Ooops, well it took me an hour but I finally figured it out. Thanks for answering my previous question though :) Its nice that people are so willing to help us newbies :)
Hi (think I'm doing this right?) anyway, you very helpfully answered a help question I asked (re a template thing) and I went to the template page but still couldn't figure out what I needed to do.
If you've got a spare minute to help an incredibly uncertain newbie trying her best to figure the whole wikipedia thing out (!) would you mind emailing me? I'm finding this whole communicate-by-wiki thing a bit tricky and I don't mind the world knowing this email address: [email protected]
Thanks! CarlyPalmer 08:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)Carly
Rick, I saw your comments at RfA: "IMO, voting in essentially any context within Wikipedia has become virtually meaningless." I've been getting pretty frazzled by all the hooting and hollering about userboxes. I feel overloaded. Meanwhile, I'm still trying to overhaul the categorization policies but am not getting much response. I think some general process guidelines for all of WP might help, but I don't have a clue these days how to make any suggestions that anyone would actually listen to.
So, back to Categorization. I'd like your help with clarifying the wording of the guidelines, and then I think it is time to call for consensus. Or should I just say that there is consensus and just post the policies, be done with it and see if anyone notices? My view of consensus (and the way I've tried to facilitate the cat proposal) is that consensus is a very slow process. You discuss, you have straw polls, you brainstorm ideas, and you listen to peoples concerns. Eventually you arrive at consensus and it is apparent. The only problem with that process here is that you don't know if anyone is listening. I'm thinking of posting something like this on the categorization talk page:
What do you think? -- Samuel Wantman 09:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick. I've seen your conversations on Jamesday's talk. I think you would be the right person to write to.
Couldn't there something be done in the MediaWiki software to make some sort of special template which could be used on a larger scale without hurting the DB servers that much as high use templates do today?
Subst-ing is good for the servers but bad for editors as their input is "lost" (or we might say "downgraded") when they save. So subst-ing is not that popular among editors (at least not for some use cases).
I think it might be good if there were templates that are not immediately broadcasted to articles. The question is: when should an article receive an "update" of such a template?
One solution would be: when an editor edits an article. But that would be somewhat frightening as this might not been easily understood by editors (could look like a strange side-effect).
A luxory solution would be if an editor could see an indicator on the edit screen that for a specific template there is a new version. It would then be fine if the user could in a edit action say "yes, I want to upgrade onto the new version of template X" as part of an edit action. If editors then would deliberately choose not to do that, the article would just continue to use the old version of template X.
This would also enable a stable view on old versions of an article. Today, if I look on an old version of an article I do not see how that article was at that point in time. I always get the newest version of the template applied to that article revision. If that template changed its semantics in between (for example there was a change in the name of a parameter), chances are high that I see complete rubish when viewing an old revision of an articles.
Example: on article Bill Clinton, User:NetBot changed on this revision the parameters of the president box on the right side (diff). All revisions after that edit of that article now show a good president box on the right side. But all revision prior to that NetBot edit show a broken box (example: revision before that edit).
So, in fact the "you can always go back" promise that Wikipedia makes to editors cannot be upheld if templates are used that way. Adrian Buehlmann 00:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I'm having some trouble with an anon user at the USC Trojans football article; despite my numerous attempts, they have refused to work the dispute out at the talk pages either here or here (I'm guessing it's the same user, but since the complaints are always from anon accounts, and they don't sign their Talk posts, it's just a guess). I've proposed a couple of compromises there which I think present a balanced view, but they always revise the article text after simply dismissing my views. Any chance you could take a look and weigh in (particularly on my most recent suggested version)? MisfitToys 02:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't figure out where to put this-- it doesn't belong at the help desk, or administrator's noticeboard, and certainly not RfC. There's an anon I spotted making rather silly changes, such as adding original research/attacks [1] and making Wikipedia Day distinctly uncheerful [2]. I told him to cut it out, and in response he registered an account and gave me a "barnstar" [3]. Now he's reverting my additions as "vandalism" and generally being nasty [4]. I fear I've gotten off on the wrong foot with him, and I'm no good at mending such things. Do you think you could calm him down? Ashibaka tock 04:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I've only just logged back in, so I've responded to you at the pump. I'm confused by your, to my ears, techno babble slightly, but read my new thoughts and see what you think. It does seem a good idea, yeah, cheers, and I will take it up with a developer soonish. Steve block talk 15:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I filled the table that you made in from the netstate.com website. It looks it like was the only source available. I could not find a more offical site. The infobox has width and length in kilometers, but no source is cited for them as well.