User talk:RoseParks

Thanks for the copyedits Rose. :) It was also nice to see you in RC again. -- mav 04:04, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Copyediting

Oops -- I meant "punctuation", not "spelling". Where is my mind? What are the differences between Br and En punctuation? Please answer only the latter. +sj+ 04:11, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Responding on your talk page. Because that "new messages" banner is so cute.

• The selection and access to copyediting reference books. The Chicago Manual of Style, Garner's Dictionary of Modern American Usage, Fowler's Modern English Usage.

Everyone should get a CMoS. They're $3-$4 used (and who cares if the edition you get is ten years out of dae?). I use Fowler's for american english; it is still considered the final reference for all manner of usage, in some circles. We might identify a group of final-review editors who should be the last ones to edit an article, and require more of them in the way of access to references.

• In Wikipedia, since we have multiple authors, American and British English are mixed :-). There are major differences between the two in punctuation and spelling!!!

Yes. I think it was decided somewhere that either Am or Br spelling is alright, but it has to be consistent within an article. We can note which is the native tongue of each editor, to properly match up final reviewers with articles.

Please explain about the spelling punctuation -- I am surprised to hear it, and have yet to notice.... Speaking of which, we should probably draft a quick addition to the current Wikipedia:style manual, noting the convention for all kinds of silly things, such as em-dashes (in what character set? substitute -- when necessary, or just a single hyphen?), ellipses (three or four dots at the end of a sentence?), &c. (use an ampersand in &c., write out etc., or either? disallow parentheticals after sentence-ending abbreviations, due to final-stop ambiguities?).

These don't matter much, but it would be nice to start building a structure which could eventually produce a stylistically self-consistent volume.

You note that most of these things are covered in the CMS; excellent. I was just giving examples off the top of my head... there are going to be quirks of the medium which we should work out as they arise, and then there is be the occasional disagreement between references.

• Copyediting does not seem to need a scale to evaluate articles, just a simple "Yes/No."

Agreed.

• Copyeditors do not need content knowledge to copyedit an article.
• Copyediting will be strange with no author to appeal to for disambiguation of content, clarification of content, etc.

I think the Talk: pages are a perfect place to appeal for dab. or clarif. of content. I will regret the absence of prufer's marks, and the inefficiency of having to write out descriptions of twenty small clarifications on a separate page. (:

+sj+ 23:49, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hello again

Hi Rose, thanks for all the comments. Now I see what you mean about punctuation differences. Perhaps thats why my editor was always more lenient in what kinds of quotation / ending-punctuation styles he would accept in manuscripts! And I am glad to note that we have the first few bites of interest from other editors at m:Copyediting. +sj+ 05:31, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee

ps - I hope you will vote in the current ArbComm elections. I am vying for one of the open seats, with grand plans to make arbitration an accessible and less ponderous process. +sj+ 05:31, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Meetup in the City?

Hello Rose, a meetup in Manhattan is being planned for the weekend of Nov 13: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC. I greatly hope you can make it. +sj+ 21:51, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Dec would be cool, even if I'm not there. Yes, there will be a december newsletter!

Perfect; I was hoping you would be around to help out. We should give more positive feedback to the others who have been helping with the first NL; see the comments on m:Talk:Translation requests/NL-1/En:

There is a meetup scheduled for Sunday, December 12 as well. (same link) – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 23:28, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Main namespace cleanup

Heya, I've moved RoseParks/Disability Etiquette to User:RoseParks/old-Disability Etiquette. There's some edit history, so perhaps you want to keep it. Otherwise just delete it (or ask an admin to do so). --fvw* 20:28, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)

New Quarto editing

Hello rose!

Yes, the copy on the Draft page is ready for general editing and review. Erik knows about the reduction of his long essay, and is unhappy that it had to be reduced but has had a chance to comment on the edited version.

--+sj + 01:16, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

more on WQ/2

You're right, don't do any copyediting until I finish going over the current text... to clean it up a bit. +sj + 04:27, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In particular, pgs 4 and 6-8 may be rather shorter than they are now, so you might be losing time on those. pgs 1-3 and 5 definitely need copyediting (and compression in size, where possible), which need wait on nothing. +sj +

1 and 2 are done now. Perhaps you could look at 3? I will start on 5. +sj + 04:16, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Main namespace cleanup

In an effort to clean up the main namespace, I've moved your old userpage to User:RoseParks/old, as there's some edit history you might want to keep. Otherwise just delete it. --fvw* 12:15, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

WP:MENTCOM

Thanks for the copy edit. I was surprised to see you were a Nupedian! Redwolf24 (talk) 04:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Meetup in NYC in June

Hi, Rose, I noticed you are a New Yorker. If you are interested in coming to a meeting of Wikipedians take a peek at this and please tell any other Wikipedians that you think might be interested in participating about this event. Thanks. Alex756 02:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Your user page

I found your old user page while checking out some old edits. I have history merged it, so that all edits are in one place. Hope you don't mind.

I've also done the same thing at User:RoseParks/Disability Etiquette. Graham87 03:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

(delivered by mabdul 23:46, 3 December 2012 (UTC))

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Your very old sandbox

Hi Rose, I found a very old sandbox of yours while doing some Wikipedia archaeology; it's at the title R P Sandbox on the Nostalgia Wikipedia, a copy of the Wikipedia database from 20 December 2001, and was deleted in October 2003 after this deletion discussion. I don't think anyone in that discussion figured out it belonged to you, so it was just deleted. I've restored it to User:RoseParks/sandbox, and re-added a link to it on your user page; hope you don't mind. Graham87 12:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear RoseParks,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

"Holidays" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Holidays. Since you had some involvement with the Holidays redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Interstellarity (talk) 21:06, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Allow me

Would you mind if you allowed me to correct some of the spelling mistakes of your member page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.96.80.7 (talk) 23:36, 6 March 2021 (UTC)