Hey TH - I made the name change you proposed at WP:CLS, but there are still some additional changes to the text (esp. the Series box section) that could be made to make the page broader. Any of your help doing so (and changes to what I have done so far) would of course be welcome. Thanks! UnitedStatesian (talk) 06:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's one extensive infobox! The examples show the versatility well. The graphical layout is clean and crisp - I like it. The chart under "Template fields" that explains each variable is awesome - it makes the whole thing fairly easy to understand. The only problem I found was that the bulleted instructions under "Usage" are unintelligible - I have no idea what they are trying to say. The Transhumanist08:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. I will relook at the bulleted instructions . . . I still have a few things to do anyway. I have not looked at its discussion page yet.
Thanks for the notes on my talk page. I have added some replies there.
And I think you archived our last discussion before I could get back to you. Are you happy to continue?
Sorry but my Internet time is very limited for the next three weeks and when I do get it I can only dial in at about 32kbs! So my responsiveness is going to be a bit irratic.
Thank you for the heads up. The lead needs touch up "A suicidal person is a person that is contemplating suicide or is seeking means to do so." Seeking a means to contemplate suicide? It doesn't read quite right. (Never mind, I fixed it).
Also, the article needs a section on what to do if you are a suicidal person or if you happen to encounter one. The most significant thing about a suicidal person is how to deal with them (or how to deal with yourself if you are one). Suicidal people are in danger (of hurting or killing themselves). In the U.S., a suicidal person is considered to be ill, and suicidal behavior (including suicidal thought) is considered a medical emergency (and warrants a call to 9-1-1, possibly restraining the individual until professional help arrives, etc.). See suicide intervention.
Is a person liable if he just stands there and lets a person commit suicide without trying to intervene? Are you obligated to report someone who has stated they wish or intend to commit suicide? Are there legal responsibilities involved with encountering a suicidal person? If so, those need to be included in the article.
Thanks for the suggestions. I think I can agree to cover the "typical response" to a suicidal person but I don't think adding information on "what to do if you are a suicidal person or encounter one" is appropriate. I feel that would inject some POV into the article, that being suicide is bad. I could add different countries' perception on suicidal people (you mentioned that the United States views them as ill and being suicidal is considered a medical emergency). So:
Typical, global individual response to suicidal people (if the response is in fact significantly different in other parts of the world.)
Global perspective on suicidal people.
Global, legal responses to suicidal people (and those that live with them)
By "what to do" I was referring to what the medical profession advises in such situations (presented as such), what emergency services advises (that is, according to them, under what circumstances should 911 be called?), and the positions of the WHO, most governments (assuming they're similar), etc. And if there are typical or major laws concerning suicidal people, those should be reported in the article as well. Do suicidal people have the same rights as everyone else, or are those affected by their condition? And so on.
I've started a "Views on suicidal people" section with the subsection "Legal." Eventually the "Legal" part will contain more information (currently it mostly consists of historical legal views) and I also wish to make a "Religious" subsection. Do you think that this will duplicate information elsewhere on Wikipedia? For example, there is a Religious_views_of_suicide page already, but I think it is very relevant to my article. Maybe a summary and a "Main article:" preface? Hazillow (talk) 16:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm starting to become convinced that the suicidal person page isn't really needed. Nearly everything that could reasonably be included here is covered elsewhere on Wikipedia, and in much more depth. Hazillow (talk) 18:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Participate at RfA for a couple months, and you'll know who they turn down and why.
Go through WP:ER, and they'll let you know if you are ready or not (but only if enough people participate).
Ask an experienced admin if you are ready.
Get a good admin coach, and he or she will let you know.
Read ALL the guidelines and policies, and rack up 20,000 edits spread across a wide selection of subjects and departments. Put in 5,000 developing articles, 3,000 edits vandal hunting (including WP:AIV), 2,000 at WP:XfD, and 500 or so in at WP:AN and its subpages, and you will know. Clerking and mediation work, and maintenance work in the departments listed at Wikipedia:Community Portal or Wikipedia:Maintenance is also good experience. Don't get into any conflicts, and maintain your composure at all times. If you are not sure that you are ready, then you aren't. That knowledge will come to you in due course.
Or ask me. :) (You aren't ready yet. Give it another six months to a year at least).
Not including user space edits. ;) I recommend you submit a new request for editor review. Make it provocative, advertise it on your user page and talk page, and invite everyone you know or respect (on their talk pages) to participate and review you there. And be sure to invite the opposers on your previous RfA. You'll get plenty of feedback. The Transhumanist18:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Er, that previous RfA was kinda a messup. That was before I had a clue what I was doing ;) Also, one of those people (whose name I will not say) will probobly oppose no matter how well I do. And I am pretty sure I know what those departments do, and how they opperate, but I know there is always more to learn :) And ok, I'll take your advice for the editor review. JuliancoltonThe storm still blows...19:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget the invitations, especially of those guys who voted in your RfA. You may even want to ask "the unnamed one" to be your admin coach (if he's an admin). As for the testing, being "pretty sure" isn't testing. I recommend that you go down the pages I mentioned above item by item, describing to yourself in detail what each one is for and the procedures involved, moving on to the next one after you've checked your answer. The Transhumanist21:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I read through those things, and they are more or less what I remeber them being, so I have a fair idea of what they are. Also, one of those people who voted on my last "RfA" is an admin, so I'll ask him if he wantscoach me. I doubt he will though. (another person who thinks little of me, just because I was once a newbie, and that's all most people remember of me :() Julian(Leap Day 2008)15:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Me and Ballonman have sort of taken the initiative and overhauling the admin coaching program, in light of your reduced activity and Fang Alli's longterm wikibreak/retirement. But we're struggling to figure out how to handle who should be accepted as a coachee. We think there should be osm minimum edit count to be a coachee, since we have limited spots and getting people closer to rfa (3 months out) will be a more efficient use of resources. But some applicants think this is a bad idea. In any event, I don't want to drag you back if you don't want to, but given your institutional memory, any input at Wikipedia_talk:Admin_coaching/Requests_for_Coaching#Mission_of_this_proceess would be appreciated. MBisanztalk23:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to set requirements. It's a politically charged issue, is anti-wiki, and you don't want to touch it. Some believe that it's never too soon to begin admin coaching (which should start with teaching wiki-philosophy, fundamentals, etc.). There was major opposition when I tried to implement an edit count requirement, and such conflicts just waste time. It is prudent to leave the choosing of students totally up to the individual coaches. Coaches look over requests and apply their own criteria on who is ready for their coaching. As long as the usual links (talk, contribs, count, etc.) are provided for coaches to evaluate each requester, that's all the screening support the department should provide.
After coaching a bunch of people, I've come to the conclusion that the only reason coaches are needed at all is because of a lack of documentation on how to prepare for RfA/adminship. It would be of far greater utility than coaching to write a guide on how to prepare for adminship and RfA. A very good guide could be put together by experienced coaches or by someone who has studied the coaching pages of previous students. To avoid it being torched by the "admin cabal", it should focus on how to assist admins through admin-like activities. On a related note, tutorials on Wikipedia's operations are starting to accumulate, and links to these resources may also be helpful to admin hopefuls. See Template:VC lessons and User:Enochlau/Signpost tutorial series. Prominent links to Wikipedia's other learning assistance departments (WP:HD, WP:ADOPT, etc.
Thanks, that is some good input that I should be able to adapt. Some coaches seem (by inactivity) to want to be assigned coachees, so I've been trying that. Others prefer finding their own. So I think a balance can be reached there. Edits counts are a tough area, I'm going to have to mull this over in my brain for the next several days. But a list of things to do will be finished in about 20 mins at User:MBisanz/Coaching/OtherOptions. MBisanztalk00:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Err, every time I create an article, I usually add it to the list. Is there a mistake on the list (it's been known to happen, as articles have been deleted and then recreated by somebody else)? --Sharkface21705:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I was asking because I'm looking for the fastest way for a user to create a list of the pages he or she started. I thought you might have used a special trick or technique. So far, I've learned of this tool. It only lists articles created in the main namespace, and you have to linkify the results yourself, but it's still a shortcut. If you come across any better ways, let me know. I've added this one to the User Page Design Center, so everyone can benefit from it. The Transhumanist07:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, gotcha. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that I've missed at least one article I've created, since I started the list a while after first came to Wikipedia. Honestly, the list is less for vanity and more for ensuring that I make future edits to articles I have created while also ensuring that they are not deleted (as many of them have). But yeah, I'll tell you if I find a good tool. --Sharkface21720:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note, I've made a minor update to your contributions. To reiterate my edit summary, you put in a tonne of effort there, and you deserve to be credited for it :) Feel free to revert, nonetheless. Regards, AGK (contact) 16:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Skimming through Wikipedia:User Page Design Center/User page examples for inspiration revealed several deleted revisions. I removed two which are completely deleted, but others have been restored so I left them in as I don't know how close their respective current state is to the deleted revision.
