hello! Your submission of Deborah Zoe Laufer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! feminist (talk) 10:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• @Feminist: -- I've added a QPQ review -- thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 17:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Just wondering what “‘X is Y’ format” means? I'd be happy to tweak the article accordingly, but I haven’t come across that phrase before. Seasider53 (talk) 00:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Seasider53 The reviewer was referring to the DYK hook itself. I'm not sure why such a thing matters if the hook is interesting and I have over 300 DYKs (not counting nominations of other people's work). SL93 (talk) 03:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Seasider53 -- as SL93 said, "x is y" refers to the format of the hook sentence. The DYK guidelines suggest that we 'Try to avoid hooks that take the form of "... that X is Y?"'. I agree with SL93 that it's not a deal-breaker; I couldn't think of a way to improve it. Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned it. - Kenirwin/(talk) 13:59, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:45, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 17:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:53, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:52, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply