User talk:BlackTea

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with...I have made changes in my sandbox to an article I wrote a couple of years ago, however it won't publish? BlackTea

BlackTea (talk) 23:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your User:BlackTea/sandbox is about Geoff Garrett, and there is now an article called Geoff Garrett. Any further edits you make to your sandbox will not automatically be published in the article. You'll need to make the edits in the Geoff Garrett directly. However, if you are Geoff Garrett or have any conflict of interest, then please do NOT edit the article and instead make suggestions for improvements at the Talk:Geoff Garrett page with the {{request edit}} template. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:42, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackTea (talk • contribs) 23:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BlackTea! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Geoff Garrett, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from [1], and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Geoff Garrett and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Geoff Garrett, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Geoff Garrett. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Geoff Garrett with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Geoff Garrett saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:14, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am Dr Geoff Garrett's executive assistant and together we set up his Wikipedia page. There is no copyright issue, Geoff wrote the copy for his page. Geoff speaks at a number of events and is a member of a number of organisations so he provides his biography to these organisations for publication - this includes the Research Impact Academy.

With regard to the citing issue under Personal, I don't understand why this section needs citing. Geoff is just stating that he is married and has children and grandchildren. Can you please let me know what we need to do here.

I ask you to please restore Geoff's Wikipedia page.

Also, see [Ticket#: 2021111510004792].

Hello! Copyright issues are complicated; while you're waiting for someone knowledgeable about them to address the issues, I would strongly recommend that you and/or Dr. Garrett read three important pages:

• Wikipedia:Verifiability (which explains why everything should be cited, and what kind of sources are acceptable)
• Wikipedia:Autobiography (which explains how and when Dr. Garrett should edit an article about himself)
• Wikipedia:Username_policy#Sharing_accounts (which explains why you both having access to this account is a Very Bad Idea, policy wise)

It's a lot of reading, I know, but that tends to be how we do things around here. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 16:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your rapid response Wikignome Wintergreen, I have read the content on the three pages you provided with links. I would appreciate a quick resolution to the copyright issue as I wrote the content on the Research Impact Academy webpage in question. Is there a way to escalate this problem?

I don't doubt that you wrote the text on that page - unfortunately, since they then posted it under their own copyright notice, things have now become rather murky in the legal department. Wikipedia takes these things very seriously, since otherwise the project could be sued for copyright infringement.

I'm no expert in this area, but I can try to point you in the right direction. If you look at the message on this page entitled "Copyright problem: Geoff Garrett", you'll see three bullet points that outline how you can get the material released for use on Wikipedia. Assuming you still retain your original copyright, the second bullet point seems most relevant to your situation. Follow the instructions outlined there.

It would also help if you could post on the article talk page (at Talk:Geoff Garrett) explaining the situation and the steps you're taking to release the text. A discussion has already been started there about various issues with the page. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 02:01, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noting also that even if the copyright problem is solved, it doesn't solve the the problem of sourcing. A text at an org website and a text on WP has different purposes and aims. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:49, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your help and advice, Wikignome Wintergreen. Much appreciated as I am in new territory here…

And also noting with thanks the input from Gråbergs Gråa Sång‬.

And might I use Dear WW and GGS as we continue to dialogue??

I guess I’m a bit frustrated as everything seemed to be just fine with the page for the past five years, but then the small edits (to update facts) proposed last week seems to have sent the proverbial balloon up!

Anyway, moving on….

Firstly, I remain a bit confused as to whether to carry on the conversation here (it’s nice to be dealing with people who interested and responsive) or move to the Talk:Geoff Garrett page (with another editor)? Or both?

But for the present let me continue with you (and I can always copy it across if and as needed, and as you advise). So….

Having, as I’ve said, now read the (comprehensive) material in the 3 bullets, esp #2 as you rightly recommended WW, I guess there are some options/actions…

Throw in the towel, it’s all getting too hard, and ask the site to be deleted. But easy or not easy to do?

Plus not my preferred way of solving problems!! And I’m learning a lot!

Noting the advice re essentially autobiographical articles, I reckon I can hit the ‘neutral’ button - everything there is absolutely factual - but re ‘verifiable’ I’m just wondering the extremes one needs to go to re ‘sources’? Thus problems started occurring when I was asked for sources re the short para about my wife, kids and grandkids etc … would I really need to provide links to (or documentary evidence of) marriage and birth certificates? All doable, but necessary? (And - mea culpa - recognising that the newly inserted reference to this ‘family para’ was/is a typo glitch.)

Alternatively I can ask someone else to write a piece, which seems to be bullet #3’s suggestion? But it might end up looking somewhat similar as facts are facts so, again, necessary? On the other hand a different perspective might be value adding all round and better meet your editorial/governance policies?

Getting the perceived Copyright problem sorted soonest is a priority for me. (You will no doubt appreciate the reputational negatives with anybody who opens the page as it currently stands.) Thus, re the link listed above as being the problem, I can and will get in touch with the Research Impact Academy boss (where I am an adviser) to declare for me to send to you that there’s no conflict and give their permission to use the content, etc. Will that help to do the trick do you think?

Thanks again for your time and engagement!

Sincerely

Geoff Garrett

Hello!

GGS is fine, for some reason there are people who don't have "å" on their keyboards.

