User talk:Bluerasberry/Archive 29

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 25 ← Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 → Archive 35

Citation data handling

Hey Lane,

At this was there any ongoing output after the talk? From here it seems like not much visible has happened. LeadSongDog come howl! 05:47, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

LeadSongDog I have no good information. I have a foggy idea that as Wikidata develops then eventually some development in Wikidata will make it easier to track citations. Wikidata developers have told me that there is no way that Wikidata can store all citations for Wikipedia in the way that Cite Doi generated a template for each one, so my wish that Wikidata would bring some change is my own ignorant idea and wishful thinking. On 16 September "arbitrary access" to Wikidata comes to English Wikipedia. I continue to watch Wikidata and see what happens.
Having an easy way to get information about how citations are used on Wikipedia would greatly increase the interest that experts had in contributing to Wikipedia. Some developments are that Cochrane and BMJ are committing resources to partner with Wikipedia for the long term. What they do is not much, but then also, the Wikipedia community has trouble crowdsourcing the kind of business negotiation they need to develop a relationship more quickly. PLOS also has staff friendly to Wikipedia. A friend there asked me to send them some measure of how PLOS Medicine is cited in Wikipedia and I do not know what to send them.
If I had a wish it would be to have a quick way to determine how many times a given citation is used in all Wikimedia projects, and also a tool to count how many times a particular citation field (like journal or author name) is cited in all Wikimedia projects.
I do have more notes that I could share by email. One thing that I have is demonstrations of some Mediawiki extensions which are not installed on Wikipedia, but which non-Wikimedia developers have made for managing citations. It is not easy to understand how they work or even what they do exactly, but contributors to sites like http://acawiki.org have invested time and resources in trying to prototype these things. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:11, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
LeadSongDog Also see d:Wikidata:WikiProject Source MetaData. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:54, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Ah! One more place. We've got a horribly scattered discussion, it's no wonder we're having so much trouble getting any results. Template_talk:Cite_pmid#Discussion is another. We've got to get a centralized discussion going.LeadSongDog come howl! 15:33, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
LeadSongDog I compiled what discussions I could find at meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Reform of citation structure for all Wikimedia projects. I think that is why you came to me in the beginning. My vote for the best place to discuss everything is in that Wikidata project. On English Wikipedia I know of no obvious place to centralize discussion, and might suggest that someone make a WP: page if centralization here is desired. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:44, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I appreciate that was where things stood 18 months ago, but since then user:citation bot has been abandoned by its operator, {{cite doi}} has been deprecated and now the cleanup of its transclusions is once again being discussed. Meanwhile incomplete examples such as the {{cite wdl}} at [1] left citations such as "A bot will automatically expand this citation to WDL:227 within the next few minutes." in articles for months on end. I expect that we won't see a peaceful resolution until there is a workable tool in place that permits entry-level editors to simply provide an identifier while editing an article, then automagically see a fully formed citation appear. The trick is to do this without sacrificing wp:V to a simple typo in an identifier. For that to happen we need the centralized infrastructure to work first. The citation bot workaround was always unsustainable, it was completely unfair to the operator that we relied so much on him. LeadSongDog come howl! 17:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

RfC on cite doi

Hi,

I've posted an RfC at Template talk:cite doi. Thanks for your offer to help. I'll wait for the bot to take care of the initial notifications, but a number of other notifications need to/should be sent. As many science wikiprojects as possible, I would think, as well as participants in the previous discussion. (Do other academic areas use cite doi often? Any other topic areas?) This is the sort of thing that an automated tool like AWB would presumably be helpful for; I don't use those. Any suggestions? —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 02:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Ashill Comprehensive discussions are hard to organize, so I try to go for good enough discussions. The discussion is already lively in my opinion, and I hope that you like it. I posted at some other science WikiProjects and listed them in the discussion section of the deprecation talk. Thanks for articulating good points for keeping the template. I know this discussion will not end soon. With the advent of Wikipedia:VisualEditor I think we will have an Eternal September of new users who all make new decisions, and options not imagined now may overshadow all the options discussed in this talk. I am delighted that you raised so much awareness on this, and ultimately want Wikipedia to have the best citation system anywhere and want for it to work cross-wiki and even connect off-wiki. I appreciate the time you took to further thought. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

September 16: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

Wednesday September 16, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project!

We hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Bonus events, RSVP now for our latest upcoming editathons:

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

2875

Sorry! I did not realize that there was an actual page for 2875. It looked like nonsense to me. — Anita5192 (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

I am late

but now I have read your article on Signpost in August.

I fully agree, especially when you wrote: ...that almost all of the conference presentations were showcasing the work of paid staff, when many people think of the Wikimedia movement as a volunteer initiative.

I am pretty active as a volunteer since 11 years, and I won´t accept exactly this issue.

I saw it the first time in London, but that was precisely the reason why I refused to go to Mexico. In London I wanted to make a presentation together with a female scientist of the Austrian Academy of Sciences on a common potential major project, this presentation was rejected on the very last day.

What happened in London? I have seen paid staff, which have never even done in their life a single edit in Wikipedia, but have actually declared an audience of probably 500 years Wikipedia Experience how Wikipedia works.

In the meantime, I still consider, that the Wikimania is nothing more than an incentive for users, but where it is also striking that there are not really active users, which is a Wikimania apply for scholarship and get it amazingly well.

For the rest of the year you will no longer see these people.

Maybe I'll go to Italy next year (because it is very close to me), but I'm not really sure.

I considers that local meetings - so such as the WikiCon for Germany, Austria and Switzerland (and, of course South Tyrol) are far more efficient. They are smaller (200 persons) and one also has therefore better access to the various stakeholders, which is indeed a daily basis in his work meets Wikipedia.

Unfortunately, it is so that the separation WMF / Chapter / Communty by such events is not resolved, rather the contrary.

Greetings from Vienna --Hubertl (talk) 09:49, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Personal acquaintances: you are confirmed!

Hello Bluerasberry, You are now confirmed! Welcome!

  • You can add this box to your userpage: {{User:Romaine/Persönliche Bekanntschaften/box}} This works on de-wiki, en-wiki, fr-wiki, nl-wiki, Commons, Meta, Wikidata, WMBE-wiki, WMNL-wiki and can be requested on other wiki's.
  • The list of English participants is on Wikipedia:Personal acquaintances/Participants.
    • To stay informed, add this page to your watchlist.
  • For a complete overview of all participants, see here.
  • You can confirm others at: this page.

Romaine (talk) 14:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Palestine

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Palestine. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion

Bluerasberry, thanks very much for your helpful suggestion at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Free Speech Flag.

I've added a few citations, and responded there.

I hope you will reconsider,

— Cirt (talk) 19:01, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I would be willing to rename it along with your suggestion -- do you mean move the Featured Picture candidate page? I'd rather not move the file on Commons as it's been there at that file name for years with many incoming links. What's your advice? — Cirt (talk) 19:08, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Cirt Are incoming links such a serious problem? Moving it would create a redirect. If it is moved, it should only be moved once, so getting other comments about the appropriate file name might be best. I still could be wrong - maybe it is the recognized free speech flag. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:13, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Please see:

  • S, Ben (March 1, 2011). "46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2". Yale Law & Technology. Archived from the original on March 10, 2011. Retrieved September 24, 2015. A 'PS3 Flag', an homage to its predecessor, the 'Free Speech Flag'

It was the original Free Speech Flag. It inspired others. It was the first one. What do you think? — Cirt (talk) 19:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Please see:

  • Thompson, Jeff (August 13, 2011). "Illegal Numbers". Jeff Thompson. Archived from the original on September 24, 2015. Retrieved September 24, 2015. An example of this is the so-called 'Free Speech Flag', seen above.