Also, since you are generally interested in user page design, can you tell me if you have seen another userpage formatted like mine? Dorftrottel (complain) 21:24, February 29, 2008
I've added his page. Regarding my own page, I'm reluctant to add it myself for obvious reasons, but since I don't know another userpage formatted for pseudo tabs/frames, it's remarkable for that (unless there's someone who did it before me). Would you agree to adding it? Dorftrottel (canvass) 08:08, March 3, 2008
Very cool design. I'll be happy to add it. By the way, you don't need anyone's permission to work on the WP:UPDC. Feel free to improve it in any way you see fit. It needs someone to adopt it and look after it with tender loving care. The Transhumanist08:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks, I've boldly added it. Glad you like it btw. I hesitated to edit it because the UPDC is your brainchild, and I think it's a matter of simple politeness to approach the principal author, at least on non-mainspace pages. Dorftrottel (talk) 10:22, March 3, 2008
Of the designs you reported above, only 2 were intact. I've updated those links and have removed the rest. Users occasionally move their userpage, copy the latest version over the redirect, and then have the moved page deleted. Sometimes a user will request to vanish, having his entire account renamed/moved - when that happens, no redirect is left to the moved page, and the user page is then either blanked or deleted. We've lost many great page designs to these practices. One solution would be to copy page designs (and their subpages) to sandboxes and there replace all personal information with mock info, and then cut and paste the genericized designs to subpages of the UPDC examples section. This would result in permanent user page examples not subject to the whimsical deletion by individuals. Time-consuming, yes, but worth it. All new pages added should probably be subjected to this process. I was planning to add your page in precisely this way. But with your permission, we could take a snapshot of it just the way it is and place a copy of it in the UPDC instead. Would that be okay with you? The Transhumanist10:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) I've added mine here already, but I think your idea of placing snapshots into a UPDC subpage is a far better idea indeed. I think we might as well do it with the pages already included there. Yes, any username mentions and personal info should be replaced with dummy info, so that would take a little time. OTOH, what about pages like Kingturtle's? His article list is personal info of sorts and it is what makes the userpage interesting. Hm. Maybe we could find a compromise by dividing the userpage example page into two distinct sections, one focusing on layout examples with the secured, "dummified" snapshots you proposed, and one for other interesting userpages (like Kingturtle's) with revision permlinks from the original pages just like the current ones. Dorftrottel (warn) 11:21, March 3, 2008
Two sections might be confusing. Good mock versions could be made of anything. For example, Kingturtle's article list could be replaced with a list of random articles, or with a list we customize (there are thousands of lists to cut and paste from on Wikipedia). To cut down on the work for future dummy pages, we could create one complete example user, and reuse the data from that for all the example user pages. Or we could differ the data (preferred) to give exposure to the full range of barnstars, userboxes, etc. etc. The tricky user pages to mock will be those with custom graphics like Aeon1006 or with personal pics like Alkivar. Alkivar's page also has some missing components that should be replaced with new mock components. The Transhumanist11:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re article lists: I don't think we need to "illustrate" to anyone what a long article list looks like, so I would include average length dummy lists on the dummy layouts. But I think it's still worthwhile to permlink to specific live user pages for reasons other than their layout, e.g. an extraordinary contributions list, or an interesting text or link collection etcpp (I have a few examples in mind). That's to underscore my own private opinion that ideally, a good layout should be combined with interesting content.
As to the example user idea, I think it's great and we could use that userpage to build dummy layout after dummy layout on it and permlink to the revision for each different style. That's what you proposed, if I understand you correctly? How about User:Page layout example? Dorftrottel (taunt) 16:03, March 3, 2008
Not quite. One main user page which includes all the content types listed at Wikipedia:User Page Design Center/About you. The data can be reused for various user page design examples, but since user pages are often multi-page constructions, each example will need to be a full-fledged page of its own. Plus, this approach gets rid of the annoying "This is an old revision of this page" notice, which throws off the look and feel of page designs. The Transhumanist16:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So if I understand you correctly, you would create the example layouts as subpages in the userspace of that example account? But isn't that terribly tedious, building an entire example userspace? I think users will quickly get the idea anyway, no need to illustrate the possibilities of subpages. The revision tag doesn't really annoy me personally.
(ec) I think the whole idea of creating such a mock user page with multiple layouts is specifically to preserve the layout styles as opposed to the specific contents. In other words, that's why I suggested creating two different sections. One for layout (=the dummies), one for content (=the live user pages). Imho, mock content can never be as good as the real thing and can never convey the spirit. I can hardly imagine rewriting a well-written userpage text into a still-interesting dummy version, and I think we needn't bother when we have so many and so different examples available.
To that effect, I wouldn't say that those two sections would be confusing at all if they simply said "layout" and "content", respectively, accompanied by a short explanatory introduction if need be. (Actually, I would go so far as to argue that the current "examples of excellent or very interesting user pages" is indeed more confusing than two different sections with very clear and distinct purposes rather than mixing it all into one.)
Another idea I just had is to add uniform descriptors to the permlinks to the various dummy layout revisions on User:Page layout example. These descriptors could be based on various aspects such as dominant color (since color scheme is one distinctly interesting aspect of layout), userspace arrangement (e.g. "disambig user pages" like User:AxG), or dominant page layout (e.g. navbox design). Just kicking ideas though, looking forward to your further input. Dorftrottel (criticise) 16:38, March 3, 2008
The sample userpages should probably be subpages of the UPDC. It's best to keep everything together. It prevents nasty surprises. For some user pages, subpages are integral. I like your "layout examples" and "content examples" sections idea. Naming pages based on their main element is a good idea. And we could go to a bulleted list with annotations in presenting the examples on the example page. The Transhumanist16:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you should cut back on the sugar snacks (cookies). They're making you hyper! :) I'm in the process of going over the whole awards center, since Sharkface isn't available. I'm not on WP as much these days, so please be patient. The Transhumanist18:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering if you could help out with the WP:AWC backlog I am currently experiencing. While I am obviously dedicated to the Awards Center, real life issues have forced me away from the computer and I won't be free to contribute here regularly for a bit. It is highly regrettable that this took place after you transfered the AWC over to my mainspace, and I can only hope that after I find some time I will be able to return here.
Thanks a ton --Sharkface21720:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to get all the barnstars except the ones for Milk's Favorite Cookie. I won't be able to do an in-depth review of his contribs for a bit and was wondering if you could cover this one. Again, thanks. --Sharkface21721:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll get the rest of the barnstars owed to Milk's Favorite Cookie, even though you have given him everything and the kitchen. --Sharkface21721:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of any copyrighted material. The most obvious candidate would be Back to the Future. Is it a derivative work of Back to the Future intellectual property, such as the milieu of the Back to the Future movie trilogy? Universal owns the Back to the Future timescape, and the article presents that timescape. Is it fair use, or a derivative work? The Transhumanist12:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks for the barnstar! Also, nice idea with the transcluded subpages (particularly the modular tabmenu!). I think I'm sticking to the one-page variant for now, because it's easier to fiddle with the code that way. Incidentally, I tweaked your tabmenu, as your vertmenu is slightly wider than mine and the tabbar jutted over the main box.
