User talk:Larrykoen

1) .pdf URL at a specific page

After .pdf,

    #page=[page number]

e.g., https://dbc.wroc.pl/Content/110174/music_the_cultural_bridge.pdf#page=114

Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 01:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

2) Reference in a Talk section:

3) Help:Using the Wayback Machine for formatting references to archive.org.

I've been following your edits of List of African American newspapers and media outlets with interest and curiosity. I note that the Wikipedia style article Wikipedia:African American, which inconsistently uses both hyphenated and unhyphenated versions of the phrase throughout, includes a summary at the beginning:

This page in a nutshell: Use the term "black" as a color descriptive and not "African-American"

However, they precede this summary with another box:

This is a failed proposal. Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please do so below or initiate a thread at the village pump.

So my research indicates that both hyphenated and unhyphenated versions are stylistically valid.

Anyway, to my questions.

1. Why did you remove the hyphen in the title? Your explanation specifies "redirect consistency." But that explanation cuts in both directions. For myself, I haven't seen a reference to this article where its wikilinked title lacked a hyphen. Nor have I ever seen it unhyphenated in any other medium.

Unhyphenated, it looks like the reference is to African immigrants to the USA; not to the general population of Black people in the USA whose forebears have been out of Africa for generations.

As examples, consider Barack Obama, his father, and his wife. Had his father, a citizen of Kenya, become a naturalized USA citizen, he might be considered an African American (no hyphen). When describing Michelle Obama, the attribute is always hyphenated. Barack Obama? I think in his case it is always hyphenated as well.

2. What does "ce" mean as your explanation for your later edits to the article?

3. Why do you freqently erase the contents of your Talk page? It is valuable for other editors to understand what people have thought about your efforts. This information is of course still available by looking at earlier versions at the page's User talk:Wow#history, but it does require an effort that no Wikipedian should force on others. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 20:51, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Wow responded:

1. I removed the hyphen to be consistent with African American newspapers, whose hyphen was removed by another editor a month ago.

2. It means copyediting.

3. I erase them for decluttering purposes. Wow (talk) 22:49, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I have now put a similar question to FloridaArmy, who removed the hyphen from African American newspapers on June 11, 2023. Previously, on February 22, 2013 (i.e., over a decade earlier), User:Schierbecker had added the hyphen. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Larrykoen, I acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, referring to my edit summary at List of Holocaust diarists.
I am surprised that someone with over 2,300 edits asks what the meaning of Rm is in the phrase "Rm additions without an article = No inclusion" - it stands for Remove, as is explained at Wikipedia:Edit summary legend#Removal of text - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 16:22, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

@Arjayay

I just didn't get "rm." Thanks! Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 18:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Just wanted to acknowledge your note proposing bios for Marilyn Robert, Satoko Motouji and Steven Oshatz. I'll be doing some research in the next week to find reliable secondary sources with significant coverage. I had researched Satoko a few years ago, but at that time the available source were mostly announcements of her showings. I'll be checking ProQuet and JSTOR to find more sources. Again, thanks for your note! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 15:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I posted Draft:Marilyn Robert, and welcome your suggestions/comments. Also, would you be willing to post an image on Wikimedia for the infobox, and perhaps a few images of her works? Since copyright belongs to the photographer, it would be ideal for you to post them. Just let me know, and I'll be pleased to add them to her article. See Susan Mohl Powers for some ideas to incorporate images in a gallery at the bottom of the page. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Grand'mere EugeneThank you for the article and for letting me know about it. I am in process reviewing it. I will not edit it, e.g. incorporating images, because I think that this would implicate COI. Rather, I will put images on Wikimedia and then let you know about them. I anticipate that this may take several days to a week. I will also add possibly useful references that you haven't listed at Draft talk:Marilyn Robert, as I think that this is outside COI rules. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 23:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I agree completely. I'll continue to add material using the list of potential sources on the talk page. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 00:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I moved the draft to article space, and then archived the talk page discussion. You may want to view our last exchanges: oldid=1255218309 — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! In a recent edit to Uberto Pasolini, you added an archived version of a referenced webpage by replacing the list-defined reference (using {{cite web}}) with a {{webarchive}} link. Firstly: thank you for helping fight link rot! An archived version of a page is always better than a dead link. But please note that when {{cite web}} is used, you can use the |archive-url= and |archive-date= parameters to add the archived copy without needing to rewrite the entire reference (see the documentation). Thanks! – Daℤyzzos (✉️ • 📤) 23:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Larrykoen. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Marilyn Robert, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 21:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Arjayay, Already a while ago, I had included COI declarations on my User page ("This user has publicly declared that he has a conflict of interest regarding these Wikipedia articles: Marilyn Robert As noted at the end of this capsule autobiography, "I have been married for many years to the fiber artist and educator Marilyn Robert"") and on the Marilyn Robert talk page ("The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Larrykoen (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.")

