Supplying the names of wineries does not serve as a "wine-guide." It informs the literal topic of the wine route.
Heysuk (
talk) —Preceding
undated comment was added at
18:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC).reply
I'll bite. This listing of wines seems to me is comparable to the listing of
Beatrice Foods brands or
List of Coca-Cola brands. Are those two pages in need of revision too? I think you're being over broad in applying a policy that's meant to keep out wine reviews --- this seems more a listing of brands under one umbrella, comparable to the Beatrice and Coca-Cola examples.
Rickterp (
talk)
12:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)reply
Good to finally see this article, since it was the last (major) regional article missing for France. I just added the wikilinks, and noticed that the German article
de:Weinbau auf Korsika is actually "GA" (Lesenswert), a lot more extensive than the French one, and also illustrated with several images. Perhaps you're interested in adding a couple of them to the enwiki article.
Tomas e (
talk)
07:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Hi, Agne - I was in the process of moving Flickr-sourced images to the Commons so that their licenses can be verified and the images made available to other projects (you may have noticed that I moved some of your other nice vineyard and wine images - good finds!) Anyway, I ran across the above image - it's currently orphaned and has some contradictory licensing info, and it appears the original source has gone dead. Can we delete the image?
Kellyhi!15:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks, Agne - I nominated the image for deletion. For your future uploads from Flickr, I'd like to recommend
Flickr Upload Bot (you'll need to have a Commons account). It automatically fills out the details for you and verifies the license, so you never have to worry about the copyright status being questioned if the photographer goes offline or changes the copyright details on the photo sometime in the future.
Kellyhi!17:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Corsica wine
On
28 May,
2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Corsica wine, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
Thanks for uploading Image:Trentino Cab.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.
BJBot (
talk)
10:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Brotherhood winery label.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brotherhood winery label.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.
BJBot (
talk)
10:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Stag's leap bottle.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under
fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to
the image description page and edit it to include a
fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the
Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Million_Moments (
talk)
19:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)reply
There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at
WP:GA.
The backlog at
Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to
WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11)
The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the
GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions.
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and
criteria. If you are interested, please contact
OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
Giggy (
talk·contribs) (a.k.a.
Dihydrogen Monoxide (
talk·contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by
Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to
Giggy (
talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include:
This WikiProject, and the
Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
New GA Review Process - Review Subpages
In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable.
When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at
WP:GAN in the appropriate category.
When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the
Good Article criteria, as well as to the
Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the
mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be
transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter.
Haven't seen you hanging around there much lately. I kind of miss seeing your quality wine articles there. Have you given up on DYK, or do you just no longer have the time?
Gatoclass (
talk)
08:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)reply
You just happened to catch me online. :) I've actually been taking a little wiki-break due to a hectic work schedule and studying for my Certified Wine Educator exam. Things are starting settle so I hope to bump up my activity. I'm nearing completion of a new
History of French wine article that I will be hopefully submitting to DYK by the weekend. Thanks for the thoughts! :)
AgneCheese/
Wine08:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Welcome back, and great article on
History of French wine! Perhaps I'll add a couple of sentences on Alsace; I may have some text pieces handy. I notice that you base it primarily on OCW. In the unlikely event that you don't own it already, I can really recommend The Story of Wine. I also noted that another of your contributions, a certain
image, just made
a guest apperance in the Syrah article. A completely different thing. I'm going to Mosel for a couple of days in about one week's time. The
Mosel wine article seems rather well illustrated, but do you still think there are any images missing in it? And obviously, I won't be able to take pictures of an Eiswein harvest or the sorting-out of TBA grapes... :-)
Tomas e (
talk)
15:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the note. Yeah, I do have Johnson's Vintage and have taken a few notes for the article that I just haven't incoporated in. I did rely heavily on the OCW because it condenses things nicely and is the most up to date (2006) book resource in my collection. I know a few things in Vintage have been disproved in the last 2 decades. Oooh the Mosel trip sounds fun. As for pictures, I'd really like to see more "glass of wine w/ bottle" pictures overall--with the Mosel and
German wine both needing one. A nice "dream pic" would be a line up of the different classifications from Qba to Kabinett to Trockenbeerenauslese (ideally from the same producer) that shows the different color concentration of the wine. Other pic ideas include include some of the unillustrated grape varieties like
Elbling,
Trollinger and
Auxerrois Blanc (though their plantings are pretty scarce in the Mosel). Some of the more famous vineyards like the Mittelmosel's sundial vineyards; Brauneberg Juffer-Sonnenuhr, Wehlener Sonnenuhr, Zeltinger Sonnenuhr probably are notable enough to merit their own splinter article from Mosel wine and it would be nice to have some pictures of those. The same with the Juffermauer vineyard near Treis-Karden. There are also articles that need to be created (or expanded) on well known Mosel wine estates like those of
Ernst Loosen,
J.J. Prüm,
S.A. Prüm,
Fritz Haag,
Selbach-Oster,
Schloss Saarstein,
St.-Urbans-Hof, etc. While those articles might not be written soon, it would be nice to have some Commons photos for those when we do get around to those articles.
