This is an archive of past discussions with User:Julia W. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello, Julia W, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! DS (talk) 13:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, DS! Finally, something on my talk page :))))
Hiya, thank you for your review of my spoken contribution to Green Wing (series 1). I haven't a clue what is involved in reviews and the like, but thank you for taking the time to do so, and thanks for the tip! :) Great to see you're getting involved in stuff despite your 'newbieness' ;) Cheers once again. londonsista | Prod19:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I see you are interested in reviewing some articles. I would appreciate if you review a few of mine. The quality does vary among them. The ones that I started with are the worst ones because I did not know how to use the software. In any case, if you are interested, picking a few of mine at random is probably the best way to go. I think there is only one long article. You can see what I've recorded on my user page. Thanks! PopularOutcasttalk2me!20:55, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for the review of But I'm a Cheerleader! I don't think you are picky at all and I do like hearing people's opinions. I can't improve the way I read the article unless folks let me know what is right and what is wrong (in their ears). My objective is simply to get the spoken article out there in a form that is true to the original article and "hearable" by a listener. And I admit that my pronunciation is a bit flaky ... for example, "Ian" -- I would have never looked it up because it never occurred to me I was wrong! LOL!!! What's difficult when you do this alone is that you do not realize you are saying something fairly common, wrong. Thanks again. :o) PopularOutcasttalk2me!13:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
If you can cope with another article, I'd be glad of a review for my first spoken article, Isaac Newton. I've also commented on the spoken Wikipedia project talk page to that effect. A.C. Norman (talk) 09:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Heh, yeah; the combination was somewhat irresistible. :-)
BTW, if you're interested in improving Wikipedia's Shakespeare coverage, please do feel free to go to the WikiProject Shakespeare page and add your name to the list of members. It's by no means an exclusive club (hey, I joined and nobody complained! ;D), but it will mean you'll get the odd automatically delivered newsletter on your Talk page, urging you to participate in whatever collaboration is starting next (our current collaboration is to deal with a peer review of Romeo and Juliet in the hopes of bringing it to Featured Article standard). On the project page there is also a Todo list for suggested priority tasks. As mentioned, the project is sadly short of hands, so if you're at all interested we'd love to see you join. --Xover (talk) 19:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Iam new when it comes to nominating many articles at once. I mostly nominated only once. Anyways welcome to Wikipedia.--SkyWalker (talk) 07:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Mr Maedin they are the winners so to if i put the biography of the Miss Nepal and the runner ups so pupils can know more about them so please stop deleting my pages. Thank You NepaliBoy7(NepaliBoy7 (talk) 20:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)).
Hi NepaliBoy, I'm not deleting your pages, I'm only taking them to AfD so that the matter can be discussed. Please join in at the discussion page (clearly stating that you are the creator of the articles) and post your views there. P.S. It's Miss Maedin :)))) Maedin (talk) 07:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. Sorry I've taken a bit longer than I expected to respond. The first thing to say is that I entirely agree with and support your concerns, and the observations you made about specific deficiencies. At this time I have only listened to Part 1; the impression I got from the beginning was certainly that it "sounded like the first read-through, and even then by someone who is unfamiliar or uncomfortable with reading aloud", as you said. Specific deficiencies are:
The non-standard comments at the beginning
The rather hurried pacing and lack of sufficient pauses between sentences and between paragraphs
The use of inflection in a way which fails to convey the nuances of the text, and which is sometimes in fact misleading
The frequent mis-reads, which should always be edited out or re-read to remove them. Mis-reads and pauses, while an inevitable part of the narration process, should never make it into a finished and uploaded recording, because they are very distracting for a reader
Technical problems: although the recording is correctly produced in Mono at 44100 Hertz, it has a very low audio level. I have opened the file in Audacity to analyse it, and the spectrogram—I think that's the right name for it! :)—is very low, with little body above or below the 0.0 line. The audio level would need to be amplified somewhat. Also, there are various background noises—both one-off clicks/thumps and longer periods of low-level noise and scratchiness. I noticed one at 18:03 in Part 1, for example
Frequent unclear enunciation and some mispronunciations. A recommendation I would always make to spoken article contributors is to read through the article in search of potentially awkward or non-standard pronunciations, and research them before starting the narration—for example, by enlisting the help of a foreign-language speaker (perhaps relevant for an article like this, as you say), by checking online resources such as the Merriam-Webster online dictionary (which offers audio pronunciations of most words), by just Googling around or by checking a printed dictionary. I have often found that entering <word> pronunciation or "<word> is pronounced" in Google turns up something useful. Anyway, I digress!
