User talk:John Cummings/Archive 6

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.

Facto Post – Issue 9 – 5 February 2018 m:Grants:Project/ScienceSource is the new ContentMine proposal: please take a look. Wikidata as Hub One way of looking at Wikidata relates it to the linked structured data , and looks ahead to greater support for "federated queries" that draw together information from all parts of the emerging network of websites. Another perspective might be likened to a photographic negative of that one: Wikidata as an already-functioning Web hub. Over half of its properties are identifiers on other websites. These are Wikidata's "external links", to use Wikipedia terminology: one type for the DOI of a publication, another for the VIAF page of an author, with thousands more such. Wikidata links out to sites that are not nominally part of the semantic web, effectively drawing them into a larger system. The crosswalk possibilities of the systematic construction of these links was covered in Issue 8. Wikipedia:External links speaks of them as kept "minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article." Here Wikidata finds more of a function. On viaf.org one can type a VIAF author identifier into the search box, and find the author page. The Wikidata Resolver tool, these days including Open Street Map, Scholia etc., allows this kind of lookup. The hub tool by maxlath takes a major step further, allowing both lookup and crosswalk to be encoded in a single URL. Links What galleries, libraries, archives, and museums can teach us about multimedia metadata on Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Foundation blogpost, 29 January 2018, by Jonathan Morgan and Sandra Fauconnier m:The Wikipedia Library/1Lib1Ref/Connect, 2018 institutional participation in the #1lib1ref campaign Newspeak House queries, created at 3 February 2018 event in London led by Magnus Manske Cochrane–Wikipedia Initiative, Wikipedia Signpost special report 5 February 2018, by JenOttowa What is the Last Question?, 5 February 2018 To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see below. Editor Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him. Back numbers are here. Reminder: WikiFactMine pages on Wikidata are at WD:WFM. If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM – Volume VIII, Issue I, January 2018 Headlines Australia report: We came, we saw, we conquered! Basque Country report: Books, librarians, encounters and borrowed data Côte d'Ivoire report: #1Lib1Ref, Côte d'Ivoire participates for the 2nd time France report: Fonds André Cros; #1lib1ref; Library of Dinan; LATMOS Germany report: sustainability beyond metrics Indonesia report: Digitizing the letters from Dewantara Kirti Griya Museum Yogyakarta continues Italy report: Seventeen: let's talk and celebrate! Macedonia report: Importance of digitization in 21 century Netherlands report: Local heritage made available through Wikimedia & 3rd Wikicafé Tilburg Norway report: Image collection from Armenia and Sami bibliography Serbia report: #1lib1ref first time in Serbia: 786 references added! Spain report: #1Lib1Ref Sweden report: Photos, 3D and training with the National Heritage Board Tunisia report: Upload Book UK report: Oxford Wikidata project Ukraine report: Libraries at the Forefront of Running All-Out Action for Ukrainian Wikipedia USA report: Wikipedia Day Wikidata report: Our constraint reports won't constrain you! WMF GLAM report: Call for case studies, #1lib1ref, Structured Commons and more Calendar: February's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Here's an invitation you can send to those who are helping you with your editathon:

		Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons. New: "Women's History Month" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list )

--Ipigott (talk) 13:21, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

In response to your request on the WiR talk page, we've put together a draft set of simple rules for new users. Is this the kind of thing you need? (BTW, you don't yet seem to have noticed the comments I made two or three days ago on User:John Cummings/WIR. They are on User talk:John Cummings/WIR.)--Ipigott (talk) 16:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ipigott:, thanks very much for this, I'll have a look at everything properly tomorrow, the rules look excellent, I think they may need to be paired with some basic mechanics of editing Wikipedia (which buttons to press to different things etc). Thanks again. John Cummings (talk) 16:35, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that might be a good idea. Your thanks should also be extended to Megalibrarygirl who formulated most of the rules.--Ipigott (talk) 16:43, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to @Megalibrarygirl: too as well :) John Cummings (talk) 16:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Anytime, John! :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

