User talk:Rublamb

WP:US20

I've seen your contributions to Wikipedia:50KDE. You should join wp:US20, an America-specific improvement challenge. Roast (talk) 03:57, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

@Guerreroast: I knew about the women's subsection but did't know the American project existed. My updates are random articles I come across, but are usually U.S. related. I assume articles can be included on both lists? Also, can I add retrospectively to this list? If so, how far back (maybe March)? Rublamb (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, you can retroactively add articles, and you can go as far back as the project's beginning (~November 2016). You can add entries to both lists Roast (talk) 17:21, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Great. Will do ASAP. Rublamb (talk) 18:10, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	For your work on list of game designers. I truly thought the list was unsalvageable but you proved me wrong. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

List of Arizona State University alumni in academia

Wanted to flag some things that shouldn't have been removed in your edits:

• The captions. Even when a table starts right after a section header, it needs a caption for screen reader users. This is why {{sronly}} exists. I've restored these captions.
• The scopes on column titles.

I'm fine with sticky headers, but these other things should be in the table per MOS:DTAB, and you stripped them out. You can make the other changes in the other ASU alumni lists if you want. Melted Brie^ASU (onward to victory · t · c) 20:47, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out. I find it so frustrating that a group of editors, such as yourself, are working toward accessibility, but those concepts are not being integrated by general Wikipedia. For example, I have never heard of this code before, which is okay as Wikipedia is a learning process, but not so great considering how many list articles I have created.

Now I have questions. Why isn't MOS:TAB linked in WP:LISTS guideline section? Why are there FL articles that lack this markup? Why are there table templates that lack this markup? And, this is a big one, why doesn't the Visual Editor "create table feature" automatically include "scope"? This is not the first time I have learned about accessibility features that aren't regularly being used, but with tables there are so many templates and places to provide examples of best practices.

I will add a link in the WP:LIST guidelines section and start a discussion there. Do you know if anyone has tried to create a bot to add this to tables? I can get the wizards from WP:FRAT to see if we can fix all of our tables mechanically. At least, there should be a report that can identify articles with tables that don't have {sronly}.

Thanks again for letting me know and sorry for creating work. Rublamb (talk) 21:43, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Changing accounts because the rest of this discussion isn't about ASU...

You're right. Clearly if this isn't happening at FL, and if it's not being baked into the low-friction way to build a table, it won't be there in so many cases. These are good questions to go up the chain.

I picked up six random lists:

• List of accolades received by La La Land lacks a caption.
• Christina Aguilera discography is compliant.
• Some tables in List of Israeli football champions have scopes. Some don't. None have captions.
• List of Buffalo Sabres players has captions but no scopes.
• List of Chicago White Sox Opening Day starting pitchers has scopes but no captions.
• List of The Masked Singer (American TV series) episodes uses Module:Episode list, which is compliant.

I am not aware of anything bot-related in tables.

Clearly we have tutorials that need updating and maybe a project in order to bring, starting with our FLs, tables up to code. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 22:01, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

American Association of Geographers presidents

I saw the work you did making List of Gamma Theta Upsilon chapters and thought I'd drop a possible article idea from my to do list on you. The section American_Association_of_Geographers#Presidents is pretty long, and could be made into a standalone list. I was hoping to model it after the List of presidents of the American Psychiatric Association article. If you are interested, that's great! If not, I'll probably get around to it eventually. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 05:19, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey Georg. Yeah, that is up my alley; I've done many of the uni alumni lists too. The list could be either AAG presidents or members. I need to think about how to meet NLIST without a secondary source. Rublamb (talk) 05:39, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

The Links

Thank you so much for fixing the article, The Links. I know that Miranda edited the page, but she retired. Anyway, I wanted to edit, research, and modify this article. But, you did it. Thank you so much! I appreciate it. The only thing I should add is that we need to come to a consensus to move the page from "The Links" to "The Links Incorporated," since that is what the organization's legal name is. Have a great day. Thanks for editing this. I learned some things that I didn't know about The Links. Nepaxt (talk) 02:40, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Glad you are around the help! I worked on this article as part of WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities which you are encouraged to join. I had fun learning about your interesting organization.

