Jump to content

User talk:CJLL Wright/Archive XI

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


ARCHIVE INDEX (EDIT)
2005 2006 2007 2008
2009 2010–11 2012

Feb '07

Request for help

I noticed that you were instrumental in bringing a recent article to FA status. I have been trying to get the Ohio Wesleyan University article to FA status. One of the critical areas for the article that remains an issue is copyediting and prose. I was wondering if you might be willing to help me in this area? I'd greatly appreciate it! Thank you. WikiprojectOWU 22:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, WikiprojectOWU. I'll see what I can do, but I've been away these past two weeks and have a fair amount of catching up to do, and so it may take a little while. Cheers--cjllw | TALK 23:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The article has gone through an extensive copyedit process but more comments can always make it better. Do you think you might have a few minutes to take a look? LaSaltarella 20:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi LaSaltarella. What with one thing and another cropping up I hadn't actually managed to provide any comments, and see that since I looked over the article there's been a considerable collective effort which at first re-reading seems to have further improved it. Not sure that I'll be able to add much more in the way of constructive comment over and above those which have already been made, but will give it a more intensive read sometime in the next week or thereabouts and maybe suggest one or two things. Nice work, though! Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 07:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

1st English regiment

i dont know why you deleted out page but i can assure you we are a real organisation and i would very much appreciate it if you could re instate the text OR send me a copy of i. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamesruth (talk • contribs) 16:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

I deleted 1st English regiment because it was patent nonsense and an evident hoax or poor attempted humour. Sentences like "The 1st English Regiment... Has the unique aim of total conquest of Scotland and the harsh supression of its people" were a bit of a giveaway. I see no purpose in sending you the text- particularly since your few edits here so far seem to be exclusively adding nonsense to articles, which per the warnings on your talk pg are readily considered as vandalism.--cjllw | TALK 02:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

This is just the kind of attitude that has driven us to want to conquer Scotland. You are completly OUT OF ORDER and i demand the reinstatement of the page. With independant research i am sure you will discover that the English 1st are an actual registered organisation. I note you have included an article on the Klu Klux Klan on wikipedia. Some would claim that thier aims are as laughable as our yet they have the right to appear on this website. If you wish to avoid the regiment moving to full mobilisation against your organisation i suggest you comply with our demands, We already number in our 100's and we take our work very seriously. The regiment consists of some very unsavoury people who would be more than willing to apply techniques such as firebombing, electronic sabotage and kidnapping.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamesruth (talk • contribs) 24 February 2007.

Yeah, right. The answer is still no, pathetic attempts at intimidation notwithstanding.--cjllw | TALK 00:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Cancun resident and author requests assistance.

I'd like to call your attention to some comments that I made today on the Cancun Discussion page. If it's more convenient for you, I can come back here and paste them in, but I will appreciate looking at what I have to say. Briefly, my family and I have lived and worked in Cancun since 1983. I'm the author and publisher of the Cancun User's Guide, among other books. It is perhaps the only book about Cancun that mainly deals with local and Mexican history, society and culture. It's not much of a commercial project, to say the least, but it's basically a placeholder while I complete my work in progress The Real Mexico.