AgneCheese/
Wine23:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)reply
And BTW, thanks for pitching in with the reviews at the DYK suggestions page. When I asked why I hadn't seen you around at DYK for a while, I was thinking of your articles, I'd completely forgotten you reviewed other folks hooks as well! Anyhow - you do a great job as a reviewer, so I hope you can find the time to keep contributing there :)
Gatoclass (
talk)
10:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Hi. Looks like you accidentally blanked the suggestions page:
[1]. Your summary sounded like you meant to approve a hook so maybe you want to go give it a - I'd check it myself but I'm about to run. Cheers,
Olaf Davis |
Talk23:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Huh....how in the hell did I do that? After I clicked save, my browser took me back to the page and everything looked normal with my comment included. Weird. Thanks though.
AgneCheese/
Wine23:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)reply
DYK Help
Hi,
I see you're active in reviewing DYK noms... I'd like your help. I expanded the
BEL Weapon Locating Radar page on 25th July and nom'ed it for DYK on that day.... but I haven't got a comment till now. I think there may be something wrong in the nom or the hook, since both the entries next to this one have been reviewed. Could you take a looksie and tell me what I'm doing wrong? Coz the main text of the article has definitely been expanded at least 10X. All the 3 hooks I've suggested have been cited with what i think are pretty reliable sources. And I dont think the hooks have exceeded length.
The fact that it hasn't been commented on yet shouldn't be a cause for alarm. Most hooks don't get seriously vetted till they are closer to expiring. Newer hooks may get an earlier review if something jumps out to the reviewer (like it peaks their interest or there is a glaring problem). One of the things that I personally do is give each hook a quick glance through for date/length issues or other obvious problems and then come back to them later on to review the referencing. That way if there is something that will likely need a significant amount of work from the nominator they will know earlier. When I did a quick glance through on BEL WLR, I didn't notice any obvious issues so it basically passed that first, cursory review. I'm sure it will get it a secondary review on the referencing within the next day or two. It can be time consuming reviewing hooks so most reviewer will review a few and then take a break before going back to reviewing. You are always welcome to help out with the load by reviewing other hooks on the suggestion page. That will lessen the load and give other reviewers more opportunities to review your nom.
AgneCheese/
Wine01:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks a ton for that... its a relief. Btw, even I can review hooks??? I was under the impression that only a few ppl can do it, at least the vetting part. If I need to help out, is there a list I should add my name to??? Thanks a ton. Cheers. Sniperz11@CS17:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)reply
There's not really any list. You just read up on the rules listed at the top of the page and start reviewing. Some of the regulars may notice a new name reviewing and double check a few but that's about it.
AgneCheese/
Wine02:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Thank you for your DYK review of my article. It will be hard for me to expand it even more because of lack of further sources and information :( I am glad you found the article interesting, anyway. :) --
Kasjanek21 (
talk)
08:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Quick question - I know Richardson would be close, but it was hard to determine. Based on the total k, it should be 5x the none removed first size. However, that includes a few images and two sections of text that I converted into a "quote" box, which would technically be images. I can add more if needed. What do you think?