--MJCdetroit 19:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I used the auto AFD (a wonderful tool). Typed delete into the first box and boom I was straight back to the page and the link was red. No second step. When I attempted to finish it manually it looked as though an extra page had formed because at articles entry remained red but the entry was present on the articles for deletion page as it should be. It simply skipped the second step. Made me think there might an extra page which we don't need. I have used auto-afd quite a few times before with no problems. No one was in and I couldn't connect to IRC which is not unusual. On a hunch I cleared my browser and it solved the problem. It could be a bug. I appreciate your answer. Thank you again.--Dakota ~ ε 20:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for the link to this, but it doesn't appear that anyone is paying any attention to the entries that are being made there. What's the point of this list if there are no actions upon it please? --Rebroad 20:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about the extra revert on USC Trojans football; I posted an explanation, along with some concerns, following your comment on Kingturtle's talk page. Again, my apologies; I thought the extra revert was both correct and necessary, but in retrospect I suppose it may have been necessary for someone else to do it. MisfitToys 00:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
With the creation of Category:Living people I've been wondering about a template for helping navigate through huge categories. There are some other administrative categories that would also benefit. Is there any way to have a template allow for user input (like the search box)? Or, how about a double TOC? The first TOC would bring you to the first letter, but the second one would be for the SECOND letter. I can't think of how to do this. Is there a way to set a variable that remains with the template? Is there a way to extract the information necessary from the global page information (i.e., is there anything that indicates that the page is starting its display with the letter J for example?) -- Samuel Wantman 09:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you about Living people. However, there does seem to be some fairly large categories out there that might also benefit from this. I got thinking about it because of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categorization. There seems to be general consensus that bigger categories would be good for browsing. Many categories are artificially divided into small subcategories that make them less usefull for browsing (like Category:Film directors). Radiant seems to think that the developers would like us to keep categories small, but I have not heard any mention of this other than from Radiant. There was discussion about templates in which the developers said that we really don't need to concern ourselves with performance. The consensus at the Categorization page seems to be that categories should be populated up to the lowest topic article level. For example, we have an article called Film directors but we don't have one called Polish film directors, thus the categories should be populated up to and including the level of Category:Film directors. If this happens, there may be many 4 figure categories. I can imagine that administrative categories would approach 6 figures. Above about 4000 articles, a better TOC would be helpful.
The way I'm thinking about the double TOC is that it would look like this:
Whenever you clicked on the top line, the bottom line would change to that letter. This is the part I don't understand how to do. -- Samuel Wantman 20:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I finally responded to your request for a comment here. -- Samuel Wantman 02:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Can't you write a short stub on that topic? --Candide, or Optimism 22:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Is that newbie editors who try and edit a "stable" version to fix a minor error and get the open version with: A: MAJOR changes, which totally disorients them, or B: the error fixed, which also disorients them, or makes them wonder if their cache is dicking around. Frankly this whole "stable articels" buissiness seems like more trouble then its worth unless someone comes up with a really simple way to do it that wont: A, confuse the newbies, or; B, dramatically increase workload, disk/memory/proc/bandwidth, or software or process complexity. 68.39.174.238 00:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I liked your suggestion on the Help desk page about Alpha Phi Omega what links here, but I don't see how to yank the new list onto a subsidiary page. The what links here list can not be edited. Naraht 13:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm very distressed to see the number of Admins who are taking extended breaks or leaving altogether. The most recent is Radiant!. While we often disagree on deleting categories, I find him to be one of the sanest voices around here (along with yours). I don't understand the recent agitation that seems to have overtaken the big controversies of late, Userboxes, Living people, Pedophiles; but it seems that some of this might be stress from the top. I'm reminded of the long discussion we had about biting newbies after the Rich Wannen affair. There was so much concern about how to project the best image from the long timers around here. I feel this slipping into away, and I feel for Radiant! I wish people could just relax a bit and not take all of this so seriously. Anyway, I have not seen you involved in any of these discussions, and I'm wondering if you, like me, are just watching from a distance in disbelief? -- Samuel Wantman 06:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Greetings! You have edited the Katie Holmes page in the past. I've completely reworked the article and have posted it on WP:PR in the hopes of advancing it to WP:FAC. I would be grateful for your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 18:41, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Hey! You're back! This may be very late, but I just came back. Anyway it was sad to see you go and very good to see you back. Howabout1 04:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I am new at this; so if i am not supposed to do this, then i'd like to apologise in advance.
I wanted to know if there was a way to save a Wiki page exactly as i view it, ie: the Menu bar to the left (Main Page, Community Portal, Search box etc), the funny world jigsaw thingy, etc. When i save a page using File->Save in Firefox 1.0.7 the formatting is lost and it looks pretty yucky!
