User talk:The Transhumanist/Archive 22
|
[1]
[edit] |
 |
To The Tranhumanist in thanks for his sharing some knowledge of | |
| The Fine Art of Wikipedia signatures . — Justmeherenow 03:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC) |
Do you always make so many radical changes without any discussion or consensus? Whether your changes are for the betterment of the project or not, it's quite uncollegial to edit in such a manner. Please don't do that again. -- Brangifer (talk) 03:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, my name is The Transhumanist, but you can call me TT. Nice to meet you.
- The endeavor was bold, yes, but undertaken with care and caution. The changes were obvious improvements which closely followed Wikipedia's content guidelines. And they were done over a period of several weeks, allowing plenty of time for feedback. There have been zero complaints about the content (title content, as well as page content). The changes made perfect sense, otherwise, there would have been a great many complaints weeks ago, about the content of the changes.
- In addition to reducing the ambiguity of the titles in how they described the contents of their pages, the name changes solved a critical problem with the "lists of x topics". There were actually two sets of pages competing for those titles: a set of alphabetical indexes and a set of structured lists. And the two sets were impeding each others' growth. Now that the renaming is virtually completed, each set can be expanded without running into each other.
- Another sticky problem solved.
- If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.
- Sincerely,
Quick question
[edit]Is there a draft template for basic outlines, like there was for the country pages? Or do I actually have to build Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge/Drafts/Outline of tropical cyclones manually? :) –Juliancolton | Talk 00:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's Template:Outline generator. The instructions are on the template. Please let me know if those instructions are understandable or need improvement. The Transhumanist 00:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Gimme danger (talk) 03:51, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: OOK
[edit]I have to say, I'm impressed with how quickly the outlines are evolving. My availability has declined somewhat, but I will continue to contribute to the outlines when I can. And yes, I am involved in the tropical cyclones WikiProject. This seems like such a fundamental change to the encyclopedia, and yes there are gaps, but that's where the editors come in :-) . Good job. ~AH1(TCU) 23:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Outline of South Africa
[edit]
What are the benefits of a tree structure?
[edit]Greetings, TT! I suggested that your query might be better posted on the Mathematics Ref Desk but didn't carry out the move myself, thinking that perhaps I simply don't fathom your having posted it on the Humanities RD. So, the move is up to you, while I'll just advise that it ought to be one or the other (or yet another, as I don't know anything about tree structure except this brief look just now), and not crossposted simultaneously, which doesn't give the respondents the benefit of reading each others' remarks. -- Deborahjay (talk) 22:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Reply
[edit]Hi Transhumanist! Could you please clarify what you mean by "We'll definitely need the rest of the awards in place before we take the project to the next level." What do you mean by "awards in place"? Are you referring to the creation of specific topic awards such as for medicine? -- penubag (talk) 07:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- I meant "awards done", "ready", "prepared", "completed", "finished". :) You mentioned that you could easily make medals for various subjects (like medicine). (Though "Health" would be better than medicine). I guess we should start at the top, and move down the hierarchy if time permits. Here's the top of our hierarchy: the broadest subjects besides Geography are Culture, Art, Health, History, Mathematics, Natural science, People, Self, Philosophy, Thought, Religion, Spirituality, Society, Social Science, and Technology.
- I'm going to guess :) at what your next question will be: "When will the "next level" be?" Well, there are 3 things that need to be done before we can transcend: 1) Guidelines, 2) Projected Outline, and 3) Outline article. I'm almost done with the outline guidelines, but we keep running into editors who don't seem to know what an outline is. For example, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of South Africa.
- To transcend to the "next level" we'll be placing or sending thousands of notices, and this could compound the problem. If there are too many confused people, they could conceivably join together and form a consensus based on ignorance and misassumptions. And that would be bad. :(
- Therefore, I've been working on a draft to replace the article Outline that will define outlines more thoroughly, so that we can point to it from all of our notices, from the guidelines, and from the OOK WikiProject and anywhere else the OOK is introduced or discussed. That article draft is our main bottleneck at this time.
- Once the article and the projected outline presented at WP:WPOOK#Projected outline are completed, we'll start our expansion phase of operations.
- The guidelines might take another week. I could probably finish the projected outline in a few days after that. But the article draft may take a few weeks (it must be impeccably referenced, and this will require a lot of reading).
- I'm doing a little recruiting as well, and if the right people join the effort this could speed things up. But I'm not holding my breath.
- The Transhumanist 23:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Great! I've been itching for a new graphics project! (sorry I hadn't realized this earlier). I'll be fairly busy for a while, but I'll start cranking those out in no time! Also thanks for the status update, I'll also be happy to design the templates, if you need someone to.
- Also, on an unrelated note, I found a FF addon that made me think of you, tell me if SnapLinks [4] help you at all. It can quickly open many links at once (screenshot)-- penubag (talk) 05:49, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- What kind of text would you like on each of the medallions? Would you like to keep it at "Wikipedia World Developer"? -- penubag (talk) 00:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- It should match each subject. "World" goes good with countries development and geography. Work on finding images to add to the medals, and I'll brainstorm some names.
- Culture: ?
- Art: ?
- Health: ?
- History: ?
- Mathematics: ?
- Natural science: ?
- People: ?
- Self: ?
- Philosophy: ?
- Thought: ?
- Religion: ?
- Spirituality: ?
- Society: ?
- Social Science: ?
- Technology: ?
- It should match each subject. "World" goes good with countries development and geography. Work on finding images to add to the medals, and I'll brainstorm some names.
- What kind of text would you like on each of the medallions? Would you like to keep it at "Wikipedia World Developer"? -- penubag (talk) 00:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm drawing a blank at the moment. But I'll think of something. :) What awards did the Wizard of Oz give out? The Transhumanist 03:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, started up user:penubag/graphics again. I finished up the math medallion just now, just waiting for the text. -- penubag (talk) 07:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- x2
- x3
If you are a lurker on my page, I have a couple questions for you...
[edit]Don't be shy. Here they are...
What are the benefits of a tree structure?
[edit]The article doesn't say.
I'm interested, because I need to explain the benefits in the guideline on outlines I'm writing. (Outlines are a type of tree structure).
I've also asked the question at various reference desks, and these threads may help to jump start your brain on this question. :)
- Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#What are the benefits of a tree structure?
- Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics#What are the benefits to humans of using a tree structure?
- Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#In the humanities, what are the applications and benefits of a tree structure?
- Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#What are the benefits of using tree structures in linguistic communications?
- Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#With respect to the fields covered by this refdesk, what are the applications and benefits of a tree structure?
What are the benefits of outlines, over and above regular articles?
[edit]What benefits have you noticed?
How are Wikipedia's outlines useful to you?
I look forward to your answers.
The Transhumanist 04:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Looks like you've received helpful comments at the various refdesks. Personally, I've found outlines to be helpful in terms of organizing boatloads of info that you would otherwise have to trudge through manually; we're a huge encyclopedia, so they certainly make navigation more convenient. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "trudge through manually"? The Transhumanist 16:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I suppose I could have worded that better, but I meant that in, say, United States, you have hundreds of links in no particular order, and it's nearly impossible to find what you want efficiently. Outline of the United States, on the other hand, provides all the links in an organized (and visually appealing) manner. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Nice comparison. That helps a lot. Thank you. The Transhumanist 16:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I suppose I could have worded that better, but I meant that in, say, United States, you have hundreds of links in no particular order, and it's nearly impossible to find what you want efficiently. Outline of the United States, on the other hand, provides all the links in an organized (and visually appealing) manner. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "trudge through manually"? The Transhumanist 16:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
unsubscribe
[edit]Hi Transhumanist, please remove me from your talk page message list. Thank you and have a nice day! Zvika (talk) 05:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Libya
[edit]I had a quick browse through the Outline of Libya page, and it looks good. Will try to have another look in greater detail soon, but so far so good.Jaw101ie (talk) 07:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
RE: AWB Task: Index talk pages
[edit]Hi there,
I've been away for a few weeks so I've not managed to do this task yet.
However, I'm back now, and I am running this task on AWB as I type this message. I will leave you another message when the task is completed.
Thanks,
The Helpful One 17:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- This task is now
Done! The Helpful One 20:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- Nicely done. Hopefully those banners will help attract people to the Index WikiProject. If not, we'll have to keep trying new things until something works. :) The Transhumanist 21:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Question about outlines
[edit]What do you think the ultimate goal should be for outlines on Wikipedia? I'm doubtful any of them will ever make FL-status, but should we build an assessment scale for the wikiproject? Just a thought. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- Don't worry about setting up a rating scale. Outlines have already started to be rated by the other WikiProjects they belong to (each outline belongs to one or more subjects, after all). On the importance scale of the matching subjects, since outlines are core pages for those, their priority should be ranked top - because each outline is the table of contents for its subject. Top priority. For example, for WikiProject Geography, the Outline of geography should be rated Top Priority because its scope is the subject itself, which gives it core significance.
- Most rating scales include "List" as a class, which is ludicrous, because the classes are quality grades. The term "class" should be renamed to "quality". When grading quality, I would avoid "List" and use "A", "B", or "C" instead, but I would prefer if the ratings paralleled the priority rating system ("Top", "High", "Mid", "Low").
- I'm against setting up a separate rating scale for outlines, because it is metawork. Just another layer of administration. It's better to focus on the actual work. But different people like different approaches, and so if I were to create a rating system for outlines, the quality rating would parallel the priority rating ("Top", "High", "Mid", "Low", "Crap"). :)
- Just kidding on the "Crap" rating. Low is low enough. If it's lower than "Mid", the outline should still be in draft form in project space, where we don't have to worry about how crappy it is - they don't get moved until they have enough meat on them (that is, are good enough) to be moved to article space. So if you come across a crappy outline that is likely to get deleted, move it to the draft collection over at the Outline of knowledge WikiProject.
- I hope I've been of help.
Re:A question for you, concerning a possible contest...
[edit]I haven't been active on the outlines for a while now, but I understand that certain country outlines are significantly better than others? So wouldn't that mean an unfair advantage for certain country WikiProjects? --Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. The same can be said for different schools in a league. Like those schools with more students, better funding, etc. But yes, some of the outlines are WAY better. So how about this... When we send out the invites, if that's the approach we decide to take, we can skip inviting those WikiProjects for which the outline is already completed. What do you think? The Transhumanist 01:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Then we'll need to have a criteria for each league? Or for inclusion in the "near-complete" league, which would be left out? Are outlines eligible for FL status? Then we could still have a league for the best outlines. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Technically they are eligible for FL, but I wouldn't want to see a link dropped just because they couldn't find a citation for it. And that's really what FL's are all about: citations. The FL people also frown on redlinks, and those are an integral part of outlines (the topic of a link is as important to include as the link itself). So that pretty much nixes FL as a viable option.
