User talk:Edenaviv5

Hello, Edenaviv5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
Check out some of these pages:
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Introduction to Wikipedia
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 16:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I edit some particular pages?

Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.

Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?

Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.

How do I create an article?

See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.

How do I create citations?

Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:

==References==
{{Reflist}}

What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?

A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

Orphaned non-free image File:HaynesFluteCo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HaynesFluteCo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I am working on creating an article about the company. Edenaviv5 (talk) 23:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:New England Folk Festival logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:New England Folk Festival logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The image was removed because the editor thought it was not a valid fair use, but it does fall under fair use and is back in the article. Edenaviv5 (talk) 19:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sex Is as Sex Does: Governing Transgender Identity has been accepted

Sex Is as Sex Does: Governing Transgender Identity, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Stuartyeates (talk) 04:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Edenaviv5 (talk) 19:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for citations for Rabbit

Thanks for adding the citations in for Rabbit. Always good to have things documented. I'm very new to WP & was wondering about the use of 2 different terms to describe the same thing: coprophagy & caecotrophy. If the different citations use the different terms, does WP suggest to use the 2 terms, or is it ok/better to use 1 term in the article. In fact, the first couple of paragraphs have common info & was wondering if you think it would be best to combine them. As I said, I'm new here & don't know what is usually done in WP so these are just thoughts. I just think it's great when people (like you) add in new citations & wanted to get more info about the workings of WP. Sunandshade (talk) 20:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good question! I'll be honest, I'm not sure: I know the source I added uses both terms and says the latter is the newer term. When it comes to writing articles, my understanding would be that using the most common term is best, but it's also a good idea to note other well-known names for something if it differs and both are equal in their usage.

You might find some suggestions in the Manual of Style but I didn't easily find a good answer for you, sorry!

————

If you were looking to improve the article, I would suggest finding all uses of the terms and noting that they're interchangeable when the first use pops up.

Ex: "Rabbits engage in caecotrophy, also known as coprophagy, which means..." and then trying to make it so all the subsequent uses refer to one term (in this case, caecotrophy, given how the sentence is worded).

This way, future edits that may use the alternative would still hopefully be clear. But this advice is mainly coming from my academic experience rather than Wikipedia's guidelines, and those two do often clash. Edenaviv5 (talk) 21:16, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your well thought out reply. Doing more research, it looks like the 2 terms are actually different. I ended up explaining the diff in the Coprophagia article. Then used the cecotrophy term in the Rabbit article. Used that spelling since that is what is used in the cecotrope article. Hope that's all ok with you. Don't know how to find the term in all the articles related to rabbits. Sunandshade (talk) 02:10, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update and the info - I didn't realize they differed and upon further research, you're totally right.

As for searching for a specific term across Wikipedia, you can Google "site:en.wikipedia.org" (without quotes) then follow with your terms (i.e., rabbit + coprophagy) in quotation marks.

You also can do CTRL + F on the rabbit page to find all mentions of coprophagy and just fix that one page. All of this is optional, of course, but I assume you're like me and want to rack up some edits to eventually get to the 500+ range and have more edit access.

Hope that helps, & happy new year! Edenaviv5 (talk) 20:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your info is quite helpful. Didn't know about the "site" search, tho I had to modify it. It said:

No results found for site:en.wikipedia.org "rabbit + coprophagy".

Results for

site:en.wikipedia.org rabbit + coprophagy

(without quotes):

So it didn't like the quotes. I think when it's in quotes, it needs everything exactly as laid out including the "+" but works without the quotes; also works without the "+".

That brings up another question. I'm interested in rabbits & wanted to read all the rabbit articles. I know I can look up each breed name, but there are also articles named Angora rabbit, etc. so it's hard to find them all. Now I know from your info that I can use the "site" string & "rabbit" but that included every article that just mentions Rabbit in passing. Do you know how I can get just the rabbit related articles?