On a related note, you could do me a big favour and help me make up my mind. I did a mock "monobook" revamp yesterday, now I'm not sure which version I prefer: the monobook variant, or the original version. Dorftrottel (troll) 13:29, March 5, 2008
Nevermind, I switched back to the colored original. I realised that I was primarily hellbent on creating a version where the focused tab has no border with the main box, which I accomplished. But the colored version looks nicer. I also followed your example and created a subpage at least for the vertmenu. Dorftrottel (talk) 13:48, March 5, 2008
Because I don't place too much stock in categories. And I'm not currently available for working on humanism-related subjects. Maybe later. The Transhumanist05:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your enthusiasm for the Basic projects list, but please don't plaster spammy messages on my user page. I'll work on the project when and if I have time. If this is a problem, I'd be happy to remove myself from your group. Thanks and good luck with the project! --babbage (talk) 06:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! What did you have in mind? What I'd love even more, along with it, would be instructions on how to create them. Or help creating such instructions to add to the WP:UPDC. Am I asking too much? The Transhumanist02:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of. The second part yeah. It's pretty much a "secret" between me and Chetblong. You can always add a link contacting us on the page though. Can you email me everything you would like in it (colors, font, images, etc.) That would be great. I should easily be able to get it to you by tomorrow. - Milk'sFavoriteCookie02:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A secret?! Oh well. Thank you for the offer to create a header banner. I need time to think about what should go into it. I'll contact you in a few days when I have it figured out. The Transhumanist02:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry it took so long to get back to you (been busy). I believe that one could make a very strong argument that the article is a derivative work. It would turn on whether or not arranging the material into chronological order, and comparing the alternate timelines brings it to the level of a "new work." It certainly is "recasting" it, and it differs substantially from the way the original material was presented. So it could very well be. That said, I believe that it is also a textbook example of the fair use exception, so long as appropriate credit is given for the source material (which with all those "citation needed" tags it may not be crediting the source materia adequately. JimZDP (talk) 01:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I wouldn't see a problem with it. However, that really is a question for Wikipedia's legal staff to answer definitavely. The reason I say, is because they represent Wikipedia and I do not. It's not appropriate for a lawyer to provide advice to a person who is not his or her client. Not trying to duck the issue, but I don't want to go beyond an academic discussion into the realm of providing any legal advice upon which somebody - who is not my client - might rely. Might be a good idea to bring the article and your concerns to the attention of Wikipedia's legal staff. JimZDP (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion review was approved for recreation: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 10. Just letting you know, in case you weren't watchlisting it. I'm not sure what you have to do next to get the old version undeleted though (if that's what you wanted :) Nice catch on rescuing that grouping. -- Quiddity (talk) 00:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I don't want the old version undeleted - I requested to be able to recreate the list from scratch. But the page will have to be unsalted (if it hasn't been already) so that it can be recreated - I'll put in a request to the admin who closed the DRV. I've created a new draft page called User:The Transhumanist/Drafts/Lists of fictional topics and will work on it as time permits. As it becomes more fleshed out, I'll contact those I know of who were interested in developing such a list so that they can join in on the fun.
As for the DRV, I don't think it is an indication that this list will be anywhere close to safe. There appear to be editors who are intent on blocking this topic from inclusion on Wikipedia, much more intently than one would expect from the usual anti-list camp, so it seems there are two biases at work here: anti-list and anti-fiction. So extra measures will need to be taken to help ensure its safety (it's a shame parts of Wikipedia have to be protected from the Wikipedia establishment, er community, itself). A carefully written explanation of the purpose of the list needs to be written for the talk page, and a brief note in comment delimiters at the top of the article page itself. The debates hinged heavily upon the issue of scope (including indescriminacy) and this point of contention seems to originate in Wikipedia's policies (especially WP:INDISCRIMINATE). The policies don't put scope into context, and are extremely vague on this point, leaving editors divided as to how it applies to broad topic classification efforts (mathematics, philosophy, psychology, nutrition, fiction, etc.), and the survival or demise of lists of this type seems to be at the mercy of gang warfare - only if a large enough "gang" is protecting a list (like the List of mathematics articles is it safe from deletion. The issue of scope needs to be addressed.
The list guidelines also don't cover this aspect of lists (scope) very well, and it would be helpful to list builders to have guidance on this matter. This too needs looking into.
I wasn't planning to get involved with fiction - but I kept coming across this fight while participating at AfD, and it appeared that most of the participants were unaware of Wikipedia's overall design structure and how this fit into it. Fiction is a broad subject area, maybe not as important-sounding as mathematics, but it would be a blatant hole in Wikipedia's table of contents if it was not included.
Hmmmm. "Overall design structure." Is there an overview of this anywhere, explaining the major components of Wikipedia's design and how they fit together? If you know of any, please point them out to me.
I copied your layout design (i guess you are the author) from 'account settings and maintainence/style'[1] and pasted on my talkpage. Now whenever a message is added to my talk, it appears outside the Box-design, and not inside the design. Perhaps you could help, if you can, then please fix it for me. It would be nice of you, thanksAjjay (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of this, I'm loving the new design, TT ;) The "next-tab", section-flick system is pretty ingenious, if you don't mind my saying! Regards, Anthøny13:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Transhumanist,
Yes, I am working on the Cure article, but it's been pretty hard... It is close to the CRCT, end-of-year tests, and I'm really studying.It also seems that the shorter and simpler the topic is, the harder it is to write an article on it. However, I am gathering info for it. This weekend,or earlier, the article will be written for sure. Thank you for allowing me to write this article! I will send you what I have so far by this afternoon, or evening, the latest.--Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC) :-)[reply]
I just had the idea of writing up an angry version of all WP policies in one page, as an essay. Think "Do your fucking research and cite your fucking sources, moron!" How about that as a "more mature" alternative, with a far richer context? Dorftrottel (vandalise) 13:16, April 2, 2008
I remember a while back I got into a discussion regarding wikiphilsophies on one of your subpages (it was something you hosted, if I remember correctly) and I completely flipped out, making personal attacks, going crazy, etc. I was wondering if you happened to have the page still, as I might be running for adminship soon and it would be nice to be forthcoming about my past mistakes. --Sharkface21700:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I'd be honored to nominate you for adminship. My nominations have had 100% success rate so far. Other than my self-noms, that is. :) The Transhumanist00:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a page up, if you're interested. Be warned, though; I give this RFA a million to one shot of passing. Both of us have a ton of history behind us. --Sharkface21700:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another question: If I alerted users who were involved in the various cases where I screwed (my blocks, my deletionist comments, etc.) to my impending WP:RFA, would that be considered canvassing? I really don't want to surprise anybody by digging up old history out of the blue. --Sharkface21701:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know that I may be having another RFA towards the back end of the month. I'll leave another message closer to the time incase you may/may not wish to nominate me. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 09:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
.... i do admit i was a bit immature to Beeblbrox (did I spell it correctly?). I saw the messages he left on your talk page. Anyway, I've decided not to do the RfA anymore. I came to Wiki to write, and I like doing it :-) The page you created was very helpful and informative. I do admit that I do need to think before I talk sometimes. --Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. (talk) 21:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help with the article, looks like someone else jumped in also. I am pretty much done with it, I love lists and may look for another to do from your list. I am certain you know but, doing "basics" lists really lets you see how much work some of our most basic articles need. For instance, interphase was horrible, unreadable, and inaccurate (obviously I couldn't leave it that way) I hope it's a bit better now; doing this list allowed me to find lots of basic inaccurate stuff about biology in lots of articles and to fix them, thanks. Peace...Earthdirt (talk) 02:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I went digging around to fix the redlinks in the skeleton, fixed the ones I could, and added a few other things I came across. You're going to have fun fleshing out this list. I'm blown away by the number of articles about Egypt on Wikipedia. You're turn. :) The Transhumanist19:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Articles expand in haphazard ways, based on the varied experience and interests of the editors who contribute to them. Coverage is rarely proportional on the road to completion (during an article's development), but usually becomes more balanced as the article matures. Rather than remove material to achieve the desired proportions, it's usually better to let the rest of an article catch up. The Transhumanist18:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes TT. I gave you a barnstar, what yesterday? You are obviously a good user, but RfA#5, as it sits, is very very likely to fail in it's current state. You need to clearly articulate what you have been doing since #3 and #4 to alleviate prior concerns, or you will garner opposers that don't even look at your contribs. I'm hoping you flesh/flush out #5 so I can support. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer22:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I hold a different opinion: now is a good time for TT to run again. However, I would very strongly urge you to suspend and delist your RfA, make a proper statement (perhaps get a co-nom, even as an "endorsement"?) and answer the questions properly, and then restart the discussion. It's your choice however, and this is just my professional opinion, but you're doing yourself no favours at the moment. Otherwise, best of luck and regards, Anthøny22:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Worrying about RfA presentation is worthless meta-reasoning. RfA collapses in on itself by making the RfA itself important. But RfA page formatting and presentation is not important at all - it's a forum for discussion of how well a person will do as an admin, but it has devolved into a forum about how well a person presents an RfA. The participants there are fully capable of analyzing my performance on Wikipedia (as opposed to the RfA process itself), and I trust them to do so. The Transhumanist22:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, TT, you are guinea pigging yourself. Whatever your thoughts of the RfA in and of itself. It is what it is. You are going to garner opposition. If you are comfortable being a guineapig, so be it. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer22:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LOL: Great nomination. Good Luck to you. If you need, one more opinion expressed either, on the Support side, or Oppose to be the hammer to nail-down your point, let me know. ShoesssSTalk23:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for offering to write articles for the Wikipedia Signpost tutorial series. Just letting you know that we have run out of tutorials to use in the Signpost, and so if you have time, it would be great if you could make a start with some of the topics that you have claimed, but not yet finished! Thanks! enochlau (talk) 23:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Compliments on your expansion (absolutely no waistline pun intended) of central obesity! Could I suggest that you use {{cite journal}} for scientific references? This gives a highly predictable result, and also has the added facility of automating URLs, DOIs and PMID codes to articles. If you know the PMID code (just search Pubmed for the first author and the year), Dave Iberri's tool will generate all the content into a nice template. The tool is at http://diberri.dyndns.org/wikipedia/templates/ . JFW | T@lk19:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks to be pretty tight at the moment, i have already voted for you. I think you should be gathering everyone around and tell them to support you because one vote could make the difference. I assume thats how it works, you get more support than oppose and you got it. Good luck, you need it:) Roadrunnerz45 (talk) 04:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Outsider, yes... I can see how people are tarting about the fact that you didnt take it "seriously". But in all fairness, its generally the people who dont think of the "tools" as a Holy Grail that utilize them best. You've been here long enough, you've done enough work. Quite simply, you should be promoted. Of course, the RfA isnt looking too good, but I supported anyway. And I will keep supporting, baring some massive murderous rampage through town... Anyway! Have a great day! Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love16:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also... ya'lls responses to Kurt? Fab. Just fab. As I dont plan on running for anything within this site, I can say that too! Its amazing how many people hate what he writes, and have thrown around RfC and AN... but nothing has come of it. He really is a distraction, and his opposes are ridiculously myoptic. I might have said something worse... Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love17:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well. C'est la vie and all that. Let me know if you decide to try again and you'll have my full support. The perfect RfA, IMHO!--RegentsPark (talk) 02:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to mention (and you have probably noticed by now), that I closed your RFA as unsuccessful. I closed it as per your apparent withdrawl in the Oppose section. Keep up the good work and I hope you gain adminship soon. Useight (talk) 05:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Evolutionary immonology, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 04:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice! Thank you!!! By the way, it isn't clear what "URL for wiki links" and "Base URL for relative links" means (I've been here for over 2 years, and I still didn't know what you were referring to; "Encode HTML entities" is also unclear to me). Where is the documentation that explains these and how to use the converter? The Transhumanist23:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you are creating a list of topics related to Japan. I just gave the topics listing a major overhaul at Portal:Japan. I thought it may give some inspiration or help. Keep in mind it is still a work in progress as I am still actively cleaning it up. When I am done improving Portal:Japan, I'd be more than willing to lend a hand on this list. -JadeFox (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know if you need help; I want finish what I started on Portal:Japan before I lose my train of thought. Also, I noticed you copied the links over. I wouldn't focus too much on people and military history if you are looking for an overview (in fact that is what I'm working on now). -JadeFox (talk) 23:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you on military history except where it is central to the history of Japan (World War II, as one example). Concerning people, they are central to culture, so I plan on reading the people articles to get a feel for whether they are representative, and will share my observations and will make suggestions once I'm done reading them. At a minimum, it seems like links to pages that list Japan's people would be appropriate, either under culture or in the lists section. I found the people types interesting. I was amused that Japan has their own version of valley girls. The Transhumanist00:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
^_^ You should read the toilet article (it's featured too). Oh, if you stop for a while, leave a message here, my talk page, or the list so I know what you're working on later tonight or tomorrow. I don't want to duplicate/overwrite any work you've done. -JadeFox (talk) 00:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I leave, I'll check in when I get back. But I'm tinkering on the Japan list at the moment. I'll stop by the portal too, to check out what you are up to. I've done a fair amount of portal work, so maybe I'll see some minor ways to improve the page. The Transhumanist00:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am In need of a new userpage design. Maybe a mac-stile userpage? I know that you made a PC stile one already. I put my trust i your ability!!! Thank You --user talk:Megapen23:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You've caught me a little off-guard...
I'm a PC-user and I'm embarrassed - I have no idea what "Mac-style" means. But the most important part of a user page is what you tell everyone about yourself. So toward that end, I've thrown something up on your user page that you can start filling in, editing, and playing around with. In addition to the content, you can change the colors, the border thickness, etc., until it's something unique to you.
If you need help with anything specific, please let me know and I'll drop on by.
Since you do not know about mac pleas create a PC stile user page an you did for another user. Thank You!!!
I did. Every page on Wikipedia is a PC-style page, as far as I know. WP:UPDC includes all the elements that typically go into user pages - simply copy and paste anything you like and modify to taste. Wikipedia:User Page Design Center/User page examples has examples of many cool user pages. Check it out, and see what you like. I copied my user page's basic design from another user, and he in turn based his userpage on somebody else's. Copying and pasting and modifying is the easiest way to get started. To understand multi-page user pages, see Wikipedia:Subpages and Wikipedia:Transclusion. The Transhumanist17:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A couple editors have raised issues with the Award Center and suggested deleting challenges they view as potentially harmful or counterproductive. I restored the deleted challenges and commented as well, but would also appreciate your input. Thanks. BrokenSphereMsg me15:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, User:JadeFox alerted me to your suggestions and comments you left on his talk page about the new portal we've been making. They are great suggestions and I'm trying to implement them as I type this. I also wanted to invite you to help out. Even if you only have suggestions, it would help a lot. It has basically only been us two working on it thus far. Also, could you post the comments on the Portal's talk page so I could more easily access them as well? Thanks! Torsodog (talk) 06:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. I'm currently generating a couple lists using AWB's category recursion feature, to see if they time out. When those are done, I'll check out your changes. Thank you for the assist. The Transhumanist18:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with the workings of the newsletter or its bot, but my guess is that the exclude list ensures against someone being added back onto the subscription list by mistake. The Transhumanist23:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transhumanist is correct in his assumption. Newsletters generally need both inclusion and exclusion lists. Speaking of the newsletter, it's a bit late this issue (my apologies)... --SharkfaceT/C01:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The newsletter has been redesigned. Thank you to WBOSITG, MFC, and IMatthew for your design contributions. This shiny new newsletter is a result of their combined efforts.
Thank you to Enigmaman for participating in the previous Award Center Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please note that if you wish to be given credit for work completed, you must sign up for the collaboration first. This week's collaboration is Luc Besson.
Apologies for the late newsletter. The editor has been swamped lately due to school and vacation. If in the future a fortnightly delivery schedule cannot be kept, this newsletter will be delivered monthly.
A lively discussion about the future of the Award Center is currently being being hosted on the Award Center talk page. Input is always welcome.
To make sure I understand your question, did you mean to ask "Is the heading hierarchy used in the List of basic Ecuador topics consistent with the hierarchy used for country categories?" No. They were developed independently, and the structure used for the country lists is still under development, and is contained in Template:BLT country - I've been refining it continuously as I work on each new country list. What you saw was a beta version. I've updated List of basic Ecuador topics to the current template version, but it's still likely to change soon. I figure the structure/template for these lists will become stable by the time I complete about a fifth of the countries on Earth (around 50). So far, 14 have been completed and are listed at Lists of basic topics - and a couple of those need to be updated to the latest template version. :)
Another difference between the basic country lists and categories is in the naming conventions used. For ease of construction and to support alphabetization by topic, I've been gravitating toward the standard topic form "topic of country". For example, "Culture of Ecuador", "Culture of Armenia", etc. In the category system, the naming convention varies from topic to topic, with some topics being presented in the alternative possessive form, such as Category:Ecuadorian culture, Category:Armenian culture, etc., which changes the order in which topics are presented for each country, and also impacts searching. But there's also Category:Culture of the United States, because "Category:American culture" is ambiguous.