You can see my general qualifications in my resumé at Who Is Jules Siegel. I could contribute a lot to the Cancun article, but I am reluctant to do so because of what I perceive to be abusive editing by ignorant people who enter often rather low-quality second-hand information while removing any links that they perceive to be commercial. I will appreciate any advice you might have about how to deal with this. The discussion page will give you all the information you need to understand the issues involved. --Jules Siegel 02:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Jules, I recall that we had some exchanges at the Cancún page a while back, so I am sort of familiar with your position (I've also seen some of your postings to the AZTLAN list). No need to copy the dialogue here, I will look into the discussion and make such comments and suggestions I may have at talk:Cancún, once I catch up on it and when I get some time to do it- it may not be immediate. Kind regards, (also posting at your user talk pg) --cjllw | TALK 03:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Glad to hear from you. I see that guidelines are now posted over there. The one I'm not clear on is "original research." Example: As far as I have been able to determine there are no public official sources of information on foreign ownership of property in Cancun. The 70% Mexican Hotel Zone ownership was provided by Abelardo Vara, who opened Cancun's first hotel, and was president of the Hotel Association when I spoke to him about this. He listed all the hotels that he knew were owned by foreigners and added up the number of rooms and calculated that they were 30% of the resort's capacity. Since then, some other hotels have been sold to foreign groups, and the figure is probably around 50% for hotels.
But hotels (including condominium hotels) aren't the only Hotel Zone properties. There are also private residences, condominium apartment houses that offer little or no hotel service, shopping centers, entertainment districts, marinas, office buildings, a military installation, government offices and other assorted structures. I have yet to hear of any significant foreign ownership or operation of any of these properties. I know many of the owners personally. They are almost all Mexican. The developer of the first shopping center was born in Germany but was a Mexican citizen. Almost all the owners of the stores are Mexican.
The Hotel Zone condominium complex in which I live was developed by a Spaniard. He still owns 32 small condominiums that he runs as a hotel. Two of the Mexican owners each hold more square meters than all his units combined. Only twelve of the 123 owners are foreigners, one Italian but naturalized Mexican, 11 Americans. Thus foreigners are by far the minority in this complex.
I also interviewed one of Cancun's leading real estate brokers and developers, Ivan Ebergenyi, a born in Mexico City, mostly raised in Yucatán, where mother managed the first hotel at Chichén-Itzá. He said that foreigners were not a significant real estate market. Mexicans tended to be more "adventurous," he said. Any examination of Hotel Zone property dispute history will make that remark quite meaningful.
Thus, while I have been unable to obtain an officially documented figure, the idea often put forth in the international media that the Cancun Hotel Zone is overwhelmingly owned by foreigners is, at best, absurd. My authorities for this are Cancun's pioneer hotel owner and one of its pioneer real estate experts. I didn't put all this in the article, because it seemed cumbersome. It requires annotated footnotes, which hardly seem appropriate. Shouldn't my own credentials suffice in a situation like this? Or am I somehow suspect because I have a book for sale about Cancun?
So is that the bad kind of "original research"? If so, you are eliminating a whole class of expert and very well-informed contributors in favor of amateurs working from secondary and tertiary sources, often of dubious accuracy.
Sign me Puzzled in Cancun. --Jules Siegel 15:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jules- it's not that anyone necessarily doubts the accuracy or experience of your information, and certainly not because you have a book out on the general topic. Wikipedia's No Original Research policy is a long-standing and necessary one- I'm sure you can appreciate that wikipedia is a frequent target by less scrupulous folks who seek only to promote their own ideas and theories (often quite fringe ones), products, and personas. It is if you like one of the things we try to use to sort the wheat from the chaff.
Equally however it shouldn't mean that valid and earnestly-meant contribs such as yours are automatically disbarred. The main issue boils down to Verifiability, another policy- by providing reliable sources we can at least give the reader a chance to ascertain where a certain piece of info originates from, and (hopefully) distinguish it from stuff that for all anyone can tell may or may not be completely made up.
In the particular case here of local vs foreign ownership, if the article says most hotels are foreign-owned and there is no reference to it, and you believe it to be wrong, then you could remove it and comment to that effect on the article's talk page. If you have difficulty in finding any independent references one way or the other then you could ask for some consensus for a restatement of the info and see if anyone has an issue with it. If references simply aren't available then it might not be something worth going into too much detail on the article anyway. I don't suppose your book has any mention of it (in which case you could at that as a reference which could at least be cited)? Or any articles on it in the local press?
As mentioned I'll be offline for a couple of days, happy to take back up the dialogue when I get back. Regards, (also posted at your talk pg) --cjllw | TALK 00:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

sprotect

Hi cjll, thanks for the info. My first idea was to leave a message saying it was about time to remove the protection, but then I decided to see if I could do it myself. Good to know that doesn't really remove the protection. See you, Piet | Talk 07:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Olmec & Mesoamerica

As you may have seen, I've been back at work, focusing on Teopantecuanitlan for the moment (in fact, I added a nice little drawing - we need more artwork & photos - words can only take us so far).