- The outlines that are most developed include Outline of the United States and Outline of the United Kingdom (extensive links), and those with lots of picture support include Outline of France, Outline of Japan, Outline of Vatican City, Outline of Taiwan, Outline of Thailand, Outline of Japan, and Outline of Iceland. The Transhumanist 01:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Come to think of it, the ones with pictures, I did each of those in about a day. So if the contest lasts 2 months, that's not that big of a deal. We could give the almost completeds less time? The Transhumanist 01:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well for the more complete ones, the challenge could be to get those redlinks into well-sourced articles, and to get citations for the outline? It's not impossible, and it would give the average content contributor something they're used to doing. The outlines you linked to are looking good, much better since I stopped working on them a while ago. Heh, makes me feel proud to have done a bit. Well anyways, two months sounds a bit long, and enthusiasm and activity tends to wane. The MILHIST B-class assessment drive, and Tag & Assess 2008 drive both lasted about 1.5 months. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've copied this thread to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Country outline contest proposal. I suggest we continue the discussion there. ;) The Transhumanist 02:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well for the more complete ones, the challenge could be to get those redlinks into well-sourced articles, and to get citations for the outline? It's not impossible, and it would give the average content contributor something they're used to doing. The outlines you linked to are looking good, much better since I stopped working on them a while ago. Heh, makes me feel proud to have done a bit. Well anyways, two months sounds a bit long, and enthusiasm and activity tends to wane. The MILHIST B-class assessment drive, and Tag & Assess 2008 drive both lasted about 1.5 months. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Come to think of it, the ones with pictures, I did each of those in about a day. So if the contest lasts 2 months, that's not that big of a deal. We could give the almost completeds less time? The Transhumanist 01:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Re:Country WikiProject
[edit]Have retired with only infrequent small contributions made during actual wiki use since. Will definately not be participating in any projects any time soon, sorry!. └ VodkaJazz / talk ┐ 01:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: AWB task request 1
[edit]
Done –Juliancolton | Talk 01:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Done 2 and 3. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Done –Juliancolton | Talk 02:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Done –Juliancolton | Talk 03:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
NW's AWB requests
[edit] Done #1 NW (Talk) (How am I doing?) 03:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
AWB work
[edit]Hey there. Julian told me to ask you if you had any more AWB work for him, and to do some of it to help his workload. So, anything? NW (Talk) (How am I doing?) 03:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, there's lots more. Though it requires me to make the lists for you to input into AWB's "Make list" feature. I should have another task ready (similar to the tasks posted on Julian's talk page within 10 or 20 minutes. The Transhumanist 03:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
NW (Talk) (How am I doing?) 04:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Outline Contest / Retire
[edit]I am sorry, have retired from Wikipedia, for the time being. I may get back into it during the summer but most likely not. I have gotten to addicted to the game Combat Arms, and surfing the web, and Skype, and Twitter, hanging out with my friends, and being with my girlfriend, I don't have time for Wikipedia any more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackadam2 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Enjoy life. And once you've acquired much worldly experience, return, and share it with us! The Transhumanist 22:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
An idea for a contest
[edit]To promote work on the country outlines, maybe a contest between country WikiProjects could be run, to see which WikiProject could develop the best country outline.
What do you think?
(I look forward to your reply on my talk page).
The Transhumanist 23:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. There is less than ideal participation from the individual Wikiprojects and may only attract a few, if any, enthusiastic participants. Perhaps individually contacting and challenging the most highly active and participating users from the WProjects to a face-off may rally more support from their peers, who will in turn be ready for your next contest. But we're going to have to make this look big; lots of templates, formatting, and pretty colors. -- penubag (talk) 06:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that if the notices were just posted on the WikiProject talk pages, they might not get much response. But I was planning on having notices posted everywhere possible, including to all country WikiProject members, to the talk pages of the country outlines, and to the talk pages of the corresponding country articles. To the talk page of the Geography and Countries WikiProjects, and of course to the WP:CBB. Actually, there's a notice for it on the WP:CBB already. :)
- Perhaps we should post notices and banners.
- The only other place I can think of announcing this would be the Signpost. Could be intersting.
- Wait, just thought of more. Maybe check the histories of the various country-related articles (country, "government of", "geography of", "culture of", etc. and contact active editors?
- I like your idea of impressive notices and a big promotion campaign.
- How much of a build-up period (count-down) do you think we should have before the starting date of the contest? Post the count-down on the CBB? (change the date-count each day?)
- What if editors start editing before the start-date?
- And what about Buaidh and I, who are already editing these things on a frequent basis?
- Last I checked at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries#Country_outline_contest_proposal, I hadn't seen any discussion taking place at all, but that was premature and I hadn't realized that it wasn't long after you posted there since I looked. But now I see at least 3 other interested editors, which is great. What we should do is make them sign up under a "participants" list so they feel committed to continue. We also need a centralized page for the contest (which will look fancy) with a huge count-down timer until the start of the contest. The reason we need a centralized page just for the contest is to keep it organized. I rather found it hard to keep up when there were countless user subpages of lists of articles. I originally had no idea what exactly the project was that I was making all the awards for. I looked a lot of places to find out but eventually became bored and just did everything you told me to. And other users won't be willing to spend the time to do this. I don't mean to sound bad or anything but I feel other users must have felt the same way, and the lack communication between the other users is less than ideal for motivation. Organization is key. On this centralized page, you can post your weekly news and updates; let's just hope it doesn't go to MfD. Anyways...(sorry there :) )..what we can do to obtain maximum participants is to reach out to the individual directly. This is a lot of work, but it will be worth it. "Hello username, I've noticed you've been doing a great job editing x and think you will be a worthy opponent in [[Around the World Competition]]. If you win the championship, you will be awarded a golden trophy and be titled "Champion of Whatever". I feel you have a chance at winning! Care to give it a shot?" I can help with recruiting a few people as well some of the other members. Also, advertising to reinforce the depth of this competition will be good to the user, whether invited or not, as they would feel they are a part of something important and big. You mentioned posting on the Signpost and banners in various places, which is perfect. Put banners on talk pages (which should be more invitational than of a notice), project pages, etc to rally support. Once we've gathered the participants, make it very clear they will be awarded even if they don't win but if they try hard and put effort. This might get rid of the bystander effect along with deindividuation (which in simple terms explains the phenomenon that if a large group exists, the individual is less likely to put an effort). Anyways, I'm just on a rant so just take everything as advice; do what you think is right. Also, I've replied to your transparency request on my talkpage and updated /graphics. -- penubag (talk) 03:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- The work on the outline of knowledge has been decentralized up until now because it was essentially a proposal. Rather than posting a formal proposal at WP:VPR about making it, we instead just started making it to display it in partially completed form (i.e., developed it in place) as a model that the whole project will be based on. Why? Because how do you describe what we've built? It was far more practical to build it and show it. You can't really understand the outlines until you've seen and used them.
- I tried the proposal process on part of the OOK project, a rename of the page set, and most of the participants didn't even know what I was talking about (they didn't seem to know what a topic outline was), and most of them didn't return to the discussion after their initial post (and vote) to read the explanations. Hence the alternate approach. And due to this, I couldn't post a centralized page for a contest on a project that was being developed from our talk pages.
- As for contests, "Around the World" is dead. It no longer exists. That approach was thoroughly rejected. Burned with fire. This is a totally new contest concept. (Though we don't have a name for it yet). And rather than going straight to hosting and posting this new contest, we're getting community input, so that design flaws in the contest itself can be avoided, and so that any reservations can be dealt with and worked out in the contest's design.
- Rather than individual contestants, the contest proposal is for WikiProjects to be the contestants. Formal teams wouldn't work well, because what do you do if a non-team member drops in and edits the page? The WikiProject will be rewarded. I guess participants could post templates designed for them on their talk page, similar to how they post their own userboxes.
- Though the dynamics of the award process has yet to be worked out. But, tracking the edits of individual contestants would be virtually impossible - it would take longer than the edits themselves.
- And since the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries is sponsoring the contest, it makes sense to make the contest's central page a subpage of that WikiProject, though this hasn't been decided upon either. It's up to the group discussing it all.
- I think the WikiProjects, or anyone on behalf of the various WikiProjects, should recruit participants to work on each WikiProject's respective country outline.
- Just throwing in some ideas. Nothing's been worked out yet. But one thing is for sure, you and I need to keep fanning the flames so the fire doesn't go out. :)
Contest Question
[edit]A WikiProject race - I like the idea - it will hopefully work not only to complete the pages but publicise them. (I noticed the pages have all been WikiProject tagged) Highfields (talk, contribs, review) 15:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Ps. I've nearly finished the currency filling in task you gave me ages ago - it's been slow because I've been very busy and will be again very soon but it should be done in about a week.
- Cool. Thank you for keeping track of the currency task.
- The contest probably won't be a race. It will likely be a cake-baking contest. That is, judges will decide which "cake" is the best. There will be a time limit, probably a month, within which each WikiProject will work on it's respective country outline, and then the best ones will be chosen as the winners.
- The discussion to set the details of the contest is on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries.
- Only a few of the country outlines have been WikiProject tagged. Most of them still need tagging. Please put that on your task list, right after "currency". :)
(Every little bit helps!)
Canada Provinces
[edit]Just to let you know; I have added the Canada Provinces to the Outline of Knowledge. I am currently working on them trying to get them up to being legit. I need help and thought you or someone else could offer me some assistance. ThanksBurningview (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
RE: A two-pass AWB task (for placing notice on "Government of" talk pages)
[edit]Hi there,
For this task - are you sure that you have given me the right sandbox? That sandbox doesn't really have any links on it - perhaps you have given me the wrong one?
Thanks,
The Helpful One 17:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sandbox32 (a list of "Talk:Government of" pages)
- This task is Done The Helpful One 20:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- This task is
RE: Another notice-posting AWB task
[edit]Hi again,
This task is now Done!
The Helpful One 19:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hi there, a problem has occurred by creating these pages, please see here. Thanks, The Helpful One 14:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your commentary about the Outline of Organic Chemistry page. My original concern was due to the occasional punchy nature where often content will get deleted in the churn of creating/modifying content. This page is one of the oldest pages on Wikipedia, and its edit history shows aspects of that history as well.
I still think pages of this nature get deleted from the main-line content pages of Wikipedia far too often, particularly when the content shows some age compared to the fortunately ever improving content of the rest of the project. As my comment on the talk page is already two years old, even that shows a bit of history now.
Again, thank for the reply that I wasn't even expecting. That is a good pick-me-up for the day. --Robert Horning (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
sure
[edit]I'll help you out at-210 discovered elements ∞ what am I? 20:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Help request
[edit]You've got 7K more edits than I do, I don't really see how I can help!
I'm also unclear how the outline of knowledge will improve over categories. I'll try looking into it a bit, but I'm not really interested in a big project right now. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 20:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Userpage design centre
[edit]Hi, I have a suggestion for the design centre-maybe you could add a section on formatting your signature-although not technically userpage-would still be very useful?! dottydotdot (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Customisation
- [[5]] (WP:EIW)) which will link you to most anything
- User:NikoSilver/Signature shop
- Wikipedia:Smurrayinchester's signature tutorial
Re:
[edit]"Outlines"
[edit]I note you have been moving numerous "outline" drafts into main namespace (such as here). Note that these aren't valid article titles, unless they are discussing something known as an "outline", citing eferences establishing the notability of said "outlines". As long as "outline of X" is just a stubby fork of the "X" article, it is in violation of WP:CFORK and needs to be merged or redirected. --dab (𒁳) 10:11, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- 1) Outlines: I've replied to dab's thread at Portal_talk:Contents/Outline_of_knowledge#namespace_discipline with some clarifications and answers. Let's keep that discussion there.