Note that country categories aren't completely standardized, and may differ slightly from country to country. Keep in mind that improvements are welcome. However, if you intend to make any drastic changes, it would be a very good idea to propose them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories.
Redmarkviolinist would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Redmarkviolinist to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/The Transhumanist . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
Sorry for the flurry of activity TT. RMV nominated you for adminship, such is true, and rather flattering I imagine. He/she then went ahead and transcluded #6 before receiving acceptance from you, and was reverted twice (once by me, once by User:Naerii). Now that things have settled a bit, I went ahead and deleted the unaccepted nom#6 so as not to get in the way of the real nom#6, if/when that ever happens. Hope this all makes sense, as right now, I'm sure you're offline and will arrive in the mornign with a flurry of messages and weirdness. My talkpage is open, TT. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer23:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nah. I plan to start over with a new account and get adminship with a clean slate.
Wow. I'm very happy that you've taken on this task. Nicely done so far. I look forward to seeing how you finish it up.
The "Things to do" box could list articles from various maintenance projects, "improve an article to GA status", FA status, adding articles to the "Selected" frames' queues, creating a "Did you know" for the box of the same name, and (I'm sure you can think of more), and "add more tasks to this list", etc.
The "Topics" box will be more involved, entailing that you browse the subject's articles, and its categories, gathering links as you go. It doesn't need to be comprehensive; all the main articles on the subject plus a good cross-section of the rest of them.
The most major thing I noticed was the big gap under the selected biography - you could rename the top box in the left column to "Selected Dynasty", and then create a new box for "Selected article" (under the biography box), putting non-dynasty and non-biography articles in the new box - like articles on artifacts, places, customs, events, etc.
Portal:Charles Dickens does a very good job of balancing columns, by standardizing the length of excerpts for each specific box. Tricky, but the effect is nice.
Note that "selected" articles don't have to be "featured".
Hey thanks for the advice. As you can no doubt tell, it's very much a work in progress :) This is the first portal I've created, so - taking it bit by bit, heh. I'll work on those suggestions as soon as I catch the time! Cheers, -- Naerii10:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the symbol for humanism. I thought you might want to display it on your user or talk page.
Are you working on Humanism articles? What do you think is lacking in Wikipedia's coverage of Humanism?
Thank you for the advice on joining the humanism category. I'd really like to meet more humanists, and so I've joined. I wouldn't have if you hadn't suggested it. Thanks.
By the way, I just noticed that there isn't a Wikipedia:WikiProject Humanism. If you were to create it, I would certainly join.
Hey Trans! I was thinking about Wikipedia:WikiProject Humanism!! How do you read the mind of a person? I was thinking about it!! I want to create WikiProject Humanism. Humanism is a much broader philosophy than atheism or agnosticism. You are one of the best editors on Wikipedia and it would be great if you help me. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 07:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The first step is to figure out what the WikiProject's goals should be. What does the subject "Humanism" on Wikipedia need? You may want to start at List of basic humanism topics in surveying/exploring the subject. I find the basic topic lists to be exceptional tools for mapping subjects as I explore them. Maybe you will too. The Transhumanist07:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your suggestion sounds like a great idea. At the moment, I'm tagging talk pages with the project template. Once I'm done, I'll feature the list on the project page as you suggested and send out a notice. Thanks for your contribution. GregManninLB (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I know it's rather short-notice, and it seems strange to be doing this over a year and a half after its last edit, but I have made slight alterations (albeit purely in phrasing) to May 4th's Tip of the Day. Which I'll grant you, is one Richard seems to have put together rather than yourself - however, if you have a problem with this alternate wording, please feel free to revert back to its previous form, as I don't hang around TOTD all that much.
I'm flicking through most of the ToTD's this morning, partially out of lack of enthusiasm for RC Patrol! I'll warn you if I'm going to do anything major, in case you feel it needs reversion. Thank you for checking it out so quickly. Bobo.00:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note that we have the TOTD department set up around the "yearless year". That means the same pages are used year after year. Sometime after the first of the year, the entire yearless year is copied to archive pages to preserve a historical record of the tips displayed over the past year. 2007 has been copied/archived, which means you can change the yearless year pages any way you want (replace tips with new ones, change their order, etc.) - but not those that have already passed (unless you copy/archive them first - they need to be copied to 2008's archive before replacing them with 2009's tips). The links to the archives are included at the bottom of the main TOTD page. The Transhumanist01:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.
If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 18:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
About a year ago, you wrote to me saying that every-thing I've ever written for Wik can be found at "my contributions." But I can't find articles that have been deleted. Where can I find those? Kdammers (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the generality. Deleted articles can only be browsed by Wikipedia:administrators. If you are looking for a specific article, and you know its name, and you wish to work on it to address the concerns expressed at its WP:AfD, you can request that it be userfied (moved to your userspace). You can make the request at WP:DRV or ask an admin who you know. Good luck. The Transhumanist02:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for Your quick response. I find it a poor policy for people's articles to be made relatively inaccessible just because some-body (from the writer's point of view:) vandalized an article that the writer might have taken hours producing. Why can't Wik at least leave a trace for the writer? I've just had an article deleted and even got an unfriendly comment that the deleter would "have to" black ball me if I again removed the speedy delete tag (which I had removed but only with a clear explanation as to why it was inappropriate; the tag itself had no explanation other than "not an article"). (By the way, this was on the German Wik, but I can't follow the meta-Wik there (It's tough enough here). Sorry to rant on, but I'm so steamed, I can't type an answer in the German Wik: my hands shake too much. Kdammers (talk) 02:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like you've been duped. That is, an admin wouldn't warn you away from removing speedy tags from a specific article, he would just go ahead and delete the article (if he found it to meet speedy deletion criteria). "Blackballed" isn't a wikiterm - an admin would say "blocked". Sometimes articles are speedied that shouldn't be. Can you think of a reason that someone would describe your article as "not an article"? If you describe the article to me, maybe I can make sense of the situation and provide more specific advice. The Transhumanist02:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as I said, it was on the German Wik, and there are a lot of people there who delete any-thing that isn't a longish article. (By black-ball, I meant that he said he would report me to admin to be possibly blocked for removing the speedy delete warning.) I'm an inclusionist, believing it is better to light one candle than to curse the dark -- but obviously a number of people at Wik-de don't agree. While I can speak German like a native, writing it is not so easy for me - esp. in the style for Wik-de; so I write short - or very short - stubs that give totally correct information that others can expand on. The most recently deleted article was a one-sentence one that said "XYZ [Steven J. Sasson? - I can't check now with-out loosing this page.] (born DMY) is the inventor of the digital camera." I then linked to the Wik-en site and also added one (or two?) refs. that I'd checked. Kdammers (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:DICTDEF. That alone isn't enough to speedy delete an article on English Wikipedia (according to WP:CSD). I doubt it's justification on the German site. By the way, you can use Wikipedia in multiple windows and/or multiple tabs. What browser do you use (I highlyl recommend Firefox - I generally have it running in several windows, at least one of those with a dozen or more pages open in its tabs (subwindows), meanwhile running WP:AWB (which uses IE) running in another window).
