User talk:Beccaynr/Archives/2022/January
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
January 2022 Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Happy New Year!
|
Happy New Year! |
Hello Beccaynr: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. |
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message
Thanks for the discussion
Thanks for the discussion about the Robin Wonsley Worlobah article. I edit almost exclusively about Minneapolis. I tend to edit on current events, but I really want to edit more about the city's historic people, places, and events. I noticed the deletion discussion and wanted to help improve the article so it wouldn't be deleted. I apologize for the sloppy series of edits. I think we may have been editing at the same time, adding the confusion. :) Best of luck with continued development of the article. Minnemeeples (talk) 16:10, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, Minnemeeples, and I definitely think we were confusingly editing at the same time, but I am glad we are having a productive discussion now. I very much appreciate your contributions and perspective - my editing has tended to focus on people, which informs my perspective. I have made some additional changes based on your latest comments on the article Talk page and agree there is more that could be done to improve the article - the question, as always, is how to best accomplish this in the context of the policies and guidelines, and I look forward to continuing to work with you. Beccaynr (talk) 17:23, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
June Preston
Hi @Beccaynr: I wonder if you could take a look at the June Preston article, if you have a moment. Preston's daughter was trying to update the article to preserve here memory and it went to coi and then, it was copyedited down. Preston was a American child actor who famous for a while in the early 1930's to mid 1940's. Any help is appreciated. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 16:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hey scope_creep, I just wanted to thank you for letting me know about this article - I was more off-wiki than on recently, but I appreciated the opportunity as I started to get back online. Beccaynr (talk) 00:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Beccaynr: How goes it? I'm glad, you got involved. That was nice of you. I wasn't sure what to do, at the time. I mentioned in a few places and thought of yourself. I was hoping somebody would pick it up and ran with it, which you did. I didn't have a clue how to find references that old, and remembered you doing work in an Afd, late last year. It's seems to be a much better condition now, than when I started. I felt sorry for the lady, who was simply trying to preserve the memory of her mother. Something in her voice. It shows how well colloboration works, trully the best of Wikipedia was on the display. The response was tremedous. scope_creepTalk 00:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- It goes, scope_creep, and I am glad to be back on-wiki. There was a point when I was marveling at the number of editors who showed up to help with the article, it was impressive. And your response to the editor was particularly kind, speaking of the best of Wikipedia being on display. Hopefully we'll get access to more sources to continue expanding the article, and I am gathering some thoughts to share on the article Talk page about some edits in the meantime. Beccaynr (talk) 01:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Beccaynr: Thanks!! Thats good. I hope the filmography list will come back. I think once the Google Graph updates, there should be more sources available. It might take some weeks or possibly months right enough. scope_creepTalk 01:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- It goes, scope_creep, and I am glad to be back on-wiki. There was a point when I was marveling at the number of editors who showed up to help with the article, it was impressive. And your response to the editor was particularly kind, speaking of the best of Wikipedia being on display. Hopefully we'll get access to more sources to continue expanding the article, and I am gathering some thoughts to share on the article Talk page about some edits in the meantime. Beccaynr (talk) 01:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Beccaynr: How goes it? I'm glad, you got involved. That was nice of you. I wasn't sure what to do, at the time. I mentioned in a few places and thought of yourself. I was hoping somebody would pick it up and ran with it, which you did. I didn't have a clue how to find references that old, and remembered you doing work in an Afd, late last year. It's seems to be a much better condition now, than when I started. I felt sorry for the lady, who was simply trying to preserve the memory of her mother. Something in her voice. It shows how well colloboration works, trully the best of Wikipedia was on the display. The response was tremedous. scope_creepTalk 00:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Bindu Ammini
Hi Beccaynr, thanks for all your work improving the Bindu Ammini article (among others). I'm coming back to you - admittedly after a while, since I only just saw the revision - to offer a little more context for my editing of the article, and why I think your reverting my edit doesn't hold with MOS:CONTEXTBIO. For Bindu and other Dalit activists and individuals, their Dalit identities are at the core of their work and therefore, notability, and removing that descriptor ends up undermining the significance of that work. I'll wait for a bit, in case I've misunderstood your reason for the revert, and then add back the descriptor in the lede paragraph. Thanks again! Anasuyas (talk) 11:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Anasuyas, thank you for following up, and I appreciate the opportunity to further explain my thoughts. I also made the deletion from the lead more recently [1], citing MOS:LEADREL, WP:LEADBIO, and MOS:CONTEXTBIO. My perspective is based on the weight of notability, as measured by the secondary sources in the article - per MOS:CONTEXTBIO,
