User talk:Pegship/20061

Her Pegship's Civilized Discussion Page

2005 archive

January

Equine Coat Color Genetics

Thanks for all of your work on cleaning up Equine_Coat_Color_Genetics! I had been hoping to clean it up for a long time--just hadn't gotten to it --glassjar99 05:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

prezidunto

Hi Pegship,

I restored your deletion at Esperanto grammar and thought I should explain myself. It's not POV about the election recount, but an illustration of when a conditional participle might be used. The conditional mood is inherently POV, since it's POV to assume what would have been. The closer something comes to becoming real, the more likely conditionals will be used. If Bush had won by a landslide, it's unlikely that many people would call Gore the prezidunto (would-be president). But with such a close race, especially for people who think he should have won, or would have won if only some minor thing had gone differently, conditional forms are much more likely. That's the reason for having this illustration in the first place: It's a prime example of would-have-been in public consciousness. That, and the well-known Kipling novel, whose title is practically a translation of prezidunto. kwami 20:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Peg,

Concerning your response to Draft 5 of the Main Page Redesign, I have a question for you...

How do we put things in the left bar? I can't find any documentation on that. Go for it! 23:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language links

Language links automatically show up in the left bar, if you don't use the leading colon. Though I am not aware of any other type of material being able to be put there. I think it's a programming problem, as is rounded tabs. KMF and I are trying to track down the Italian WP's cascading style sheet that has the definitions for the codes they use for rounded corners, and those only work in mozilla-based browsers -- IE users don't get to see the nice round edges, even at the Italian WP! Go for it! 04:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: The left bar is now chock full of language links, on the Main Page Redesign Draft. Go for it! 04:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Round corners!!!!

We got it! KMF tracked down the inline code in the Italian WP main page, so I tested it out on the Philosophy Portal. Let me know what you think. Go for it! 06:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page Redesign Draft now has round corners too

Here's the link for your convenience: Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Draft

(This is fun!)

Go for it! 06:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)==Wikipedia Community==[reply]

Do you still want round tabs?

If you are using Firefox, you can. Just copy my .css at User:Go for it!/monobook.css to User:Pegship/monobook.css, and you'll have the rounded corners in the top tabs and left column. I think you have to restart Firefox for it to initialize. Go for it! 08:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Pegship

Hi. I've switched over to working on the help page to give the main page redesign time to generate feedback. I've revamped the page, and now I'm looking for icons for the headings. I've found quite a few, but I'm not all that familiar with icon collections, and I was wondering if you were into icons and if you'd like to take a look at what's needed on the help page. (General feedback is good too - anything you see that needs improvement, just let me know). --Go for it! 09:31, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The new Help portal look

Yes, I like it very much! If you're looking for icons, try Commons:Category:Icons. I personally like the Nuvola icons (can be small, nice, compact, and shiny) and if we go with the bluish & white color scheme they will add a dash of color here and there. Shall I mess with it a bit? Her Pegship 21:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do! --Go for it! 21:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for feedback

I'm thinking about requesting adminship, and have written a draft of my request. I would appreciate it if you would proofread it for me, and let me know what you think on its talk page. Thank you. Sincerely, --Go for it! 23:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: Thanks for all your help on the help page!

Karen Dotrice

Hi, thanks for your attention to this article. I did revert your edits because the wording references the book series ("... Disney's adaptation [the film] of Mary Poppins [the books]."). Radio Kirk talk to me 22:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! Thanks for fine tuning Karen Dotrice's entry. I appreciate the distinction between the books & film...the thought flitted across my mind as I edited the other (film) links but it immediately evaporated. Cheers, Her Pegship 22:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings back! It occurs to me that the reference could easily confuse... I'll try a clarification. :) Radio Kirk talk to me 23:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Main Page Version you liked is not a new entry you can vote on

I saw your message on the Main Page Redesign talk page, and have added the version you expressed interest in voting on as Draft D in the voting section. I've even voted on it myself. --Go for it! 23:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Hello! The {{expand}} template goes on Talk pages, not on articles. Happy editing!! --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dia Duit

Hi there! If you're ever short of a few subjects to do, we'd be more than happy to see you at Wikipedia:Irish Wikipedians' notice board. There's not that many of us, and we need all the help and opinions we can get. Cheers!Fergananim 21:01, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Atemajac de Brizuela

I removed your speedy deletion tag from this article. You had marked it as A1 (a short article with no context) but it clearly does (it's an article about a town in Mexico). By general consensus, articles about real places are always kept. The stub and cleanup tags should stay on so that it can get some attention (yes, I realize it's been tagged for cleanup for almost a year, but there's a huge backlog). Regards, howch e ng {chat} 18:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

February

Glad to have met you

This would not have been appropriate on our project's talk page, so I will put it here.