From what I read about COI, I understand that only one of these was required, but with both of them now present, so be it. I did not create the Marilyn Robert article and have made comparatively very few, mainly inconsequential edits there. You can see this at the article's revision history. The revision that you immediately reverted (and for which I thanked you in the revision history) has as its explanation, "Wikilinking tp User:Larrykoen as I can't find a rule against linking to a user page." (Apparently "tp" is a typo for "to".) I looked at MOS:DRAFTNOLINK, perhaps too hurriedly, searching for a "user page" prohibition without success. Perhaps you can quote me a rule about this specifically?

At any rate, my idea was to give it a whirl and if it was wrong, someone would catch it quick. So thank you for that, here as well as in the Marilyn Robert revision history.

(PS: couldn't figure out how to wikilink Marilyn Robert: Revision history, it always gave me a red link. I'd be grateful for learning how.)

Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 22:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Larrykoen,

Thank you for creating Edward A. Kramer.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

IMDb is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia per WP:IMDB because it is user-generated. Please replace with other sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Cielquiparle}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Cielquiparle (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

@Cielquiparle: Good point! I wasn't aware of IMDb's validity being challenged on Wikipedia. I've removed all use of it in the references, leaving only as a pair of external links to it. Unfortunately a few of Kramer's credits don't have other sources, so they no longer appear in the article; but diligent readers can go to the external link, Ed Kramer filmography at IMDb, provided in the article, as well as numerous other presumably equally unreliable sources, to find those credits.

I also omitted some material (e.g., employers, NASA contract w/Mars Rover animation) that was too vague as to dates. Is "In the 1980's Kramer worked for NASA, creating an animation about a mission to Mars" too vague? Skipping it for now.

Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 23:41, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for removing IMDb as a source. It is probably better not to try to list every single credit anyway, as Wikipedia is not IMDb, nor is it LinkedIn. It's more important to list the most notable ones and the ones where the individual's contribution was significant, or which are most important for other reasons, and these would tend to be the ones for which you would have reliable sources anyway. (Many articles on academics, for example, get tagged for trying to provide an exhaustive list of every article they have ever contributed to, which is excessive detail.) See WP:ISNOT.

(By the way, film titles on Wikipedia are italicized. See MOS:TITLE.)

I haven't looked closely at the revision history, but it might actually be better to restore some of the other "color" in his biography even if you don't have exact dates like you would in a CV, especially if you have reliable secondary sources that are discussing interesting facts about his career and life. The whole point is that we don't want a Wikipedia article to look like a CV. The biggest problem for many biographical articles about "professionals" is that they usually have a professional biographies which often get replicated on Wikipedia in some fashion, and these, rightly or wrongly, tend to get fast-tracked for possible deletion. See WP:RESUME and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY.

There are many techniques you can use to avoid this problem. I would advise looking for biographical articles about individuals in similar (and not-so-similar) fields on Wikipedia that are "B" grade or above as possible examples, and trying to see if you can structure the narrative about his career and achievements in a more interesting way. (Do you have XTools turned on? If not, go to Preferences/Gadgets and search for the XTools box.) Cielquiparle (talk) 04:51, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scam, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim Thompson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

@DPL bot fixed. thank you for the notice. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 15:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The article The Reawakening (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:04, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@Shhhnotsoloud: Your proposed deletion is correct. I created the offending disambiguation page over ten years ago, before I'd ever heard of hatnotes, before I'd learned much at all about the templates available to Wikipedia editors. I think the speedy deletion process is the way to go — by you, not by me, as I don't have that privilege.

Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 21:19, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Black Mountain College. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: Thank you for catching this. The previous citation led to a completely different work than what it purported. I suppose I got confused in fixing this. Thanks again! Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 21:35, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

All good. If I had a nickel for every time I've made this mistake... Just wanted you to be aware. Keep up the great work! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:36, 2 November 2025 (UTC)