One sentence isn't enough to worry about. Here's what I would do: recreate the page with 2 sentences instead of one. If they delete that, try again with 3 sentences, etc. I hope this helps. Let me know how it turns out. Good luck. ;) The Transhumanist03:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I used this on a user's talk page for the first time and noticed my name shows up twice. Once without a timestamp, and once with a timestamp. Can you correct this error? Oore (talk) 22:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I see you have been wikifying pluriform multiparty system in order to link to the plurality voting system and multiparty system. That is not correct. Pluriform does not refer to the voting system but to the party system. It is a multiparty system with different several kinds of parties. Countries like Belgium, Ireland, Spain don´t have a plurality voting system, they use some form of proportional representation. I´m reverting all these edits. C mon (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see your problem. I think the use of pluriform multiparty system is a stylistic error, because pluriform and multiparty are used to refer to the same thing: that there are multiple parties. The best option would be to remove the word pluriform. I don't think that there is a problem with wiktionary because plurality can refer to different things that the voting system. C mon (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your interest. The list is being constructed as part of a set of country lists for the geography section of Lists of basic topics, part of Wikipedia's contents system. Once the list is added to the contents system, I plan on posting notices to the Indonesia WikiProject for you guys to further develop, refine, and maintain. The way the list is being constructed is to match the general layout of the other country lists in the set that have been posted at Lists of basic topics - their information is presented in pretty much the same order. The Transhumanist19:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that - we have been having on wiki and off wiki conversations amongst a few of us on the project re the quality and status of some of our lists and I happened to come across yours - hey that sounds good - thanks for your response - cheers SatuSuro00:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Regarding your recent move of the page back to the main namespace: I'm not sure if you were aware of this AfD where the purposes of such lists were discussed, and many thought they should have been projectified since they were mainly used for maintenance purposes (recent changes monitoring). --Paul_012(talk)16:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The list conforms to the scope and format standards in common use for lists of this type (about countries, and far more about subjects other than countries). It's an alphabetical list of articles, which is very useful for browsing purposes, and therefore belongs in article space where readers can benefit from it.
Do you have something against lists that are designed as index pages? I've created many, and they all live happily in article space, and have been doing so for years now. What's up?The Transhumanist17:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late reply. I wasn't advocating for having the page either way. Just asked to raise the topic and wanted to know your opinion. Having the page this way is fine, thanks. --Paul_012(talk)15:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I'm really sorry if I'm blaming you for something you haven't done but I have a feeling your recent edits to Template:Africa topic have broken it regarding the second paramater - it appears at the end of every single link now. I don't really understand how template code works and I wouldn't want to revert your changes just at a guess. You can see the problem on pretty much any of the African politics pages and maybe other things to. Again, sorry if I'm completely wrong! --Tombomp (talk) 20:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing out the problem. It turned out not to be the template. On each of those articles, the transclusion call included an extraneous/unused/erroneous parameter that became activated when I added code to process a 2nd parameter to the template. I'm in the process of correcting the transclusion calls on the articles now (by removing the parameter). Should be done in 10 minutes. Again, thank you for the heads up! The Transhumanist21:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC) Done 21:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What the template does now that it didn't do before is allow a suffix (with space or without) to be added to each article name. Here's an example. Be sure to click on the countries - they have both a template-based prefix and suffix portion added to the country name. To replace the title of the template, I've used the "title=" syntax to set the title parameter, which the erroneous parameter mentioned above was missing. The Transhumanist22:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your recent edits to Template:Europe topic and I am hoping you can help with a small but irritating technical problem. We use an assessment template for WikiProject Scottish Islands - Template:WPSI. It comes with a 'comments' section, but there is an annoying glitch. The talk page of an article without a comment on the template (e.g. Whisky Galore) works fine. When you click on the "leave comments here" link it takes you to Editing Talk:Whisky Galore/Comments to leave whatever message may be required. However, for an article with a pre-existing comment e.g. at Talk:Lunga, Firth of Lorn clicking on the "edit" button in the WPSI template takes you to a "Server not found" error page. If you can fix this, tell me how to fix it, or suggest someone who might I'd be very grateful. Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk11:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why not have the rating discussions on the regular talk page of each article? That way, anyone reading the discussion page will find it and may be more likely to participate. As it currently stands, a user has to click on a tiny link in a footnote of a notice box, which may reduce the number of participants. I look forward to your reply. The Transhumanist11:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't spot your reply because the message alert feature of Wikipedia only works if you reply on the other person's talk page. Didn't expect that you'd require a request to reply on my talk page with every single post in the same message thread. To expedite a conversation, it is best to reply on each others' talk pages. Otherwise it just circumvents the alert feature. I almost never check back on threads (as I rely on the alerts), and returned to your talk page to report on my progress: I went ahead and fixed the template by removing transclusion - it makes little sense to transclude the comments in fine print - vision gets worse as you get older, so older (and wiser) Wikipedians won't even be able to read the comments. Linking to the comments works just fine. The Transhumanist12:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for fixing this - it looks good. A question if I may - I think I know what template 'purgepage' does, but why is it useful here? Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk13:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It forces a refresh of the page from the latest version, thereby purging the server cache. It's mainly intended for pages hosting nested pages that get updated or worked on often, as different users may see different versions unless you purge the cache. I added it while working on the page. It will be useful if anyone wants to further improve the template, or update the ratings. If you need further help on anything, feel free to ask anytime. ;) The Transhumanist13:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorta on a partial wikibreak, no new articles right now only fixing vandalism and short whatnots on my watchlist, all my time is being spent gardening and fixing the chicken house now that spring is finally here in Maine. Peace, Earthdirt (talk) 22:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a question. Are you even willing to pull down th bad challenges, that, note, most if not all of the people in the MFD agreed with pulling them down? Feel free to not reply/ignore, but I'd rather not do this the hard way. Steve Crossin(talk)(review)00:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've got my hands full with another project, which is one of the reasons I handed off the AWC. I have complete confidence in Sharkface to oversee that operation. Also, I don't agree with you on what constitutes a bad challenge.
By the way, the MfD is no indication of consensus. It was closed less than 24 hours after it started. That's not enough time for a consensus to be formed. Besides, the cons were presented, and not the pros. I would have, but it was the wrong venue.
Having said that, I think you are going about this in entirely the wrong way. Complaining, ranting and raving, MfD'ing, waving RfC around like an axe, etc. make it appear like you are being predatorial (adversarial, confrontational), like you love to pounce on your natural prey and eat the poor little creatures alive. Instead, I think you should be progressive, get in there and mingle, participate, and help develop the page in a hands-on way. (Be cooperative). Lead, don't force. For example, be an example. Post some challenges that meet your standards for challenges. As you get a better feel for it, write up some suggestions pointing out the pitfalls to challenging. Maybe start it with something like "Be careful what you wish for..." and then provide your pointers (as suggestions rather than as "rules"). You could write the suggestions up as a draft and then propose 'em on the AWC talk page, or just add them to the page itself one-at-a-time as you think of them. Others will modify them, or even revert them, and Sharkface will be on hand to override anything he finds senseless.
At the moment, due to your hard-nosed tactics, you have poor Sharkface and WBOSITG running around like chickens with their heads bitten off. Or you could be like the little faeries on Walt Disney's Sleeping Beauty - after the sorceress bestowed her curse (as a gift) upon the newborn princess, they bestowed their blessings to ameliorate her curse. In the case of targets that are set way too high, you could could add amendments to relieve the pressure, for example, provide lower intermediary targets, no time limit, etc. Outbid the initial bidder. :) The Transhumanist01:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I love that show. I like watching it a whole day at once, in real time. Each season takes about 18 hours. I don't have the patience to wait a week for each hour of it. That's just too damn slow. So I just wait until each season comes out on DVD and then watch the whole damn thing non-stop. :) By the way, I look forward to seeing what you come up with at the AWC. The Transhumanist01:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The first few references are always the hardest. A person might try for 10 minutes and think "100 of these? Screw that!" The idea is to recognize achievement. And 10 references means the person has gotten started, and that's worth rewarding. I wonder if anyone will make it to 1000. :) The Transhumanist03:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, feel free to change it (I've posted it to AWC already). But quick, before anybody new signs up! (Once they sign up, you can make it easier, but not harder). As for 24, I'm only up through season 3. Joining the project could be a plot spoiler for me. Sorry. :) The Transhumanist04:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(mebeeneditconflictedtodaylike10times -_-) Well, you could help us on Chase Edmunds, it's kinda about to be merged. I have stacks of sources, however I'm a tad busy co-ordinating all the crap that goes on with the project. He's season 3, so no spoilers :). And, I think that mentioning Special:Random is slightly redundant, the unsourced category is a lot better, imho. Will change the number now. Let's not edit war over the AWC. Heh ;) Steve Crossin(talk)(review)04:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, think like a game show host. Would Alex Trebec say "I'm gonna be bold and change the challenge, cos I can"? That would shock the nation. And striking out a host's post and his name is real bad form on Wikipedia. I've rewritten the challenge, using all of our versions, and Sharkface can do with it what he wants. The way it was, it looked like a big fight was going on. We should provide a unified front. Who wants to receive rewards from us bunch of clowns who don't look like we know what we're doing? :) The Transhumanist04:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll jump in here. First off, it's good to see some good old debate and compromise going on here. The last thing I would want is for AWC to go to RFC. That being said, I am in a similar situation as both of you: Real life and other Wikipedia obligations (article writing, RFA, COIN, FPC, etc.) have kept me away from my Award Center duties. While I admit that the AWC needs a bit of a cleanup, Wikipedia has no major deadline and as such it often takes a back seat to other needs (say, a term paper due tomorrow). As for the new section, I've endorsed it and I added your name to it, Transhumanist. Should be good now. --SharkfaceT/C21:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When will you be out of school for the Summer and ready for some major action on Wikipedia again? June 26th? Or do you need time after that to recover from your finals? :)
I'm working on something big (very big) for the AWC, but it'll have better success if you are on hand to oversee your page, to intervene if conflicts erupt, etc. :) It will be the biggest collaboration I've attempted to date (bigger than the TOTD project, bigger than the Contents project collaboration, bigger than the Help page redesign, and even bigger than the Main Page redesign). It can't start until the graphic design work on the awards is completed anyways, so it may be awhile. But I figured I should give you time to get psychologically prepared for this. :) I'm shooting for at least 20 contestants at a time, with constant turnover likely over the life of the competition. I'm going to need at least two others to help coordinate this thing (dole out assignments, check completion claims, etc.). Who would you recommend? (You can do this too, but I have a hunch you'll have your hands full keeping the peace).