Sadly, even with careful editing and audio enhancement in Audacity or similar, it would be very difficult to improve these audio files enough for them to be properly usable as a Spoken article. What next, then? Some other observations I've made on the contributions of the uploader, Pordaria (talk·contribs): he uploaded a fair number of spoken articles at around the same time, all on Near/Middle Eastern topics (particularly "History of..." articles). There has been no spoken article activity, and sporadic editing activity, since then (March/April 2008), so there is no certainty over whether he is aiming to continue providing recordings. None are shown on the pending list. It is likely that the other audio files also suffer from problems, and some of the accompanying articles are high-traffic ones (for example, Middle East got ~100,000 visitors in March 2008); therefore some of the audio files are likely to have been listened to by a fair number of users. My view is that Pordaria should be alerted to our concerns on his talk page, indicating that although the time and effort etc. are noted and appreciated, we feel that it may be better to remove the spoken articles pending re-recording (you mentioned you considered removal; I agree with that). Also, if he would like advice, help etc. with how to record spoken articles, we/I should offer that freely. There are valid arguments in favour of removing the files immediately without notification—not least the lack of a spoken GFDL licence statement; however it seems reasonable that we make an effort to avoid discouraging a clearly enthusiastic contributor who has the potential to become a provider of good-quality narrations if certain improvements are made.
Hello again; oh dear, I didn't manage the weekend, but finally I have some time now. (Have been spending ages over at WP:DYK this week; also off-Wikipedia I write a monthly column for a specialist publication, and my self-imposed deadline for the next one was today!) Anyway, I have listened to the most recent recording, Islamic feminism. There are some improvements, but problems such as lack of introduction and licence statements remain. May I suggest that you draft a piece for his talk page reflecting the concerns discussed above, then I will have a look and we can post it jointly? You could post it here or at my talk page first, then we could move it to Pordaria's. We can then decide what to do next depending on his response. Also, when it comes to removing the files, it may be wise to "comment them out" (hide the links from normal view, but still show them in the edit window; this is done by putting <!-- --> round the links) rather than delete them outright, otherwise it could be misinterpreted as vandalism or accidental deletion. We can come to that later anyway. I should have a bit more time from here on, so I'll try to respond as soon as I see your next reply. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!)21:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Maedin! OK, I have carefully read your proposed message a couple of times and have made some minor additions, and I'm fully comfortable with what we're saying and how we're saying it. I've added my signature, and you can now move it across to Pordaria's talk (or I'll do so if you prefer). Again, thanks very much for composing this! I'll put both his and your talk pages on my watch list so I can check responses quickly. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!)19:53, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the detailed review. It seems that editing audio problems have plagued me during recording. I think they are better now, but then again, it's not like I noticed them initially. I do appreciate the detail of your review but don't kill yourself making them so detailed, unless you really like to do it. I think what is important is a general idea of good points and things that need improvement. Me, if someone had a lot of mistakes, I would only point out a few and ask them to redo the whole section or whatever. But, that's all my opinion. As a reader, I appreciate the detail. As a reviewer, I'm not sure I'd be willing to put the same amount of work in (and thus I don't do it, LOL).
I do realize that reading every section, even if I am not reading the contents (like Notes, References, etc.) is a bit annoying. Honestly, it's annoying to read. However, I tend to look at this from the perspective of a blind person or someone who is not looking at the article when listening. I think it is important to let the person know what types of additional information is available (and, as such, if they need to use a regular HTML page reader for any section). External links are read because of something I remember reading initially in the instructions for the readers. I wouldn't mind reading something more general, if someone were to write something up. I definitely don't like the article to end right after the subject material is over.