- 2) Indexes: The Category:Indexes of articles seems to be redundant to the older Category:Lists of topics by country. Is there any reason these shouldn't be merged?
- Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. I've replied to the dab thread. As for the index cat problem, I'm on it. The Transhumanist 23:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Re:
[edit]@Skaterthealmighty: @Skaterthealmighty:
Talkback
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
NW (Talk) (How am I doing?) 01:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Outline question
[edit]Hey I saw your request on my talk page. I wanted to let you know I was not ignoring you, however I'm at Walt Disney World right now, and haven't had a chance to give you a reply. Quite a task you've taken on though that I see. When I get back on again full-time I'll make sure to drop in my $.02. Wildthing61476 (talk) 18:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- I look forward to your input. Thank you. The Transhumanist 20:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hello, sorry I seemed like I ignored you too. I am having some serious, stressful business at MfD. I am very impressed with your contributions, but I'm unable to help right now. Like I said, I'm going to be busy on MfD until it closes, but hopefully I will return when it is all finished. ZooFari 04:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
OK I'm back from vacation and ready to throw in my $.02 here. This is a rather ambitious project, and from what I see it looks good. I know there has been discussion on WP:AN on this, but I think this is a good centralize point for people to use on various projects. As for the contest, that seems a bit trickier, while it will lead to better article being written, in my opinion at least it takes away a bit as to what Wikipedia is, being a all-volunteer project with the reward being knowledge for everyone. Wildthing61476 (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Government of Nepal
[edit]Talk:Government of Nepal, which refers questions to you, discusses Outline of Nepal. So why isn't that discussion at Talk:Outline of Nepal, so its editors will see it? Government of Nepal is a new redirect to Politics of Nepal, so I would think anything on its talk page should be about the redirect. Art LaPella (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the heads up. I have a bunch of notices I need to post to the outline talk pages, and was planning to write and place them all at once to save time. The handful of people who edit that outline are busy editing 500+ outlines (and we're supposed to be creating 500+ more) and we're doing many other tasks, so we are spread pretty thin. We need as much help as we can get. The notice doesn't discuss anything, it's just an announcement. I don't have time to check back to 200+ talk pages, and so I've left my contact info for convenience. The notice doesn't preclude nor prevent discussion about the redirect, and is otherwise on topic (concerns "government of Nepal"), so it does no harm. It caught your attention, giving me the opportunity to ask you for help. Help! Would you please fix the problem on the government branches sections of the Outline of Nepal? It's part of Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, which serves as the table of contents and site map of Wikipedia. I look foward to your reply on my talk page. Thank you. The Transhumanist 20:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- My only contribution to Nepal articles was to create the redirect, so I left a note at Talk:Outline of Nepal; otherwise they wouldn't see your note where it is. Art LaPella (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
outline of politics in Ukraine
[edit]Re this message, Outline of Politics of Ukraine#Government and politics of Politics of Ukraine doesn't exist; however Outline of Ukraine#Government and politics of Politics of Ukraine does and I've updated and corrected it. -- Timberframe (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
RE: Here's a similar task, to post a notice on "Politics of" talk pages)
[edit] Done
The Helpful One 22:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: In need of mentorship
[edit]Good morning! (or afternoon, or evening, or whatever time it is when you read this; I've never been any good working out time differences). You raised a number of points on my talk page, and so I'm here to address them.
Now, it seems your product's biggest selling point is interconnectivity (oh God, I sound like I'm on The Apprentice). Every user on this encyclopedia is here to improve Wikipedia (at least we hope so), and so, theoretically, every user would want to help with a project that coordinates most of the encyclopedia's work. In practice, however, most people just want to get on and do what they're most comfortable with. Because of this, I would recommend requesting help form the relevant WikiProject for each Outline page. If you market (there I go again) the Outline as not only a way to improve readers' knowledge about a particular subject, but also to help recruit editors for that WikiProject, I'm sure they'ld (is that a word?) be willing to help. That said, there will, of course, be a number of editors who would want to help with all aspects, and so placing an ad wouldn't hurt. I suspect that most people who would want to help with this type of project would be WikiGnomes, and so keep on the lookout for behind-the-scenes workers. Finally, a notice or two at the the Village Pump wouldn't go amiss.
Stay tuned for more in this brand new series about advice for the accompanying webpage.
Next time: Weebiloobil thrillingly details the improvements that could be made to User:The Transhumanist/Outline of knowledge.
Presented by: weebiloobil (talk) 08:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hello again! Blimey, it's been a long time since I last posted here. Revision always seems to remove your time sense, doesn't it? One second, the exams are 3 weeks away, there's more than enough time; 3 seconds later, you're standing outside the exam hall, not being able to remember the definition of a species and confusing radicles with plumules. Ah well, better late than never (unless you happen to be a bomb disposal expert). Here I am wittering away, when this post is supposed to be about your Outline of Knowledge page. The one, big thing Isee when reading it is the lack of examples, which are only provided for the Countries section. If people want to help, they'll want to check that what they do is OK, and the best way of doing this is showing them what the best Outlines are like. Aside from this, there isn't really much more you can do; the only other thing I can think of is to add a picture for a splash of colour (it doesn't have to be relevant, any picture will look nice). I'll be back soon with some more advice! - weebiloobil (talk) 13:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- Examples. Pictures. Gotcha. Will do. Thank you! The Transhumanist 16:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Apparently, some people dislike the Outline of Knowledge
[edit]As the driving force behind the Outline of Knowledge project, this AN thread about people complaining about (and threatening to AFD/MFD) much of the project will be of great interest to you. Could you please comment there please? NW (Talk) (How am I doing?) 04:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hi TH. I'm sorry I haven't responded to your earlier request for help. Off-wiki I have been busy with real life, and on-wiki I have been trying to clear up a backlog of projects I've already started (and never finished) before adding more to my plate. Then I noticed the same WP:AN discussion that NW pointed out, and I thought I'd better let you know since I hadn't seen any responses yet from you there. I really resent the implication that the OoK is a "shadow" version of Wikipedia. Obviously the people commenting aren't familiar with it and are just freaking out because of the negatively hyped initial info. It would be good for someone with your knowledge of the project to add their thoughts. Hope your weekend goes well otherwise! —Willscrlt ( “Talk” ) 05:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- The thread was archived before I read my messages this morning. Oh well, you can't please all of the people all of the time. But enough people understand what the OOK is, that I'm not too worried about it. Though it looks like a good idea to address the points that were presented in that discussion, in case they come up again. Thank you for the heads up guys. The Transhumanist 19:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Peeking over shoulder comments. Re your sandboxed "OOK update", I strongly recommend moving the outline guideline draft into projectspace (still as a draft) - Many people are hesitant to edit userspace subpages; it seems a bit furtive, somehow. I'll try to add some comments to the talkpages soon.
- Re dab's thread at AN: He took part (made 2 comments) in the last discussion about which namespace these belong in (when they were called Lists of basic topics - Oct/Nov 2007) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contents/Archive 4#Contents pages, and lists of lists, so he shouldn't really have been so surprised, but he might have forgotten, or not seen the Lists of basic topics even then. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- You seem to have disassembled the Category:Topical indexes, and reconstructed it at Category:Indexes of articles: However, Mathbot is still repopulating the 1st category. You break it, you buy it! (But please disassemble the old structure entirely).
- I think you're repurposing some of the topic lists as outlines: You should take a read through Category talk:Topical indexes, which I wrote whilst initially populating the Topical indexes category. Might help with something or other. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 20:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. The guideline draft is still being composed, and won't be ready to propose until it is completed. It's 90% done, so it shouldn't take me too much longer.
- DAB was out of line, and because of this he is discrediting himself. First, he mistakenly stated that outlines were being moved from portal space, and second he used rhetoric at WP:AN which came off like Chicken Little crying "the sky is falling!" His negative hype was not appreciated by many, and appeared to piss some people off. Fortunately, level heads prevailed.
- I've recategorized topic lists that are structured lists as outlines. They enable the same type of browsing as the outlines do, and differ from alphabetical indexes in the same way that outlines do. And most of them look like they can and should be converted to outlines or merged into existing outlines. Look over Category:Outlines, and you'll see that they match the type of pages listed. Let me know if you think they do not fit. There's a little more to do to clean up the list category tree, and I will get to it as time allows.
- Thanks for taking over the index categories, and I agree with your repurposing of some of those topics lists as outlines.
- To clarify: I mean that the draft guideline should be moved immediately, and completed in projectspace, before proposing it formally. This isn't a personal project, it is a Wikiproject, so the whole team should have equal-appearing access to changing it.
- If you want more participation in the whole endeavor, from folks well-versed in our meta-structures, I don't think the folks at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles or Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team have been invited yet. I would invite them myself, but I'm still not a firm believer in the scope of the project that you envisage ("outline of the history of the state of ..." is a step or 2 too far, currently, imho), hence recommend that you or someone else write the invite/explanations instead. Cheers. -- Quiddity (talk) 23:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not comfortable with moving the draft until I've completed the writing I have left to do. Once I sit down to do it, it probably won't take more than a day or two.
- Note that I haven't been developing the outline down that deep. Those state historical outlines were developed last July by an editor (User:Buaidh) not associated with the WikiProject - just another list builder working on topics that interested him (it's the Wiki-way). I just pulled those in when I discovered them 2 months ago (March 11). It made no sense to leave them orphaned from the OOK when they were clearly outlines. But they were way off the tree (!), so the next day I created state outlines which they could link off from, and Buaidh started working on those and on our country outlines. In fact, he has become one of the most prolific developers of currently existing outlines. So this has worked out well.
- My personal view is that we shouldn't take the Geography branch any deeper until we buff up some of the other branches (because the OOK is currently geography-heavy - we did this purposely to bulk up the OOK, but now it's time to add more body to the rest of it).
- I'm trying to delegate existing outlines off to the Wikipedia community, so I can get back to work on creating new ones - one of our notices caught Dab's attention, but attracting detractors is an unavoidable risk of advertising. :)
- Concerning scope, I don't believe we should limit the scope as a matter of policy (as that might dissuade editors like Buaidh interested in a particular subject), but rather we should encourage development of the top levels until they are well done, before emphasizing going any deeper.
- I've been pushing the refinement of our current set of outlines, and they have been improving steadily. We've also been gathering the names of lists that are actually outlines, and will be converting the most core of those over before focusing on creating many new outlines.
- Quality level (e.g. "no redlinks") seems to be a big concern with some editors, but I see that as lunacy. To keep the pages as drafts in project space until they are complete (or all the expansion links turn blue) means hiding them from the very people who are most likely to complete them (Wikipedians). The Transhumanist 00:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- I completely agree on the redlinks. Should be decided by relevant experts/wikiprojecters, case by case.
- You'd said in your 'update', "I requested help on them, but there was none forthcoming." My suggestion of moving the wikiproject's guideline draft into wikiproject-space, was meant to help explain, and correct, the lack of other editor's editing WP:OOK. The article on outlines is your own thing, and you can edit it in userspace forever (and invite participation on it there), but the wikiproject's guideline seems more like it belongs to everyone who has ever influenced it.