Ottava Rima (
talk)
05:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)reply
It never hurts to add more. I think the hook is a good one and so I don't think it's at risk but anytime you can further improve an article is a good thing to do.
AgneCheese/
Wine05:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I hope you understand where I am coming from about the recent DYK talk page change. My feelings are that the page and the original person get credit, so there isn't major foul. I can understand the arguments from both sides, but I think it should be a credit to Ryan that he was willing to not fight anyone who wished to change it back on their own. Does this make sense? You can contact me about it if you would like to talk.
Ottava Rima (
talk)
01:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
It's fine. I was glad the article got credit. I was mostly concerned with the misplaced "BLP-paranoia" that caused Wikipedia to send a an offensive and hurtful message under the banner of "BLP". There's a systematic problem at root here that in the long run doesn't protect BLPs and only ends up producing more drama. Unfortunately, it looks like little will change and the kindling will stay smoldering till the next drama explosion.
AgneCheese/
Wine17:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Perhaps a Village Pump misc or policy discussion on the issue without naming individuals but focusing on the discussion in general? There are some talented people at the Medicine WP that deal with such things quite often and they could be notified about the discussion to help. How does this sound?
Ottava Rima (
talk)
19:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Admittedly I'm a bit tired and worn out from the ordeal so I would like to take a step back from the issue. I'm sure there will be another opportunity to bring it up.
AgneCheese/
Wine20:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I saw the hubbub over the DYK hook and wince over the way it was handled. I think you
were 100% right here.
Moreover, I'm glad to see you're still editing regularly. One of my pipe dreams (the one entitled "Productive Content Contributor") is to put all of my considerable weight behind
WP:WINE and go around Flickr and real-life vineyards looking for beautiful pictures and to get out all my wine books and start copyediting and expanding articles about varietals and wine regions.
That's probably never going to happen (as I'm far too easily distracted by the latest wikiscandal and wikidrama when I'm not busy and/or lazy in RL), but even if I never grow into a worthwhile editor, I will continue to marvel at the content you produce. warmest regards,
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (
talk)
21:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Heh, thanks for the note. It's okay (both the DYK hook thing and being a lazy editor :p). We still need level headed and grounded editors involved in our day to day wikidramas and scandals to sort things out. Else wise the crazies would truly be running the asylum. Speaking of crazies, have they made you an admin yet? ;)
AgneCheese/
Wine21:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
No, I've been a very naughty Fat Man lately... publicly insulting the Arbitration committee, biting newbies, hanging out at attack sites. I would be thoroughly rotisseried at RfA. But when I start
canvassing for support of my promotion, yours will the first talk page I visit. :-)--
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (
talk)
21:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Could you please reconsider. I basically trippled the length of the article just today. I have also spent a considerable amount of time trying to help relieve the backload.
Nrswanson (
talk)
09:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)reply
We certainly appreciate the help but we should be fair and apply the standards equally to everyone. If we bend the rules for you, me, or any of the other DYK regulars, then it is hard to be consistent and fair with everyone else. On the
WT:DYK thread I linked to, a senior admin and frequent DYK contributor expressed his desire for an expanded 7 day rule. I would recommend reviving that discussion and maybe you can lead consensus your way to make that change. You are also welcomed to note the recent 3x expansion on the nominating page. That does add a unique element and I certainly wouldn't object to an admin
WP:IARing it in based on that. I hope you don't take my review as a personal slight. I only wish to be fair and consistent with everyone. At least an WP:IAR hook would be clearly identified as on that is being WP:IAR-ed in.
AgneCheese/
Wine09:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Please note
this. I listed Irene for August 14, but saw The Vanity of Human Wishes dangling at the end, and decided to combine the two based on them being produced the same year and while Johnson was busy on a famous work on his (the Dictionary). There seemed to be a back log of DYK, so I thought combining two might ease the problem some.