Hi there. I saw your adoption request in the category and I would offer to adopt you; if you are still seeking and want me to adopt you, please leave me a message at my talk page. If you are not seeking adoption anymore, you should remove the userbox. Regards SoWhy19:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Remember, that you can give them out yourself, see WP:BS to find the right one for each occasion. I advise you to be bold in doing so: If you notice someone doing some great feat, go ahead and give them a Barnstar. It usually motivates people and makes them feel that their edits are appreciated. SoWhy16:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I didn't think it would even work when I did it, but it did the job so I left it there :) Thank you for telling me how to make it more appropriate. I got tired of the bold lettering on edits that showed up when I used that script, it was too obtrusive for my tastes. Wanted to turn it off! Cheers, Maedin\talk10:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Sure, no problem, I just noticed it. As I keep on saying: We live and learn. And mostly we only do so because other people tell us to :-) SoWhy10:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I usually place it at the very top if possible, because it is not intented to stay but to be easily removed after being noticed :-) SoWhy10:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Is and are
Thanks for the message, but in this case, I am going to have to disagree. While, of course, the team is a singular entity, "The Calgary Flames is..." is a remarkably awkward statement and one that is not in common use in Canadian/American English. Sports teams are almost always referred to using the plural form rather than the singular. I suspect this is mainly a difference in dialect and usage between British and Canadian English. Regards, Resolute19:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Oops, apologies; I neglected to reply earlier - bad habit, that. You beat me to the fix quite easily in the end given that I was staring blankly at the "dif"s without being able to spot the one of yours that I'd lost: slap-bang in the middle of those changes...
Anyhows; onwards! Keep up the good work (looks like you're having fun from those contribs of yours *g*) & Have a good week. :)
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback can be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback may be removed at any time.
If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! –xeno (talk)17:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for that Barnstar, Maedin. It's as nice as it was unexpected. I haven't been exactly "cultured, intelligent, capable, and well-spoken" or particularly civil during my Wiki-crisis of the past couple months. :-) I hope you find contributing here to be rewarding. Cheers! Dekkappai (talk) 19:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Prerana Shah
Why is it because she was not the winner of Miss Nepal for something but look at other girls like Mika Hagi this page is not even said the biography about this girl. so please stop deleting my pages. Thanks(NepaliBoy7 (talk) 09:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC))
Thanks, Maedin. Yes, that was some sort of odd vandalism. Reports of my goodbye to the world are highly exaggerated. (At least I don't think I had that much to drink last night... :-) Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 18:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone19:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Just re-posting my reply to your comment on my talkpage:
I'm fine with a detailed review. I'd like if you would be able to prioritize the critique though. E.g., things which are "must fix," things which "should be fixed but aren't as critical," and "tips for next time." Also, I am editing this using GarageBand for Mac, and converting the .m4a to .ogg with Switch. If there are quality issues with the encoding there, I would appreciate any technical tips or software recommendations to help. Huadpe (talk) 08:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello again! With no response received yet to our shared concerns, we had better think about removing or commenting-out the series of spoken articles we investigated. I'm away for 6 days from tomorrow, so perhaps we should proceed after that? Let me know your thoughts. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!)11:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Hiya; I now have more time again after a hectic couple of weeks. It's a fair point that WP should be "a community that improves upon each other's work", but the problem is it's a lot more difficult to do that with sound files—you really need access to the original raw data to edit it properly, and another person can't really make additions because the voices will be inconsistent. Anyway, I suppose I could have a go at downloading, editing and re-uploading one of the existing files. If you get a chance, perhaps you could try re-recording and uploading one (I remember what you said about being able to get help with pronunciations)? If one of us leaves a note to that effect on Pordaria's talk page, he will kept up to date. Let me know what you think. Best, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!)11:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Your comments about Buckshot and Tadakuni RfAs
You're right on the money. Perception/PR at RfA is very important. Facts matter a lot less than they should. An off-the-cuff remark can haunt an applicant forever; look at Kww's RfA. VG☎20:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure that my comments were right on the money; I certainly regret them now. Not regret them in an "Oh my god, I can't believe I did that" sort of way, but in a "why did I waste my time on searching through his contributions when I obviously came up with the wrong answer after all?" sort of way. I do not think that lone comments should actually count against users as much as they sometimes do, and pushing bad press as a result of linking to that example wasn't my intent. I felt that it came as a mild negative amongst other uninspiring things, and was thinking "neutral" overall. But little things like that amongst uninspiring things turn into vehement opposes on a different user, hence my utter confusion. I lurk around RfA a lot but am very rarely inclined to comment, and even more so now.