- That's actually my main suggestion for the guideline. Point out a little of it's own history, somewhere. On the talkpage, if nothing else. -- Quiddity (talk) 03:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- I just discovered a OOK-related proposal at WP:VPR#OoK's expediency. Since the guideline needs to be on display now (you were right), I've moved it to a subpage of the OOK WikiProject. The Transhumanist 04:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I strongly support the project, and will say so as necessary--I just commented at the VP. But I do not think posting additional notices at this point is a good idea. We should be editing current outlines before we get involved with more. DGG (talk) 00:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- Don't worry, the current notices, and the planned ones mentioned in the update, concern the development of existing outlines. For example, notices of work that needs to be done to them, and notices to recruit editors to help out on them. The Transhumanist 00:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
RE: AWB task - replace footer template
[edit]Hi there,
This task is now Done!
Thanks,
The Helpful One 14:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Re:Outline of Knowledge
[edit]Hi, I've been thinking about the matter of spreading the OoK to editors all over Wikipedia; it is quite a detailed navigation system and can definitely help users to look for what they want to find. I'm aware that this undertaking is no minor one; spreading awareness about this project across Wikipedia is not easy. Thus, I advise you to perhaps ask for help from every avilable source. The WikiAd a good place to start, if you haven't already tried it. Then there comes the arduous task of asking others to inform their acquaintances around Wikipedia. It's slow, but it works nevertheless. Finally, I suggest that you try to ask the Admins for help; they might have something up their sleeves. If all else fails, perhaps you can try the advertisement space they usually reserve for the big projects, like the pop up box they design for donations (the ones at the top of your page, during the donation periods). You can also create cards and userboxes (how do you like to search Wiki easily and hassle free??--not a good slogan, but you get the idea of what to put on the cards/userboxes) and put it on your talk page, send it to your acquaintances and ask them to send it to theirs; it's so much easier than to send a message over and over again. Plus, cards are better at grabbing people's attention, especially if it's particularly neat.
- Concerning your outline details, I see no particular flaw there; it seems to be quite detailed, if not a little too detailed. I'm sure you'll be able to pinpoint anything you missed out when more and more people use it; they each tend to have their own preferences and dislikes, so I think you'll be able to change the outline based on their...er...complaints. As for now, I can't help much, sorry about that.
- As for your contest, you might want to first think about what the winners will get. Since it's a contest, there must obviously be a winner and therefore a prize of sorts. It must be highly esteemed by the community, too. Usually, something like a major announcement of the contest and the prize must be made. The winner might get special praise and recognition from someone high up in the community (The Administrators of the Wikipedia community recognizes this user for his/her outstanding contibution in the...) or perhaps even a special note of thanks from Mr. Jimmy Wales himself! I'm sure that one of either would be very much sought-after, and if you can somehow manage both, there will be, no doubt, a warm response from the society. That said, you must then proceed to advertise this project/contest and to make full effect, I suggest you take it to the highest possible person in charge; that will certainly make it a big thing almost immediately if you get a green light from the person in charge. Naturally, you'll want a judge (or judges, since there'll be many contributors if you've made it known to the community and you'll need to go through all their edits). Then you'll need to make a page for them to register themselves (the editors who are interested) and then give them a time limit, say...you tell them in advance the day on which they have to register themselves, then on that day, make the page. The editor who has the most edits and made the best articles in 48 hours (so on, so forth) will win. Or perhaps you just give them a time limit of 48 hours from the time of their registration (give them a week to register) then judge their works; Wikipedians come from all over the world and have different time zones, so one particular time of the day will not appeal to everybody. As for how it should go, perhaps you can get them to see who can write the most detailed and reliable article about a parituclar country, perhaps even more than one article in the time limit given to them.
- Whew. Well, I hope I have cleared some of your doubts, even if it's just a little. Glad to help you. Cheers, Zacharycrimsonwolf 11:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- As for your contest, you might want to first think about what the winners will get. Since it's a contest, there must obviously be a winner and therefore a prize of sorts. It must be highly esteemed by the community, too. Usually, something like a major announcement of the contest and the prize must be made. The winner might get special praise and recognition from someone high up in the community (The Administrators of the Wikipedia community recognizes this user for his/her outstanding contibution in the...) or perhaps even a special note of thanks from Mr. Jimmy Wales himself! I'm sure that one of either would be very much sought-after, and if you can somehow manage both, there will be, no doubt, a warm response from the society. That said, you must then proceed to advertise this project/contest and to make full effect, I suggest you take it to the highest possible person in charge; that will certainly make it a big thing almost immediately if you get a green light from the person in charge. Naturally, you'll want a judge (or judges, since there'll be many contributors if you've made it known to the community and you'll need to go through all their edits). Then you'll need to make a page for them to register themselves (the editors who are interested) and then give them a time limit, say...you tell them in advance the day on which they have to register themselves, then on that day, make the page. The editor who has the most edits and made the best articles in 48 hours (so on, so forth) will win. Or perhaps you just give them a time limit of 48 hours from the time of their registration (give them a week to register) then judge their works; Wikipedians come from all over the world and have different time zones, so one particular time of the day will not appeal to everybody. As for how it should go, perhaps you can get them to see who can write the most detailed and reliable article about a parituclar country, perhaps even more than one article in the time limit given to them.
- Concerning your outline details, I see no particular flaw there; it seems to be quite detailed, if not a little too detailed. I'm sure you'll be able to pinpoint anything you missed out when more and more people use it; they each tend to have their own preferences and dislikes, so I think you'll be able to change the outline based on their...er...complaints. As for now, I can't help much, sorry about that.
PS: Sorry for the late reply; I'm pretty busy of late and I am using an old computer now, so I try not to log in as much as possible, for fear of slowing it down. And I don't come online that often anymore either, so pardon me if my replies are a little late. I'll try to log in once a week to check on my mails, so do send me a message if you need help. I'm too lazy to archive my talk page too, so it's a little too cluttered now...sob. Anyways, peace and out. =)
200-WikiProject
[edit]Hi
Not sure where you got the list from to have the 200-WikiProject notice posted, but it was also placed at talk pages of non-existent projects, e.g. at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Macedonia, and a number of other G8able pages.
Amalthea 13:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm looking into the feasibility of creating the missing WikiProjects (those that are not title typos). The Transhumanist 22:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see how this info posting helps a non-existant WikiProject. I've asked it at User talk:MSGJ#RE: Another notice-posting AWB task, can you create a list of all those talk pages that were created on your request where the WikiProject does not exist, so that they can deleted in one batch? Amalthea 23:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Why did you ignore me just now? The Transhumanist 20:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Where did I ignore you? Amalthea 20:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- "I'm looking into the feasibility of creating the missing WikiProjects." Your reply totally disregarded that statement. Let me restate it: rather than delete the discussion pages that have no corresponding project pages, I'm looking into starting the projects. I'm currently trying to track down a template for creating WikiProjects, but have not found one yet. I'd be surprised if there wasn't one. Would you happen to know what it is called? The Transhumanist 20:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- You stated above "I don't see how this info posting helps a non-existant WikiProject." Well, if you look at them as future WikiProjects, rather than merely non-existant, that would reveal the potential for future benefits. The posts are there ready and waiting for them, which suits my purposes fine. But since it bothers you, I'll be happy to speed up the process by creating the non-existant WikiProjects myself, as long as it is feasible, that is. The Transhumanist 21:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- I believe I replied to that with "I don't see how this info posting helps a non-existant WikiProject". A WikiProject isn't made of a project page, it's made of editors. Mass-creating project pages where there is no interest by editors to at the very least watch the project's talk page is not helpful at all. To the contrary, it makes it far more likely that editors seek support from a project where nobody cares and can respond. Pre-spamming their talk pages may "suit your purposes fine", but I don't really care about that. If a project doesn't exist and has no support by active editors, it shouldn't have a page.
I'd also actually be surprised if there were a template to create a generic WikiProject. They are all decidedly different in scope, goal and appearance, and have grown into their current shape through the work of their editors. Amalthea 21:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- I believe I replied to that with "I don't see how this info posting helps a non-existant WikiProject". A WikiProject isn't made of a project page, it's made of editors. Mass-creating project pages where there is no interest by editors to at the very least watch the project's talk page is not helpful at all. To the contrary, it makes it far more likely that editors seek support from a project where nobody cares and can respond. Pre-spamming their talk pages may "suit your purposes fine", but I don't really care about that. If a project doesn't exist and has no support by active editors, it shouldn't have a page.
- Now I see what you mean. Thank you for elaborating. Now I'm sure it is feasible. It will just take a little more effort, such as placing banners for each WikiProject to attract members, posting task lists, watchlisting the talk pages, etc. And I've already got a couple new volunteers to help with this. The Transhumanist 04:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Yep
[edit]Bring on the AWB tasks when ready. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I will need some tips... :) ChiragPatnaik (talk) 11:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- AWB says no pages link to User:The Transhumanist/Outline of knowledge. Seeing as that's obviously false, do you know what the issue is? –Juliancolton | Talk 19:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I got it to work by selecting "What links here (all NS)" instead of "What links here". –Juliancolton | Talk 19:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- "All namespaces". I'll have to remember that. Thank you. The Transhumanist 19:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Done! –Juliancolton | Talk 20:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
status
[edit]hey Transhumanist, sorry for being so inactive all of a sudden. I'm extremely busy IRL and will continue to be until after this week. I'll reply when I get the chance. Thanks. -- penubag (talk) 03:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
let me know
[edit]sure... AWB work is interesting to say the least. lets me practice Regexes :). let me know ChiragPatnaik (talk) 11:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
AWB Tasks
[edit]Hey, I just wanted to check up on any new AWB tasks for me, as you said you had a few more for me to do. Are you still working on collating them, or did I just miss one on my talk page? Thanks, NW (Talk) (How am I doing?) 20:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Outline of X (country) articles
[edit]These articles have the nesting of Environment -> Ecology -> Renewable energy. Renewable energy is not a subset of ecology. Also, having articles with the title "Ecology of Country" is incorrect. Ecology does not end at a political boundary. Environmental issues and environment do however have political boundaries since environmental policy and environmental law can end at such a boundary. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. I'll definitely look into that. The Transhumanist 21:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Glossaries
[edit]Howdy. 2 separate issues.
Do you have a person you'd suggest (or could ask), to do some AWB talkpage tagging with the {{WikiProject Glossaries}} banner, of the articles in Category:Glossaries and Portal:Contents/List of glossaries. (and perhaps make a list of any that don't appear in both? I'm not sure how subcategories should be worked in or accounted though...)
Also, some of these are coming up for deletion again (eg List of Internet-related terminology), and it'd be nice to get some of these issues ironed out, or new thoughts arrived at that don't waste(as in kill) the information. (So many discussions, so little consensus, so hard to remember where it all is, and what all the pertinent points are...:( Any ideas? -- Quiddity (talk) 02:03, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm, at a glance, Category:Lists of terms seems to be a mix of indexes, and topic lists, and glossaries. I'll stare at this later, if you don't first. Wine and a sunny porch are calling... -- Quiddity (talk) 02:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- AWB - FYI, I created WP:AWB/Tasks for placing tasks when you have nobody specific to ask (or when they are all busy). There are several AWB'ers on the OOK Advanced Wikitools Workgroup (though the name is unofficial), and I'll gladly put your requests at the front of our task queue.
- By the way, don't you have AWB? It processes a list of 300 to 360 pages in about an hour on a good connection (Comcast). The lists you make can be saved, so you can chop off the done part and resume a task later. Makes it easy to split up tasks amongst short sessions.