I am so glad that we met and work so well together. :)

Lady Aleena 07:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bangalore Kannada copyedit tag

Made some clean up attempts on the Bangalore Kannada article. Don't know if it should be un-tagged, and I prefer to run it by the original tagger.

Besides, the legitimacy of the article seems to be in question, (See discussion comment)

I wouldn't doubt it if the phrase at the end of the article ("Maam, avanige bombaataag ikkde") translates to an objectionable phrase that would otherwise be omitted in any other form, other than as an example of a little-known "dialect". Shabbs

COTW Project

You voted for Aeronautics, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

That looks ambiguous, like a "no bread" sign. I wonder if you could get an image that looks unmistakably like a house and put a circle-slash over that? Thought it would be a good idea, Peg. --Shultz 22:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

does anyone know of another ripley poster I can use...

I have tried to find various world wide posters from the 1999 movie the talented mr ripley, I have only been able to find two, has anyone ever seen other posters from other countries?

Words of a Nation

Hi can you tell me where you found out this was directed by Roman Polański as I can't find it on imdb? Thanks Arniep 21:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi the article and the links were hoaxes. Arniep 01:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming issue

Other than this naming issue, we have worked well together. It seems that we are both strong personalities which are clashing. With our previous record of co-operation, I see no problem in the future after this naming issue is finally settled. We are both acting like adults, so as long as we keep it that way, we should be fine. If there are problems in the future, we will find a way to work it out in the same manner as we are doing right now. If the two other project participants would join in to break this deadlock, we may get this settled, but they seem reticent on this issue. Do you think that they are afraid of two very strong willed women? :) - Lady Aleena

March

Category alphabetisation

Please only remove diacritics from category alphabetisations in international categories. In categories specific to the article subject's own country, leave the diacritics alone. Thanks. JIP | Talk 07:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

userboxes

No problem, copy away! I made {{user LOTR}}, and it's so much fun to see people using it. You're a fellow INFP. Neat! There aren't many of us around. Thanks for your compliment about the page, too.

You may want to "subst:" your userboxes, in case they get deleted in the near future. (This may happen if/when a userbox policy is adopted.) Cheers. --F a ng Aili 20:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To subst a userbox, type "subst:" in front of the userbox code like so: {{subst:user LOTR}}, then save the page. If you go back again and look at the code, it will appear as the hardcode of the template, like this:
<div style="float: left; border:solid {{{1|#008000}}} 1px; margin: 1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: {{{2|#32cd32}}};" .

Etc...

If the template gets deleted, you will still have the hardcode on your userpage, and the box does not disappear. The downside of subst'ing is that you no longer appear on the "What links here" of {{user LOTR}}, and if someone makes an improvement to the template, you won't see it.

I haven't subst'ed my boxes yet because I'm waiting for the outcome of the userbox policy debates, but I put hardcode copies at a backup page just in case.

Hope this all makes sense. Feel free to ask any more questions. --F a ng Aili 20:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you undo the sort order in the Lists category

I had sorted the subject-related subcategories to the front so they could be found easier. I understand that it's not standard, but could you try discussing it with me first before just reverting my changes? --JeffW 22:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your split suggestion on The Trail of the Lonesome Pine

Hi. I noticed that you have suggested that The Trail of the Lonesome Pine be split, but I didn't see any related discussion items on the article's talk page. Would you mind elaborating on your suggesstion there? --Takeel 15:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Book-stub sorting

Hi, thanks for your work on the stub sorting. Just notice though you have missed removing the items worked on from the list. This had been asked for by the creator, it means we don't know which have been worked on a which hav'n't. thanks anyway. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 14:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

responded on talk page - also look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels#Hierarchy_Definition and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels/Novel_categorization for category and stub information and discussion. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 15:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Book->Novel

