User talk:Skomorokh/ב

As a mentor.

I think it was ment, to be. What do you think?

Certainement. Skomorokh 13:50, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring

Hello, I am a graduate student at Indiana University, and am taking a class on Urban Economic Development where we are getting training in editing and posting on Wikipedia. Part of our "initiation" is to choose a mentor, and your bio seemed similar to not only my interests, but the focus of the class as well. I hope you will be my mentor, and can offer me some good advice seeing how I'm new to all of this.

Cheers,

Meister84 (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hola, Meister, I would be very happy to act as your mentor. Let me know what you're curious about learning or if you run into trouble. I'll keep an eye on your talkpage and contributions and jump in if I think I can be of help. Best, Skomorokh 13:50, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skomorokh, I copied over your reply to Meister84's talk page. Hope you don't mind. In future, can you please reply on the students' talk pages? They don't know about watchlisting and might think you did not reply. Thanks! Bejinhan talks 13:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that was thoughtful. Skomorokh 11:48, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's your Online Ambassador experience going so far?

Hi Skomorokh,

We're starting to get into the busy part of the semester for Online Ambassadors, and we want to check in and see how you're doing, what your opinions about where we are now, and any feedback you may have.

Please answer these questions either on my talk page or send them to me by email.

1. How many mentees are you currently working with?

2. Have you reached out to students who don't have mentors yet? If not, would you be willing to?

3. What do you think of the content of messages on the Google Group?

4. What do you think of the volume of messages on the Google Group?

5. Do you participate on the Google Group much? If not, what would make you participate more?

6. Are there any problems you've experienced so far?

7. Is there anything else Sage or the rest of the Public Policy Initiative team could do to make your experience as an Online Ambassador better?

8. Are you okay sharing your username with your answers to our Public Policy Initiative team, or would you prefer to remain anonymous?

Thanks for your feedback! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 19:24, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FFF article

I did accidentally tag bomb that article, still not used to the new tagger and several tags were redundant. That was unintentional. You beat me to fixing that and so I left it alone after I saw you were trying to clean it up.

I was serious about what appeared to be intentionally misleading labels on the lower quality external inks to pass them off as references.

I'll leave it alone since you appear to trying to fix some of the issue. Cheers, Veriss (talk) 21:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, no harm done, and thank you for your considerate message. I appreciate the sincerity of what you were concerned with, and definitely share your apprehension about topics of dubious notability having dodgy sources passed off as references. Only when links are clearly labelled "External links", the issue becomes less one of reliability and more "is this useful/interesting for the reader?". For short articles like FFF, these sorts of links go a long way to make up for our poor coverage even though they should never be used to source content. The thing about tagging is that it is rarely useful unless the issues are beyond one's own ability to fix practically, so I didn't think it constructive here when verifying sources and finding categories took just a couple of minutes. Best regards, Skomorokh 11:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2010/Coordination

Hi there. I am interested in volunteering at the Arbitration elections, mostly out of a desire to help Wikipedia, but also out of an intellectual curiosity spurred on my my academic training in political science. I have three questions.

Am I elegible to join (I'm not an admin, but I am an editor in good standing)
Is it too late to join (The elections are only what, a month away)
If I can join, what still needs to be done.

Please use a talkback to inform me if you respond.

Thanks, Sven Manguard _Talk 22:39, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion Moved

Not that I don't like Fetchcomms, but coordinating outselves on his talk page might not be the best idea. I looted the relivent material from his page and set up a workspace for us at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2010/Coordination. I do believe we should keep our future communications there, or elsewhere in "Wikipedia:" space, for transparency, posterity, and efficiency reasons. Sven Manguard _Talk 01:19, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Public Policy Wikiproject

I'm in the Legal History group in the UC Berkeley Politics of Piracy class, working on the Public Policy Wikiproject. Your profile said you specialized in history and politics, so I thought you could be a very good resource as I figure out how this works. I'll appreciate however you can help.

The group is working on articles relating to the history of different kinds of intellectual property piracy. We split up into sub-groups, so a partner and I are working specifically on the history of intellectual property and copyright infringement before the digital age, or a sort of printing press piracy. He found a Wikipedia article which mentioned briefly that sort of thing, and we were talking about breaking that section out to its own page. I'd show you the link, but I'm not sure which article it was in, I'll have to double check with him tomorrow. We've also found a book, titled Piracy that talks about piracy before digital computers, and I'm looking around for a second source, currently.