I really appreciate you coming to my talk page to make reference to it though and voicing some support; I wasn't just talking to myself after all! Thank you, :-) Maedin\talk16:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
RE:Your signature
Thank you very much for the note. I'll change my signature into something more functional, yet more appealing, to keep browsers from crashing. Thanks for the note. Marlith (Talk)21:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Oops, second report today of the wrong format. I do try hard to assess each article correctly, and a lot of them have the wrong format to start with. You're perfectly right, and I apologise. And it was well formatted anyway, without inconsistencies.
But now I see our old friend User Tennis expert has been stalking me and reverting. Someone else has just stepped in since, but naturally enough re-reverted to my faulty version. I'll convert to the correct format now, once, but I dislike intensely edit conflicts over this matter. I'd be pleased if you took it up with Tennis expert yourself if he returns to impose his ownership on the article. I'm outa there, wishing the editors goodwill and going on to make improvements where they're appreciated! Most of his colleagues at WikiProject Tennis don't agree with his extreme stance. Tony(talk)13:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Maedin. I noticed you were interested in starting a discussion about delinking/relinking dates in tennis articles - well I tried that a month ago - you can see the discussion here. Basically, from the folks involved in the discussion there was support for delinking in accordance with the manual of style. But unfortunately User:Tennis expert doesn't wish for WP:TENNIS articles to follow the WP:MOS and so the project is stuck. I was shocked to find that it has just two FAs, and worse still, they're both about video games (Mario Power Tennis and Wii Sports). I was hoping the tennis fraternity could get together and try to improve articles and really get the project on the Wikipedia map but I think most of the editors there have left over these debates over linking and nomenclature. Good luck with your discussion. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. All I've ever advocated was adherence to the WP:MOS and some common sense (e.g. what is the point in filling a page with links that are not relevant to the article?). All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Somerset doesn't include Bristol (but I work there so I edit some articles within the city) but wikipedia works on ceremonial counties so includes BANES (including Bath) & North Somerset (I happen to live in the Chew Valley which is within BANES so it is an issue for me). Once again welcome & any & every input is welcomed.— Rodtalk22:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Julia W, someone, probably you, requested access to the account creation tool. For security purposes could you please confirm that it was you who made the request so we can approve you, thanks. Also, if it was you who created the request, you may also wish to the subscribe to the mailing list, which is used for internal discussions between the account creation team. If you use IRC, please join us on the Freenode Network, #wikipedia-en-accounts. Hope to hear from you soon! TheHelpfulOne16:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to the ACC Team!
Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on Freenode and/or the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my talk page if you have any questions. Thank you for your participating in the account creation process. TheHelpfulOne16:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, messed up! I'm pretty inexperienced - I'll go and fix it right now. I think you're right about the title; I was trying to think up a phrase that didn't make it sound like a recognized medical term for a syndrome, and I think Sexually-induced sneezing works better for that ("sexual sneezing" could mean sneeze fetishism, after all). Anyway, thanks for the kind words about the article. Graymornings(talk)21:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! I was browsing the userpage design help desk and checked out your page. Loved the layout, so I have shamelessly borrowed it for my own page. Just thought I should let you know, as imitation is the highest form of flattery. :P Cheers! Her Pegship (tis herself)23:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Julia W. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
-_Good_pic.jpg)