Ottava Rima (
talk)
01:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)reply
There are currently 4,675 Good Articles listed at
WP:GA.
The backlog at
Good Article Nominations is 141 unreviewed articles. Out of 186 total nominations, 28 are on hold, 14 are under review, and 3 are seeking a second opinion. Please go to
WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film, and drama (28 articles), Sports and recreation (27 articles), Music (22 articles), Transport (18 articles), and War and military (13 articles).
There are currently 4 articles up for re-review at
Good Article Reassessment. Congratulations! There really is no "backlog" here! :-)
GA Sweeps is Recruiting Reviewers
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and
criteria. If you are interested, please contact
OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
ThinkBlue (
talk·contribs) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for July, based on the assessments made by
Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. ThinkBlue had a whopping 49 reviews during the month of July! ThinkBlue was also one of our two reviewers of the month from June, and has been editing Wikipedia since
December 1,
2006, and is interested in articles dealing with
Friends,
Will and Grace,
CSI:Miami,
Monday Night Raw,
Coldplay.
Congratulations to
Giggy (
talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of July include:
This WikiProject, and the
Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
GA Sweeps Process
The GA Sweeps process has recently reached its first year anniversary. If you are unaware of what GA Sweeps is, it is a process put in place to help ensure the integrity of the ever-growing number of GAs, by determining if the articles still meet the
GA criteria. Experienced reviewers check each article, improving articles as they review them, and delisting those that no longer meet the criteria. Reviewers work on a specific
category of GAs, and there are still many categories that need to be swept. In order to properly keep track of reviews, a
set date was used to determine what articles needed to be reviewed (since any future GAs would be passed according to the most recent GA criteria).
The number of GAs that were to be reviewed totals 2,808. Since the beginning of Sweeps, the progress has reviewed 981 by the end of July 2008 (or exempted them). For a table and chart breakdown of the current progress, see
here.
With more than twenty editors reviewing the articles, progress is currently a third of the way done. At this rate, it will take another two years to complete the Sweeps, and active involvement is imperative to completing on time. We are always looking for new reviewers, and if you are interested in helping in speeding up the Sweeps process and improving your reviewing skills, please contact
OhanaUnited.
Did You Know...
... that the goal of GA Sweeps is to reviewed all articles listed before
26 August2007?
... that the entire category of, "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" has been swept?
... that of all subcategories, "Recordings, compositions and performances" in the Music category has the most articles (240 articles in total)?
Hi, thanks for
being bold with editing this article. However, can you please alert the rest of us on the nature of you major edits? This article is a mess, and was almost deleted. Some of the material you deleted could be further down in a sub-section, minus
the POV. Thanks again.
Bearian (
talk)
17:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Oh I'm going to do a complete, fully referenced rewrite and publish it by the beginning of next week. Very little of the current material will be used. The purpose of the clean up was two fold--one, I felt compelled to get rid of some of the more glaring messes and inaccuracies because it's better to have stub than a bad article and two, I'm going to use this rewrite to facilitate discussion over
at DYK about new content and rewrite.
AgneCheese/
Wine03:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately work stuff got in the way today so I wasn't able to complete the article. I should be able to devote a nice chunk of time to it Wednesday.
AgneCheese/
Wine04:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Looking forward to your new version. I recall detesting that article when I tried to clean up the more egregious NPOV violations in August. I ended up tagging a bunch of things and giving up. A wholesale replacement with new content would be welcome from my point of view. ~
Amatulić (
talk)
17:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Yeah...I got sidetracked. I have my Certified Wine Educator exam coming up next week so my wiki-editing is concentrating on prep work for that exam. I have my notes done, it just getting to the grunt work of writing the article. If you or Bearian feel its better to revert back to a previous version, I'll cringe but won't be begrudge it. :p But I'll have a new article up shortly after my exam.