That's about where we're at now. Android the Andrew (talk) 07:35, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Andrew, great to hear from you and I would be happy to help out. It's a fascinating topic area to be sure, and I particularly like the angle you are taking with it. Two 20th century topics that immediately sprung to mind about pre-Internet piracy were mix tape culture (see, for instance Home Taping Is Killing Music) and zines, which liberally appropriated copyrighted text and images. Although technically, this stuff stretches all the way back to Gutenberg at least, so you should have no trouble finding topics!

As regards finding a topic and splitting it out to its own page, this is likely a good option, as Wikipedia's content in this area is underdeveloped. What you will need at minimum is at least two mutli-paragraph reliable sources (i.e. from scholarly books, academic journals, magazine articles, broadsheet newspapers) that discuss the topic in detail.

Let me know what I can help with; you can leave a comment here any time and I'll get back to you asap (and feel free to tell your colleague likewise). I'll also keep an eye on your talkpage and contributions in case you run into trouble with the natives. Ciao, Skomorokh 11:11, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I haven't gotten back to you in a little bit. My group partner Farzad and I have rethought the topic a little. We're still doing a history of copyright piracy with an emphasis in the pre-digital era, but we decided to focus a little more on music--so everything from copying sheet music to radio-to-cassette recordings. We've got a couple books from the university library that we've been looking through, which should be good sources. There doesn't seem to be a History of Music Piracy article, unless Farzad starts it by the time you read this message, so our plan is to start that page. I've heard a lot about new pages or new sections in articles are often summarily deleted by very picky Wikipedians, and with no or little explanation as to why. So I want to check on the protocol about starting a new page before I get into it, so that we don't waste any time reposting the same article. Android the Andrew (talk) 10:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Andrew, no worries about the timing; you guys set the pace. The topic sounds very promising; and it looks like you're right about the lack of an existing article (the closest I could find were copyright infringement and music law). About writing new articles, you are right to be wary about overzealous deleters, so it's a good idea to start the article in a subpage of your userspace (i.e. at User:Android the Andrew/History of music piracy), then having someone experienced look it over quickly. The basic rule of thumb is that if the article clearly cites two or three reliable sources (basically the kind that would belong in an academic paper), and explains the topic briefly, it should be safe. More advice at these pages:

Wikipedia:Your first article

WP:42

Let me know if there's anything you need a hand with. Cheers, Skomorokh 18:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I'll be starting it in my Talk page, then, today and tomorrow. I'll compare notes with Farzad, and get back to you when I need the article draft reviewed. Thanks, Android the Andrew (talk) 22:45, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Best not to put it on an existing page, as it will be difficult to move properly from there. Otherwise, great, talk to you soon. Skomorokh 22:55, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of sources like JSTOR? It's legitimately scholarly, of course, but access is heavily restricted, which would make it hard for anyone who wants to look at the source material. Seems to me that if they can't check up on the source, it sort of defeats the purpose of the citation. I wonder sometimes about the usefulness JSTOR's accessibility for even scholarly papers, though... Android the Andrew (talk) 07:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, JSTOR is more of a search engine for sources (i.e. individual articles in journals), but yes, Wikipedia would generally rank material sourced through JSTOR very highly. While you are right in that it's obviously more desirable to use accessible sources, academia is by and large still sticking with a ludicrous closed model from the paper age, and we simply can't afford to exclude academia. When you cite an difficult-to-access source, it's generally taken on faith that the source supports what you say it does. When it comes to a formal review of articles, we have ways of accessing almost any source given our huge and diverse volunteer base. So by all means go ahead. Skomorokh 19:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 2010

This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Special Cases ^{LOOK, A TALK PAGE!!!!} 11:26, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Special Cases, when you template a regular editor, particularly when you level a serious allegation against them as you've done here, diffs are pretty much essential. It's well-nigh impossible for anyone to investigate your claim without diffs - the only point-of-intersection I can see between you and Skomorokh is at Intelligent dance music, and I assume you're not suggesting that this is a personal attack? TFOWR 11:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TFOWR. It might have helped Special Cases develop a better understanding about how all this works if I had had someone else leave a gentler message, but hard to anticipate these sorts of things in advance. Skomorokh 11:41, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you were too harsh. He seems to understand how it works, and he's able & willing to research and use all the proper templates and procedures for advancing his agenda—he just deliberately avoids fulfilling any requirement in those procedures wherein he would have to defend his position or acknowledge that it has zero support. For example, he used the AfD and prod templates on the IDM article, but never articulated an argument for why the deletion/merge should occur. He only ever gave an argument (sort of) at Talk:Intelligent dance music#Merge, and his only response to the rejection of his proposal was to proceed without further discussion. I went to the trouble of giving him some constructive advice for how to handle the situation both there and on his user talk page, but he ignored it. That he continues to post on both of our talk pages from anonymous IPs suggests he's not above holding a grudge against those who call him out on it. I hope he eventually figures out that he can catch more flies with honey. —mjb (talk) 04:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special Cases was been indef blocked. The above warning appears to have been some sort of hoax, troll, or disruption. Jehochman ^Talk 12:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special Invite

You have been invited to comment in a special Request for Constructive Criticism page. I am looking for areas in which I can improve. I have identified you as both an experienced and trusted Wikipedian, and as someone that has had sufficient contact with me to able to recognize areas in which I can improve.