Seemed fine for 5 years, yep, that's WP, it can be like that. Atm we have about 125,000 active editors (this includes you) and about 6,400,000 articles, so a lot of stuff doesn't get a lot of attention. But as time goes on... To pretty much all of us regular editors, this is our hobby. Or passion. Or obsession.

It is customary to discuss article-issues at the relevant article talkpage, and as I understand it, the copyvio-people will look for comments there, see below.

It may not appear that way right now, but WP is in general positive to articles about academics. We have a "rule", WP:NACADEMICS, intended to make it a bit easier to "keep" such articles, since athletes and tv-people generally get more media attention. So I think the article should probably stay, even though details about education, achievements etc may have to be trimmed per lack of sourcing. However, WP:BLP needs to be followed, and that is rather "extreme" on sources, though the devil is in the details. Twitter can be be properly used in a BLP. On details about family, the default position is that they shouldn't have to be named on WP because you are, more at WP:BLPNAME.

Deleting the article may not be simple or easy, but if you want I'll formally propose it (WP:AFD).

I don't know what the result of the copyvio-thing will be. WP:COPYPROB says

Listings typically remain for at least five days before review and closure by a copyright problems clerk or administrator. During this time, interested contributors are invited to offer feedback about the problem at the relevant talk page, to propose revisions to the material, or to request copyright permission. After the listing period, a copyright problems clerk or administrator will review the listing and take what further action may be necessary.

When this has been sorted out, we can move on to getting the article into WP-shape. If you're interested in providing an image of yourself (we have strict rules about this, too), we can look into that.

Also: "BlackTea" has now stated both that they are Geoff Garrett and his assistant. WP:NOSHARE is another rule, please use individual accounts. It is appreciated if you add something like "I am Geoff Garrett"/"I am Geoff Garrett's assistant" on your respective userpages (User:BlackTea).

For talkpage discussions, you may want to try Preferences > beta features > Discussion tools, it can make talkpage discussions easier.

Hope this helps some. Pinging Marchjuly and Drmies, if they feel like having opinions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:24, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And if you haven't found Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, you may find it interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, Dr. Garrett, GGS is a very experienced editor who really knows their way around BLPs (biographies of living people) - I've actually asked for their help before, back when I didn't have an account and was stumbling around as a clueless IP editor. Our best resource around here is good editors like them, and our best tool is communication.

I don't have much to add, except that deleting your article might be difficult since you seem to meet the notability guidelines (Wikipedia:Notability, yes, more reading, always more reading; WP:NACADEMICS is the specific version for academics). As far as sources go, here's a page explaining the kinds of things we use: Wikipedia:Reliable sources. The buzz words are "reliable, independent, published" (with "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"). This is especially important in a biography of a living person, since - as you pointed out above - what we do here can have real effects on article subjects' lives and reputations.

Getting the RIA to officially release the material would probably help, yes; might as well get the ball rolling on that, it can't hurt. Getting someone else to rewrite the article might be easy or difficult, depending on what sources are available. You or someone you know could do it, but there would be a conflict of interest (WP:COI, reading, yay) which requires declarations and posting requests on talk pages instead of editing the article directly, all sorts of bother. Definitely do not pay anyone who may e-mail you with an offer to write it for money, there are loads of scams out there. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 14:02, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I don't mind you calling me WW, I can pretend you think I'm Wonder Woman. ;) Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 14:08, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I may not have known about Officer of the Order of Australia before, but it sounds like a well-known and significant award or honor to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:28, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Well, I don't really want to dive into the copyvio issue here, but that does need to be taken care of. No, we cannot have shared accounts, but obviously an account should belong to, and be operated by, a single person. In addition, if someone is someone's boss, then there is an obvious conflict of interest which needs to be declared: please read WP:COI, and follow the guidelines on how to DECLARE that COI--lest the account be blocked. I'm serious: this is a requirement. Finally, I looked at the article, and it reads like a resume, not like an article. I have not looked at the sourcing, but I fear that the sourcing may reflect its origins. Thanks, "GGS"--and I offer anyone the ALT-0229 shortcut. Drmies (talk) 15:12, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following the above instructions is important, Dr. Garrett - Drmies is an administrator here and can block this account if they feel it's necessary. Just edit the page User:BlackTea and type {{UserboxCOI|1=Geoff Garrett}}, without the invisible 'nowiki' tags on either side that I've used. Once that's done - do you know of any reputable news organizations that have published articles about you? Not interviews with you, not a press release from an organization you're affiliated with, but an independently written article about you, your work, being awarded the Order of Australia, etc. That's the kind of thing we need; that's where the information for an article should come from. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 15:51, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[2] could be a good one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I can't connect to that link at work. It might be the same as one of these two I found in a quick Google books search - Icon in Crisis: The Reinvention of CSIRO and Exploring the Earth under the Sea: Australian and New Zealand achievements ...; I'm not sure whether either is sufficiently reliable and independent, I'm still woefully inexperienced in this area. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 17:26, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's Icon in Crisis, UNSW Press. Though the foreword indicates he was somewhat involved, I think it may be independent enough. "Exploring" doesn't sound independent though. Found a book-review [3], definitely independent. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:50, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I see you've posted more possibilities on the talk page. I'm willing to try and write a very basic, new version of the article based on whichever of those I can access - I'll have to wait until I get home to find out - but I'd appreciate someone more experienced checking over the result once I'm done, especially the hash I'll probably make of citing sources. Where should I write it? At the temp page mentioned a few sections above (here)? Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:06, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, yeah. At [4] you can see the old article. I think [5] is reliable, but per WP:ABOUTSELF etc, must be used in moderation. As a rule of thumb, it's ok to cite awards etc to the award-org, if the award has a WP-article (as in notable award), though of course secondary source is better. We don't know what'll happen to the old article, though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I've made a very small start here. I'll slowly work on expanding, wikilinking, etc. Please do fix any problems you spot if you have the time, or it'll be quite a rough draft for a long while! Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:51, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is Geoff Garrett

Dear WW, GGS and Drmies

Wow! Waking up this morning (here in Australia) to 15 emails alerting me to your messages, with all the info/feedback in the chat room/discussIon, I feel very loved by WP!