AgneCheese/
Wine02:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)reply
The current version is sparse, but any previous version is just more garbage, so there isn't any point to reverting back. I'm going to leave it alone and wait to see your version. I congratulate you on even attempting to re-write an article about such a subjective subject. I mean, there isn't a lot of objectivity out there on wine and food matching, unlike for articles about grape varietals. ~
Amatulić (
talk)
19:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Again, it's not required. There is only a recommendation. I still contend it will be confusing and will just have to be undone once new refs are added. I appreciate your interest in improving the article but I fret that these improvements will only add more confusion and headaches in the long run.
AgneCheese/
Wine17:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)reply
That's fine. Again, I appreciate your concern but when I eventually get around to expanding it with other references, I would appreciate more not having to redo the referencing to avoid confusion with other references.
AgneCheese/
Wine00:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Débourbage & Debourbage
On 07 October, you created two redirects:
Débourbage &
Debourbage.
Debourbage redirects to
Débourbage and
Débourbage redirects to itself. Can you fix this, please?
Débourbage should point to a valid target and
Debourbage should point to the same target so that it's not a double redirect. I searched for possible targets, but didn't find anything definitive so wasn't positive what you had in mind or else I would have fixed it. Thanks! --
JLaTondre (
talk)
17:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Oh lordy...that's what I get for editing late at night. Complete brain shut down. I meant to redirect it to
Settling but somehow screwed that up royally. Thanks for pointing it out. I fixed it.
AgneCheese/
Wine20:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Hmm, my source doesn't have the ü but then again Gruner Veltliner is also spelt without the ü as well. I would trust your knowledge of the German language and wouldn't object to the spelling change.
AgneCheese/
Wine21:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Spinning Cone Column
Hello Agne,
I note your removal of my additions to the Spinning Cone page. I have added some points to the discussion page (perhaps incorrectly - I am in wiki learning mode) but not sure how to best elicit comments. The point I would like to make is that there have been several low- and reduced-alcohol wines released recently in Spain despite use of the technology being 'illegal' in the EU. These are referenced in trade journals and other literature and while perhaps of a 'marketing' nature for the winery involved, I feel the presence of such wines in the marketplace adds to the body of information on use of spinning cone technology, particularly under "wine Controversry" section. I would welcome advice as to how such information may be appropriately inserted into this wiki page. (My feeling is that if a single winery is not predominant or favoured in the article the issue of inadvertent advertising is diminished)!! I'd be very grateful for your suggesstions and comments. Thanks
Ado073 (
talk)
19:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
On the talk page of the
Spinning cone page, Amatulic and I have responded to some of your concerns. I think there is a middle ground that we can find to include some of the information but the key will be to have sources that comply with our
reliable sources guideline.
AgneCheese/
Wine03:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for uploading
Image:Wine label.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of
fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets
Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an
explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a
non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Wake up WP:LGBT! It's time to kick in gear and get some things done!
Project News
Wake up!
I say this to myself as much as I say it to all of us. I work a lot by myself or with individual editors who spend time at
Featured Article Candidates. It seems on November 5 a fog was lifted off my brain that helped me realize that we have massive potential in this project to get things done. Take this allegory, for instance: On Wednesday, Nov. 5, 1980, my 10th-grade American history teacher started class by unfurling The New York Times. She pointed to its triple banner headline: “Reagan Easily Beats Carter; Republicans Gain in Congress; D’Amato and Dodd are Victors.” “Save this paper,” she told us. “This is the start of a whole new era.”Judith Warner from The New York Times
It definitely seems a start to a whole new era now. If planets align correctly to remind us that whatever advances we may have made in electing what appears to be an
extraordinary president in the US, the moons that revolve around those planets also serve to illustrate it's not that simple. Florida, Arizona, and California all appear to have banned
same sex marriage. As someone who was married in California and lives in Florida, this is particularly poignant. We seem to be at the juncture of two converging paths. If we maximize our efforts and take the right ones, we might just be able to affect some change for ourselves.
Though what we do is an interesting hobby for some, we have the power to make a difference. California's ballot initiative to ban gay marriage was a fierce fight. It's being challenged right now, but just look at how Wikipedia played a role in that: in October 2008, 360,238 people read its article. On November 5, an astounding
467,000 people read it. I commend the editors who work on that article—both those who support and oppose it. A look at the talk page shows a concerted effort to keep it civil and accurate.
