This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2017. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
A fact from Vine Colby appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 October 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that a 1912 party hosted by Vine Colby made the news for its originality?
The article was excessive for such a minor personality. I have trimmed it and removed the cruft. 103.30.142.19 (talk) 09:02, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
your editing was disruptive. you removed content that was essential to understand Colby's life, like her involvment in the Potter's Wheel, providing poems and designs, and the anthology contribution. Removing sourced content due to your personal opinion is not a good way to edit. If you want to remove content, before open a talk here to discuss. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 09:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
AGF and avoid provocative terms like "disruptive". I have edited carefully and retained everything required for an average encyclopedia reader, especially readers from the global South. On the other hand you seem to be pushing some kind of personal gendergap feminist LGBTQ agenda over here. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a platform for canvassing or for demonstrating article ownership. As an uninvolved editor with absolutely no interest in the article subject, I am policy reverting you until such time as more uninvolved (and uncavassed) editors can discuss this. If you have any conflict of interest(s) you should declare them. 103.30.142.19 (talk) 15:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
care to explain how this part under education: "She graduated from Washington University with an A.B. in 1908.[10] In 1912–1913 she obtained a Senior Fellowship from the St. Louis School of Social Economy to be trained for social service." Was cruft? This is an example of the disruptive editing you did. Your opinion on the fact this was a minor character should have not influenced your editing. Everything is sourced and pertinent. The article has been reviewed carefully by at least other two users. Info you deleted had been added with a purpose. You even deleted the news that was the subject of a DYK feature Elisa.rolle (talk) 13:30, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the so-called "news" that was the DYK feature because it was non-notable trivia, did you even read my edit summary ? 103.30.142.19 (talk) 15:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing of LGBT on the university she attended, on the fellowship she obtained or in the places she lived, all material that was removed without a logic explanation.
The Potter's Wheel was somehow linked to the lesbian community but I do not see the pertinence and reason to remove the type of contribution Colby had.
The fact she contributed to an anthology edited by Sara Teasdale again can be seen as linked to the LGBT community but again I do not see the logic reason to remove it.
I did not link this article to the LGBT project so I do not understand the implication of above. If this editor is removing content due to the fact they think there is a LGBT link that is a totally different issue. Elisa.rolle (talk) 16:17, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
As for the canvassing and the "gendergap feminist LGBTQ" again I'd like to understand where the LGBTQ entered in the picture of that comment of the Project Page of WIR, the same place where it was discussed how to improve the article... improvements that were deleted. It was the right place to discuss the topic and to ask why it was right for the above editor to remove the educational achievements of Colby.
As for being the "owner" of the article, previous editors removed content or trimmed the article , with logic , and that was not reverted. Even the previous editor trimming about the grandmother was maintained,
Even if I personally do not agree with this edit. Elisa.rolle (talk) 16:32, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The LGBTQ comes over from a Reddit discussion. The LGBTQ angle is irrelevant for me, I am on the policy aspects. If you have a WIR agenda, please stay out of this, since you persist in canvassing support outside of this talk page from your COI circles. 103.30.142.19 (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The notability of this person is fairly low and may not warrant an independent article. Better to merge into the Potters. 103.30.142.19 (talk) 16:52, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merging has been already discussed, content to prove notability added (content you are removing). Before removing content, find consensum on this talk page. Elisa.rolle (talk) 17:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WiR Project is included because this article has been created under the #1day1woman project under the WiR umbrella. "If you have a WIR agenda, please stay out of this" this comment is inappropriate considering I'm the author of this article and that it was created under a WIR project. What I'm repeatedly asking you, is to find consensum for your edits. If you find consensum, then fine, if it's just one opinion, your opinion has the same value as mine. Elisa.rolle (talk) 17:21, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This page [1] and the opening is "WIKIPEDIA : Vine Colby, collaborative exercise in Western LGBT imperialism: Lead author 'Elisa.rolle' self identifies as queer Second author 'Ipiggot' self identifies as a member of WikiProject Classical music. Third author 'Yoninah' self identifies as Jewish"... what I have to understand? that since I'm queer, Ipigott loves classical music (?) and Yoninah is jewish (what does it matter anyway?), the article has to be reduced to a level of info that does not justify its existance and therefore merged? I think you are unveiling a huger issue here, about judging the article based on their authors... Elisa.rolle (talk) 17:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
103, you're coming in from a notoriously misogynist Reddit forum, linking a post that's casting vaguely anti-Semitic aspersions about another editor (not to mention that claim about LGBT people), and slashing the content of this article because of vague reasoning about it not being necessary... and you claim that Elisa is the one with the agenda here? AGF is not a suicide pact, and it's pretty obvious that you have some kind of axe to grind with WiR. Knock it off with the disruptive editing. TheCatalyst31Reaction•Creation 19:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
TC31, I see no evidence offered that the Reddit forum is notoriously misogynistic. I do see that you are a member of WIR who was canvassed. I have no agenda, you do. I trimmed the article because it is badly written cruft and not because of anything on reddit. 103.30.142.19 (talk) 19:33, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Will those IP addressed editors kindly stop harassing other editors. You will not be warned again, if you have any interest in continuing to edit wikipedia I suggest you back off from articles related to women for a while. Dysklyver 19:34, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disagreeing about the notability of an article is "harassment" now? My goodness, that bar has certainly become conveniently low. 2601:600:9B80:5C91:6543:5C28:260D:5D48 (talk) 03:11, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not an expert of IP Address but I found interesting that this comment comes from an IP address starting with the same number of another "2601:3c8:300:77fa" which was warning thrice not to remove LGBT content (again sourced) from another women biography Katharine Lee Bates. Is it just a coincidence? --Elisa.rolle (talk) 09:50, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
103, up until contrary proof, since I did not even know about that reddit link and YOU are posting the link here, who is posting slurs off-wiki is for sure not Dysklyver or me. Being called c*** or harpy is for sure not something that we, as women, are aspiring or searching. Considering you are so ready to post the links here, it's sure that YOU are reading that blog, not us. Elisa.rolle (talk) 20:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=small}