And you mention ‘Passion’, GGS, is always key to success; and our ‘Herding Cats’ trilogy is/are replete with its importance.

Plus re ‘obsession’ I regularly quote management guru Tom Peters, who has said (paraphrased) “Whenever good stuff happens in life you usually find a monomaniac on a mission!”

Righto, having tried my best to assimilate the extensive material you have provided, let me make the following four points in response – for your further consideration…

One: the current (blocked) essentially autobiographical article should disappear, ASAP. So as per your kind offer, GGS, please proceed along this line. But see also point 3 below re a ‘Phoenix’ article ….

Two: Maybe before it is deleted, and for future clarity, re the perceived copyright issue with the ‘Research Impact Academy’ (RIA), and taking up WW’s point that “Getting the RIA to officially release the material would probably help”, the founder/CEO there, Tamika Heiden, kindly provided the following today (see at the bottom of this note) which I hope will solve the problem …. so perhaps you could liaise with the Copyright Clerk/Administrator that you mentioned is in charge to do so in order to “get this ball rolling”. And as Drmies has observed, it “needs to be taken care of”. OK?

Three: I very much appreciate WW‘s kind offer to craft an ‘independent‘ article and the first draft linked, if you all feel this is of benefit, once points one and two above have been implemented. I would of course be very happy to assist (as and if I’m allowed to) in providing input/links/feedback but probably there is enough truly factual material in the current (soon-to-be deleted!) article to move forward with. So WW, let me know how to help going forward. And, as an alternative approach - which ever you deem will be best - as GGS has suggested, rather than starting from scratch, perhaps starting with the original to “get the article into WP shape” would work? So WW (and GGS) let me know which route forward you think will be best, bearing in mind you are no doubt busy people with other projects in your job jar.

Four: we understand the point re multiple access/editing from the user perspective, so from here on it is just me, Geoff Garrett, using the BlackTea log in for commenting. And I hope, for convenience/continuity it’s okay to still use this chat room for the time being? It is jolly useful to see the whole, unfolding conversation in one ‘train’, with easy access to the links you have provided.

So thanks again for your ongoing help, Team! And I look forward to seeing further observations and recommendations.

Cheers Geoff

From: Tamika Heiden <theiden@researchimpactacademy.com> Date: 18 November 2021 at 10:43:09 AEDT To: Geoff Garrett <geoff.g.garrett@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Perceived Conflict of Interest ….😀

Hi Geoff, Great to catch up again this morning. So…

To whom it may concern at Wikipedia As the Founder and Director of the Research Impact Academy, I Dr Tamika Heiden wish to confirm that there is no Conflict of Interest between what we have written on our website for Geoff Garrett. I write this to inform you that Dr Garrett has our formal permission to use this information on his own wiki page. In fact, it was Dr Garrett that provided the words for the Research Impact Academy to use. If you require any other information please reach out to my email theiden@researchimpactacademy.com or by phone +61 405 721 141

Regards Dr Tamika Heiden

Tamika Heiden PhD Founder & Principal Research Impact Academy m. +61 405 721 141 e. theiden@researchimpactacademy.com w. researchimpactacademy.com

Two things, Dr. Garrett:

• You still haven't followed WP:COI and put a disclosure on your user page. I don't know how we can stress this so you'll realize it's important. It's important. Your account is at risk of being blocked. Again, this is the template you would use: {{UserboxCOI|1=Geoff Garrett}}.
• The rewritten article is at Talk:Geoff Garrett/Temp. I've used all the info from the old article that seems uncontroversial and decently referenced. For the love of Eru, please do not edit it; if you have any suggestions, you can post them either here or on Talk:Geoff Garrett. Provide more sources if you have them (keeping our standards in mind). And feel free to point out places where I've Americanized things instead of Australianizing them, since I'm not terribly familiar with the conventions of Australian English, and we do try to respect national varieties of English when the article has strong ties to a particular country. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 13:54, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On article deletion. This gets a bit bureaucratic. There is a specific format. A discussion is started, typically given a week but longer if necessary. Anyone interested can participate, there is a mechanism for announcing it's happening. Then it is closed by an uninvolved editor, weighing the arguments presented per WP-wisdom. These discussions can be short and sweet like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shakespeare knot, or less short and less sweet like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Z. Williamson (2nd nomination).

Should I start this now the response will be "Huh? There is nothing there! We can't have an informed opinion before the copyvio people are finished! And they might delete it anyway!" It will annoy the cats without good reason. Also, insulted Australian editors may berate me for trying to delete a beloved and distinguished scientist. But that's less of a problem.