Also didn't know about getting more edit access with 500 edits. What extra access do you get? My goal was to do an edit every day for a month, which I did. Now I'm just reading articles & fixing minor things if I see them. Sunandshade (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, I meant quotes around each term (and not the plus) individually, sorry! But glad you got it anyway! For finding articles only about rabbits, I would go through the contents and categories pages, like this one. Here's the animal category. You could also use the Citation Hunt tool to search for needed citations by topic (type in "rabbit" and wait for the menu to pop up).

Also through the Community Portal (link is on the lefthand sidebar of Wikipedia, and accessed easily via the home page) you can find a list of things to do under "Help out," and those are sorted by maintenance categories as well as topics.

As for the extra edit access, it's the extended confirmed user status. You'll notice some articles are locked to prevent vandalism (mainly ones pertaining to major, controversial events, but others, too). For me, I wanted to get this status because many articles I have knowledge about are locked until one gets this status. Edenaviv5 (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My way without the quotes sometimes listed articles that had only 1 of the topics but with your current explanation, it now works perfectly. Thanks. I'll look at your suggestions for finding articles, tho it will take a lifetime to work on all of them. Looks like you made the extended confirmed status. Congrats. I don't think I'll ever need that for my rabbit editing, but you never know. Sunandshade (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Kris Wu

Hey, just wanted to thank you for your recent edits on the Kris Wu case. The article has become a pool of WP:COI editors chiming in to try and "minimize" the page as it is. I'm not even commonly here but now I have to re-check every day just to see what "neutralization" or bad quality ref they're going to add next. Again, thank you, and have a nice day. Ignaseeo | Talk page ^Sup? 12:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - no problem! The source on her claims I verified seemed pretty clear, and her claims are her claims. Even after a totally neutral third-party assesses all the facts and can judge each of the claims for their accuracy/what happened, what I see there is just a statement of what she's said about his [alleged] actions.

(And, while this didn't play a role in my edits, like, what person makes that shit up? The backlash faced for speaking out like she did is so massive, and too often the accused get away with little-to-no long-term damage to their reputation. Plenty of US and European men as examples for that. Her accusations are not very wild, compared with other rape accusations, and she spoke very directly/matter-of-factly.) Edenaviv5 (talk) 19:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I noticed you have been editing some health-related articles, and I wanted to say that a bunch of us hang out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. You're welcome to join us. It's also a good place to ask questions about finding good sources for medical content or writing style. There are a lot of other groups, and one like Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies might align more closely with your interests. Feel free to put the group's page on your watchlist, or stop by to say hello some time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Ackermanville, Pennsylvania, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2020 Census. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 05:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ellen Bender moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Ellen Bender. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Ellen Bender has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Ellen Bender. Thanks! CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jewish Radical Feminism has been accepted

Jewish Radical Feminism, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Cambalachero (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Radicalesbians redirected to Lavender Menace

Courtesy link: User talk:Mathglot § Radicalesbians

Hi Edenaviv5,

Thank you for creating Radicalesbians, per an article request. Unfortunately, the article Lavender Menace already exists, and covers the same topic, so I turned the article into a redirect. If there's anything in the article that is unique and not present in Lavender Menace it can be moved over, but I didn't see anything at first glance. However, you seem to have a lot of good references, and they would make a good addition. If you answer other article requests, which is a really great thing to do, don't forget to do an exhaustive search for the article, under other spellings, other punctuation, other capitalization, and other names, before starting to create a new one. Thanks again, Mathglot (talk) 08:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mathglot - yes, the name of the group is not Lavender Menace. That page covers the initial action but not the actual group that came up afterwards and spread to other cities. It also is not entirely accurate. I published so I could continue building it. Edenaviv5 (talk) 17:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this is just my actual area of research and I am wondering if it could just be put back and the redirect done in reverse, because "Lavender Menace" does not make sense as the title, and the topic is a bit different. Also, as I said, that page would need an extensive overhaul to cover "Radicalesbians"