- If you get a bot account, you can let AWB run in the background on many task types.
- Good idea about the banner - putting the banner on the glossaries' talk pages is a good first step to protecting them from arbitrary or misguided deletion. I've augmented the banner with an intro similar to the one on {{WikiProject Outline of knowledge}}, describing glossaries and providing links to relevant guideline pages.
- Writing a Wikipedia:Glossaries guideline would help even more, and a link to it could be provided in the WikiProject banner's intro. All the pertinent points should be gathered to a single guideline.
- A major discussion on the usefulness of Glossaries and how moving them to Wiktionary kills them (a key point) can be found at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Archive 22#Glossaries.
- To make a list of glossaries that don't appear in the cats, you can use Google to do site-specific searches of Wikipedia. Be sure to select "in the title of the page" in the "Where your keywords show up" slot" under the "Date, usage rights, numeric range, and more" link on the advanced search page. The terms to search for (in separate searches) would be "terminology", "terms", "jargon", "slang", and "vocabulary". This type of task is pretty hard to delegate. I think you are on your own on this one. Once you have a list, and have whittled out the non-glossaries, I'll be glad to put it on my AWB task queue.
- Category:Lists of terms is redundant. But it is small, so you shouldn't have much trouble with it. :)
- I hope the above comments help.
- P.S.: Glossaries aren't mentioned at all in WP:NOT. And in WP:NOTDIC, they are only mentioned way down in the "Wikipedia is not a usage guide" section. Better placement on those pages of the glossaries exception would certainly help.
Hi there,
Please comment at that page about an AWB posting task that I did for you.
Thanks,
The Helpful One 09:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Bump this thread, please see User_talk:MSGJ#RE:_Another_notice-posting_AWB_task. The Helpful One 10:15, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- That's actually about the same issue I mentioned further up at #200-WikiProject. Which you didn't comment on either. Amalthea 10:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikibreak
[edit]I'm currently taking a wikibreak, I will do your instructions when I get back.--SKATER Speak. 14:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]Message added 23:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Happy The Transhumanist's Day!
[edit] |
The Transhumanist has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, |
→ Dylan620 (Toolbox Alpha, Beta) 00:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Adoption
[edit]Looking around your User-page, I'm not sure I'm the right person to adopt you - you really need specialised advice about running projects and attracting editor's attention, and I'm not really familiar with either of these. However, I am happy to give you some advice about attracting attention.
Firstly, I would suggest developing a number of Project templates which can be placed on relevant articles, so that editors working on those articles can help with the project. Since your project will be involved in a number of mainstream topics, this should raise awareness significantly.
I would also recommend developing a userbox for all project members, so that they can advertise their involvement in the project and so that other users can see it on their User page. If you don't want to make the userbox yourself, you could leave a note at WP:Userboxes/Ideas, or request it from a user whose userboxes you like (a number of editors, including myself, will make userboxes if requested).
Similarly, you might want to develop, or ask another user to develop, an advert to gain attention. Many people display randomised ads on their User pages, but the template can be set to display one ad in particular if you want to use just your ad.
Finally, you might wish to create an 'invitation' template, or even just a short message, which can be left on pages of users that you think might be interested in the project.
Once all these are done, you can add them to the project page, so that new members can easily find them and help to raise awareness. Even if these measures don't increase membership, they will help spread the word about your project.
I hope these ideas are useful to you, and that you find some-one more experienced to help you out. If you need any more advice, please leave another message at my Talk page and I'll do my best to help. strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 08:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Having taken a closer look at the project, have you considered placing the 'Projected outline' section in a category or a sub-page? It would make it easier to read the Project page, and would still be easy to find if clearly linked to. strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 08:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
RE: I need your advice on a particular garden that needs tending...
[edit]Nice title ;) And by golly are your posts tl;dr much...
Anyway, for your questions, sorry if this isn't exactly the length or quality of response you're looking for, but I'm rather pressed for time at the minute with exam revision and such. My main idea would be to include some kind of reward at next year's WikiCup (inclusion this year would be practically unworkable with both the stage of the contest as well as the fact that the rules have already been altered excessively and I'm sure you'll appreciate that a whole new item to score from would be a rather avoidable inclusion.
As for people in particular to help out with your scheme, I'm pretty dry on idea there I'm afraid. I'd look for bot operators who are used to small repetitive edits or even some people from MILHIST who have regular (well, relatively) contests involving mass tagging and reviewing which sounds a similar process to the one you plan to undertake.
I wish you the very best of luck in this endeavour - you might need it. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 10:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. TLDR (or tl;dr, tl/dr, tldr and a host of other spellings) means "too long; didn't read" which I'm sure you'll agree sums up many of your posts (not that this is a bad thing!) I'll definitely get back to you if I have a brainwave ;P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 10:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
RE: Speedy delete request
[edit]This has now been Done.
The Helpful One 16:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject
[edit]Hi, I saw your post on my talk page about WP:WPOOK. I am very interested in this project, as I think the outlines will increase traffic. I do have a few ideas on how to acheive the goals which you've requested. I like how the exsisting outlines are structured, but think we could expand with a few words about each sub-topic, to give readers info about what they're looking at. The best way of advertising the OOK is of course, the main page, which I thought could be organized like portals are. Each general topic could link to the actual outline of the subject. I will help out in any way I can. I look forward to expanding the current outlines and, in time, leaving portals forever. Thank you! T-95 (talk) 17:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. Welcome to the team!
- Speaking of traffic, are you familiar with the last two links on the navbar below?
- I've been using these to compare the traffic of outlines with the traffic of the corresponding articles and portals. Most of the outlines are still orphans, and their traffic reflects this. It should pick up one we link them into the encyclopedia. I'm currently looking into the feasibility of placing a hatnote a the top of articles that leads to each subject's corresponding outline. It makes sense to have the TOC (which each outline is for its subject) at the top of the subject's main article rather than at the bottom in the see also section (which seems like the perfect place for a link to the subject's index page.
- Take a look at the traffic counts for the portals listed on the Main Page. They are really high. I think it is because of the portal navbar that is at the top of almost all of the portals.
- By the way, short section leads are fine with me. Though we'll need to do something to prevent them from growing too large.
- As for the Main Page, I was thinking we should try to replace the portal links with outline links, once the outlines become more numerous than portals. But that probably won't fly. Your idea is more feasible I think, as the community is more likely to accept it. Thank you!
- Would you like to make the proposal and post it to the Main Page's talk page? But before you post the proposal, I'd love to see it. You should also bounce your Main Page idea off of Quiddity and RichardF too, because they are also very familiar with Wikipedia's contents systems and the Main Page's role in them.
- I look forward to your reply.
- The Transhumanist 04:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Brief note: The usability project has created a new skin (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-06-01/Technology report), that won't become the default, but might be worth taking into consideration in the event of mainpage tweaks or redesigns. They simplified the sidebar selection, and the mainpage might need to compensate for that. (But, to repeat, it is not being made the default, so there is no rush).
- Regarding redesigns: A few mainpage tweaks are vastly more likely to be accepted, than another overhaul. The last attempt just ended, after running from July 2008 - February 2009, and died horribly, leaving most people involved with a bitter taste - there's a fairly strong consensus that no major changes are needed/justified at the moment. Walk gently, and have good draft mockups, with concise explanations, before probing for feedback at the talk:mainpage.
- I strongly recommend against even suggesting the replacement of portals, until the quality of the majority of outlines, is greatly superior to the portals. T.T.T. (his image here) :) -- Quiddity (talk) 05:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- You are the voice of reason, as usual. :) But, T.T.T.M.T., and anything we can do to speed this project up would be a good thing.
- More thoughts and some questions...
- How can we inspire 1,000 editors to work on the outlines?
- In Vector, did they remove "Contents" from the sidebar menu?
- Getting "Contents" added to the Main Page was fairly easy compared to the overhaul and overhaul attempt.
- Speaking of the overhaul attempt, please point me to it. I'd like to see if there are any designs worth adding to Wikipedia:Main Page alternatives.
- It might be possible to include double links somehow. Like have the first half of each subject be green (outline) and the right half be blue (portal). Just brainstorming here. Having two complete sets of those subjects sounds like it will be cumbersome, so it might be better to integrate them together somehow.
- Previous redesign attempt: Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal.
- In Vector: if you read the link and looked at the screenshot, you know as much as I do. :)
- Context-based coloring of links is generally frowned upon for accessibility reasons. Red and blue is all we've got, for the next few years at least. Splitting a link in half is a bad idea, for the same reasons. More confusion than help for some users.
- More editors: More spammed notices. Tis the most effective way. - Like I said before, Wikipedia talk:Vital articles and Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team would be good/ideal to notify, and request assistance/input/participation from. They know our meta structures and knowledge structures better than most editors here.
- Oh crap! They took "Contents" out! That's a step in the wrong direction. This calls for some heavy duty brainstorming.
- OK. We're gearing up for the next round of AWB blasts. :) Have you seen the latest opposition the previous round stirred up?
- And your suggestion to contact Wikipedia talk:Vital articles and Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has finally sunk in. I'll pay 'em a visit. The Transhumanist 03:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The outline project
[edit]- Well, I could try and help... what's the main issue right now?--[[User:Tutthoth-Ankhre|Tutthoth-Ankhre~ The Pharaoh of the Universe]] (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- If you are speaking about advising, I need advice on how to recruit or attract editors to the outlines to work on them. Your comments on how to achieve the WikiProject's goals would also be greatly appreciated.
- If you are speaking about working on the project, the government sections of the country outlines (see Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge#Geography and places) need to be checked, corrected, and completed.
Mentor
[edit]Hello there
thanks for your ask and i will be hapopoy to help you any way i can, though I am not mr perfect, i tend to try to think who is reading this article and aim it that way, and sod the recommendations. most of the time i get my way because it is not of ignorance but sense.
So delioberately i have not read your project articles yet *(will do in a bit) but yeah quite happy to help, as i say i am ver picky for spelling and grammar and that kind of nonsense but more than anything i want articles to make sense and that crap can come second. anyone tells y9ou otherwise refer them to me. SimonTrew (talk) 20:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC*
Excuse me i should add i just got a new netbook and am having some trouble getting used to its little keyboard so please excuise my typing nerrors quite embarrassing! 20:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- I look forward to your advice. The Transhumanist 04:43, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Please be aware that the adoption WikiProject is not ment to be a vehicle for canvassing (I suggest you read that guidelines thouroughly before you attempt any such thing like contacting all regular editors). I don't support your attitude of competing with Portals and "leaving them in the dust", we shouldn't be competing with our own content although there's nothing wrong with complementary work. I think you should slow down and convince people why this all is important instead of expecting that thousands of editors will start working on your project.
If you seek editors to write outlines on certain topics, you can contact the relevant wikiproject. But again, don't start canvassing all wikiprojects, it's considered spam as you rightly point out. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Steven, canvassing is an attempt to sway a discussion (e.g. at AfD) by informing editors of it. I'm merely looking for guidance and advice, from an advice department, on how to recruit people for a WikiProject to work on articles. I have definitely not been canvassing.
- Thank you for your advice. I'll definitely continue staying on topic for each WikiProject, department, and user contacted.
