User talk:Grand'mere Eugene

Archives (Index)

2016/August 2016/September 2016/November 2016/December 2017/January 2017/March 2017/April 2017/May 2017/June 2017/July 2017/August 2017/September 2017/October 2017/November 2017/December 2018/January 2018/March 2018/April 2018/June 2018/July 2018/August 2018/October 2018/November 2018/December 2019/January 2019/February 2019/March 2019/April 2019/May 2019/June 2019/July 2019/August 2019/September 2019/November 2019/December 2020/January 2020/February 2020/April 2020/May 2020/June 2020/July 2020/August 2020/September 2020/November 2021/January 2021/February 2021/March 2021/April 2021/May 2021/June 2021/July 2021/August 2021/November 2022/February 2022/March 2022/April 2022/August 2022/November 2022/December 2023/February 2023/March 2023/April 2023/August 2023/September 2023/October 2023/November 2024/April 2024/May

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Hello! Sorry if my edit summary sounded snarky. I'm feeling a lot of "people are wrong on the Internet" today, alas. I noticed today that a bunch of place articles (not any "Shaniko Junctions" either!) were deleted and I'm trying to finish up spring term (in Geography!) and I can't do anything about it, so I'm just extra grumpy today! Hope you are well! Valfontis (talk) 04:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Valfontis, no worries. I stalled out on Draft:Capitol Highway, after the discussion on the Oregon Project talk page sort of went sideways with the preference being not to create a separate article from the "OR 99W (or even a spun-off US 99W". I do think it has an interesting history, including its location on the former Taylor's Ferry Road and that the current fragment in Portland is a remnant of the earliest paved highway that eventually became Highway 99. Still regretting the Shaniko Junction outcome... — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 04:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a couple AFDs going right now for Oregon places if you want to contribute! Stay away from roads, haha. Valfontis (talk) 22:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grand'mere Eugene, Hi. I work for AG1, formerly Athletic Greens. I noticed your active editing and participation in the BLP project, particularly bios for women, and I'm hoping you could help me out. Kat Cole's current Wiki doesn't reflect her recent promotion (as of July 24, 2024) to CEO of Athletic Greens. Her role as COO and President at AG1 is mentioned only in the intro section and now needs to be updated; neither of her positions are mentioned in the body of the Wiki. This is my suggested language for inclusion. I know that paid editors are not meant to make such changes without community approval; if you give your OK, I will make the edits. Thank you, 2603:7000:8807:D600:D0F3:1911:A19:3D74 (talk) 16:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BL for AG1, your proposed changes look okay, so I added the new text and revamped the citations. The Fortune source and Bloomberg are behind paywalls. In order to make it possible to verify the text and check for compliance with WP:COPYVIO policy, you can use the quote parameter in the citation template to briefly cite the relevant sentence(s) from the article. I added a quote parameter for the Bloomberg source so you can see how it's done, even though the relevant text is apparently in the first few sentences, visible in spite of the required subscription. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 03:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grand'mere Eugene, Thank you for your time and help with adding this content.

I am also working on a draft for the AG1 company. I look forward to collaborating with you on that as well. Thanks again, BL for AG1 (talk) 12:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, BL for AG1, just ping me when you are ready. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at my user talk page you will see a few messages to me from the course tutor which may interest you, but again thank you. This one seems to have caught your imagination 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your kind words are much appreciated, Timtrent. I do like a good challenge, and since I retired a decade ago, WP has become a daily habit. I have a quandary that you might help me with: when I Googled Moss's parents, I found them mentioned in this U.S. Senate confirmation hearing (chaired by Orin Hatch) as parents of Randolph Moss, then being appointed as a US federal district judge. Without mentioning her name in the hearing, he referred to his missing sister, "My sister is with the youngest in that family at a conference in Florida today and couldn't be here." He also mentioned his brother-in-law Jack Berger. There's a Prabook bio (of course, not an RS) that lists her husband as "Donald W. Berger". I'm currently thinking it's not appropriate to include her brother or her husbnd in Moss's bio. My mother would say, "Discretion is the better part of valor." Still, it's one of those Wikipedia rabbit holes that I enjoy stepping into from time to time... — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 02:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like a challenge too. This one was worth accepting. There are several abandoned student projects here. I found them from this tutor's talk page which lists declines amongst the acceptances. I have done what I am able with some of them. (That was a hinted request for help!)