(I also did do extensive searching and no suitable page existed) Edenaviv5 (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is becoming fragmented because of the separate discussion on the same topic at User talk:Mathglot#Radicalesbians. I suggest you start over and unite them at a common venue; I listed some there. Mathglot (talk) 22:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second Wave

Just noticed your user page with your background. There's so much to do in Second Wave, I don't know where to begin. I guess I'd start with Shulamith Firestone, who I am in awe of, and we should have way more on her. Somewhere I have some raw notes about her but never had time to get back to it. In particular, Notes from the First Year, and Notes from the Second Year are available in facsimile or digitized, and they have so much core information from the early days. Do you know any French? The whole area of French feminism is underrepresented, and besides going their own way to a certain extent, there has been a lot of cross-pollination back and forth between French and American feminists of the Second Wave and beyond; the articles on Hélène Cixous, Monique Wittig, and Luce Iragaray should all be expanded. I'm always happy to find links between the two traditions, and am particularly proud of this edit to Simone de Beauvoir; I was surprised and pleased to learn of the pilgrimage of many of the founders of American Second Wave to Beavoir, and to hear of the impact it had on them. You can read the same bit more easily by going to the § Legacy section of the article. (Beauvoir of course later came to the States to return the visit.) I also enjoy topics around language and gender; see, e.g., Binnen-I, or Luise Pusch. Anyway, glad to have you aboard, and look forward to anything you decide to contribute to. P.S. Now that I think about it, the topic of the interplay between French and American feminism has plenty of sources; I even have a couple of books on it (Berger, Le grand théâtre du genre, and Bereni et al., Intro aux études sur le genre, and of course, The Straight Mind, not specifically about the topic, but enriched by it given that Wittig wrote it first in English while in Arizona I believe). It's undoubtedly a notable topic and we should have an article about it. Hint, hint... Mathglot (talk) 07:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and I hope things are all good after the exchange we had the other day. As you can see from my page, I fixed up the RL article and revised the Lavender Menace page a bit. I also see where the confusion came from, as the Poirot source on the LM page a few days ago had the wrong term (others works of Poirot's don't called the group the "Lavender Menace"). I noted such confusion on the RL page under the NYC group section. Edenaviv5 (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good. Nbd, but to the extent possible and reasonable, please try to avoid idiomatic expressions such as gaining steam for the sake of the large number of ESL speakers who read en-wiki. Try standard expressions instead, such as accelerating, building momentum, gaining force, growing stronger, etc. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, though just to note, some of those are also idioms, and some of them (like "accelerate" and "building strength") don't convey the same meaning. Edenaviv5 (talk) 06:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We might be using 'idiomatic' in different ways. What I meant was, that any of the last four expressions can be understood by an ESL speaker by looking up the words individually in the dictionary, but that doesn't work with gaining steam. Mathglot (talk) 08:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I hear you, though fwiw, I teach multilingual writing, and the reason I don't avoid "gaining steam" normally is that it is in the dictionary itself as a phrase. It's one common enough in reputable sources (e.g., The New York Times) that it needs to be taught as a phrase. I get we're not teaching here, but I am just explaining my logic.

It also functions very similarly to "building momentum," as well as "gaining force" -- "momentum," "force," and "steam" have two meanings, one of which is "power." They're interchangeable idioms in many cases. I still get what you're saying, but idioms are not universally bad in contexts with English-language learners is my point. Edenaviv5 (talk) 15:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ellen Bender (March 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mach61 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please sort out the one citation which purports to be a Boston Globe article by dyer, but is in fact a link to a New Grove Dictionary entry on the city of Boston which doesn't mention Bender at all.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ellen Bender and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Mach61 10:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edenaviv5! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Mach61 10:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Angela M. Haas

Hello, Edenaviv5. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Angela M. Haas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Association for Language Learning

Hello, Edenaviv5. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Association for Language Learning, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.