Author of above source = Assistant Professor and Program Director of Visual Art & Technology at the Stevens Institute of Technology. What are your thoughts? Can we please keep the current title? — Cirt (talk) 19:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

  • Update: = Done. I've changed the file and caption to Sample 09-F9 protest art, Free Speech Flag by John Marcotte, as you suggested at the FPC. Thank you for the suggestion, it is indeed more accurate and descriptive. — Cirt (talk) 19:33, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

i like your hamster

Hello, Bluerasberry. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hi Lane, im super terrible at the wiki - will get better - met you at wikiD this week. i had a question about fixing a header Kellnerll (talk) 22:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)kellnerll

Saturday October 3: WikiArte Latin America Edit-a-thon @ MoMA

Saturday October 3: WikiArte Latin America Edit-a-thon @ MoMA

You are invited to join us for a full Saturday (drop-in any time!) of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) for our upcoming "WikiArte" Latin America Edit-a-thon, for Wiki Arte y Cultura Latinoamericana, a communal day of creating, updating, improving, and translating Wikipedia articles about Latin American art and culture.

11:00am - 5:00 pm (drop-in anytime!) at MoMA Cullman Education and Research Building, 4 West 54th Street

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required. We will provide training sessions and resources for beginner Wikipedians, WiFi, reference materials, and suggested topics, as well as childcare and refreshments.

Please bring your laptop, power cord, and ideas for articles that need to be updated, translated, or created. You are welcome to edit all day or drop by to show your support, and to follow #WikiArte on social media!

Trainings for new and less experienced Wikipedia editors will be offered (in English) at 11:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 3:30 p.m. Tutorials and resources in Spanish will be available online, and participants are also encouraged to work on the Spanish and Portuguese language editions of Wikipedia.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 10:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Next event, October 15 - Women in Architecture editathon @ Guggenheim