By the way, do you know any good graphics designers?
HA! I literally laughed out loud when I got to the part about my hands being full keeping the peace. Long gone are the days where I sponsored challenges for AWC. Now I spend all my time fighting for the page's existence (and I don't seem to do as well in that job as you did/still do). That being said, I really love my responsibilities for AWC and wouldn't trade them for anything in the world.
Unfortunately, I will most likely be going on vacation immediately following June 26th for an extended period of time. For the past few years, my family has vacationed in Florida for at least two weeks at a time. This trend is likely to continue. Access to computers can be from anything to 100% to sporadic to nothing. Two or so years ago, I used open Wifi networks. Last year, they were shut off for the duration of my vacation (owners of routers not there) and as such I was completely incognito. It's completely up in the air until we get to our vacation spot.
My Wikipedia usage, as you can tell from my contribs (or use this) is a bit unpredictable. I can tell you that I will probably not be on here from May 28- June 1st. My June editing will be decreased greatly due to finals and all of the other end of year junk I have to deal with.
As far as your project goes... figure me out of it. That is to say, while I probably will be a major part of it, plan for the worst and assume I won't. Take the number of people you think you'll need and double it. In fact, judging by the way you described it, I'd suggest getting at least 6 people who can constantly dedicate time to this.
My Recommendations (in no particular order):
WBOSITG -- Totally cool user, active at AWC, new admin. Assuming he's not bogged down with admin duties/other stuff, he'd be an awesome addition.
Wisdom89 -- Another great user. I'm sure he'd love to help.
Red Thunder -- Always willing and ready for anything
Juliancolton -- Article builder who'll work on anything
The above list was by no means comprehensive; it's currently 11:30PM and those are the first eight that I found on AWC.
Also, what do you mean by "keeping the peace"? Is this regarding your new project or AWC? I don't know if I could defend AWC and your new project at the same time. Unless, of course, AWC is cleaned up and becomes non-contentious (a pipe dream) by the launch of your new project.
The AWC is in no danger. It works. It's a way for people to hook up on tasks. It needs to be refined, true, but it works. The community won't kill it for that very reason.
By keeping the peace, I mean, since it is your userpage, you pretty much have the final word on edit wars, cheaters, etc. - and if I'm not mistaken, in your own userspace you aren't limited to the usual 3 reverts (though we should look this up to be sure). FYI, my new project is a challenge to be posted on the AWC. It will replace my entire current section. :) Today I posted a message to the editor-in-chief of the Signpost to inquire about how to obtain (ongoing) coverage for an event, the announcing of monthly winners, the current champion, etc. Haven't heard back from him yet, though. You wouldn't happen to know anybody who participates regularly in the Signpost's operations, would you? By the way, thank you for the referrals. The Transhumanist05:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, just as long as I'm not juggling the AWC and another project at once, I'm fine. As for Signpost operations, I know nothing. --SharkfaceT/C22:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Can't promise to be thoroughly involved in the mystery project, but am always happy to help keep the peace. --Dweller (talk) 09:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've started looking over your references, and have just finished looking at / editing Attera Totus Sanctus. The link you added was an external link, rather than a reference.
Nice external link, though.
A reference is a source that verifies a factual statement in the article. (Click on the little "1"). Wikipedia requires 3rd-party sources, that is, sources that are not by who the article is about or their agents (1st party), or by you (2nd party). A reliable third-party source would be an article in Time Magazine, an article from most any scientific journal, or an article published in a mainstream music magazine (or website). Note that the one reference given in the body of the article is 1st-party, and doesn't qualify under Wikipedia's reference guidelines. It really belongs in the external links section along with the link you provided.
The biography you provided was from a volunteer-edited site similar to Wikipedia. It states: "We rely on volunteers to edit the historic biographies on a continual basis."
There's no indication on there of what comes from the original sources (the biographies were initially copied from 19th-century works), and what is added by volunteers. And no references as far as I can see for the volunteer-added material.
It doesn't fit Wikipedia's definition of a 'reliable source.
The link you provided was to the sports center's own website. That's good for an external link, but is not an acceptable source. Also, you didn't provide it as an inline reference, so it wasn't clear what facts you were trying to support with your source.
The source you provided looked like a catalog entry, or an abstract to an article, and not an article itself. A little further down the Google results, there was a well-written review by Matt Rowe. So I replaced your reference with his review. Note how I used the Cite web template and inserted the reference in the text of the article between the <ref> and </ref> delimiters. The reference won't show up in the reference section unless you put {{reflist}} down there.
Referencing is tricky, but is easy once you get the hang of it.
The reference you provided was another Wikipedia article. Wikipedia needs to be externally sourced. I've converted your link to a see also link. Internal sourcing is like pulling yourself up by your own shoestrings.
Please find an article from a mainstream source like CNN, Newsweek, or other authoritative source concerning fictional content, etc.
As a reference you provided another community-edited Wiki, and they didn't provide their sources. Wikis aren't reliable sources, unless their sources are reliable. In which case you'd site their sources, rather than them as a source.
Good source. Poor reference (you didn't specify what you were verifying in the article). I've converted your reference to inline format, so the reader can see what fact in the article the reference verifies. Take a look, and click on the "1".
Removed this one. It's a distribution web site, which makes it an agent of the artist, and therefore 1st-party. We're looking for 3rd-party sources. (I typoed my edit summary - ignore it). 3rd-party = not you, not them, but somebody else. ;)
Cheqtel is an ISP, and the reference you provided was a personal web page. Not a reliable source. Reliable sources are publications in the field that have an established reputation for fact checking and accuracy. The Transhumanist20:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Before you try anything new on Wikipedia, you should read the policies and guidelines for it first. It is clear you didn't read these before adding references to the above articles, because you didn't know what you were doing. You would have known exactly what to do if you had read the instructions!
I look forward to your next round of references, but please read the relevant policies and guidelines before you do!
Sorry, but due to personal issues, I cannot preform your graphics design request. Also, by superimposing this over the Wikipedia Logo, it contradicts copyright law, as all my images are copyrighted by me (unless requested not).
I do apologise a lot. I think the current one still looks great. If you still want me to try and expirement, I will, but it may take a week or so. I am sorry, one again. SimsFanTalk to Me • Commons15:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The image would belong to Wikipedia, in the same way all the other Wikipedia logos do. I request that you do not copyright the images (including all developmental versions) for yourself whether or not it includes the Wikipedia logo. This is for the community. Besides you can't copyright derivations of copyleft works, as their licenses carry through to the new works. Have you read the GDFL? A week would be fine, as the competition doesn't start for 2 months. The Transhumanist ??:??, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm looking for someone to create one of the 3 awards for a major competition I am preparing to run in 2 months at the AWC. (It'll be the largest collaboration I've ever attempted to coordinate on Wikipedia - larger than the TOTD, bigger than the Help system redesign, and even more involved than the Main Page redesign.)