The opening paragraph should usually provide context for the activities that made the person notable
. In this article, most sources focus on her attempts to enter the Sabarimala Temple, because she is a woman. The article only mentions her association with the Bhim Army and her membership in the Dalit community, so I was thinking about the weight of the sources in the article and the guidance from the MOS about what should be emphasized, including per MOS:LEADREL. But she has recently been in the news describing casteist attacks and abuse against her, e.g. [2], [3], and some news sources describe her as a Dalit activist. I appreciate you following up because I intended to revisit this article and assess the development of recent events for inclusion, and it appears that adding more information may be the way to resolve the issue - from my view, adding reliable sources to the article can help support inclusion in the lead per the MOS. I think the article structure needs some revision to incorporate additional content, and I will try to make some additions over the next several days. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 22:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Beccaynr, thanks in turn for your generous clarification! As always, with individuals and communities marginalized within their own contexts, the marginalizations extend to the way they are described - so for Bindu, her primary identities are multiple and intersecting (at the very least, being Dalit, woman, lawyer, activist) - and in the case of the Sabarimala temple, it's particularly notable that she is both Dalit and a woman "transgressing" a male *and* "upper-caste" space, but even the journalists writing the piece may mute one aspect and highlight the other, because of their own systemic biases. As you say, there are now a growing set of reliable sources for the Dalit identity (some of which I'd originally cited), but perhaps so I don't get in your way as you improve the article, I'll leave it here for now, and will be happy to be pinged in case you need any further support from me. ...Btw, I notice a similar issue with a bunch of notable Indigenous Australian bios as well, where their Indigeneity is core to their work and identity and well documented, but the ledes completely miss that. Systemic bias in sources and Wikipedia edits is unfortunately rather similar across contexts. :-/ Anasuyas (talk) 11:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, Anasuyas, I agree, and there are sources already in the article that can be used to better develop article content about her intersectional identity, e.g. Time Magazine. I also recall a source where it is noted Bindu has a different experience than Kanakadurga after the temple entry due to caste, and I will look for it as I review and revise the article. I welcome your assistance, and encourage you to keep the article watchlisted - after she was recently in the news, my request for page protection was understandably declined because of the collateral damage it could have caused to IPs also trying to protect the article. Thank you very much for contacting me, I very much appreciate your perspective and insight. Beccaynr (talk) 15:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Beccaynr, thanks in turn for your generous clarification! As always, with individuals and communities marginalized within their own contexts, the marginalizations extend to the way they are described - so for Bindu, her primary identities are multiple and intersecting (at the very least, being Dalit, woman, lawyer, activist) - and in the case of the Sabarimala temple, it's particularly notable that she is both Dalit and a woman "transgressing" a male *and* "upper-caste" space, but even the journalists writing the piece may mute one aspect and highlight the other, because of their own systemic biases. As you say, there are now a growing set of reliable sources for the Dalit identity (some of which I'd originally cited), but perhaps so I don't get in your way as you improve the article, I'll leave it here for now, and will be happy to be pinged in case you need any further support from me. ...Btw, I notice a similar issue with a bunch of notable Indigenous Australian bios as well, where their Indigeneity is core to their work and identity and well documented, but the ledes completely miss that. Systemic bias in sources and Wikipedia edits is unfortunately rather similar across contexts. :-/ Anasuyas (talk) 11:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for expanding Draft:Sanjib Baruah
Dear Beccaynr, I just wanted to say thank you for helping the Draft:Sanjib Baruah with more citations. :) Thank you so much. Arunudoy (talk) 22:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Arunudoy, thank you, and I am just getting started - I also have access to The Wikipedia Library, but I like to first check what is available online before I search for sources there. I am also thinking about creating an article for Baruah's most recent book because of how many book reviews I have already been able to find and the book notability guideline. I would then link the book article to your article about Baruah, which can help show his notability per WP:AUTHOR#3. I welcome your contributions and comments. Thanks again, Beccaynr (talk) 22:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)