• Glad to see you've become a member of Women in Red, especially as you hope to bring us lots of new members. I'm sure we'll all be happy to help you develop your plans.--Ipigott (talk) 13:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks very much @Ipigott:, the thing I really need is help from someone who can create and edit FormWizard forms. I currently have a a button on my draft page for the event Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Events/UNESCO_2018 which allows people to join WiR, however when people fill in the form it takes them to a userpage that only offers them the option of going back to the main WiR page, not the event page. I really need to find a fix... Also I'd really love to add FormWizard forms to a few other places including Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Resources#External links to make it easier for new people and passers by to add useful resources. Do you know who might be able to do this? John Cummings (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

John Cummings: Sorry, I have absolutely no experience with Form Wizzard.--Ipigott (talk) 07:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem @Ipigott:, very few people have.... John Cummings (talk) 12:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

		Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons. Historically, our March event has been one of the biggest offerings of the year. This year, we are collaborating with two other wiki communities. Our article campaign is the official on-line/virtual node for Art+Feminism. Our image campaign supports the Whose Knowledge? initiative. Women's History Month 2018 Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk ) 16:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hi, John! I do a lot of outreach here in Queensland and I train using the Visual Editor only (I have previously trained using the source editor and the difference is astounding, VE is much easier for people to learn and use, and some people now continue editing after the VE training sessions which was rarely happening before with the source editor). But, as you have discovered, it means that when these folks want to embark on projects, the Wikipedia name space is closed to them.

The workaround is to add {{VEFriendly}} to the start of any Wikipedia namespace page that you need VE-only people to work with. This means the page has to be started using the source editor, but after the template is added, anyone can edit it using the VE. Apart from the shiny button to click, what is happening under the hood is that it launches the URL with "&veaction=editsource" which starts the Visual Editor. See it here on Wikipedia:GLAM/State Library of Queensland and the active subpages of that page. Also see it at User Talk:Kerry Raymond. You are unlikely to get any support to add it to more widely used pages, due to the intense opposition to the Visual Editor that you may have observed. And if a page is using a lot of templates, it may be difficult in any case for the VE user to edit the templates (possible but once inside a template, you need wikicode) so common templates like multi-column are difficult for VE users). WhatamIdoing says my template doesn't work with people using wikitext instead of source editor (wikitext is the halfway house which does source editing within the toolbar and tool support of the Visual Editor). I don't use wikitext myself as I use a lot of gadgets which don't work with wikitext, so I either use VE (for most of my normal content editing) or traditional source editor for when I need to heavy-duty work with templates or use my gadgets. As I work with VE users (rather than wikitext users), this limitation is not a problem to me. Enjoy! Kerry (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond:, thanks very much for the explanation, I've decided to move everything to Meta because its going to be in multiple languages and there may be blocks on VE in other languages I don't know about. I'm currently looking at if there is some sort of template or code that will block Visual Editor on a page, do you know if that exists? This would allow the few admin pages which use the Wikipedia: namespace to use that and allow all Wikiprojects to have VE enabled and make nice tables etc. Thanks again John Cummings (talk) 08:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't believe that the VE is blocked anywhere, but rather the user interface doesn't have the tab to easily invoke the Visual Editor from certain namespaces. All the tab does is launch the Visual Editor just as my template does and it works everywhere I have tried the template, so I don't think there is any restriction. Certainly I would prefer it to enable all the namespaces and just a template to restrict it in the few places where it would be a problem. Kerry (talk) 08:53, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

I see you mentioned you might want to create several hundred accounts for an edit-a-thon. I think I am friendly with one of the bureaucrats who give the account creator rights. Do you want me teo ask them for zh.wiki? Artix Kreiger (talk) 14:34, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Women in Red has a few admins. Do you want us to be on stand-by on March 8th for account creation? If yes, let me know what system would work best for you, e.g. maybe Slack? maybe Google Chat window? maybe Women in Red talkpage? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks @Artix Kreiger: and @Rosiestep:, I think we should be OK, I have account creator, I've asked for the IP address to be unblocked and there seems to be some way of doing it through the events dashboard also. John Cummings (talk) 18:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, John Cummings/Archive 6. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Hi John and @Kvardek du:. Two things to tell you.

I just tested out join the wiki4women course/programme. I note that the numbers signed up have increased from 11 this morning to 20 this evening. However, it wouldn't let me join. At least it appeared not to. I received the following message at this page:

500 — internal server error. :-( Something went wrong. Please contact the maintainers of this dashboard to let them know about the problem.