Anyway, as a result of my work on Teopantecuanitlan I had to review the theories around the appearance of Olmec-like artifacts outside the heartland. In particular, I was reading Kent Reilly's discussion of this in "Art, Ritual, & Rulership in the Olmec World" and I was thinking that I need to rewrite that discussion in the Olmec article.

As it stands now, the only archaeologists mentioned in this context in our article are Niederberger and Magni, in two paragraphs that really don't address why Olmec-like artifacts are found outside the heartland. Therefore, to introduce some balance in what this survey article (e.g. I've not seen Magni cited outside Wikipedia), I would like to move this paragraph out of the Olmec article and put them in the Christine Niederberger article where in my opinion it belongs.

Of course, I know this has been a touchy subject with one occasional editor and so I wanted to discuss it with you beforehand and solicit your input. Let me know, and thanks, Madman 16:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

HI there Madman. That's some mighty fine work you've been doing on Teopantecuanitlan recently. And I like your drawing there- looks like you're getting the SVG format nicely squared away!
Re the Olmec articles- it's been a while now since I've looked into them, but I do agree that the "Olmec question" debate (eg mother- vs sister-culture) is interesting and involved enough to be deserving of a much more extensive, thoughtful, and possibly circumspect treatment than we currently give it. Although I'm still unconvinced that there is really something which could be called a 'french school' of thought on this, and it's still not all that clear to me just how Niederberger's & Magni's views differentiate from those of other proponents, maybe the way to go would be to continue adding in material and viewpoints from other researchers such as Diehl, Flannery, Reilly, Joyce, Cyphers, Coe et al, and try to arrive at a balanced presentation of the competing viewpoints that way. If it can be confirmed what Niederberger & Magni's actual claims are (there's this article from the latter which could be reviewed, for eg) then some mention of these in the main article should be ok, as long as they don't predominate.
If any discussion ensues then hopefully it can be maintained at a reasonable level. So, if you've the time I'd say go for it and add in some of the viewpoints you've researched- as it goes along we can assess relative balance and presentation, and deal with any issues that may crop up.
(by the way- I know it's puerile, but when doing some background hunting around on Magni I couldn't help but respond with amusement to the acronym of this research institution she's a member of...)--cjllw | TALK 08:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
That is a hilarious acronym!! LOL
What I think I'll do, then, based on your comments, is to create a separate article on Olmec culture in Mesoamerica or Olmec culture outside the heartland (comments welcome on title). I foresee a longish article investigating various theories, soundly documented. There would be a stub-like paragraph or two in the Olmec article itself, with a Main article link. This is similar to our action of last year where we moved the Olmec origin speculations into its own article. Sound OK?
Finally, I am wondering whether you might know of a site map for Teopantecuanitlan. I think the article would benefit from one, similar to the one created for La Venta. Let me know, and thanks, Madman 16:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it is amusing in an unfortunate kind of way- like if there was an institution called Mesoamerican Environmental Research Directorate on Epigraphy (MERDE)...(!)
I think there'd be enough published on the debate to fill out a separate article on it. What about something like Olmec influences on Mesoamerican cultures or similar for a title?
Re site map for Teopantecuanitlan, a long shot maybe but you might like to try our resident archaeologist User:Oaxaca dan, he may be able to help. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 03:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I've made a good start on the Olmec influences on Mesoamerican cultures article, and I hope/expect you'll be please with it. I'm writing it outside Wikipedia right now, since it's still very much a work in progress, but I expect to load it up tomorrow or Friday, once it's somewhat presentable.
One of the frustrations I've experienced in past in pulling out and expanding sections to create new articles is that editors start putting their own little bits back in the original article, and pretty soon identical paragraphs appear in two articles. This happened to History of the Aztecs, although I note with relief that we have not experienced any creepback (to coin a word) with Olmec alternative origin speculations. I mention this in the hope that we can hold the line against potential creepback. I would like to raise the Olmec article to GA or even FA, and this partially will depend on keeping the subject at a "survey" level. All for now, Madman 04:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok thanks Madman, will look forward to seeing those developments once you think they are ready. It would be great to get Olmec up to recognition status - I think once we get the Olmec story right, it should make it easier to more consistently flesh-out the historical narrative for Mesoamerica generally across a number of different articles. Cheers!--cjllw | TALK 22:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, CJLL, I finished what might be termed a first draft of Olmec influences on Mesoamerican cultures. It's at the point where I feel comfortable turning it over to the other editors here, and frankly I'm a little burned out. No other article presently links to it, but I will start integrating it into other articles once I get an OK from you. Hope you like it, Madman 22:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Zounds, Madman - most impressive!! I've had a look over it and can only think of a couple of potential areas for expansion, which I've commented on at talk:Olmec influences on Mesoamerican cultures. I don't know whether Oacaxa dan or user:Chunchucmil have any particular expertise in matters Olmec, but it might be worth asking if they've the time for some peer review as well. Otherwise when I can organise myself to sit down for a couple of hours I'll see what else can be expanded, and also give some more thought on how best to integrate the material across the relevant articles. But once again- top stuff! Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 08:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Sentinelese