Hello I am the creator...I saw you have been doing alot of work to my list:-) I am going to regenerate it very soon (it should be up in 4 hours or so.)Eagle (talk) (desk) 19:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like me to generate other lists of anything you would like (Find <keyword or words> in <location>) just tell me and I will work some regex magic and get you a list that has a high probability of being correct. (The book->Novel list I believe has averaged about 98% right)Eagle (talk) (desk) 19:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As long as what you want is in the english wikipedia, I can do almost anything for you (this is my goal, to make things easier for others:-)).Eagle (talk) (desk) 19:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I really apreciate if you remove those that the program was correct with, and mark those (false positives)...The ones that the program was wrong on...with something like "not a ____stub" ect. Thanks very much for your effort...Mine has gone into making programs for other wikiprojects:-)If you wanted to knowEagle (talk) (desk) 19:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify

I am right now refreshing the list (be done in an hour or two)

Seeing that you are devoting your time to go through articles and find missing stubs, Let me know if you want me to generate a list for you. (It can be for anything)Eagle (talk) (desk) 20:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do respond yes or no

Nice idea

I saw where you put the book to novel stub link to the project page on the Book Category!!!!Nice thinking, will save others your pain:-)Eagle (talk) (desk) 21:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list is done, I would suggest you continue your work from it, as it is only minutes old.

here is the link...same place as before:-)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Book to novel autolist

Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow---you like my list!!!

Good work!!!---is it reasonably accurate??? just curious.Eagle (talk) (desk) 03:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

As long as it is usefull and accurate...once I did the programming (about 3 weeks ago) it is only click 3 buttons and set the regex statement and in a few moments I can get a list on anything...Than I just format it for wikipedia and presto!! you see the list. Again thank-you, it is rare that any one thanks me...Mostly they just complain:-), though that is probably my fault, as I normally don't wait untill every one chips in on one of my proposed ideas.(to me as soon as 2 or 3 say its a good idea, and the idea can do absolutly no harm to wikipedia than I just be bold...:-) sorry for my rant...Its just that I have been here for 3 months and have been thanked/ appreciated mabye 2-3 times.Eagle (talk) (desk) 05:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any way I really apreciate the fact I was able to be of service...Feel free to call on me if you want another list done, It really does not matter on what!!!Eagle (talk) (desk) 05:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels

Hi seeing your interest in books and novels, I was wondering if you might like to get envolved with our as yet small (revitalised) WikiProject. Being a small group currently there is plenty of scope for influencing things and making your contribution count. We are about establishing standards for Novel based articles and writing articles that meet our own and others high standards, and to improve Wikipedia's diet of articles on Fiction books, otherwise called Novels. Please be very welcome. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 12:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that was quick - thank you for joining the WikiProject. Have a look round take a look at the tools and templates (both article patterns and wikiTemplates). If you have any questions, do ask.

Please be very welcome. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 16:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Initial D (film)

Please stop stubsorting the article Initial D (film) as a Japanese movie article. It is not. It is a Chinese made movie and it says so directly in the article.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 01:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April

Sortkeys

Looks like we had an ad hoc mixture of " " and "*" sortkeys in the US-bio-stubs (just as in many other places), though as I understand it, such consensus as there is on the topic (and I use that loosely), is that " " should be used for the main article of a category (not that that applies to stub types), and "*" to sub-categories. Alai 01:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Not a problem really, just trying to increase the groupthink on which scheme to use... I've heard of the SFBA "Dumbarton" -- in my mispent youth as a Car Wars player, I noticed it appearing in the name of an "autoduel arena". (Unless that was another US Dumbarton, not certain about that part.) Alai 03:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Barbara Meetup

Hello. Since you're listed in the Wikipedians from UCSB category, I thought you might be interested in the Santa Barbara Wikipedia Meetup on Saturday 8 April. Please see that page for details. I hope to meet you there! Angela . 10:20, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The Community Portal was recently reverted to a version that appeared months ago. Therefore, I've called for a vote to restore to the Community Portal the version that had developed there up until that reversion. There are three drafts competing for the privilege, each representing entirely different approaches, including the current revert version. To show your support for which design should be displayed as the Community Portal, VOTE HERE. Sincerely, --Go for it! 18:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok ok ok... I'm comming back

Give me ideas on what other lists that you would like me to generate... The last list that I made saw 102 edits done to that page. In addition the page saw 6 "unique" editors... though most of the work was done by 2-3 people. It seems like these lists are allowing "drudge" work to be done in a simpler and easier manner. By "drudge" work, I mean, non-article creating work. I mean really, it takes special people to sort out stubs... Thanks for you work on them, Pegship.

Of course if you have not figured out I am reffering to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Book to novel autolist

And I am asking for more ideas on what to base other lists on.... I'm comming back.