Hello there, I will try to help, even though I think you have more experience on WP than I. What May help on your WP page is to have a page which many other WP call "Outreach" SK Outreach WP Outreach, Baseball Outreach
Sometimes as in the case of Baseball outreach, the page is devoted solely to the newsletter. However many of the other wikiprojects and or outreach pages also have a welcome template of some sort.
I guess further to this a pattern that is developing on some WP projects is to discover who the new editors are which have an interest in their particular WP. This robot helps to identify who likes to write about Japan for example for the WP Japan project. However that would not help the WP:WPOOK as much as for instance asking the robot to keep looking for those folks who have written "Outline of foo" page already, and also including those who have written "List of Foo" pages. Then editors who already show an interest in the WP "Outline of" content could be extended a welcome. (The robot also helps with category, WP talk page banner and list classifications as well).
The other pattern would be to see which editors like to edit "Outline of foo" pages, by placing "Outline of Foo" pages on outreach editors watchlist and providing a welcome to them.
An "outline of Foo" should/could also be used to enhance a "Foo:portal". Many portals are using tabbed pages now, and I personally think again, that a portal would blososom if the "topic of foo" page were added to the portal as one of the portals tabbed pages. (However this page wouldn't rotate its content) Portals introduce rotating featured subject foo content, rotating featured images, rotating featured biographies, (The best of the best) and categories to the reader, and an outline tab would also introduce the reader to more about the subject foo as well...
However the bad part about outlines is that if the reader goes to an outline of foo page and sees a huge tree of outlines/topices, etc, but nowhere on the outline page is the sub-topic the teacher assigned for study, then the person may rightly or wrongly assume it is not on WP and leave without doing an independent search to see if such an area was created after the topic outline was made.
Perhaps a usefull template would be an incomplete outline template such as an incomplete list template which would encourage other viewers to see what is incomplete and encourage additions. (and requests) I see there is this one for a subject talk page Template:Outline of knowledge coverage, (Which could be put on soooo many subject pages) but there should be one for the main outline page or section - "incomplete outline tag" as well (unless there is one already).
I see you hae already contemplated contests. Some past ideas that work sometimes are collaborations, and article (outline) improvement drives. Sometimes they work better with a newsletter.
Personally I think the outline pages would help to develop WP in the same way that a list complements a category, so I hope you do well in your WP:WPOOK endeavours. A category shows what is done to date, and a list shows what is still to do, as well as what is done for an example. An outline complements navboxes, infoboxes, but in more detail as empty infobox fields are not used in an article, but they perhaps are red links (to do) in an outline.
Oh my goodness this became a lo-o-o-ong reply, but I hope a nugget of it is of some help to you in some way. Maybe these things you are doing already, but I missed them, in that case I am sorry, Tried to scan through your progress thus far, and you have done a lot! (Really good job BTW) Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 01:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Those are some very good ideas. I've added them all to our task list except the portal integration suggestion. We can't transclude outlines into portals, because articles in article space can't be transcluded. Copying outlines to portals would create another entire set of outlines that needed to be kept up to date, and we are overloaded already. Moving the outlines to portal space is also not a good plan, because they are articles as defined by WP:LISTS which belong in article space, and portal pages are not supported by default in Wikipedia's search results. The best we can do for portals is to add a link or a hatnote that leads to the outline, and that is already on our task list.
- I'll be sending you updates from time to time, to let you know what we've been up to, the status of your tasks, and to give you an opportunity to provide further ideas on where we're headed and how to get there.
- Thank you very much.
Re: WikiCup
[edit]Sure, that would work IMO. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ask one of the judges nicely, I suppose... :) –Juliancolton | Talk 03:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, well you should probably leave a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup to ask to get them included, then when the judges start next years competition, they'll see what they can do. (I'm currently a Judge of the WikiCup, so depending on whether or not I am one next year, I'll see what I can do too!). The Helpful One 20:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Proposal
[edit]Ok, so my idea is this: we merge
This page into the portal section. This way we don't interfere with the portals to start with, and our idea is out there. I have not requested this be on the main page yet, as to see your opinion. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. T-95 (talk) 12:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "merge", and what do you mean by "portal section"?
- See also Quiddity's reply to the WikiProject thread above.
- By this, I mean adding the page to the Portals on the top on the main page. The portal section being the list of portals on the main page. Hope this helps, T-95 (talk) 01:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- Where would the outlines link go? The Transhumanist 02:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC) the link would go beside the list of portals. T-95 (talk) 13:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Re:
[edit]Archive
[edit]I notice your page is getting a little long, maybe you should Archive it. I know Miszabot does it automaticly.--SKATER Speak. 13:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yep, it grows pretty fast. :) But bots have a tendency to disrupt live threads, and mine tend to stay live pretty long. :(
- I archive manually when the page exceeds 100k or so of dead threads. :) The Transhumanist 19:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello
[edit]- I just read your message about making of the outlines, and would like to try to assist with this project. I may not be able to edit regularly due to internet connectivity issues I am experiencing at home... however I am still able to edit from school and the library. Vivio TestarossaTalk 21:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Welcome!
- I'm excited that you are interested.
- Please sign up at WP:WPOOK
- By the way, what are your favorite subjects?
Thanks for the Support
[edit]I thought I was doing Wikipedia a service helping out with the Outlines project, and did not realize there are users on here that object to the idea of it so harshly. I appreciate the kind words and will work with you on this project. I have recruited users who have more knowledge than me on Canada's provinces to help out. I will admit that I am ignorant with the subject, but the idea went off in my head at the time to create the O of BC page because I thought it would be a good thing to have comprehensive, and great outlines for the Canadian provinces; like the U.S. states have. Thanks for the support. Burningview (talk) 00:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, you did us (Wikipedia) a wonderful service. You see, we (WP:WPOOK) just placed over a thousand banners and notices concerning outlines to increase editor awareness, and we weren't absolutely sure what the response of the community would be. Some feedback was trickling in, but you blasted it wide open. (Which is what we wanted). You had no way of knowing that we generally create new outlines as drafts away from article space to avoid AfD nominations (which deletes premature pages, prematurely, in my opinion). But when I moved your draft, I forgot to remove the link from the main OOK page, and apparently someone spotted it there, clicked on it, and tried to nuke (AfD) the page. It turned out that AfD was the perfect place for positive feedback to surface.
- Because the OOK team has been concentrating on Geography outlines for the past year, I wasn't planning on unleashing the OOK team on the Canadian provinces until after we spent some time beefing up coverage of other areas of knowledge. But sometimes we have to sail where the wind takes us. And that wind turned out to be you! Congratulations, you are a driving force!
- Don't worry about ignorance. I started most of the outlines, and I knew diddly squat about most of their subjects when I did. My favorite one so far is on robotics, about which I knew almost nothing - I think it turned out pretty good. Making a map is one of the best ways to learn the landscape. I applied the same approach to learning the landscape at Wikipedia - I built the Wikipedia:Department directory and led the overhaul of the Help system (which is a menu or site map of Wikipedia's help pages). Once you have a map, you can go just about anywhere!
- All you need to start a journey are wits and will, and you have both in abundance. Know-how you pick up along the way.
- I'm pleased to meet you. And I look forward to a long and successful collaboration with you.
- So, what subjects are you going to tackle next? :)
Alright, allow me to give you my two cents on this project. Honestly, it looks like your diving head-first one of the largest tasks I've ever seen a user attempt to do! And there's nothing wrong with that: boldness is an excellent quality to see in an editor such as yourself. You've started a WikiProject that has a pretty decent future, something that seems like it will provide a foundation for the rest of Wikipedia to branch off of. Now, you asked about a way to contact editors to help the project grow in size. Attracting editors it a difficult task, and almost all WikiProjects have some trouble doing it. Here's a few suggestions, really meant as a form of brainstorming:
- Consider putting up an ad for the project as dictated by WP:BANNER, which is transcluded on between 2,000 and 2,500 pages. That way, you're bound to get some attention, especially from users that aren't likely to find the project another way.
- Tell your wikifriends about it. That's how I learned about WP:REHAB, for example. User:Abce2 attracted me to the project with this message. Possibly, you could create an invitation template similar to this one, and have information about the project spread virally. Project members could tell a small number of other users about it, then those users could tell even more users about it, et cetera.
- Collaborate with other WikiProjects. For example, two completely unrelated projects, WP:WPAFC and WP:OPERA, met with each other through this offer of friendly correspondence. You could get willing users from WP:SPORTS to help with the Outline of sports page and its suboutlines, and users from WP:CANADA to help with the Outline of Canada and its suboutlines. The possibilites here are endless.
I hope that this helps! Regards, The Earwig (Talk | Editor review) 02:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- You may not know this, but sending multiple identical unsolicited messages ([6], [7], [8], etc.) to people you are not acquainted with is generally considered spam. The WP:ADOPT project is a "program designed to help new and inexperienced users." I appreciate that you want help, but you are not new and do not seem inexperienced. Further, I have concerns about your approaching this as a battle with another project (WP:PORTAL). Superm401 - Talk 17:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- Though I am not new, I am definitely inexperienced in the things I need help with. And I'm looking for experienced users who are interested in helping others. By joining that department, the people at ADOPT have expressed a desire to share their experience and help other users, and therefore my requests are not unsolicited. They are volunteer helpers, and I really do need their help.
- Contacting users in the way you described does not appear to be covered under WP:SPAM (which concerns advertising within encyclopedia articles). Can you point me to the guideline that covers it?
- "Battling" conveys connotations that I do not support. If I were battling portals, I would be trying to get rid of them. But I'm not. (I've built or improved several). I am simply trying to surpass them in coverage and quality, and there's nothing wrong with playing leapfrog. Friendly competition (as in sports and art) is a healthy thing. And the competitive spirit is a driving force!
- Superm401 is referring to the behavioral guideline on canvassing, section 2.1. Also see an ArbCom ruling on crossposting, which passed 10/1/0, here. The Earwig (Talk | Editor review) 20:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- That specifically pertains to sending announcements about important discussions. (Here it is verbatim: "Important discussions sometimes happen at remote locations in Wikipedia, so editors might be tempted to publicize this discussion by mass-mailing other Wikipedians. Even if the goal is not to influence the outcome of the debate, indiscriminately sending announcements to uninvolved editors is considered "talk-page spamming" (or e-mail spamming) and therefore disruptive.").
- I didn't announce anything, so it obviously doesn't apply to me. Whew. That's a relief. I simply asked questions to editors involved with helping other users. Thank you for the citation. The Transhumanist 20:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
RE:So, what subjects are you going to tackle next?
[edit]I have no idea. Usually (with me) I take on the easy, but time-consuming tasks on Wikipedia like categorization; i.e. tagging articles under the scope of there respective WikiProjects related to them. Also putting template messeges at the top of articles.(Of course I'm sure you know about all of this; so no need of explaining, LOL). It is only when creative inspiration strikes me that excites me to do something greater on Wikipedia. But I will be offering my services to WOOK for the meantime. All this attention I have recieved in the past few days over an article I created; really has motivated me to get on Wikipedia more often, its alot more exciting. Burningview (talk) 02:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- We have several high-powered wikignomes on the project. I'm sure they'll be glad to meet you. And we have lots of tasks of the type you mentioned. I generally assign them to each wikignome's talk page. I'll be posting a new round of tasks soon.
- By the way, please put new messages at the bottom of user talk pages. I didn't spot your "Canadian Provinces" post for weeks. Most users keep messages in chronological order, and I always jump to the end to look for new messages.