So what I propose is that we wait for a response at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems#Geoff_Garrett, then see where we are. The response may be to insert WW:s version, which I think would be a good idea. Then we can see what other sources we can use, perhaps try to herd some cats from Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:54, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear WW and GGS

Many thanks again for your rapid responses.

Firstly – the urgent and important matter re the (ongoing) copyright issue. Obviously I have glitched as I’ve not been properly following your guidance but I'm now scared regarding getting blocked completely and I hope you can help!

So I guess I was hoping, and as I had indicated, that the material I provided above would do the trick (ie no conflict with the RIA) and that you - being ‘insiders’ – would be able to send it across to the relevant Copyright Clerk/Administrator. Might this still not be possible?

In the meantime I have gone to the WP:COI link that WW provided (and the template you mentioned doesn’t link, btw) but I find it very difficult to understand and navigate… and particularly what to put in, where and how? So if you deem I personally do need to do this (rather than you doing it, as just floated) can you give me some more advice - step by step, 'tiny tots' actions? (Us geriatrics need all the help we can get!)

I’m very sorry to be gobbling up more of your time.

Sorting this is obviously the priority, first step as you have indicated.

Thereafter it makes sense to me – as GGS said – to substitute what WW is writing for the ‘old‘ one (rather than kill it off first which seems, from what you have said, quite bureaucratic and potentially time-consuming).

And WW I will have some suggestions, and some other sources, for your consideration for your latest draft so I will be in touch again soon. Plus I have got the clear message not to edit it!

Thanks again. Cheers for now, Geoff

You're right, the template doesn't link; it was simply an example for you to copy + paste onto your user page. I'm not sure if someone else is allowed to place it there for you, otherwise I'd do it myself. Here are step by step instructions:

• Click this link: user:BlackTea
• In the new window that pops up, type this exactly as you see it right now (copy+paste if you know how): {{UserboxCOI|1=Geoff Garrett}}
• Click the button at the bottom which says "Publish page".

That's it. I just got home from work, I'll add more later to address your other questions. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 00:39, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks WW...

First, time for your supper and some relaxation I hope!

Me now no doubt being really stupid here.... So if I just put in {{UserboxCOI|1=Geoff Garrett}} in to that open window how does that help and where do I put the Copyright story/appeal ... eg in my words from the above conversation, cut 'n pasted to get the attention of the WP Copyright Clerk/Administrator you have mentioned?

It still would be great if you could put the relevant material in the right place on my behalf ... possible do you think?

Unfortunately I don't know if it's legal for me to do that, and I do mean legal, there might be actual legal issues involved here. So yes, put {{UserboxCOI|1=Geoff Garrett}} (WITHOUT the "nowiki" tags; copy+paste the way it looks when you're reading this page, not when you're editing it) - and press Publish page. Your account will then be fully legally in compliance with Wikipedia's COI policies and no admins will be hovering about to block you. I'll get to the copyright issues in just a few moments. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 01:42, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing: GGS did indeed send the info "across to the relevant Copyright Clerk/Administrator", telling them about the discussion on this page, the permission statement from Dr. Heiden, and the existence of a rewrite ready to go. Unfortunately, an article must be listed for at least five days before a clerk is allowed to take action (so until Nov. 20 in this case). Why? I dunno. I'm just a WP:GNOME, I hide in a shrubbery when copyright issues rear their many ugly heads. You might need a WP:HERCULES (why don't we have that essay??) to take care of all this early.

I do sort of know where one can be found: we have an administrator named Diannaa who is practically the WikiGod(dess) of copyright issues. I've been helped by them before, though I asked in fear and trembling, as I am a Lowly Newbie. If you want to approach the throne and ask to bypass the copyright investigation queue, follow this link: User talk:Diannaa. Once there, click the New section button at the top, type something in the subject line, explain the situation in the box below the subject line (try to be as concise as possible), add four of these things to the end of your message: ~, and click Publish changes. You might just get politely told to wait your turn. On the other hand, maybe Diannaa can work some magic. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 01:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks WW! (Glad I’ve lucked in to e-meeting a wikiGnome not a wikiOgre!)

First off – GGS - thank you indeed for sending the relevant material “across” and will hold thumbs that the responsible Copyright Clerk/Administrator agrees to remove the Copyright block.

Let’s stick with waiting 5 days. At this end of my career I’m not sure that I would have the same appeal to goddesses that I might (possibly) have had 50 years ago(!) Plus Q jumping in my experience is often not well regarded and can potentially lead to unintended, and adverse, consequences…

Secondly, I have implemented your process instructions exactly, WW. I was somewhat surprised by (and don’t understand?) the yellow flag with arrows that popped up immediately ie … This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Geoff Garrett. But if this achieves the desired objective of my now being “fully legally in compliance with WP’s COI policies” then so be it. (Just hoping I haven’t made another glitch!)

Thirdly, over the weekend I will get onto providing you with some suggested edits/sources for your draft ‘new’ Garrett article, WW. So, I’ll be in touch.

Cheers for now Geoff

You've done it exactly right. Here, I'll give you a gold star, Mr. Doctor-Professor-Executive-Dude. ;) Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 06:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not assuming that we are enemies of all that's good and proper in the world (on this talkpage, anyway), and thanks WW for reading my mind correctly (WE ARE BORG). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:47, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Goddessess have been approached: User_talk:Bishonen#Geoff_Garrett. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:15, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a WP:SLOTH, btw. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:13, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Successful collaboration! Huzzah! Wikignome Wintergreentalk 06:50, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PHEW! That's a relief! Thank you WW ... and I trust this will now feature prominently in the 'Awards' section of my new Wiki page!!