However, when I tried a second time I received this message: Enrollment failed. Users may not join the same course twice. I managed to find myself listed. I then tried to assign myself a brand new article on en.wiki (noting that I did change it from fr. to en.) I plan to create and work on Susan J. Patrick, but when I clicked "View full contribution history on Wikipedia", I received my very paltry contribution list for French wikipedia, not en.wiki. I think this might confuse users.

I signed up to get myself sent a certificate, and noted wierd translation on this page which somone might like to address. (My emboldening):

The #WIKI4WOMEN initiative calls everyone to take few minutes (from 30 minutes) of their time to create, enrich or translate, in as many languages as possible, Wikipedia portraits of women committed in the fields of education, science, culture, social and human sciences, or communication and information. No matter where you are in the world, all you have to do to join #WIKI4WOMEN is:

• create an account on Wikipedia
• start working on women portraits:

I'd also point out that the correct spellings on that page and elsewhere should be enrol; enrolling, and enrolment (one, two and one 'L's respectively).

Hope this all makes sense and is helpful, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:12, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much @Nick Moyes:, I'll ask for your changes to be added. John Cummings (talk) 10:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

• Hi John. As far as I can see, 22 of your group registered on Women in Red today. Two of them contributed, the others just registered. I've welcomed them all and added their names to the WiR mailing list. I'll check them out over the next few days (together with those who registered earlier).--Ipigott (talk) 18:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM – Volume VIII, Issue II, February 2018 Headlines Belgium report: Photo contest Wiki Loves Public Space Brazil report: Starting new GLAM partnerships Bulgaria report: The first Bulgarian wikitown presented at an International Tourist Fair in Sofia Côte d'Ivoire report: Editing with more librarians as we expanded #1Lib1Ref campaign Finland report: Finland's First Wikimedian in Residence to Kansallisarkisto Germany report: GLAM in galleries Italy report: Boosting collaborations Macedonia report: Startup of the WikiIndustry project Norway report: Intern program for library students Sweden report: WiR at The National Museums of World Culture UK report: Scotland's Public Libraries move toward first edit-a-thons USA report: February made me shiver Special story: Pattypan 18.02: The uploading tool now includes STL support Wikidata report: Cool Tools WMF GLAM report: Structured Data on Commons, Wikidata Workshop materials, and Spring Travel Calendar: March's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Facto Post – Issue 10 – 12 March 2018 Milestone for mix'n'match Around the time in February when Wikidata clicked past item Q50000000, another milestone was reached: the mix'n'match tool uploaded its 1000th dataset. Concisely defined by its author, Magnus Manske, it works "to match entries in external catalogs to Wikidata". The total number of entries is now well into eight figures, and more are constantly being added: a couple of new catalogs each day is normal. Since the end of 2013, mix'n'match has gradually come to play a significant part in adding statements to Wikidata. Particularly in areas with the flavour of digital humanities, but datasets can of course be about practically anything. There is a catalog on skyscrapers, and two on spiders. These days mix'n'match can be used in numerous modes, from the relaxed gamified click through a catalog looking for matches, with prompts, to the fantastically useful and often demanding search across all catalogs. I'll type that again: you can search 1000+ datasets from the simple box at the top right. The drop-down menu top left offers "creation candidates", Magnus's personal favourite. m:Mix'n'match/Manual for more. For the Wikidatan, a key point is that these matches, however carried out, add statements to Wikidata if, and naturally only if, there is a Wikidata property associated with the catalog. For everyone, however, the hands-on experience of deciding of what is a good match is an education, in a scholarly area, biographical catalogs being particularly fraught. Underpinning recent rapid progress is an open infrastructure for scraping and uploading. Congratulations to Magnus, our data Stakhanovite ! Links Wikipedia goes 3D allowing users to upload .STLs for digital reference, Beau Jackson for 3dprintingindustry.com, February 22 2018 WikiCite report (video) Formal publication and announcement of ISBN citation dataset, see Twitter post, February 23 2018 Plotting the Course Through Charted Waters, workshop on data visualization literacy from Mikhail Popov, Wikimedia Foundation Using Wikidata to build an authority list of Holocaust-era ghettos, Nancy Cooey, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, February 12 2018 Why Should You Learn SPARQL? Wikidata! Mark Longair, blogpost November 29 2017 Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?, George Anadiotis for Big on Data, March 5 2018 To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see below. Editor Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him. Back numbers are here. Reminder: WikiFactMine pages on Wikidata are at WD:WFM. If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

