Talk:Curation

Type of page ?

This page is more like a disambiguation page.

The page for the museum project should really be one titled Collection curation or Musuem curation ? Pee Tern (talk) 02:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I've removed the museums project tag from this one as Collection catalog is far more within our scope. This one needs clean up and I'm going to tag it appropriately. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 15:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks fro the prompt feedback. If I get time over the next week or so I will turn it into a disambiguation page. (It is still museum project tagged though ?) Pee Tern (talk) 23:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the museum tag for now, but we can easily re-add. Digital curation has also been sent to copyvio heaven but I don't know enough about the topic, if it's actually notable, to write a new article. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 03:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[An ext lk]

Market Culture Curation== Links ==

Curation of the accompanying disambiguation page and of this talk page

In my opinion, it is too early to deal with this talk page and its accompanying Dab page by use of admin powers, despite the bad behavior (probably reflecting ignorant implementation of good intentions) of a new colleague. Efforts to enlist their cooperation and attention to WP practices and policies have, however, been pretty ineffective so far.
I'll be regularly monitoring both the accompanying Dab and this talk page, and in particular enforcing normal WP talk protocol. (I'll likely dig around and cite appropriate explicit talk and general policy refs in detail at some point, but de-emphasize them in favor of combining common sense, WP:Civility, and WP:Consensus. In particular, the discarding of discussion, whether new or old, is unacceptable, and my first priority beyond further vandalism against the article will be restoration via the edit history of the integrity of this talk page, and amelioration of ambiguities.
--Jerzy•t 09:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I note that machine comparison between the revision as of 23:35, 13 May 2017 and revision as of 04:59, 14 May 2017 verify that the combination of NapoliRoma's two revisions of 04:58 and :59, 14 May 2017‎ amounted to restoring the content deleted, in the revision of 23:40 of the preceding day, by Jay Leon.
--Jerzy•t 10:19, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[[The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson|Happy Fun Time with Robot and Old Man ]]

Yes, you get it, or at least your expectations were appropriately lowered; that's bcz it seemed Mostly Harmless anyway, but a joke title forewarns you that probably your time is about be wasted. (... As Craig would say "....Or maybe not.... [virtual wink]")

I stuck an explanatory, visible only in edit-view comment into my markup, and then expanded it into an Easter egg. Which i duplicate here: Here's the editor-aiding comment:

the usually redundant-to-Dab'n insertion of "an" clarifies the sense (result of the activity, not the activity itself) of the noun "accumulation"

(and hopefully the distinction between [an]] accumulation [of something] and [a process of accumulating (something, maybe "great wealth")] accumulation

Here's the odd thot that my idle brain gave itself over to

Hey, oddly enuf, i think "an information" would be the act [or process] of conveying information to someone.

Now, my final thot is, was i just being naive about the (perhaps sad) fact that "informate" is not a verb???? "OMG, it is!"
-- Your colleague, with too much time on his hands, Jerzy•t 13:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]