Ha! Sloth! Hardly ‘slothful’, DDS, re your connecting me/my problem back into ‘the system’ - which is much appreciated.

And I read that sloths and gnomes, while mutually respectful, are not close kinsmen/women… So helping me, as you are both doing, might prove to be a nice bonding exercise?

And having now read a bit further there surely is an exciting kiddies’ adventure story in here somewhere?? ….

Youthful ex-academic (adolescent trapped in old man’s body, wife says) accidentally falls through his computer (not a wardrobe) into a dark, mysterious virtual world, replete with fairies, elves, nasty ogres and all-powerful goddesses and fire-breathing dragons. Gets taken under the wing of an unlikely duo of a kindly gnome and a resourceful sloth who help him battle through mysteries, intrigues and perils to emerge…. (to be continued)

Hmmm… maybe too scary for a kiddies’ book?

But at least (fingers still crossed!) it will have a Happy Ending.

Gnomes and sloths work great together. For instance, GGS the Sloth might spend weeks researching, writing and tweaking an article on Shakespeare (like this one GGS made: Shakespeare coat of arms), because Shakespeare is awesome; I then come along as WW the Gnome, spend a few minutes reading the article (because Shakespeare is awesome), and make the terribly important contribution of fixing a bit of punctuation that got out of place. The encyclopedia is improved! Glory to us!

GGS is braver than I and did "poke" Diannaa earlier today, but no response as of yet; the latter is pretty busy, so that's not surprising. Hopefully, at least, when your "case" comes up in the queue, which should be within the next 24 hours, it will get speedily dealt with.

I did have a lot of fun reading articles on the Great Barrier Reef today, since your work on the water science taskforce made me curious about it. I had no idea there were such things as wonky holes and octopus trees! Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 00:44, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's something you might be able to clear up, Dr. Garrett - I know the Australia 2020 Summit was over a decade ago, but do you remember which critical policy area(s) you were invited to discuss? The two sources I'm looking at contradict each other. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 02:28, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Diannaa has worked her magic and Geoff Garrett lives again. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 03:02, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well that went well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:52, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again team

Thanks again, DDS, for reaching out to the goddesses of copyright, and my thanks to Diannaa for letting me out of jail!

And good to get more history and background around the life, times and contributions of Sloths and Gnomes!

Now - WW - getting back to business…

First, re your query re the Australia 2008 Summit, that was indeed a long time ago, and there must have been close on a 1000 attendees (certainly it felt like that). I don’t think my participation had any special significance so perhaps that sentence and the two links could be removed?

So now, to provide you with hopefully useful - and useable - suggestions (edits plus sources) for your ‘new‘ now live Garrett article, it would obviously be a piece of cake if we were in email contact and I could send you track change suggestions, and comments, which you could accept or ignore.

But assuming this ain’t possible - and noting your clear previous instruction ‘don’t edit this!’ – I have produced as follows a version with edits and relevant new links included, seeking to be - as per the chat, as comprehensively ‘verifiable’ as possible (plus with explanatory footnotes with motivations/rationales).

More clunky to see where I’m suggesting changes for your consideration, but c’est la vie….

And hopefully, for ease of reading, I have moved the footnotes up to first, with the respective annotations/locations marked in the text.

Looking forward to further dialogue… Thanks! Geoff

Revised GG Wiki (GG suggestions as at 20/11/2021)

FOOTNOTES (Motivations/rationales/explanations for suggested edits)

F1 Just ‘Geoff’ please … what I’m known by, plus would avoid confusion with another Geoffrey Garrett, another Australian on WP, now Dean of the Business School at the University of California. (And ‘Graham’ never appears!)

F2 Links to AO and FTSE moved to a suggested new section (Awards) with other, hopefully also notable Society Fellowships.

F3 I understand your Rules don’t allow me to be called ‘Dr’ upfront so suggest this additional part sentence re my PhD

F4 Important to distinguish between my two extended (7 year) academic positions and the 3 short, 6 month sabbaticals … hence the word ‘visiting’ inserted.

F5 The heads of CSIR South Africa have been labelled ‘President and Chief Executive’.

F6 I have deleted ‘in order to increase revenue’ which was definitely not the objective of introducing the Flagships Program. It was all about enhancing the organisation’s impact, so I have added the ‘impact’ word a little earlier.

F7 we did receive a lot of new funding so I mention this and the detail is given in your ref [5], the 2004 SMH article.

F8 And this is very important to me. I’m OK with the sentence re ‘both approval and controversy’ (the factual reality!) - which is well covered by using your refs 4 and 5 (and my new S7 also touches on this) - but NOT to the link to the 2013 SMH article, your ref 6. That was more than five (5) years after I had left the organisation. My successor made a whole lot of changes (as happens) but I don’t think it’s fair for me to be held potentially accountable.

F9 The two links, [9] and [10], in the ‘old’ Garrett article no longer connect. The SA Society for Professional Engineers was taken ove some years back by the Engineering Council of South Africa and ‘history’ appears to have disappeared as I can no longer find a link to my 1998 Award. (I guess a snap of the certificate on my office wall won’t do the trick!) Similarly, South Africa’s ‘Boss of the Year’ also ended (through funding/sponsorship difficulties) some years back, after running for more than two decades, and there is no longer a live site. So your call whether to delate that para, or not.