P.S. I am also leaving a simmilar message on Kevinalewis's talk page. Between the two of you, I expect to see some good ideas... (just a pun, If you don't have any, It won't make me upset or anything)

Eagle (talk) (desk) 20:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peaks of ?

Hi, I used to live in Queenie (yep queenstown) a mere 26 years ago, and yes, there is a whole alternative view on what poor old geoffrey wrote (he told me at a symposium in 1985 he thought it was too long - the book that is, and yet he was still getting new editions and reprints just in the last couple of years or so) - as I am still on a v long wiki break, I have no idea how I will track down some good refs that challenge geoffrey's assumptions - they might be hard to find. I remember being troubled by the Peaks and then lower case, and I didnt even link it to my other west coast arts! oh well - should be on board properly by may the way things are going! Best Wishes.SatuSuro 11:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Film Institute......

...has nothing to do with making films..... It's a FILM INSTITUTE organization. Vivaverdi 02:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Asterisks in sortkeys

I'm curious why you're adding asterisks to sort keys for categories for something like Category:James Bond films. None of those categories you marked with an asterisk requires it nor do categories in there even need to be sorted (James Bond falls under "J" - sort keys are only for if we wanted it to fall under "B" for Bond - ie Bond, James - which we don't). Adding an asterisk only defeats the purpose of the sort key in the first place because instead of falling under "J", they'll fall under a new title "*". Maybe I'm missing your intent here, but I looked through other contribs you made and you did the same thing to other categories. These need to fixed. K1Bond007 04:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. So you're just doing this to subcategories. I get that now. Where's the discussion that you should do this? This is a huge mistake (IMHO) because if the code were to be updated/changed in the future to perhaps fix this problem where all the subcategories weren't listed on the first page, then you've got them all under this "*". IMHO the "| " and "|*" should only be used for those of very high importance. K1Bond007 04:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Most specific discussion of this I've come across is at Wikipedia_talk:Categorization#Top-Sorting. (The actual project page just mentions the "howto" of doing this, without explicitly advocating it.) That would seem to be the best place for centralised discussion, at any rate. Personally, I'm trying to do this systematically for stub categories, partly as it's in their nature to get relatively large. For permanent cats, it's perhaps an issue only if they already are multiple listing-pages long. Alai 15:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New list for WP:NOVEL

The link is below... just read the important info section... The list is a list of articles that need the {{Infobox Book}} template added. (If you know how, feel free to make room on the project pages for it, else kevinlewis will do it). Thanks for your effort and your support when I was down..:-)Eagle (talk) (desk) 01:37, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Eagle 101/Novel Project/List01

Snow White

Ahh... You're right: they don't deserve entire pages! I suppose I'll make a characters from the 1937 Snow White movie soon, then. Thanks, Her Pegship! --Brazucs (_TALK | ^CONTRIBS) 20:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the help on The Three Musketeers (1933 serial). I knew I was making some mistakes, but I wasn't sure exactly where. proteus71 15:36, 11 Apr 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on the list

Thank you for your work on the list... Now we need to get others into the fray!!!

P.S. if WP:FILM want's a similar list, just let me know.

Eagle (talk) (desk) 18:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list needs to be advertised on WP:NOVEL

As the title says, if no one knows about it, nothing will get done. --- I would do this... but I don't know how or where to put this infomation... I these lists are my first "real" contributions to any specific wikiproject. Meaning I have no clue on what to do on the actual pages.

kevenlewis is not around, perhaps you can start to advertise the list, or just tell me what to do. Anything you do is greatly appreciated by me, As it is the list is not being used.
- I would suggest replacing the Infobox Needed with my list as I will be updating it faster than any human can (novel subcats will soon also be searched)... but that may not be appropriate, What do I know about what is appropriate :-). Eagle (talk) (desk) 22:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong link....

I would suggest replacing the Infobox Needed with my list as I will be updating it faster than any human can (novel subcats will soon also be searched)... but that may not be appropriate, What do I know about what is appropriate :-). Eagle (talk) (desk) 22:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My page is NOT the Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/InfoboxNeeded.... The correct link is Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/NovelsWithoutInfobox (The Infobox needed is a page that human editors add articles to... NovelsWithoutInfobox is the page that I generate.Eagle (talk) (desk) 02:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC) (I will fix your link on Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/GeneralForum)--- Ask me if you have questions.[reply]

Sure what???

tell me what it is, and I will deciede... :-), some of the other tasks for Gnome bot are being taken by other bots, ect. Eagle (talk) (desk) 03:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Easy

That's nothing!!!!, as long as you are not asking me to edit any pages, I will do that. Do you have a time table??. I can start it right now if you wish. :-). Just tell me what I need to find in the articles. i.e

the start of the film template. {infobox film|
the start of the novel template. {infobox novel| (double check my spelling, and make sure those are right.)