The relatives are always an interesting dilemma. I ask myself "Is this relative likely to have notability im their own right?" That assumes no article about them currently. If they do I have been known to write that, even if only a stub that shows notability, and I mention them. If not I may or may not mention that they exist if close relatives, distant I leave well alone, unless, of course, they are immediately and recognisably notable. I would mention Marco Polo! However, the relatives' presence in the subject's article need to add true value to it, not simply be for decoration.

Does that help? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Timtrent, I just realized I forgot to ping you in the note below...Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good advice. Moss's brother has a strong WP article, so I may work in a brief mention in her article.

I did add a few sources to the Draft:Elva Diaz article that meet GNG, with significant coverage her research. I think it's good to go, but I defer to your review to accept it at AfC. See what you think.

Are there more abandoned student projects that need better sourcing?

Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 09:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are awesome. I have accepted it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been deep in this rabbit hole, now, creating categories for awards where absent, and populating them with around 300 award recipients,

Thank you for your help. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! 300?! Good work! Nimble, too, jut like other rabbits... — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I may have missed a few with finger trouble, but someone else will get 'em! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Minuette Macon Will be the best perosn to tell each of us about other abandoned student works which are worth giving a big kick to. I think we are getting quite a buzz out of this rather gnomish mini-project.

• Draft:Nathalie Rochefort (neuroscientist) look too hard.
• Draft:Sarah Kucenas
• Draft:Xiaorong Liu (neuroscientist)
• Draft:Analisa Sciememi
• Draft:Lindsey Ross (neurosurgeon)

I've scraped these from Minuette's talk page 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had known idea what an avalanche I started :D

For Moss: one of her books was featured in the first Godzilla movie, but I wasn't able to find a reference for it, except for her interview on the Conjugate.blog. She really is often mixed with the other Cynthia Moss (also a well known ethologist).

The drafts you listed are the ones that remain from this year's class-we had only 4 rejections from the previous iterations of the class (2020 and 2021). All 4 were "too soon" so I decided to wait before recreating their entries. I also had a lot more time to work with those drafts in the past as the class was 3x smaller. Since this year, the class only writes about people likely to pass the WP:PROF: award winners, full professors, named chairs, etc, to increase the likelihood of acceptance. The award categories you created and updated are mighty good work and I really want to thank you for that-anyone who can help with all of this will earn a ton of good karma!! Minuette Macon (talk) 12:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about adding a mention to Cynthia in her brother's article to balance it? Minuette Macon (talk) 12:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added family info to the Randall Moss bio... tricky because their parents are listed in sources for both of them, but they do not seem to be both mentioned in a single ref.

Also, I made an argument on Talk:Elva Díaz to show she meets WP:GNG, but not necessarily WP:PROF. Chime in there if you are so inclined. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had an entry about an academic whose work is in neuroscience textbooks be rejected because they were too young ("too soon"). Whatever gets them in, I support it! Minuette Macon (talk) 14:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is another issue with one contributor (see User talk:Cindymoss). I left a COI welcome, which seems to have been ignored, as their contributions have been deleted by another editor. Oh, well. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And regrettably they have uploaded a picture of themselves to Commons, which just doesn't work with copyright laws. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(sigh) The photo will be taken down, as it should. I have explained the rules of photo submission, but I can't make anyone follow them. Minuette Macon (talk) 14:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grand'mere Eugene, I'm reaching out to you, hoping that you will look at the discussion on Daniel Lubetzky's Talk page. As you actively engage in BLPs, as well as with COI editors, I would appreciate your critical eye in this case. It seems that my request was rejected simply because of my COI, and I would appreciate greater input from the community, as I believe I raised some legitimate points. Birdhouse123 (talk) 13:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made 2 revisions, but didn't find the duplication in the Philanthropy section. Let me know if you find it. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! This is a reminder Articles for Creation reviewers who don't perform any reviews for six months can be removed from the list for inactivity. Don't be a stranger! We'd love to see you take on any number of reviews, but even a single one will be enough to maintain your reviewer status.

Thanks for volunteering, and thanks for the reviews you've done so far! -- asilvering (talk) 20:03, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, nice to meet you. I am new and learning the ropes, hoping you can help me out. I saw your interest in BLPs and women. Nicole Nason's article is missing some career details and a restructuring might be helpful as well. I have detailed my suggestions on the Talk page and would appreciate your review. Looking forward to working with you to improve the article, DScottWolf (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]