What can we do?
How do you fight ignorance? With information. That's what Wikipedia is for. This project is overwhelming with 8,576 articles in its scope. We can continue to work piecemeal as we have in the past, or we can focus on goals. These are examples of areas we can concentrate on.
Current political events
LGBT Media and Literature
LGBT History
Sex and sexuality
Articles about political issues in the US and around the world that have been especially relevant within the past 5 years
Depictions of LGBT people and issues on television, film, newspapers, magazines
Topics about gay rights activism and the opposition to it
There are more than 8,000 articles to work on. Can we build a list of priorities? Can we build enough enthusiasm to work on these? What if we had editors who oversaw progress in these areas and reported to the talk page or in the newsletter? Surely someone here wants to report on the progress of sex articles.
Tony Perkins (
irony) from the conservative Family Research Councilwas heartened by the recent passages of gay marriage bans. The Republican Party is without direction. What's going to take the place of a moderate voice will not be pleasant to our ears. Watching and improving articles of subjects that have opposed gay rights in the past will be of vital importance very soon, I predict.
But WP:LGBT is not a very active project
All we can do is start somewhere. The first step is answering this newsletter on the project talk page. Join in the discussion.
More things we can do
Give out more barnstars, and let each other know that what they're doing is valued.
Create a guide to stave off burnout, because editors in this project get burned out faster than others. There are many hills to climb.
Bring back the monthly collaboration project.
Participate in LGBT Peer reviews.
Get familiar with the characteristics of Good Articles and get our top priority articles to
WP:GA.
Use the Newsletter, Moni3! You can suggest what to send out in the newsletter, too!
Offer research materials, copy editing, ideas, and support to your fellow editors.
Keep the project talk page informed of problems and discussions we should know about.
Proposal: Put Importance Levels on articles
If this was decided long before I was a member, maybe it's time to revisit it. Other WikiProjects, such as
WP:Novels determine that some subjects have an importance category: Top, High, Mid, Low, or None (undetermined). If we decide that our most core articles, it might help to organize which articles to address first. Top importance, for example, would be
Gay,
Homosexual,
Lesbian,
Bisexual,
Transgender,
Sappho,
Oscar Wilde,
Stonewall riots, for example. High importance would be
Homosexuality and psychology,
Harvey Milk,
Mattachine Society,
Harry Hay, or
Daughters of Bilitis, and so on. This can be a matter of discussion, or perhaps we could have someone in charge of determining these levels for all the articles we have tagged.
These are the editors I've seen working (and I know I'm forgetting a few). There's more of you out there I haven't seen. Some of you are new. We need all of you. Please help.
Miami, January 18, 1977 after the gay rights ordinance was passed: While
Bryant and the others were creating the beginnings of the repeal effort, (gay activists) Basker, Campbell, Kunst, and the other (gay rights) ordinance supporters congratulated themselves on their success and then quickly disbanded... There was no organized recognition or celebration of the victory. As one activist remembered, "We just went home." They had little idea of the battle that was before them. - Fred Fejes in Gay Rights and Moral Panic, 2008
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know
here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let
Moni3 know.
Your wine maps are wonderful! A real asset to Wikipedia. AgneCheese/Wine 20:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you ! ;)
I'm sorry but my english is very bad. The maps are in french and you can't modify them because they are in png format. The svg format deforms maps regrettably. So if you want the maps in english, send me the translations of the texts of maps.
I hope you understand what I write :s lol --
Lofo7 (
talk)
23:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)reply
DYK for Aging of wine
On
18 November,
2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Aging of wine, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
Yeah, I know, and I'll give it a go. The reason I usually edit directly is, that when I edit in sandbox, I sometimes get distracted, often for days or weeks and suddenly my edits aren't valid any more, as someone has edited the article. Then I have to redo it all over again. All by my own fault of course. Another reason is that I've had techincal difficulties with the sandbox. But I'll try and adhere.