	Teacher Extraordinaire
	Thanks so much... Blossom Ozurumba (talk) 16:07, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Gryllida (talk) 20:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

		Welcome to Women in Red's April 2018 worldwide online editathons. Focus on: April+Further with Art+Feminism Archaeology Military history (contest) Geofocus: Indian subcontinent Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred --Rosiestep (talk ) 12:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Facto Post – Issue 11 – 9 April 2018 The 100 Skins of the Onion Open Citations Month, with its eminently guessable hashtag, is upon us. We should be utterly grateful that in the past 12 months, so much data on which papers cite which other papers has been made open, and that Wikidata is playing its part in hosting it as "cites" statements. At the time of writing, there are 15.3M Wikidata items that can do that. Pulling back to look at open access papers in the large, though, there is is less reason for celebration. Access in theory does not yet equate to practical access. A recent LSE IMPACT blogpost puts that issue down to "heterogeneity". A useful euphemism to save us from thinking that the whole concept doesn't fall into the realm of the oxymoron. Some home truths: aggregation is not content management, if it falls short on reusability. The PDF file format is wedded to how humans read documents, not how machines ingest them. The salami-slicer is our friend in the current downloading of open access papers, but for a better metaphor, think about skinning an onion, laboriously, 100 times with diminishing returns. There are of the order of 100 major publisher sites hosting open access papers, and the predominant offer there is still a PDF. From the discoverability angle, Wikidata's bibliographic resources combined with the text and data mining purposes they highlight. The long tail, or in other words the onion heart when it has become fiddly beyond patience to skin, does call for a pis aller . But the real knack is to do more between the XML and the heart. Links Crossref as a new source of citation data: A comparison with Web of Science and Scopus, CWTS blogpost 17 January 2018, Nees Jan van Eck, Ludo Waltman, Vincent Larivière, Cassidy Sugimoto Citations with identifiers in Wikipedia, figshare dataset Making women more visible online—with Wikidata tools!, Wikimedia blogpost 29 March 2018 by Sandra Fauconnier Village pump discussion, Turn on mapframe? We’re ready if you are reaches conclusions The Power of the Wikimedia Movement beyond Wikimedia, Forbes 28 March 2018, Michael Bernick Tracing stolen bitcoin, blogpost 26 March 2018 by Ross J. Anderson To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see below. Editor Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him. Back numbers are here. Reminder: WikiFactMine pages on Wikidata are at WD:WFM. If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM – Volume VIII, Issue III, March 2018 Headlines Australia report: Regional GLAM workshops and Art+Feminism Belgium report: GenderGap edit-a-thon; GLAM at Open Belgium Brazil report: Brazilian user group and Portuguese chapter join forces for Women’s International Month Côte d'Ivoire report: Reflecting upon #1Lib1Ref impact, upcoming collaborations Czech Republic report: Second edit-a-thon in Slaný and new cooperation with Institut of Bohuslav Martinů Estonia report: Paintings and photographers' biographies to Wikidata, translation of Rightsstatements.org, rephotography app Finland report: Combining coding, learning and culture France report: CNES, Musée Bourdelle Germany report: Presentation "70. Westfälischer Archivtag" India report: Impact of Odisha Government content donation on Wikimedia Projects Ireland report: Art+Feminism boom in Ireland Italy report: Women's month Macedonia report: Startup of the WikiBeer project & "Bitalon" - The Hackaton of Bitola Serbia report: Edit-a-thons and digitazation of books Spain report: Wikipedia courses in libraries Sweden report: National Museums of World Culture; Air Force Museum Ukraine report: Article Contest for Libraries USA report: Women's History Month Special story: GLAM WIKI Conference in Tel Aviv, November 2018 Wikidata report: Family Favourites WMF GLAM report: Structured Data on Commons; Upcoming events and travel Calendar: April's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Hi John,

I was reading

• Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia
• Template:Free-content attribution

Thanks for reading. - Paul^T+/_C 02:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi @

Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia because Wikipedia:Copying_text_from_other_sources#Can_I_copy_from_open_license_or_public_domain_sources? didn't have any. I asked on village pump and people I know within the movement and no one showed me Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Where_to_place_attribution

so I have never seen it before, (it would have been nice if these two pages were linked so I didn't spend a week writing new instructions, but that's another discussion).