With regards to the article's name, anyone can change a name without having a discussion. However, WP:COMMONNAME says to use the common name for article titles. That means "The Links" should be the title vs. "The Links Incorporated". I went ahead and used the full name in the article's lead, which is best practices anyway. @Jax MN and @Naraht, do you think there is a case to use the full name for the group based on other uses of the term "links", or is this already address with the hatnote see Link. Rublamb (talk) 14:46, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm on the fence here, but *leaning* toward not changing. The article, The Links has three links to mainstream news articles, and of those, the only one that I can get to in its entirety is the Detroit Free Press. For that one, they do use incorporated in the first mention of the article, but then use simply "The Links", which I think establishes that as the common name. I appreciate that using Incorporated does make more sense in *general* than "Alpha Phi Alpha, Fraternity Inc." (Yes, I appreciate the history there, but that doesn't affect the common usage). Unfortunately, the examples of the NPHC groups sort of leans against the "legal name" argument, since that same argument could be used there.

So take this as "I'm willing to support only if the argument is one that would *not* move Alpha Phi Alpha to Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Incorporated or any of the other NPHC members".Naraht (talk) 15:09, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

(as an additional comment, I will *regularly* go through and change instances of "Jane Smith, while attending Howard University, was on the Track team and Sigma Gamma Rho, Sorority Inc." to remove the Sorority, Inc.) I don't intend to do that with the Links.Naraht (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

As I answer this, the Links article uses that shorter, common name in the article title and infobox, while the formal name (~Incorporated) has the legal name rendered at the first usage, but generally not after that. This follows our precedent, but more importantly it follows standard business practice in the US. I think that somewhere along the line, the Black fraternities and sororities adopted their practice of announcing (and littering) simple, common names with "... Sorority, Incorporated", perhaps because they emerged at the high point of local fraternity and sorority formation. Thus this was a way to discourage others from confusing or costly usage of an already-used trade name. It became a template for their peer organizations that was picked up by even newer multicultural groups, but nevertheless unnecessary (in my opinion). Greek letters themselves are not trademarkable - only so when set out with certain colors, stylistic arrangements and mottos or marketing language that make them unique... Most organizations, too, do not bother with the longer writing, as some find it annoying, bloated and/or counter-productive for branding. Jax MN (talk) 21:30, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

The practice *also* reflects the difficulty that African Americans at the time had in getting government approval for entities. The fact that it was *incorporated* indicated a success in dealing with a white controlled government. For some it was more an issue than others, Indiana would have *probably* been more difficult than New York, but I don't know the situation in the county in New York that Cornell is in, or even if it was actually incorporated in New York.Naraht (talk) 23:33, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

A fair point. So, do our organizations continue to echo this style, in recognition of past injustice? Or are these markers set aside as another battle won? I'd guess that scholarly works have addressed this. Jax MN (talk) 14:04, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Women in Green's October 2026 Edit-a-thon

Hello Rublamb:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2026!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2026, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films or organizations created by women) during the event period — and this time, we are extending our focus to encourage more Did You Know (DYK) submissions spotlighting new GA articles about women and women's works. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by the event's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk) & Grnrchst (talk)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

CIPA Heritage Documentation

Dear Rublamb Interesting to note that you have added a ‘more references/citations’ tag to this Article. Having updated this Article, I thought it now had quite a good range of refs, eg, to respected scientific journals, books on the field by major publishers and to other international organisations which have interacted with this CIPA, eg the Getty Conservation Institute. Could you advise me on exactly where you feel some extra references might be needed and I will see what I can find? Many thanks ArchaicW (talk) 16:07, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this article. The issue is not about how many citations are used, but whether or not all content in the article has a citation. Currently, much of this article lacks a citation. You can use one citation for an entire paragraph, provided it is placed at the end of a paragraph. Otherwise, every sentence, after the lead, needs a source. Sources are not needed in the article's lead, as it is supposed to summarize the sourced content that follows in the body of the article.

You can fix this problem either by adding citations or removing the unsourced content. See Wikipedia:Verifiability for more info. Let me know if you have any questions or need additional help. Rublamb (talk) 17:42, 20 September 2026 (UTC)