Hey, could you please reply to this comment? Since you wrote most of the article, I'm guessing that you'd be able to provide a source. Khoikhoi 06:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Khoikhoi. I don't think I wrote that particular snippet of info, but the tale does ring a bell and I think I should be able to track a source down. Will add and respond to the query. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 06:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Khoikhoi 03:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Re EL Norte dab

You have a impressive background in Mesoamerican studies. RE: El Norte, in the article you made a one word change in a quote (and also included people from): from Mayan to Maya. Did you know you changed Gregory Nava's (the director) original quotation. He used Mayan. And, is not Mayan an acceptable use of the word. According to my Webster's it is. And if it's wrong should we include (sic) after Mayan. I'm leaving as it is, however. You can be the "decider."

Also, I'm glad we now have a Maya language category. Best Luigibob 03:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Luigibob. To tell the truth, I failed to notice that the link I changed appeared in the context of a direct quotation, thanks for bringing that to my attention. I've re-edited it now to preserve the original quotation while pointing to the actual link.
Re "Maya" vs "Mayan", it's true that in non-specialist/lay contexts you'll often see Mayan used. However the widely-observed convention amongst researchers and ethnographers uses just Maya, the exception being in the linguistic arena where the languages can be referred to as Mayan. Given this is a non-specialist article I don't suppose it matters that much, it's more through force of habit that I changed it along with the dablink. Note however that equally using just "Maya" is certainly not incorrect, and is more 'in line' with general usage in fields which are concerned with their ancient and modern history. Regards, --cjllw | TALK 05:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh I see, we have a little bit of what can be called "educational/specialist correctness." Ha. I guessed as much. As a political scientist, I run into the same kind of, lets say, different ways of looking at the world. We specialists known better but still have to deal with "non-specialist/lay contexts." An example in my world is the question: Can the US president control the USA economy? A political scientist would say HELL NO! Well, we know what the media and a run-of-the mill voter would say. Yes! Best to you-- Luigibob 02:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Review request of Mixe

Hi CJJLW. I have been working on the article on the Mixe people and would like someone to throw a second glance at it, copyediting a bit and maybe provide some ideas for other information to be included in the article. Maybe you would take a look?·Maunus· ·ƛ· 13:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Maunus. Sure no problem, will take a look and provide some feedback. Hopefully today, if not might be in a couple of days, but will get onto it. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 22:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Infinity (computer game)