Nwinther (
talk)
09:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)reply
New grape articles
OK, it was a couple of weeks ago since you last added all those grape articles, but they were very many put together, so I think you have definitely deserved this barnstar! (We probably use them too little.) By the way, the existence of one of your other recent articles,
List of Vins de Primeur, seems to have created
some Gallic surprise. I have the impression that some editors of other language versions, who themselves are not really active at enwiki, actively monitor the WPWine page and the project's articles. A very comprehensive article
de:Säure (Wein) a couple of weeks after you started
Acids in wine was a clear indication to me.
Tomas e (
talk)
22:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Not necessarily surprised but flattered. Wine has been deeply embedded into French and German culture for centuries longer than the English speaking world. To have the German and French wikis find inspiration in the wine articles on the English wiki is very exciting and I'm glad to be a part of the global team effort to make Wikipedia an outstanding resource for wine. :)
AgneCheese/
Wine04:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Not little flareups
There aren't "little" flareups. After the creation of the unwritten rules, they have been used ever increasingly with many people not feeling that they are appropriate. With those like Gatoclass acting as if they are the rules without them being the rules, this is a situation that needs to be remedied. The problems with the rules have always come up. I know that I led and worked with at least three discussions about them on this very talk page within the last two months.
Ottava Rima (
talk)
16:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)reply
DYK for Champagne riots
On
31 December,
2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Champagne Riots, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
On
31 December,
2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Comet vintages, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
On
1 January,
2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Grower Champagne, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
Please see
WP:UNDUE. The proportion of coverage is in line with the popularity and global awareness of each style of wine. You may also want to look at the coverage allotted to each style in any number of reliable sources such as the Oxford Companion to Wine, Andre Domaine's Wine, Sotheby's Encyclopedia of Wine, The Wine Atlas, The Wine Bible, etc.
AgneCheese/
Wine17:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Um nobody is censoring anything. Spumante has a voice in the
Sparkling wine article. And.....I would take a look at how your
WP:POV and bias is coloring your editing. Again....I encourage you to read
WP:UNDUE. We need to edit within Wikipedia policy and guidelines.
AgneCheese/
Wine03:48, 3 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Orphaned non-free image (File:Dao bottle.jpg)
You've uploaded File:Dao bottle.jpg, and indicated that it's used under
Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
On
January 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sangiovese, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
I noticed that
User:Agne isn't taken. If you don't want the number in your name, you can request to rename your account at
Wikipedia:Changing username/SUL. I just bring this up because every time I try to find you I have had trouble remembering the number 27, and I recently found that name changing mechanism. Alternatively you can create a new account "Agne" and redirect the pages to Agne27's pages.
You know I'm not really sure why I added the number to my name. I think I may look into that link. As for your offer, I would love to drop you a line if I ever make it to that neck of the woods. If you ever want to explore
Woodinville Wine Country up in my area, let me know.
AgneCheese/
Wine00:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)reply
No kidding. I even searched my cellar to see if I had a single barbera, but alas no :( After I work my way through all the content related to-do list, the next big thing to work on will be images.
AgneCheese/
Wine03:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)reply
On
February 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Arneis, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
Gatoclass 17:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Nebbiolo
On
February 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nebbiolo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
On
February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Barolo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the
Did you know? talk page.
Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington (Seattle campus), and my group is reaching out to Wikipedians in the Puget Sound area. We're hosting a focus group designed to gather information on what Wikipedians would like to know about each other when interacting on Wikipedia. Our end goal is to create an embedded application that helps people quickly know more about others' history and activity on Wikipedia, and we feel our design will be much more useful if it's based on insights of users like you.
I'm hoping that the chance to help out local researchers, to engage in lively face-to-face discussion with other Seattle Wikipedians, and to contribute to Wikipedia in a new way will entice you to join us. The session lasts 2 hours and snacks are provided - one is April 8 (Wednesday) starting at 6 pm and the other is April 18 (Saturday) starting at 10 am. (Sessions will be held on UW Seattle campus - directions will be sent after registration.) Your contribution will be greatly appreciated!