I'd like you to take a crack at the top award. A trophy.
The trophy will be a MAJOR award, to be held by the current Wikipedia World Champion, until someone surpasses the record, at which time the trophy passes to him, and so on throughout the competition. When the competition is over, the reigning champion will get to keep it forever. I need the image of the trophy only - I'll write up and design the rest of the award. The trophy's background should be transparent.
The trophy needs to look IMPRESSIVE. Impressive enough for users to want to take from someone else, and impressive enough to want to defend it against all comers. One of a kind.
On the top of the trophy should be a globe, with the wikipedia globe superimposed upon it (so you can see both the continents and the puzzle pieces. If the globe is held up with 2 hands, or on the back of Atlas, that would be COOL.
The theme is World Development - the contestants will be building a 200+ page navigation aid to the subject of geography on Wikipedia. It will cover all the countries of the world. So the body and base of the trophy should be built around the theme of geography if at all possible.
What do you say?
Will you give it a shot?
If you can come up with a better (even more impressive) design than that described above, I'm totally open to it.
I need the trophy soon so I can begin generating interest in the contest.
The GIMP can do transparent backgrounds. Though you would probably be able to understand the program a hell of a lot faster than me. By the way it's free, and from what I've been told, extremely powerful. You'll probably find it useful for a great many things. The Transhumanist22:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good start. Can you change the globe to one where you can discern the continents? Then place it in the brass stand in the image above, then place the passport on the surface beneath the stand? The Transhumanist07:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's supposed to be a non-barnstar award. And it's definitely going to include the globe stand and a globe, and a passport - those are givens. Also, the title of the award is not going to be included in the image. No need to worry, there's plenty of time. I got started 2 months in advance to make sure there is enough time to get it done to spec. The Transhumanist16:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance you can fill me in sometime on the new project you're planning? I don't need to know anytime soon, but I must admit, you have piqued my curiosity. To quote Yinsen from the new Iron Man movie... "What are you building, Stark?" --SharkfaceT/C18:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The World is its scope and its theme. It involves all the countries of the world, and it will be run as a collaboration and a competition - so far there are 3 award types being developed for the contest - a ranked award, a monthly award, and a world champion trophy (that will be passed around to whoever has "run the gauntlet" the most times - the current champion). This endeavor falls under the scope of at least 215 WikiProjects, and maybe as many as 300 or more, and so will be far larger than any collaboration I've ever attempted to coordinate before.
Also, I was wondering if you could find the time in your busy schedule to write an essay as to why AWC should be kept on a userpage. I'd do it myself, but I feel that you're better qualified for the job, as the project was your brainchild. If you can't find the time, it's totally cool. Thanks. --SharkfaceT/C19:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Presenting an argument invites argumentation. Therefor, a debate should occur only if someone proposes to move the page. If someone unilaterally moves it, then you should simply move it back, because the current consensus is to keep it in user space. For it to be moved out of there, a new consensus would have to be reached. In case you ever do need to debate the topic, there are four main reasons (that I can think of) for keeping this type of page in user space: 1) There's no guideline or policy that prevents a user from making a list in his user space of the barnstars he'd be willing to give out, and for what. There is no reason to bar someone from asking others for help in completing a list of tasks. And any user with such a list is within his rights to allow others to share his page. 2) The scope of the page is specific awards for presentation on user pages - not the designs of the awards, but the instances of awarding them. Awarding and receiving barnstars take place on user talk pages (i.e., in user space). Offering to award barnstars is an extension of that activity and falls within the same scope, and it follows that it should also take place in user space. 3) this type of page runs more smoothly with a dedicated host due to the editing conventions for user pages. 4) Rewarding, complimenting, thanking, offering, and challenging are community-wide activities. It is not practical to have them take place on one page - therefor decentralization should be encouraged. More than one user may wish to host a page like this, and there's no good reason to stop them. For example, there are several signature shops in user space. Why not wish lists too? After all, "wish list" is just another name for "task list", and many users have one or more of those.
The blue marble came from Image:Worldwind.png, and occupies another layer in the image. You can superimpose whatever you want with another layer, like this:
I used a totally different puzzle globe image to do this: I took
Image:Wikipedia-logo BW-hires.svg, added an alpha layer (transparent) to it and then removed the white surrounding the globe (leaving just the transparent background), removed the black, changed the white to black, and touched it up the puzzle a bit (erasing bits here and there, and adding a couple lines). Then I pasted the whole thing into the above image as a new layer, reduced the layer's opacity by a little over half, and wahlah!
To save all the layer information, keep a version in .xcf format (GIMP's file format), and then export the image to .png when its ready to be uploaded to Wikipedia - that way, any layer can be worked on separately without affecting any of the other images used to make the composite. Once it's in png format, it's all one layer, and you can't easily manipulated the various components of the composite.
Well, have fun, and I highly recommend you download the GIMP. There's lots of instructions all around the Web, so learning how to use it is really pretty fast. I'm thoroughly impressed with it.
Can you lay it down, on the same surface the globe stand is resting on? Also, can you make the words visible, so we can see it is a passport. And remove the country name, replacing it with The World. And replace the emblem with a silver puzzleglobe?
Getting close. It needs to be under the bar, and it needs to be adjusted in shape (perspective) so that it looks like it is laying on the surface the globe stand is resting on. The Transhumanist18:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Transhumanist,
What you describe is possible but would require quite a lot of work as I'd have to extract the stand from the globe etc etc and I'm not able to spend that much time on it. Your best bet is to get in contact with the original creator commons:User:Erin Silversmith who should (hopefully) still have a layered file. Good luck, --Fir000200:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Passport to the world2.jpg - your style, Image:Passport to the world.jpg - better IMO. No offence but the cut out job on the globe is pretty poor (which is probably why you found it so easy!). Anyway just FYI I'll be going to uni in 20mins so I won't be checking my talkpage till later tonight or tomorrow so if you post a message don't expect a speedy reply. --Fir000201:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Luckily, it's in it's own layer, so it can be improved later, if need be, though the award image will be rather small, so it probably won't be very noticable anyways. The odd thing I noticed when cutting it out was that the edges blurred into the objects they were next to. If you have any tips on how to better cut out the original globe and barnstar, I'd love to hear them. By the way, nice job on the passport. I'm amazed you did that so fast - it would have taken me hours. Thank you! The Transhumanist02:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, excellent job with it. It is most impressive. I'll look into the program, as I have been without photoshop for years and need to do some graphic design for a school project. Thanks for the heads up and good luck with your new stuff for your "secret project". --SharkfaceT/C01:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your new wikiproject sounds very cool. I can't wait to participate. And as for the essay thing, thanks for writing out that long post. I now know what I'll turn to immediately when people wish to move the page in the future. --SharkfaceT/C22:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm planning on putting up a long term post at the reward board based on my subpage here. As you've got an extensive list of basic topics and things you'd like to see up at AWC, I was wondering if you could give me some ideas for some core topics that need improving? I'd like to limit the list to ~50 articles. If I can motivate even one person into improving something it'll be worth it :D naerii - talk18:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sweet, I knew if I poked you I'd get some good advice. Over the summer when my exams are over I'm planning on bringing some of the more neglected country articles up to GA myself. Your point about us needing quality images is a good one - a lot of our articles on various animals are crowded with photos, but very few of them are particularly useful... I'll have a look at adding some rewards for useful photos to my list :) It was tempting to make a huge list of things but I don't want to bankrupt myself so I'm trying to be good and add things carefully :P Most of the articles I've improved have been music-related but I've always been aware of our pretty vast shortcomings in more essential topic areas. There seems to be a shift towards quality over quantity, which is a good thing - our coverage in pop culture is unparalleled but in other areas - particularly relating to Africa - we are embarassingly deficient. Your tips are very awesome, I already had a big mental list of things I wanted to see improved - I'll go make a private subpage sometime and see how big list gets :P
I'd love to hear more about your project! :) If there's anything I can do let me know, I can always find the time I'm sure. naerii - talk20:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
KingiMatthew2008 has given you Brownies! Brownies promote WikiLove and hopefully this plate has made your day better, and made you less hungry! Spread the WikiLove to others, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Have a nice, delicious plate of chocolate brownies. I though you deserved a treat. Enjoy! KingiMatthew200821:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