Where do you want me to start???

Eagle (talk) (desk) 03:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weird terms

...Sorry, but I am not understanding the logic to your terms. in addition, which category am I searching??

If I search Cat:Film (or any subcat) the most logical terms to me are "based on" and ("book" or "novel") tell me what you think, Eagle (talk) (desk) 03:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sounds ok but,

Sorry, but hear me out... If you run a search on only "based on", I will pick up things like "based on the prequal", "based on XXX idea". If you are looking for articles about novels and movies I highly suggest that "novel" is included at a minimum. better is "novel" and "book". Do I make sense... kick me if I'm not!!!Eagle (talk) (desk) 04:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are going to hate me, but

2 things. I did not realize that cat:Films has only 3 articles. When I do this... I will need a listing of all of the top categories and all of the sub cats.

second... if you search only "book" you will miss out on "novel"... are you ok with me useing both terms. (one or the other) whichever one appears in the article. Eagle (talk) (desk) 04:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also... with an eye out for the future

What will you do with articles on these lists. (please tell me, that way future searches can exempt articles that have already been fixed).

So... what exactly will you or members of WP:FILM be adding

are seperate pages going to be made for the novels? (me being nosy)

What text will you insert into the article?(programmatic reasons, ask me if you care)

Sorry, but before I am going to run anything, I like to know as much info beforehand as possible... I will run starting tommarow.

ThanksEagle (talk) (desk) 05:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok more questions

I am generating lists of categories, but this means that films can be in more than one category... As a result I want to make sure that you and I are on the same page with what you will be putting in the text of the film article. (i.e. some sort of notice of the book article's existance.)

I strongly suggest that you get other members of both WP:FILM WP:BOOKS WP:NOVEL as this is a Very large job. Don't forget... just becuase I make this list does not mean that new articles fitting this criteria will not be made. (thus the need for new, updated lists... this is the reason that I want to know exactly what you will put in the articles.(Film only).

so basically two things.

1) What "text" are you putting in the Film article after you deal with it... you will need to make some reference to the existance of the book article.
2) Get other's involved... trust me, based on an initial scan, this is not a easy task... I HIGHLY suggest that you bring members from WP:FILM WP:BOOKS WP:NOVEL. Please tell me if you are willing to do this.

(take my word for it, just as you took my word on the accuracy of Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Book to novel autolist

Thank you... Eagle (talk) (desk) 19:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. you like to come up with hard tasks!!! (not for me, but for you... nice inituative!!)

please answear the bolded parts... That is my only other question... Than I'll let you go at it slave:-) Eagle (talk) (desk) 23:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. when I put the list up, I will also call 911... you are crazy!!!!... in a good way!!! (mindless edits is what drove me to program bots for wikipedia:-))

Reword this, sorry

OK, I need to reword this... are you going to put something consistant, that I can find and thus avoid that article on future searches. (That way, a year from now, if I generate for you the same lists, from the same categories, I will be able to find this unique phrase and avoid giving you the same article twice.) is this making sense??? I'm sorry if I am not being clear.Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't think of one, I would suggest a comment like this.

Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:20, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you got, it

When I post the list up for you, please put what ever you are going to put in the article at the top. I would make an instruction section... just incase someone else happens on this list. (other people who like tedious work...).

I am going to put this list in my space... as I will be adding to it as you remove stuff from it.
- I will use the same page all of the time... so as you are done with pages, just remove them (the links) from the list. Basically what I will do is start with one category, than as you get near to done with that category, I will post up a new category... (just tell me what your next catgory that you want to work on is...)

On the list, when it is up. please put.

1)Infomaton about what is going on... telling others that then (may/may not)your choice.
- Same rules as before, when a article is done, remove it... in this case if the code is wrong, just tell me on my talk page, don't mark it on the list.
2)Have some where on that page what category you want to work on next is... something like, I am working on "Cat:X" the next category I want to work on is "Cat:Y".
- As you get near the end of your current category, I will post a list for the next category. (tell me if I am not making sense).
3)Pick a comment to put in the article... (one that will not change a year fom now... And put it on the page as well.