RE: Request: here's the other half of the speedy deletes
[edit]Hi there,
Done - I have now speedy deleted all of these pages.
Thanks,
The Helpful One 16:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
RE: Very funny!
[edit]Hi there,
Wow! I didn't even notice that I had signed the page! Ah, it might have been because when I added the </nowiki> tag to the end of where it was supposed to be, it used my signature instead of the one that was supposed to be yours. :S
I would love to do that task, but right now I need to get some sleep, perhaps tomorrow! ;)
Thanks,
The Helpful One 22:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
RE: Oops - move request
[edit]Hi there,
It seems that changing the template did the trick for this? Do you have any other plans for any other category renames, because I put through a bot task approval request to do the task - I've been approved for 30 trial edits, but now there's nothing to edit!
The Helpful One 18:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Category renames, no, but adding categories, yes. But this is a more involved task than you are used to. It's a little project in its own right...
- First, you need to use AWB to make a list from Template:CompactTOC with "What links here", and then save that list to a file and then cut/paste the contents of that file to a sandbox and then edit the list to linkify the entries. Or make a list directly from Template:CompactTOC's "What links here" special page by copying/pasting it to a sandbox and using WP:WikEd's search/replace feature to convert it to links.
- Article space links only.
- Once you have a list of links. Look it over. They're all alphabetical indexes, but the list is too broad to place them all in Category:Indexes, so you'll need to create subcategories. There are Indexes of people (biographical indexes) in there, and Indexes by region (geographical indexes), and other types. It is best to title the categories as "Indexes of" because then all these categories will turn up together in the "All pages with prefix" special page index.
- To split your list of links into lists of specific kinds of indexes, one approach would be to copy the list to another sandbox, then choose a type, and then delete all the links that are not of that type from the list. Then repeat this step (with a new sandbox) for each type of index you've discovered.
- But before you do all that splitting, you should choose your index types first, and start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Index to get others' opinions. Send a message to each person on our team requesting that they meet you for discussion there (including me).
- Once you have split your list into subcategory lists, then you can use each list in AWB to add the appropriate category to the articles listed, using your bot.
- If you have any trouble with this task, make a post at WT:WPINDEX and invite your problem solvers to meet you there.
- Thank you.
- Good luck.
- Be patient.
- Have fun.
- P.S.: Once you are done with this task, you can repeat the process for all the templates listed at Category:TOC templates. :) Hint: you can combine all their "What links heres" into one list first.
- P.P.S.: I've invited four technical users to comment on this task. (So don't be surprised if people start showing up with advice). :)
Re: move request
[edit]I'm not sure how to move categories, actually... –Juliancolton | Talk 20:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- As far as I know, it's not technically possible to rename category pages, but you could just recreate it under the new title and redirect the old one. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think you are right. For an example, see Category:Articles belonging to WikiProject Outline of knowledge. The Transhumanist 21:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry
[edit]I am sorry, but as unexpected obstacles arose, i will be unable to answer your questions in a timely manner. This does not mean you need a new mentor, i will still help every 2-3 days. In about 6 business days I should fully be back. at-210 discovered elements ∞ what am I? 22:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Happy The Transhumanist's Day!
[edit] |
The Transhumanist has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Cheers, If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox. |
- Congrats. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 23:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
50 AWB tasks
[edit]Here? I'm pretty sure I removed about 99% of the bad links by fixing a few templates. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
OoK
[edit]I answered the queries at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Outline_of_knowledge#Community_consensus, but not the one at Wikipedia talk:Outlines which I'm inclined to agree with. This top-of-article-notice/hatlink is a bit too much, considering the current quality of most of the outlines, and the hidden comment explanation is unnecessary (and immodestly phrased). I'd recommend we stick with links in =See also= sections, for now. Slow and steady wins the race; hasty promotion will attract more vitriol than support.
Also, I've added a line with a few examples of the best work, to the lede at Wikipedia:Outlines. Feel free to change the examples/wording/placement, but let's keep a list of 3 good examples near the top of that page. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Traffic drives improvement
[edit]The outlines aren't complete, but they are complete enough to be useful to readers. And what good is a table of contents hidden in the back? Tables of contents are most useful in the front.
The hatnote issue is very similar to adding the "Contents" link to the sidebar. And you opposed that too, on the grounds that the system wasn't ready to be displayed.
Shenme captured the essence of the situation very well:
A 'normal' wiki usually doesn't have a core structure, and so people don't expect it, but Wikipedia has quite a lot of material, and various ways of organizing it. Having a link in the sidebar to the contents page will help people to discover what organization there is. (whether perfect or not a separate topic). And, actually, pointing people to the contents page and getting their resulting comments will improve the page. Don't wait for the improvements first... Shenme 04:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
The OOK needs editors for each of its pages, and for the essential pages it's missing. Relying on a small team to finish all of this will take decades. (Do the math). I've been on this project for almost 4 years already!
So, if hatnotes will benefit readers while attracting editors to these pages, then that looks like a pretty damn good solution to me.
The Transhumanist 23:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm definitely not trying to stifle your enthusiasm/confidence, I'm just trying to act as a minor balance to it. I've been (cautiously) defending them along with you since the beginning. I pretty much agree with your comments&characterization at Penubag's talkpage, too. (Though, by "audacious", I meant "staggeringly large in scope and intent". Not the negative inferences, which I didn't actually realize it had.)
- It's the really incomplete outlines that primarily concern me, such as Outline of ergonomics and Outline of industrial machinery and Outline of information technology and Outline of cartography (just noticed whilst cleaning/sorting Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge/Technology and applied sciences). If we were to add links to those outlines, at the top of their respective articles, we'd be doing a disservice to the reader and to wikipedia (imo). Some users might find them helpful, and some users might edit them, but the majority would just be disappointed with their current state. On the other hand, I agree with the idea of linking Outline of geography at the top of Geography, because it is incredibly well-developed and useful. The rest fall in a subjective spectrum, between those.
- I totally sympathise that you want to encourage the OoK's growth as rapidly as possible, and in my curmudgeonly capacity I'm mostly trying to act as a cautious voice of devils-advocacy, in order to prevent a tide of naysayers from deluging the project. I'm impressed as hell with the amount of work you've put into it, and wish I had more brains&time to help with it all.
- Tangentially: Talking of the Wikipedia:Department directory, I'm still trying to think of a way to merge the Wikipedia:Quick directory and Wikipedia:Requests into it (and into the Community Portal), because the {{WP nav pages (header bar)}} is just painful for a newcomer to have to comprehend. Any ideas? Leave it in the back of the brain for a while, maybe. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 02:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- What, add them to both the department directory and the community portal? But not the department directory into the Community Portal, right? The former would be easy, the latter not recommendable. It's a day's project, at least, and I'm too overloaded with OOK to take on anything not directly related to outlines.
- Yes, I know you support the outlines, and I know you are simply being your conservative self. I don't have a problem with that, as I've gotten used to it a long time ago. I also know that you aren't trying to quell my confidence or enthusiasm. Your response to the recent mass name changes removed all doubt. :)
- We're obviously on the same page, since we both see it as a careful balancing act (going too fast = attracting too many opposers all at once). Unfortunately, the tightrope is about 150 feet up, with the whole project teetering in the balance. I'm as amazed as you probably are about the results of the aforementioned moves. I think they were successful only because most of the pages are orphans or rarely edited/watched by anyone. But is was a big risk. I went forward on a hunch, and because VPR didn't seem viable. Believe me, I have not let it go to my head. I breathed a sigh of relief every day for weeks after those took place.
- The WikiProject doesn't have the manpower to complete the outlines before placing the hatnotes. Though a lot of it has to do with the redlinks, many of which will turn blue on all their own over time. But now it is time to wait on the hatnotes. Placing the very best outlines might be OK, but we need to let the test run (first wave) run its course. I've also got to figure out a way to get OOK's members more active before the next big push.
- Time to switch over to outline development again for awhile. Consolidate gains, then move forward again. "Slow and steady wins the race."
- I'm not sure, but I don't think I did actually oppose the addition of the Contents link to the sidebar. I was curious about what exactly I had said, and went looking for the original thread, but all I can find is
- my proposing that the contents link get added to the sidebar (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Contents/Archive_3#Promotion_to_the_sidebar, Oct 2006, and again at Wikipedia_talk:Village_pump_(proposals)/Sidebar_redesign#Redesign_update_proposal_-_portals.2Fcats_replaced_with_contents, Dec 2006),
- and my statements concerning whether the Wikipedia:Featured content link should go above the Portal:Contents link or not (MediaWiki_talk:Sidebar#Sidebar_Redesign.2C_part_22.5, March 2007, where I said "I still think Wikipedia:Contents should be below Wikipedia:Featured content. A) because Wikipedia is trying to promote quality articles over quantity. B) because Wikipedia:Contents isn't at a consistently acceptable level of quality for my liking - many of the pages it links to (e.g. many of the "List of basic ____ topics" lists) were written by a single editor (TT), and aren't on anyone else's watchlists.").
- Were you remembering a different situation? -- Quiddity (talk) 05:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, but I don't think I did actually oppose the addition of the Contents link to the sidebar. I was curious about what exactly I had said, and went looking for the original thread, but all I can find is
- The situation I remember is the first of the March 2007 series of proposals: "Proposal: add "Contents" to Wikipedia's main menu". I presented a simple proposal to add one link to the sidebar, and you tried to derail it. You posted so much prose to the debate that it made the eyes glaze over - people started skipping right past it without voting (for or against). My guess was that they weren't bothering to read it at all. Boy was I pissed. So I created a catchy subheading and restated my proposal, and the votes started flowing again. You did not like that one bit! :)
- I was just asking for a postponement until after a wikiproject recruitment¬ification drive! For the ListsofBasicTopics project! 'twas a good idea back then too! Better late than never ;)
- And, back in Oct 2006, you were saying things like "I've found the following pages to be either redundant or useless: A-Z, Ref tables, Categorical index, Glossaries, and Lists of lists." I was horrified!
- Ah well, we'll get there somewhere along the way. It's all in the interpretation and perspective, as with most things I've been learning here. ConnotationContextIntonationImplicationEtc. Huzzah for variety.
- "... and the sky was full of what looked like huge bats, all swooping and screeching and diving around the car".