I would like to know why you deleted my article on the Infinity computer game, the reason you left made no sense, and I couldn't find any reason in the wikipedia guidelines why it should be deleted. --Spacemonkeynz 20:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Spacemonkeynz. I deleted Infinity (computer game) because I assessed it as being eligible under the Criteria for speedy deletion. Actually I re-deleted it, since it had been deleted once before, but was subsequently recreated.
To expand upon the edit summary I gave explaining the deletion, the article was about a "small independent" computer game which was still under development- that is, about a product which does not yet exist. Since wikipedia can't predict the future (aka "wikipedia not a crystal ball"), it's generally not appropriate to have articles speculating on what might or might not eventuate.
Secondly, even if the game was released, that doesn't mean it's automatically notable enough for a mention here. There must be thousands of games released every day, but to be notable enough to be included here a game really needs to satisfy notability guidelines and demonstrate that there are enough verifiable, reliable and multiple independent references to it. Please review in particular WP:WEB and WP:PROG.
If and when the game is released, and it can be shown to be notable enough per those guidelines with those independent references, and furthermore doesn't amount to mere promotion and advertising spam, that would be the time to try creating an article on it. No guarantees of course that it will be considered notable enough at that time.
Hope this explains things, regards (also posted at usr's talk pg) --cjllw | TALK 23:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups

Hey, Do you know anyone who has a steady hand and who would like to be the driving force behind Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups? I'm a ittle unhappy with some of the ideas that have been floating around there in the past few months.. delete this, delete that, rename this for no reason, etc etc.) I'm afraid it'll be taken over by... contributors... or else killed (it was threatened that way once, according to Jmabel. That's one of the reasons I was afraid WP:ENLANG would also be killed). Thanks.--Ling.Nut 20:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ling.Nut. I must admit that I've barely looked into WP:ETHNIC in the past few months, my limited attention has been focussed elsewhere. 'Fraid it's not likely I'll be able to devote sufficient oversight time there myself in the short term, have been spreading myself a little thin. However I'll do what I can from time to time to check in and see nothing too deleterious gets up. As for others, there are some 'steady hands' for eg User:Khoikhoi who have made some contributions to the project before, but are probably very busy on a host of other things as well. Maybe collectively some of those others who have indicated prior interest in the project can keep things ticking along, unless someone puts their hand up for a coordination role. --cjllw | TALK 03:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, hope things are going well... yes I definitely hear you when you say that things are busy... with WP:MESO and being an admin... I wish you all the best with both. As for others picking up the yoke for ETHNIC, I know it'll be difficult if not impossible to replace Jmabel, but... thought I should at least make some attempt to stir up interest in that direction. :-) Thanks! :-) --Ling.Nut 04:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

New Templates

I created two new templates you can use to tag accounts ad IPs you block: {{VOA}} for vandal-only accounts and {{IPsock}} for IPs suspected in "sockpuppetry" . Tell me what you think. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, odometer) 08:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there BCD. Thanks, will keep these in mind- there's also {{Indefblockeduser}} which I sometimes forget the name of, your versions at least are easier to remember & are shorter to type...cheers --cjllw | TALK 09:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


Mayan languages ready for FA?

Taking a look at the Mayan languages article I don't see anything standing between it and FA status, but I thought I should ask before nominating it to make sure that the primary contributors were more or less happy with it. It looks great to me and there aren't any outstanding issues from the peer review so I think an FA nomination is the next logical step. Do you think that now is a good time to more forward with this? Eluchil404 10:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Being one of the principal editors having worked on this article I would say go ahead. ·Maunus· ·ƛ· 12:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I took a look at it, and though most technical jargon was lost on me (phonetics/grammar), the article looks really good. I changed a few "mayas" into "maya" to keep it consistent with what's stated on wp:meso. Hope that's cool -- Oaxaca dan 14:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi all- agree that it stands a good chance of passing FA muster as-is, and that it's probably time to make a move on it. I'll just add a couple of comments to the article's talk pg.--cjllw | TALK 03:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

An RfC brought up by User:Lukas19 (also known as Thulean)et al.