F10 Very important to clearly put (Prof Sir) Graeme Davies as my co-author - we have been a very close team on our ‘herding cats’ projects across more than a decade, and to distinguish this from our more than 50 ‘consultees’.

F11 (Tongue in cheek!) I will let you know, for a follow up edit in 6 months or so’s time if and when my two children’s books - ‘Spottle the Bottle’ and ‘Billy the Buckle’ - get published!!

F12 Re the new ‘ Personal’ section, it would be great if you could mention by wife and kids (and even my 5 grandkids) by name (which I see I many people-related WP articles have. The ref/source [11] you used has the detail.

Geoff Garrett (F1) AO, is the former Queensland Chief Scientist.[1] (F2)

Garrett is a graduate of Cambridge University, where he studied metallurgy, and undertaking a PhD in fatigue and fracture of aluminium alloys (F3). He went on to hold academic positions at the University of Cape Town and the University of the Witwatersrand, and visiting positions (F4) at Brown University, Oxford University and Sheffield University.[1] He was President (F5) and Chief Executive of the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and CEO of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO).[1][4]

As CSIRO chief executive, starting in 2003 Garrett introduced changes to the management structure which were intended to increase the impact of scientific research aimed at major industrial, governmental and community problems, and implemented "flagships" (F6). He called the program, which received substantial new government funding in 2004 (F7)"one of the largest targeted scientific research programs in Australia's history".[5] His policies generated both approval and controversy.[6] (F8 - re using [4] and [5] here not [6]) In December 2008 CSIRO’s Flagship Programs received the top Prime Minister’s Award for Excellence in Public Sector Management (S1).

In 2016 he led the Great Barrier Reef water science taskforce, which reported on ways of reducing industrial pollution in the area of the reef (S2). He said that if water quality continued to deteriorate, "we’re stuffed with a capital S", and expressed concern that insufficient funds had been assigned to meet water quality targets within the time proposed.[7] He continues to provide support to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation as a member of their Partnership Management Committee (S3).

From 2017 to 2021 he was Patron of the Australian Citizen Science Association (ACSA) (S4) and, during 2020/2021 he was Science Convenor for the Australian Federal Government's Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment and currently chairs the Department's Science Council. He is also (S5) a Deputy Chair of the National Youth Science Forum.

Awards Garrett is a recipient of the Centenary Medal for service to Australian society through science (S6), and was named by the Australian Financial Review as one of Australia’s 2008 ‘True Leaders’ (S7). In June 2008 he was appointed as an Officer of the Order of Australia,[2] in the Queen’s Birthday Honours list (S8 = ‘new’ [2]). In 1998 Garrett was named ‘Engineer of the Year’ by the South African Society for Professional Engineers and South Africa’s ‘Boss of the Year’.(F re previous ‘old’ Garrett article sources [9] and [10])

He is, inter alia, a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering.S9 = [3] ,an Honorary Fellow of the Engineers Australia (S10), and the Royal Society of South Africa (S11).

Publications[edit source] In 2010, Garrett and his co-author Graeme Davies(F9), with a group of co-contributors, published Herding Cats: Being Advice to Aspiring Academic and Research Leaders, described as a "non-ideological, aphoristic little book" about managing academics and researchers[8] .which has received very positive reviews (S12). Its 2013 sequel for leaders in the professions was entitled "Herding Professional Cats"[12] and its recently published 10th Anniversary Edition, also positively reviewed (S13), “Herding Cats Revisited".

F11

F12

References[edit source] ^ Jump up to: 
a b c "Dr Geoff Garrett AO". chiefscientist.qld.gov.au (archived). ^ "AUSTRALIAN HONOURS SEARCH FACILITY". honours.pmc.gov.au. Australian Government, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Retrieved 18 November 2021. ^ "ATSE:All Fellows". atse.org.au. ^ Sandland, Ron; Thompson, Graham (2012). Icon in Crisis: The Reinvention of CSIRO. UNSW Press. ISBN 978-1-7422-4597-3. ^ . smh.com.au. The Sydney Morning Herald. 7 May 2004. ^ Phillips, Nicky; Besser, Linton (12 April 2013). "Call for inquiry as CSIRO comes under the microscope". smh.com.au. The Sydney Morning Herald. ^ Slezak, Michael (25 May 2016). "Great Barrier Reef: advisers call for cap on farm pollution". theguardian.com. The Guardian. ^ Gillies, Malcolm (9 December 2010). "Herding Cats: Being Advice to Aspiring Academic and Research Leaders". timeshighereducation.com (archived).

NEW REFERENCES (‘SOURCES’)

S1 Re CSIRO’s Flagship Programs receiving the 2008 top Prime Minister’s Award for Excellence in Public Sector Management - on its way… the Inst of Public Administration Australia (IPAA) website (they have responsibility for these awards) only has them listed back to 2013 (https://www.act.ipaa.org.au/pm-winners) so I will get on to them first thing Monday to get you the full, verifiable link.