I would suggest the instructions on Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Where_to_place_attribution are somewhat vague and don't give people enough information to attribute text well, e.g it tells people to place appropriate attribution template and then links people to chose from over 400 templates.... My understanding is that the templates exist to understand which sources the text comes from, so if you want to use a new source you have to create a new template, which is a very high technical requirement. The system I created doesn't rely on this and text from any source or a group of sources can be used and measured (e.g pageviews). The template I used (which already existsed, I just added some sections) allows you to have metrics, which is very useful for working with partner organisations e.g here are all the Wikipedia articles that include open license text from UNESCO, you simply change the search term to find text from other sources, which is explained in Measuring Reach section of the page.

My suggestion is for me to update the instructions in Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Where_to_place_attribution with a link to the instructions I wrote, they provide clearer information, especially on which license text can be used and also provide clearer attribution for the source of the text.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 14:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

That all makes sense, and again, I'm not saying you did anything wrong or improper (more explicitly, I don't think it would be appropriate for me to suggest that either). Currently, there is a link to {{

instructions

.

For example, as currently written there is no way to know why there are three USESCO works explicitly called out (as opposed to the dozen or so others that are also referenced with what I assume would be similar licenses) at the end of

Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia. For information on reusing text from Wikipedia, please see the the terms of use." being repeated three times in addition to the three large and unexplained logos. I don't think that text or logos should be in the article namespace since they have nothing to do with the article or its sources. In addition, I see there are direct attributions to the three PDF sources inline like any other citation as suggested in the guideline: "a paragraph or a few sentences copied from compatibly licensed or public-domain text which is not placed within quotations, then putting an attribution template in a footnote at the end of the sentences or paragraph is sufficient." If the license information were also added to those inline references then, in theory, we could remove the multiple {{free-content attribution

}}s from the article entirely.

This would require a major change to the template and/or your instructions, possibly creating a new template that could work inside <ref></ref> tags instead, maybe making some minor changes to {{

CC-notice}} to include the additional information you added to {{free-content attribution

}}, or even placing the template you created on the talk page of the article instead. The latter would have the benefit of not disrupting your statistics but would still require an explicit reference to the license on the article page as well.

Thanks for your response and I'm confident we can come to an agreement on this. Perhaps we should also open this discussion to others on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) (or another, more appropriate section of the Village pump)? - Paul^T+/_C 15:49, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

I think this will help illustrate my concern better. The template was much less prominent when it was added to WP:Plagiarism:

Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia

. [source information]

Now it looks like this:

This article incorporates text from a

Wikipedia:Adding open license text to Wikipedia.
For information on reusing text from Wikipedia, please see the terms of use

.

Big difference, right? Especially when it is used multiple times in an article. The former can be used in a bulleted or numbered list without messing with the visual look, but the latter needs to be either in its own section or at the very beginning or end of one. In both cases I think the link to the instructions is not appropriate for regular Wikipedia articles. I hope this helps. - Paul^T+/_C 16:15, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Psantora:, thanks for your thoughtful reply, I'll try and break up my answer into the different issues you've raised:

Attribution

Yes, knowing which text comes from which source isn't possible except looking at the diffs, which is a real limitation. What I'm hoping to do with this is to build up a body of work to show the impact and then ask for the technical work to happen to be able to have some kind of bookends for the text to know which text comes from which source. I outlined it in a proposal for an additional button on the editing toolbar here Grants:IdeaLab/An open license text reuse tool for the Visual Editor toolbar which has some support. I think one option would be to write this up again for the community wishlist.

Prominence of credit

I think having a separate section for sources is needed because the text is fulfilling two pruposes:

1. A reference: in the instructions it tells people to include the sources as a reference as well
2. A source: the credit for the text reuse, this is different to it being a reference.

The prominence of the logo is different on different devices, on my work computer with a high res screen the icon is tiny, but on my laptop it is larger, on my phone the section is collapsed so I don't see it unless I click on it and then the logo is tiny. Perhaps there is a way of specifying the size as a percentage of screen width rather than number of pixels? Although I've no idea how.