Please feel free to visit and post any comments or criticism you have. At a certain point, I cannot improve if no one tells me what I need to work on. Thanks in advance, Sven Manguard _Talk 00:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

formatting at ER

Hi, the text arrangement with the cquotes etc looks a bit untidy to me. Not sure how/whether to fix it. Sleep now. Tony (talk) 15:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, I'll muck around and see if something better can be found. Skomorokh 15:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing Article

Hi Skomorokh,

I'm a member of Peter Linquiti's Policy Analysis Course at GWU. For my class assignment, we have to critique an article that has been rated and provided an letter ranking (i.e. B or C). Would it be possible to rate this article: Land Titling?

Thanks!

Kcsl

Yo Kcsl, I would be happy to rate the land titling article. Unfortunately, although it is reasonably clear and comparatively well-referenced, I have assessed the article as start-class as it is simply too short to justify a C ranking. If you would like me to rate another article I would be happy to help. Skomorokh 20:39, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skomorokh

Thanks for the quick response! Would it be possible to rate another (similar) article instead? I'm interested in working with Land Reform--particularly the sections on “Land ownership and tenure” and “Arguments for and Against." Thanks!Kcsl (talk) 22:10, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Kcsl, land reform seems like an appropriately-rated C-class article, so it should suit your purposes well. Best, Skomorokh 17:45, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good one

LOL. Bishonen | talk 00:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I know; I wish I had the energy to actually get stuck in and fix the article but sentences like that are so dispiriting... Skomorokh 01:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Busy as a bee

I haven't been able to keep up, won't be able to until the weekend, but saw this and felt relieved. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I don't think the coordinators had considered those potential pitfalls until you mentioned them. If you get the chance to elaborate, the discussion is here. Mahalo, Skomorokh 14:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

can't til later, but appreciated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:56, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings and Salutations - and Request for Grading

Good morning Skomorokh. I am a student at George Washington University, and am taking a course in Public Policy Analysis. As part of my final project, I am going to be working on a grade 'b' or 'c' page... I was looking at several topics of interest to me, and found the page Development-Induced Displacement to lack proper citations as well as a well-rounded discussion of the causes, types, and effects of development-induced displacement including the international response. Would you be able to do a review of the page and consider whether it is 'b' or 'c' worthy? Many thanks Disasterlady123 (talk) 16:58, 13 November 2010 (UTC)DisasterLady123[reply]

Greetings, Disasterlady. Welcome to Wikipedia, I am most happy to help you. Looking at the development-induced displacement article, I would say its near-total lack of references, short length, and personal/agenda-driven tone mean that it does not meet C-standard. You may be better off looking for another page. Let me know if I can help you with anything else! Regards, Skomorokh 17:50, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skomorokh - Thanks for getting back so quickly on that article. Much appreciated and sorry it won't work...offhand, do you know of any articles relating to disaster response, displacement, disaster risk reduction, or humanitarian responses that would probably rate a B or C? The one on Human rights and Hurricane Katrina seemed promising, but is probably too short. Sorry for bothering you so much, I've just been trying to find articles on those subjects but have no idea what they might be rated. I really appreciate your help! Disasterlady123 (talk) 02:01, 15 November 2010 (UTC)DisasterLady123[reply]

No problem, feel free to come by and ask whatever you want. Article ratings are visible to all readers, you simply have to go to the talkpage (by clicking on the "discussion" tab at the top of the page), i.e. Talk:Human rights and Hurricane Katrina, which states "This article has been rated as Start-Class". It should not be too difficult to find a B- or C-class article, but I'm not familiar with the topic area so I cannot tell you off hand. You could look in the categories themselves, i.e. Category:B-Class United States Public Policy articles or Category:C-Class United States Public Policy articles (although there are only a small number of articles categorised there out of all the ones you can choose). Hope this helps, Skomorokh 16:35, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:CT Cooper/ACE2010

A quick thank you for your help on this page. I never thought to check for the architectural changes which take place almost every year. CT Cooper · talk 17:02, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, trying to eliminate any confusion arising from all my impatient tinkering. Skomorokh 17:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]