S2 Taskforce Full Final Report (PDF, 3.82MB) S3 https://www.barrierreef.org/what-we-do/reef-trust-partnership/partnership-management-committee

S4 https://citizenscience.org.au/who-is-acsa/

S5 https://www.nysf.edu.au/who-we-are/board/

S6 https://honours.pmc.gov.au/honours/awards/1127603

S7 https://www.afr.com/politics/the-list-20080808-j77ya

S8 = new [2]

S9 = new [3]

S10 https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/News/canberras-newest-honorary-fellows

S11 https://www.royalsocietysa.org.za/index.php/current-fellows/

S12 https://www.triarchypress.net/reviews-hc.html

S13 https://www.triarchypress.net/cats.html

I'm off to bed, so I'll get to this list in the morning. I don't think some of these changes can be made - hopefully I can explain why to your more-or-less satisfaction - though I think others can. You're right that we can't do this over e-mail, Wikipedia business is supposed to take place here on Wikipedia, in "the public eye" as it were.

And... um... I'm not sure how to break this to you... but by copy+pasting the whole article here, you actually committed another (minor) copyright violation. Don't worry! It's all fixed, all I had to do was write - in the edit summary for this very edit - that material was copied to this page from Geoff Garrett. I learned the hard way by making the same mistake when I was very new. If you want more reading, the whole explanation for this is at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 05:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OOPS! oh no! sorry for the extra work WW!

...and in the meantime, herewith a PS to the above

Re Footnote F9 … have discovered a live link here to part of that para (re ‘98 Boss of the Year in SA) that I’d like to retain … ie see page 6 at https://issuu.com/dictumpublishers/docs/boss_award_25_year_history_brochure

Re the other half of the para, I will call the Eng Council of SA on Monday, and see if they have an archivist who can dig out the ‘98 SASPE record and a usable link. So maybe trust me and leave/put it in (as it was in the ‘old’ Garrett article) for the time being?

Cheers Geoff

Since we're now firmly back to talking about article content, this should really be discussed at Talk:Geoff Garrett so anyone interested can notice it and join in if they wish. I will copypaste the recent discussion there, where discussion can continue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GGS, WW Righto. Will do. You’re the boss(es)!

Btw, who is allowed to edit the actual page (article) now, e.g. just WW as the author? GGS? ANOther(s)? Bye for now. GG

PS And signing off on this talk page, I’ve started a ‘whimsey’, to chart my journey with you both. Editorial comments of course most welcome! (And maybe another couple of verses??)

I took a risk, and ventured out, into the land of Wiki P I thought this was a land of plenty, ice cream and jasmin tea Not so, ‘twas a shock, and so far indeed from my normal comfort home At least I was warmly welcomed here by a friendly, able Gnome

Her pal the Sloth to the rescue also kindly came They seem so well connected to what seems a scary game With wordy, dangerous minefields to the left and to the right What a pickle I’d have been in, for sure, if left there to my plight

Technically, anyone - well, anyone whose editing privileges haven't already been suspended for bad behavior - can edit the article. Even you! But, quoting the relevant policy page, "COI editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, and can propose changes on article talk pages instead. However, our policy on matters relating to living people allows very obvious errors to be fixed quickly, including by the subject."

I've seen people editing articles about themselves before, and as long as they're not causing any real damage, folks shrug and move on. We're all volunteers, we're doing this because we enjoy it, and most people here don't enjoy putting someone else up for disciplinary action - it's time consuming and such confrontations seem to bring out the worst in people. So, how safe do you want to be? If you stick to the talk page, you're 100% safe. If you edit the article to correct a typo, you're 99% safe. If you venture much further, especially being unfamiliar with our policies, you enter risky territory (but to be honest, there's the chance no one will notice or care - Wikipedia is a BIG place). Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 09:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some guidance at WP:COIADVICE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:10, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks WW!

So I guess I should just stick with using the (other) talk page to make content suggestions then, and keep in touch there.

And a useful link, GGS. Ta.

As I learn more about how WP works, may I ask for a couple of, hopefully quick, process clarifications …

One. Who picks up and activates (or not) suggestions made on a Talk Page?

Two. What happens if some rogue editor gets in and writes some really inaccurate stuff; or, alternatively, some over-the-top, gushing stuff… How (and by whom) does that get calibrated/normalised/corrected? And indeed even spotted in such a large organisation? (There being 'the chance that no one will notice, or care'.) Ie who ‘fixes the obvious errors quickly’ that you mention? (I guess I’m asking about quality control procedures.) GG

1. That depends. If you post on the talk page of a highly-visible article - one lots of people monitor and visit every day - your suggestion will get addressed quickly. If you post on the talk page of an article no one ever reads, it'll probably never get seen. To help out in that case, we have a wizard: Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. You can go to that page, click the I have a conflict of interest button, type Geoff Garrett into one of the boxes (depending on whether your request is big or small), and you'll be taken to an editing window. There you can enter your request by filling in What I think should be changed, Why it should be changed, and References supporting the possible change. Once you click Publish changes, your request will be entered in a queue which a bunch of editors monitor. One of them will come along, review it and make the change if they think it's legit.

You could achieve the same effect by going to the talk page of the article, clicking New section, typing a subject line in the first box, typing out your request in the second box and then adding {{request edit}} (clickable this time, instructions on the linked page). I don't know which way would be easier for you.