Hello, sorry to disturb but I thought you might be interested in commenting on this rfC: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/LSLM·Maunus· ·ƛ· 19:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Maunus, thanks. Interesting, I've added some comments there. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 03:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
He's been adding edits to Indigenous people, in case you haven't noticed. :-) Wish me luck on my (2) tests tomorrow. :-) --Ling.Nut 01:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
gidday Ling.Nut - thanks, I did see some movement in that area. Nothing too drastic so far, but will consider if there's a better way to phrase things and monitor those more closely in the next little while. And of course- best of luck for your exams, sure you'll ace 'em! --cjllw | TALK 02:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

(undent)Hey thanks cjllw for the (not yet earned/deserved, but highly appreciated) Linguist's barnstar.. It was definitely a pick-me-up. :-) I think maybe I wasn't clear about the tests I took today. They were ordinary tests, not prelims for the PhD! So I'm gonna tuck your barnstar away in the history of my user page, and then when I pass the prelims in August (cross your fingers!) I'll bring it back out & display it proudly! Actually, I won't technically consider myself a linguist until I hear those magic words, "Congratulations, Dr. Ling.Nut!" when my dissertation is completely finished and accepted. But... after I pass the prelims, as an ABD I'll be significantly more legitimately able to refer to myself as a nascent/fledgling linguist than I am now. :-) Thanks again! --Ling.Nut 16:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

2020mad

I was very disapionted to see you had seen fit to delete my submission of the subject 2020mad, not much is know about this artist and if delition continues how will people do research of artists like this, I feel quite stongly on this subject as i have been tracking the work of this artist for some months now and feel the information i have found is quite important as his populrity is increasing daily with different publicity stunts appering all the time.

How did banksy start out? look where he is now!.

I have no connection to this artist nor do i know him the only facts i had placed in my submission were fact. although very thin on the ground the media is starting to take note. does this artist have to be recognised in Australia before you hit the delete button, I have ejoyed using this site that is why i decided to contribute but maybe i have been walking around with blinkers on and the admin are power hungary or scared that the site is so big now everything submited by a somebody new is spam.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Martinspa (talk • contribs) 22 February 2007.

Hi Martinspa. I deleted the above article because I assessed it as being eligible under the Speedy deletion criteria, most specifically failing to provide any demonstration or assertion that the subject is notable for inclusion here (not to mention, it was completely unreferenced). If the artist's only claim to notoriety is to have planted a few lilac-painted gnomes about town, that hardly seems to match up with the notability guidelines we have around here- I'd suggest you take a look at WP:BIO and WP:NOT for some comparisions on what is generally accepted sufficient for mention here. Perhaps he is an "up-and-coming artist", but without any demonstration of notability even within Leamington Spa (let alone a wider community), I don't think there'd be any consensus for the article's inclusion. I could be wrong, if you want to pursue it you can take it to Deletion Review for a second opinion. (also posted at your talk pg). Regards, --cjllw | TALK 03:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

WPW newsletter

The Writing systems WikiProject Newsletter
Issue I - December 2006
News
  • Welcome to the newsletter of the Writing systems WikiProject, everyone. Our project currently has 29 members.
  • Any questions or requests for assistance on writing system articles can be posted at WT:WPW.
  • Our Article Assessment Project is currently underway. Feel free to contribute by assessing and improving all unassessed articles according to the assessment page. Any help is appreciated. We would like to bring all mid-, high-, and top-importance articles to at least B class by the end of the year.
  • We are working on implementing writing systems templates into appropriate articles. Try to help out!
Writing system articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 1 1 1 3
GA 3 3 3 3 12
B 16 84 93 186 18 397
C 17 76 91 222 30 436
Start 4 136 362 1,023 62 1,587
Stub 2 22 485 51 560
List 2 12 14 426 1 7 462
Category 330 330
Disambig 13 13
File 28 28
Portal 2 2
Project 6 6
Redirect 10 30 59 203 302
Template 439 439
NA 1 36 37
Other 6 6
Assessed 42 324 616 2,406 1,064 168 4,620
Unassessed 1 1
Total 42 324 616 2,406 1,065 168 4,621
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 14,254 Ω = 4.76


To subscribe or unsubscribe this newsletter, or if you would like to edit the next issue, please drop a message on the discussion page.

This is the project's first newsletter. If you have any questions, comments, or ideas about it, feel free to post it on WT:WPW. Thanks. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 23:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey Ikiroid- good job on the newsletter!--cjllw | TALK 01:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
END OF TALK ARCHIVE PAGE
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CJLL_Wright/Archive_XI&oldid=1136202872"