Eagle (talk) (desk) 17:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. pick your first category... I will run the program on it today... (depending on when you respond),

The List will be on User:Eagle 101/films that are also novels list

Generating list

I am generating the list now... depending on how long it is, and how long I stay up it will be up tonight or tommarow.

Don't forget to put on the page (under instructions, for you and others to include  Put what ever you want in the comments, but make sure that the comment is clear as to it's purpose... you will thank me for this later... as this will reduce false hits in the future

--Eagle (talk) (desk) 05:32, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was not near an online computer today. I will put the list up shortly.

per title... sorry about that.Eagle (talk) (desk) 05:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. the list is in sets of 10. The headers, instead of numbers now letters. If one is wrong, it is because the article immediatly below the header was not sorted correctly (by wikipedia's categoryies).... I don't put the headers on any more... I made myself a regex statement for that:-).... unlike you, I like to avoid repetitive work... that's what programming is for:-)

Eagle (talk) (desk) 05:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List is up

I added this line to the instructions on the list. (just want you to be advised)

If an item on this list has not, and should not be split, please leave a message on Eagle's talk page, He want's to be able to fix the code, and reduce false hits of this kind. (just leave what article was the problem, he will figure the rest out).

I made a few changes here and there, have a look and see.

The list it's self is 163 articls long. It is seperated into 17 sections with 10 articles in each section. (the last has 3 articles)

any questions you know who to ask... now get working slave!!!!... ... ...I mean glutton for punishment :-)... are you sure that you don't wan't me to try and automate any more of the proccess. (my program could add stub next the the item in the list... so that you would know that the article has less than 225 words and should be a stub. I could come up with other indicators like this if you wish...

Infomation on Regular expression

Oh... here is the regulare expression that I used... If you want me to explain it, I will... I will explain briefly here:-)

  \b(based\son).*?\b(novel(s)?|book(s)?)|\b(novel(s)?|book(s)?).*\s\w*\s*\bby

This regex statement looks for "based on" followed by any number of words or spaces, but to match it must also have either "novel" or "novels" or "book" or "books".
If the first part is not found, then the statement looks for any occurance of the words "book" "books" "novel" "novels", followed by any number of words or spaces, but to match it must also have the word "by".
- example:"the script was made from the book, XX, written by YY"

--Eagle (talk) (desk) 05:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my user sub page:-)

Wow!!! I made that about a month ago when I realized that there was a problem... That is why I responded so readily to your request for me to make that list for you:-), plus I somehow manage to get along with you:-)... Nice working with you!!! If you need me for anything, just ask:-).

The page I am talking about is User:Eagle 101/Messed up articles Cheers!! (don't use it, work on the big one, I am sure that the articles on my sub page are on the big list, or will soon be.Eagle (talk) (desk) 17:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Comment on the post above, if you get a chance, thanks:-)Eagle (talk) (desk)

Note Pegship... can you do a test for me??, click on the edit tab for this post... (in the upper right hand corner, looks like this [edit]. Does the page come up blank??? Because it does with me... and I am wondering if it is me, or this page. Thanks.

P.S.S--- Have I been "civil" enough... I have never seen that before, makes me laugh:-)Eagle (talk) (desk) 17:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explaining Regex to you.

The regex statement that I used to find the articles is explained in fairly good detial here. Go have a look!!!(you will be suprised where it is:-)... Sorry about too many messages at one time, my fault:-).

The first bug causes me some concern... as I can't figure out why the program caught that, (It's right and I'm wrong... I just can't figure out how I am wrong yet).

The second "bug" was my fault, I did not limit the regex enough. keep them comming... both of them will(are) be VERY helpful!!!

Eagle (talk) (desk) 23:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Think about the size of your talk page

Might be time to archive... your page is over 39KB long. :-)Eagle (talk) (desk) 23:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Philip K. Dick

I would have no problem if such a category existed, but there is the small problem that the category would, at the most, have 9 items in it (2 films not yet on Wiki, and the two tv series wouldn't fit a "Films based on" category). Not sure, but I believe there is some guideline or requirement that requires categories to try to have at least 20 items in a category (I could have read something wrong somewhere). I hadn't actually seen that List of war films yet, as I hadn't gotten around to putting a chart together yet. Thanks for the link. MikeBriggs 21:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]