- -- Quiddity (talk) 05:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Ireland related article titles
[edit]Hi, please read this and WP:IECOLL. Please realise that Ireland related article titles are not to be touched as per the Arbcom ruling. I'd recommend you self revert you edits and wait before renaming dozens of article.MITH 00:36, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't rename any articles. I simply edited links on an article. The Transhumanist 00:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- to match a title which is under dispute like all the article titles. You may not see but it is disruptive!MITH 00:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- I see, you are fighting over the name of the country, wherever it appears. Whatever is chosen will be the name applied to the links when the dispute is over. Correct? The Transhumanist 00:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am not fighting over anything, please do not accuse me of something like that. The article title does not necessarily have to be applied to every link. Where are you getting that from? It is not wiki policy. However once a new title is decided then if the consensus is to apply the same link then everything will be piped linked rather than creating redirects and red links as you were.MITH 00:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- "You", as in you guys on the talk page. I walked in on that fight, "your guys'" fight. I don't care one way or the other. But if the outline drifts from the standard, it will be much more difficult to maintain it along with the other country outlines using the mass-editing tools we've been using. Which means it will likely be skipped. But I'm sure you'll be around to keep it maintained, so no problemo. The Transhumanist 00:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok I misunderstood. The likely result will be that its moved to Outline of Ireland and with all the article titles being something like Education of Ireland (country) and they will automatically be pipe linked to show just the Ireland bit. It'll be on my watchlist once its sorted out so it will be maintained. All of this will be sorted out in time but now is the time to leave it alone. Could you please undo your last edit? Thanks.MITH 01:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- "You", as in you guys on the talk page. I walked in on that fight, "your guys'" fight. I don't care one way or the other. But if the outline drifts from the standard, it will be much more difficult to maintain it along with the other country outlines using the mass-editing tools we've been using. Which means it will likely be skipped. But I'm sure you'll be around to keep it maintained, so no problemo. The Transhumanist 00:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am not fighting over anything, please do not accuse me of something like that. The article title does not necessarily have to be applied to every link. Where are you getting that from? It is not wiki policy. However once a new title is decided then if the consensus is to apply the same link then everything will be piped linked rather than creating redirects and red links as you were.MITH 00:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- I see, you are fighting over the name of the country, wherever it appears. Whatever is chosen will be the name applied to the links when the dispute is over. Correct? The Transhumanist 00:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- to match a title which is under dispute like all the article titles. You may not see but it is disruptive!MITH 00:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies
[edit]Sorry for replying exclusively on my talk page but I didn't want to start a bunch of new sections. -- penubag (talk) 18:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Replied here [9]. -- penubag (talk) 07:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well I spent several hours learning how to make animated Gifs (or relearning what I've forgotten from class long ago) and I made a mock up ad for OOK! How's it? In the ad, I tried to explain a little what an outline was, as you suggested on my talk, many don't know. Do you have any suggestions?-- penubag (talk) 08:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- More replies [10] -- penubag (talk) 03:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Done
[edit]at User:The Transhumanist/Outline of Islamic and Muslim related topics –Juliancolton | Talk 01:26, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
08/06/2009
[edit]My pleasure to help, and I will be glad to continue working on them. If you ever need backup in one of these anti-outline debates be sure to ask me, they have my fullest support. Highfields (talk, contribs, review) 11:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
08/06/2009
[edit]- My pleasure to help, and I will be glad to continue working on them. If you ever need backup in one of these anti-outline debates be sure to ask me, they have my fullest support. Highfields (talk, contribs, review) 11:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the offer to help on the anti-outline debates. But there is something you must know. It's called WP:CANVASS. We can't go around gathering our friends to help on debates. The only legitimate ways that I know of for you to participate in debates is if you find them, or watch pages for them, or are a disinterested 3rd party randomly invited to participate in them.
- So in the case of outlines, if you watched or patrolled the pages and showed up on your own, that would be acceptable.
- I watch the talk pages very closely these days, and respond to every complaint. But since I'm occasionally the only defender, outlines lose the discussion.
- Because of WP:CANVASS, I didn't report the currently active discussions. I wanted to really really really badly, but that would be cheating.
RE: Keep up the great work
[edit]I will, and again thanks for the support. Your words are encouraging. Let us continue our efforts to make your vision for outlines on Wikipedia a reality. You keep up the great work yourself!
RE: Mentoriship
[edit]That you for your lengthy message on my talk page. Unfortunately I have been on an extended Wikibreak and did not receive your message until recently. I hope you found someone else to assist you, but if you are still looking for help, please let me know. Tiggerjay (talk) 23:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Theories and isms, etc
[edit]Greetings Transhumanist, I have been organizing categories under "theories" for a while now recently. I have made some proposals to move stuff around. I thought you might be interested in the discussion at WT:PHILO. You might also want to take a look at User:Gregbard/Concepts and theories (although I don't think we necessarily need another task force about it.) This is what I was talking about having a consistent format with all the isms, etcetera. Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 04:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikicup
[edit]OK, if it is hard to put outlines into the wikicup, then reverse take the wonderfulness of the wikicup and plop it into the outlines WP as its own Outlines WP contest game type thingie. I didn't even know about the wikicup, and have been involved in two separate contest type games to make editing WP fun. So invent your own outline marathon, outline extravaganza, outline fanfare, there have been some wonderful images made in connection with the outline wikiproject, perhaps there could be 2 or 3 awards given out for different objectives of the outlines contest game and set into a table or template style format like awarding a barnstar or wikilove in a template. Then it can have points awarded differently than the wikicup, and pertinent for outlines. Let folks know, Give it a future starting /ending date etc. etc. depending on what is desired for an outcomeSriMesh | talk 04:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- There's 6 months until the next Wikicup starts, so we have plenty of time to find to a solution there.
- Elsewhere, consistent with your idea, I proposed a 200-WikiProject contest. Please take a look.
Banner updated
[edit]I would list everything I did but it's pretty apparent (unlike some of my other projects). Let me know what you think! -- penubag (talk) 07:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- okay updated with all your suggestions on my talk -- penubag (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Those 50 AWB tasks
[edit]Would it be possible to write a string of regex to replace the state-by-state find and replace selections? –Juliancolton | Talk 18:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think so.
- Post a question at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser. I'm sure someone there will know. The Transhumanist 22:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Outline of Games
[edit]"For a topical guide to this subject, see Outline of games. <!--PLEASE LEAVE THIS LINE IN PLACE as it leads to the page that serves as the table of contents for this subject's coverage across Wikipedia. Thank you.-->" - has this emerged from a games-related Wikiproject somewhere, or is it your own idea?
I thought the standard way of linking this sort of article was a navigation template at the side or the bottom of the article. Is there a reason why a navigation template isn't appropriate here? --McGeddon (talk) 23:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- The rationale for the placement was that since subject outlines also serve as topical guides (tables of contents), the most useful location for the links to them is at the front of their respective subjects.
- I placed about 30 links as a test run, to gather feedback. The resulting discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Outlines#top of article reference to outline is unnecessary spam.
- P.S.: For more information about outlines, see WP:WPOOK (which is looking for new members, by the way).
Talkback
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
NW (Talk) 02:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
NW (Talk) 04:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Chocolate
[edit]Hey transhumanist thanks for your note on my talk page. i have left a cpouple of thoughts on the article talk page i appreciate it is early days so havent cleaned up the page at all but more than happy to sub it at the appropriate time. i was thinking that the banner should be white on purple cadburys style (that is quite global in the us they licence to hersheys) but that may be even as colours a copyright or trademark infringement i am not sure. SimonTrew (talk) 05:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- to give an example the post office says "the colour red is a trademark of the post office". now obviously that doesnt stop people using the colour red, but it is a trademark in that particular context i.e. nobody else can come along and put down red post boxes. you see what i mean so i think purple on white would be extremely identifiable but for that exact reason could be a trademark infringement. SimonTrew (talk) 05:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Will do...
[edit]...but I'm still trying to figure out this regex feature... –Juliancolton | Talk 14:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
RE: How goes the category adding task above?
[edit]Hi there,
I forgot all about this task! I've added a request for my bot to be able to do this task, as well as category renaming here. I'll let you know when I get onto the task.
Thanks,
The Helpful One 16:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Opinion
[edit]I need your opinion on a situation I've been handling for a little over a month. I came across a flame war while I was on another vandal hunting spree, after reading through it I left both User:Kingoomieiii and the IP address User Talk: 67.242.56.62 Aka User:Spooky873. I soon got into an argument discussion with King and reported their actions too Wikiquette alerts (Too lazy to dig it through the archives). I agreed to help him against 67, who was edit warring and going against consensus on Foo Fighters articles and prepared an ANI case (Again in the archives) against him which was promptly ignored in the "BANNING XENO IS MORE IMPORTANT" Drama. After a break, 67 is still continuing his edit warring. You can see most of what you need: [11] and [12]. I'm at my wits end here, the only option I have is to message an Admin to look into this themselves. --SKATER Speak. 19:05, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- I noticed that the issue of your age came up. Don't fall into the age trap. Don't mention your age, and don't confirm or deny guesses about your age. Once your age is known, others may use that to discriminate against you. It happens from time to time at WP:RfA. And don't lie about your age either - lying about yourself may backfire on you (remember Essjay).
- Gather your edit warring evidence against the guy, and read the instructions on WP:ANEW. You can report edit warriors there, even if they haven't violated 3RR.
- My suggestion is to go by the book on this one. Follow the instructions at dealing with disruptive editors.
- I also suggest that you advise Kingoomieiii do so the same. The more witnesses, the better.
- Good luck.
RE: In need of your mentorship
[edit]Hi,
Sorry for the late reply as I'm currently on a Wikibreak. From what I gather, WP:WPOOK shares interests with a lot of other WikiProjects. Like for example, outline of mathematics also falls under the scope of the Mathematics WikiProject, and possibally, many others as well. So the best idea would be to approach each and every relevant WikiProject, and try to get one or more active members from that project under WP:WPOOK who would be responsible for the outlines that also fall under their project.
Partnering with other projects would help you gain dedicated members as well as wide spread reach. But you would have to be involved in a lot of dicussions, general concesus building and even disputes, as there may also be some conflicts. I'd still recommend you to go down this road though, as it would be the best way to accomplish your goals.
UzEE 14:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi again...
[edit]Hmm...so it seems that there has been some riot going on with the outline. I did not expect anyone to ever oppose this nice privilege which would definitely help users a lot; if they can't understand what an outline is supposed to do, perhaps an essay regarding the topic would be good enough to clear some of their doubts, if not all. As it is, there're not too many people going against the outline (from what I understand about the report you sent me), so I think you'll have to act quickly. I'm sure you're doing everything you can do, but have you created cards? Try making one about the outline and them to everyone you can think of. Yes, even those who do not agree with the outline. Perhaps it might make them change their mind, if only a little.
As for including Jimbo Wales in the awards process, I'm sure, if someone asks him, and if he's not too busy, he'll respond kindly enough. Of course, you'll have to get the contest going on first before asking him. I hope this helps. Cheers, Zacharycrimsonwolf 03:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- The "riot" was over the placement of hatnotes at the top of corresponding articles leading to the outlines. My rationale was that since these serve as tables of contents, shouldn't they be included at the front of the subject, rather than at the rear in the "see also" section? Indexes go in the rear. TOCs go up front! Quality of the outlines was the opposition's main concern. We'll have to settle for the see also section for now, until the outlines are high enough quality to support hatnotes.
- Occasionally there's a complaint from a fan of another type of page, like portals, categories, navigation templates, or subject articles.
A request
[edit]Hi Transhumanist. I noticed you opposed my first RfA, which occurred about a year and a half ago. If you have the time, do you think you could give me an editor review and tell me what issues I still have that may hinder my chances at a successful RfA in the near future? Thanks. Timmeh!(review me) 15:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
RE: Whats Missing
[edit]What exactly do you mean by "whats missing"? You mean the Canadian Provinces? Or something else? Not sure what opinion you want me to give. Burningview (talk) 20:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject Index
[edit]Hi, I see you are undertaking some sort of tasks with the lists. for your interest the List of words having different meanings in British and American English is partially ridiculous. I posted on the talk page if you are interested in giving opinions. ~ R.T.G 21:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)