Linking to the instructions

Why do you think having a link to the instructions for using the tool is inappropriate? I think it is important to keep the link between the tool and the instructions to allow anyone who want to do it to be able to do it easily. This is something Wikipedia is generally bad at and often to know how to do something requires clairvoyance or creative googling or just asking around because the resources aren't linked together.

John Cummings (talk) 21:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi John, thanks for taking the time to write such a lengthy and comprehensive reply!

Regarding attribution, I think we are on the same page here. I'd love to read that proposal, but I don't think you wrote out the correct link. Can you double-check? It is currently a redlink. No more! Sounds interesting. I'll look into it further a little later.

Regarding prominence, I think both purposes you listed are important. I don't follow how it then requires a separate section taking up way more visual space with duplicative text and links. I think both purposes can be fulfilled by having an inline reference when appropriate and possible, but if that is not possible there is no reason the template couldn't be listed directly below any inline references within the same section (similar to Apple Inc.#Bibliography - sorry, not the greatest example, it was the first one I could find). I expanded my comment on the talk page of the template with some proposed changes to bring the template back in line with the way it used to be (and to match the other attribution templates). This also has the nice side effect of allowing this template to be used in a bulleted list and/or an inline reference without any issues. I really don't see any reason why the logo should be any more prominent than the other attribution templates with .

Regarding the link to the instructions, my understanding is

WP:SPAMmy

since it is included in every transclusion of the template, which is often multiple times in a row.

I'll be the first to admit that I'm no authority when it comes to something like this and I'm happy to expand this discussion beyond just the two of us if you feel differently about anything above. I think the work that you are doing to increase and encourage high-value content in Wikipedia is a very good thing and I want to help. Thanks for reading (again)! - Paul^T+/_C 14:21, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

@Psantora:, sorry for the late reply, I've been doing some more research on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. The policy appears to relate to the body of the article, rather than in the other sections, as you say there are maintenance templates prominently at the top of the page which include instructions. My problem with removing the link is that it makes them less useful and usable, including for non Wikimedians who want to reuse the text. I think the most sensible thing is to ask for a clarification on the talk page of the policy. Does this sound OK? John Cummings (talk) 15:14, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi there John, no worries at all. I'm happy to open this discussion up to include more people. Just point me to it. Thanks. - Paul^T+/_C 15:19, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I just created a new thread at Village pump (miscellaneous). We can continue the discussion there. Thanks, - Paul^T+/_C 17:02, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks @Psantora:, I'll add a reply there, I reverted your edit to the template because I wanted people to be able to see the text you have an issue with in situ. John Cummings (talk) 10:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2018 worldwide online editathons. File:Soraya Aghaee4.jpg New: "Women of the Sea" New: "Villains" New: "Women in Sports" New: "Central Eastern European women" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk ) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 07:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello John Cummings. To follow up on your recent question about pages that are in both of two categories, I am curious if you are aware of this method of advanced searching, and whether or not it would help in your endeavor? Furthermore, this example shows the titles that are in all of three categories. Best regards.--

) 18:03, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: April 2018

This Month in GLAM – Volume VIII, Issue IV, April 2018 Headlines Australia report: HerStory in Alice Springs and Australasian Open Access Strategy Belgium report: Everybody WIKI Brazil report: Labs to introduce Wikidata and its potentialities in Brazil Catalan areas report: Event: Role of Wikimedia in the era of Open Science France report: City of Grenoble Italy report: Libraries in the spotlight Macedonia report: Macedonian Wikiexpeditions exhibition and workshops with Wiki Clubs members Netherlands report: 325,000 images from Dutch photo archives uploaded by Mr.Nostalgic Philippines report: First Wikipedian in Residence in the Philippines Portugal report: Partnerships, GLAMs & Art+feminism Serbia report: Strong support from the Ministry of culture and information of Republic of Serbia: Financing the three WIR programs and realizing GLAM seminars Sweden report: National museum of world Culture; Sounds and pronunciations; Nordic Museum Tunisia report: Upload Book UK report: National Library of Wales and Oxford University USA report: April showers Wikidata report: April Love WMF GLAM report: Wikipedians in Residence and Travel Calendar: May's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.