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

I reverted you

at WP:NOT. It looks to me like WP:NOPRICES fits right in and is explained very well. Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Smallbones I just made WP:Prices. I think the content should be somewhere. I would be happy to put that content anywhere else, but for so long prices are addressed there, I think redirects about prices should go there.
Some options -
  1. Delete content at WP:Prices
  2. Merge that content elsewhere - perhaps to the status quo target of WP:NOPRICES? I like the idea but that section is already a summary, not a discussion
  3. Retain redirect to WP:Prices
The part that I object to is having some pricing redirects go to one place, and others going elsewhere. Help me decide whether WP:Prices has a place in Wikipedia.
Thoughts? Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
First, I think you have to label your essay as "essay". Having a new essay replace an old policy (if only in a redirect), obviously needs some time before it is agreed to by enough people.
Second, you might call it WP:Prices and product lists since they are very similar. What I read WP:NOT as saying is that prices or product availability (e.g. a product list) cannot come from a primary source. In the odd case that it is needed for the article, then it should com from a secondary or tertiary source. This brings up WP:NOADS, which I read as saying the same thing. It all comes down to "what is an advertisement?" The classic definition that goes back hundreds of years is just another word for publicity or publicizing, e.g. "Bob was advertising his affair with Jane." But in the modern world, it is usually used for businesses, who usually pay for the ad (but not always, as on Wikipedia).
Example
Note on a fencepost "Hay for sale. Inquire at MacDonald's farm" - that's an ad. If it was in a newspaper, it would be called a classified ad. If it was painted on the side of a barn or a special large board, it would be called a billboard ad. If it was on the radio, it would be called a radio ad. All it has to be is a communication from a business (or similar) publicizing the availability of something for sale. Adding in prices only makes it "even more" of an ad. Adding in even more products available for sale - even more of an ad. Of course if a reliable source third party, notes that something is available for sale or mentions the price for some reason other than to sell the product, then it is not an ad. It might be part of marketing or promotion if the "reliable source" is just mimicking a press-release or similar. But it's not an ad. Straight from the seller - it's an ad by definition. Not from the seller, i.e. not from the primary source, then we have to use our judgement, but it is usually clear when a newspaper or website is just filling space with a press release (Promotion, marketing, or public relations - all of which are forbidden as sources in WP:NOT). Seems pretty straightforward to me. Smallbones(smalltalk) 19:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Smallbones I would be happy to move the WP:Prices to WP:Prices and product lists if that helped, and if you supported other things like WP:NOPRICES redirecting to that.
I could put the "essay" template on it but it is not really an essay, because it does not advocate for any particular opinion. I hoped that the page could be a collection of discussions on the topic.
My interest in this is drug prices, which I think is different from other products. The prices that consumers pay for drugs is not largely determined by the company providing the drugs. In the United States it is determined by insurance, in other rich countries the government sets the price in most cases, and in poor countries there is a mix of government regulation and market forces. Some people have said that prices are not straightforward for drugs. Also - drug prices have a strong relationship with availability. It is possible for a Wikipedia article to say "This is the standard drug used to treat this condition", but if the Wikipedia article on that drug neglects to mention that the drug is impossible to afford (often the case in the developing world) then the article is lacking critical information and its usefulness is compromised.
Related primary information from a database might be "Drug not available in these countries", for example, many countries ban painkillers routinely available in the United States, or some European countries prohibit drugs which America's lax safety laws allow. In the case of drugs, pricing is more of an availability issue than just marketing.
I completely agree with you about promotion but drug prices almost never would be promotional. In fact, I think practically all companies would wish to suppress the distribution of pricing data because the variability is so bewildering.
Would you be satisfied by my moving the title and appending the essay template? I do not know of much precedent of what I am trying to do here - aggregate discussions. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
All I can say now is that you've really thrown me for a loop here - this is nothing like what I thought you were talking about.
The first thing you have to do is decide what WP:PRICES is. It's not a policy or a guideline (yet), it's not a wikiproject or a talk page. So please find a normal slot that it fits into. Essay is the best that I can think of right now.
Drug prices, and their use on Wikipedia, are indeed very different from the normal use of prices here. Probably the main difference is that reliable sources often report on them in the news. Off the top of my head, there was the old drug that had its price raised by xxxx% a couple of weeks ago, there is the continuing story about US citizens ordering drugs from Canada or other reimporting programs. Price discrimination probably makes the AARP Journal every other month. Health Economics journals must have tons of material. The source you gave at http://erc.msh.org/mainpage.cfm?file=1.0.htm&module=DMP&language=English looks good. So you don't need to look for a reason to mention individual drug prices. I think what WP:NOT is getting at is mainly lists of prices - but in effect it's now about lists of products (with or without prices), since even on Wikipedia prices change too often to be listed en masse.
BTW the article Prescription drug prices in the United States looks like it could be updated.
Also databases are not necessarily primary sources - it depends who is collecting the data.
Perhaps @Doc James: would care to comment? I am usually in over my head when it comes to medical articles.
Maybe we could use an very expanded version WP:Business as a guideline or policy to clarify what can and cannot be reported in article on businesses.
So I'm just making random comments now - I don't know what to tell you except put WP:PRICES into a format that people can identify (i.e. which slot does it fit into?). Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
It states "unless there is a source and a justified reason for the mention". That is sufficient. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim

You are invited to join us for a full afternoon and evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering the lives and works of women in architecture.

noon - 8pm (drop-in anytime!) at Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Garrett Lobby @ 1071 5th Ave by E 88 St

In conjunction with Archtober and New York Archives Week, the Guggenheim will host its third Wikipedia edit-a-thon—or, #guggathon— to enhance articles related to women in architecture on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that, by its nature combines both.

The Guggenheim will work alongside ArchiteXX, the founders of WikiD: Women Wikipedia Design #wikiD, the international education and advocacy program working to increase the number of Wikipedia articles on women in architecture and the built environment. New and experienced editors are welcome.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global partnerships page to discover an edit-a-thon in a city near you or simply join remotely.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim

You are invited to join us for a full day and evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering the lives and works of women in architecture.

noon - 8pm (drop-in anytime!) at Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Garrett Lobby @ 1071 5th Ave by E 88 St

In conjunction with Archtober and New York Archives Week, the Guggenheim will host its third Wikipedia edit-a-thon—or, #guggathon—to enhance articles related to women in architecture on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that, by its nature combines both.