2. This is obviously a big problem, since we're "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" and pretty much anyone does, adding anything they want. We have two basic lines of defense: 'robots' who are programmed to detect obvious bad edits (very large additions, very large deletions, adding loads of cursing, adding loads of nonsense like 'sdfoinaasfo'), and editors who specialize in anti-vandalism patrol - some people find it fun to just remove obviously bad edits all day and they have some tools to help them out. Otherwise, the people who fix such stuff are, well, us - you and me and GGS and anyone else using the site. I often spot a bit of tampering as I'm reading articles, so I take a few moments to clean it up. If an account is spotted making a lot of trouble, then we holler for an admin at one of the water holes where they gather, and the offender is dealt with more severely. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 16:12, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I've now added bits from that final report to Great Barrier Reef and Environmental threats to the Great Barrier Reef, properly cited of course (and hopefully I got the copyright licensing for the catchments map correct!). Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 18:09, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks WW - sounds complicated...

I trust you and GGS might retain guardian angel-ship over 'my' (your) new article! GG

Thank you WW, and GGS. And concluding my above-mentioned ‘whimsy’….

“It had a happy ending though, with a goddess helping out. Friend Sloth agreed to take a chance and give the gal a shout. The copy right glitch she sorted, in just a single day. So then the gnome had fun alright and just went on to play.

She found some published pieces, buried somewhere far too long. And used the words quite carefully, it could’ve made a song. So all is well that ends well, but the moral in the tale…. Take care when Wiki editing, you might end up in jail!” GG 25.11.2021

PS I’m a March 1948 baby, btw :-)

I like it! I believe you, but I'm dogmatic on BLP stuff, in this case WP:DOB. But if "born March 1948" turns up here [6] or some similar place, we can use that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of WP, it may amuse you that we have a sort of newspaper, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost. If you'd like to write something about your WP experiences, they may very well be interested. WP is also sometimes in the news, Wikipedia:Press coverage 2021. This of course generates articles like Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia (article not "rules")... The Wiki rabbit hole is quite deep. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:20, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dogmatic?? Surely not a characteristic of Sloths?!

And Wow, I didn’t know that sloths grew up to the size of elephants in the Pleistocene Epoch. (Isn’t WP wonderful!)

Now, in response to the two points you have made, GGS….

One: Re my DOB currently being listed as ‘47/48’, aside from my birth certificate, passport, driving license, etc unfortunately I can’t find any quotable references/links - existing or new - with the actual date 😩

So maybe one of your goddess friends might sign off on a balance of probabilities? Thus I would have had to be born in November or December ‘47 to hit the ‘age 53’ in the November 1, 2001 of the da Silva article (Ref 1 – a good pick up, btw, WW - thank you). Ie 16.7% odds.

I suppose people might conclude that I was one of those (presumably extremely) rare babies born EXACTLY on the stroke of midnight on 31 December which might justify ‘47/48’?

So maybe just ‘born 1948’? And don’t use the March.

Two: Re your suggestion for an article for WP’s ‘Signpost’, please advise further… I really don’t want to fall down another hole, rabbit or otherwise!!

But if you feel it might have merit, for reasons of a/be/musement, I guess I could cut ‘n paste from here (as BlackTea) my kiddies’ adventure story framework, plus my four-versed ‘whimsy‘? Provided I could acknowledge you, GGS and WW, with your full wiki codenames!

But the Signpost powers-that-be might be looking for slightly more sophisticated feedback/input.

Let me know what you think…

GG 26 November 2021 103.129.158.22 (talk) 06:40, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitary break

On birthyear, I found a library [7] that solves our dilemma. 1948 now in article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the other point, good thinking.

BlackTea/Geoff Garrett, meet @Smallbones, Editor-in-Chief of The Signpost. Smallbones, meet dr Geoff Garrett. In short, he had a WP:AUTO on WP without problems for 5 years. Significantly copied from a text he wrote that also appears elsewhere. Then someone noticed and a ton of PAG fell on him.

However, as documented mostly on this talkpage, much thanks to @Wikignome Wintergreen, things worked out surprisingly well anyway. So I thought "how about if he wrote something about it for the SP?". Quite reasonably he wonders what the heck that would involve, so, Smallbones, care to comment on that? And is it an ok idea? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, GGS - can newbies (babes in WP arms) propose Gold Star/Barnstar Awards? You merit one (as does WW) for persistence and ‘digging’ skills! Plus you didn’t even need a goddess to help re the DOB …. Thank You!

And thanks also for the connection to the boss person of The Signpost ….Hi Smallbones!

My meagre possible contribution is as suggested above (and from further above). Part of my reticence is the ‘ton of PAG’ experienced that GGS mentions. Without knowing precisely what PAG is, it ain’t good… hence reservation in submitting voluntarily to some further firing squad!!

But thoughts welcome….

GG/30.11.2021 103.129.158.22 (talk) 11:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe PAG stands for "policies and guidelines", and we certainly have several tons of them. Don't forget to sign in to your account, mysterious IP editor! Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 13:48, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PAG of course, how can that possibly be unclear to anyone!? Barnstars are easy and informal, anyone can give them. Go to my talkpage and click the red heart. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear .... search as I might I can find no 'red hearts' anywhere, for you GGS, or WW, on your respective Talk pages ... what am I doing wrong (again!)?? GG 103.129.158.22 (talk) 23:22, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At the top right of a talk page you should see this series of options: Read, Edit source, New section, and View history. To the right of View history is the heart GGS mentioned. Maybe it only works if you're signed into an account? Not sure on that. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 23:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was the answer... Ta! (Surprising I could converse here without being logged in.) But with luck your Barnstars, with your $10k Premium Editor bonuses - WP:PEB's - from WP?! :-), will now be there... GG BlackTea (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]