The Guggenheim will work alongside ArchiteXX, the founders of WikiD: Women Wikipedia Design #wikiD, the international education and advocacy program working to increase the number of Wikipedia articles on women in architecture and the built environment. New and experienced editors are welcome.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global partnerships page to discover an edit-a-thon in a city near you or simply join remotely.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?

You are being contacted because you contributed to a recent discussion of MOS:IDENTITY that closed with the recommendation that Wikipedia's policy on transgender individuals be revisited.

Two threads have been opened at the Village Pump:Policy. The first addresses how the Manual of Style should instruct editors to refer to transgender people in articles about themselves (which name, which pronoun, etc.). The second addresses how to instruct editors to refer to transgender people when they are mentioned in passing in other articles. Your participation is welcome. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:48, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Blue raspberry soda from Seattle

Teddy's old fashioned blue raspberry soda

I bought this bottle of soda just so I could share it with you, Lane. Cheers. Brianhe (talk) 03:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Brianhe Thank you for sharing! We live in an amazing age of flavors and colors. See you soon in Seattle. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Question about Resolution for SVG files

Please note: This is an SVG. Per WP:WIAFP on SVG files: "Note that vector graphics in SVG format can have a nominal size much smaller than this, as by their nature they can be infinitely scaled without loss of quality."

So doesn't that mean the SVG file is good to go?

Please help clarify your thoughts on this for me.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 20:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Try looking at this in a "show preview" = [[File:Digestive system diagram en.svg|4000px]]. Because it is an SVG file, the quality still looks quite high quality to me, even blown up to that big an image. Can you explain your thoughts on SVG to me and why we should not follow WP:WIAFP when it says "Note that vector graphics in SVG format can have a nominal size much smaller than this, as by their nature they can be infinitely scaled without loss of quality." ??? Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, Bluerasberry, I had another look at the standards as described at the Featured Picture criteria page. The criteria state, specifically for SVG files as an exception: "Note that vector graphics in SVG format can have a nominal size much smaller than this, as by their nature they can be infinitely scaled without loss of quality." This is not a JPG file. It is an SVG file. Because it is in SVG format, it looks the same high quality when blown up to very very large sizes. Please re-evaluate your position at the FPC page. Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 20:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Please note the specific part where the criteria state: "SVG format ... they can be infinitely scaled without loss of quality." Please note the word INFINITELY. Surely INFINITE is a big enough number??? — Cirt (talk) 20:45, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Public image of Narendra Modi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Public image of Narendra Modi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public image of Narendra Modi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Wikipedia Motivation Barnstar
To Bluerasberry, thank you for promoting Wikipedia in your presentations and encouraging newcomers to edit. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

This Friday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA

You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Notice

The Cleveland Clinic situation is a mess. I've posted at COI/N. Your thoughts would be helpful.

Here's the legally required notice pursuant to Article 6, Section B, paragraph (ii)(a)3.

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:02, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

WP research ethics

Hi Bluerasberry: I emailed you a couple of weeks ago, in response to your comment here. There's no particular rush on this, but I just wanted to check back with you, in case my message had gone astray, or I dropped the ball, etc. Cheers, jxm (talk) 00:08, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I replied by email. Thanks for pinging me. Blue Rasberry (talk) 10:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

BillyBoy* book

Good evening ( for it is evening in France) ,


i made a change on the BillyBoy* book , adding a book , http://www.amazon.fr/La-poup%C3%A9e-Bleuette-Collection-Billyboy/dp/2869412045 , I corrected the tittle , you can check by zooming, still i don't know how to add an isbn adress , and put a blue point ......would you help ?


that would be very kind of you .


merci,


Jean-Marc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suzy Wong (talk • contribs) 18:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Suzy Wong: Thank you for writing. Please write anytime.
I added the book as you directed. Thank you for your interest here. Let me know if I can do more. Blue Rasberry (talk) 10:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Bluerasberry/Archive_29"