I've also tried using a MAF plugin however the results are the same, except that everything is now archived.
I've also tried saving wiki pages in IE with the same results.
Surely there should be a way to save wiki pages in a nice way. I've posted to the help desk, but havn't got a reply as yet.
Just found a fantastic Firefox extension called Scrapbook!! It saves
the web page exactly as you see it!! Wish Wiki would fix this though. :) Wooo!
I just wanted to comment to encourage your vote on U.S. collaboration of the week page for Denver. I have seen your really good contributions to the Denver page, and want to let you know that we can make the page even better if its selcted for this collaboration. To vote on the page just go here. And good job with your contributions to the Denver and related articles. Thanks, Vertigo700 00:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Good to hear from you tonight. I've pulled back some myself, a compensatory pause perhaps. I've been somewhat involved with the Mainpage rewrite - lots of action there (600-700 votes so far) and also lots of action and casualties at the Userbox dustup. Our personal situation will allow me more WP time in the coming weeks (I hope). HighHopes is gone since December and Lucky 6.9 is boarderline gone. Glad you dropped by, I was kind of surprised when you popped in at MH tonight. :-) hydnjo talk 05:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
That seems to be the question I never seem to know how to answer. I get the sense the things have calmed down a bit. Perhaps I'm just not looking where the turmoil is. I guess I can't tell you what is going on, only what I've been doing.
I've continue to focus some of my energies on categorization. I just recently did a small overhaul of Wikipedia:WikiProject Categories. I'm trying to refocus it as a place where people just announce what they are planning or doing with categories. So it would be more of a notice board than a project.
I've also started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion about creating and maintaining a list of precedents to help focus the discussions at CfD.
There's been some more discussion about duplications of categories. There seems to be a fair amount of support for duplicating categories up to the level of "topic articles". If a category does not have an eponymous article, it is likely that the members of a category also belong in the parent category. This is especially true with the fooian foo categories, many of which were only broken into categories by nationality because there was no TOC.
The problem with change at Wikipedia is that people discuss and try to implement change, and the rest of the population sees the change and thinks that anarchy has broken out and everything is going down the tubes.
So in other words, same old same old. -- Samuel Wantman 07:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey, glad you're still around. Userboxes rumble endlessly on, with a new Arbitration case involving Guanaco and MarkSweep just accepted. (User:Mackensen has resigned the committee, btw.) This seems to be using up much of the community's disputatious energy, which is probably a perversely good thing as there's not been any other major shifting of the tides in recent weeks. WP:OFFICE was already established when you were less busy, but it's come in for some criticism (mainly because of a lack of ... charm ... on the Office's part. Technically, email confirmation has been switched on after Spamhaus thought the new email server was spamming and Captchas are being used at registration time on some of the other Wikimedia projects as well as when new external links are added to articles (not on enwiki). Apparently, there is something in the works (see the tech mailing list) about having multiple talk pages per page which is probably worth keeping an eye out for. Also, Wikimedia UK was incorporated. Oh, did you see the thing about Brian Peppers? Bit of a ruckus there, when UninvitedCo deleted it on receiving a request, purportedly from Peppers's family which it turned out was likely a hoax etc. It went through the usual procedures (del, un, del, un....protect...un...) until Jimbo stepped in and declared it deleted until next Feb. The talk page and the history of DRV will fill you in blow-by-blow, but I think it's finished with, for now. Hope things are ok with you. -Splashtalk 13:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick,
Thanks for the help. That's terrible that I didn't realise that message was from a user -- I thought it was just some sort of auto-generated welcome like you get from most email providers :P I'll scoot on over there and say hi back to him :)
Another thing, I created some pages two days ago (Haleigh Stidham) and they showed up under "search" straight away, but the pages I created yesterday aren't. Any ideas on that?
Anyway, thanks again :)
CarlyPalmer 19:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your help (re: writing my first article about FVDES). I'm new to Wiki writing, but as a politics and history teacher I'm looking forward to contributing more articles in the future.
Now, if I could just remember that html and wiki markup languages are different!
Cheers, Colin (aka grapeman)
Appriciate your having said something at Talk:Dianetics. The situation seemed obvious to me but I was not able to communicate it to the other editors, thanks for an exterior point of view. Terryeo 17:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Problem being that the nomination process involves creating pages, which excludes all IP addrs. 68.39.174.238 00:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I am an editor form the Macedonian Language Wikipedia and I am translating the List of cities in Germany form the English Language WIkipedia at the moment. It is a hard enough job already, but my main porblem is that I cannot categorise all of them separately as it will take me ages. A user informed me that you have a bot that could automatically categorise them. Part of them are in cyrillic and part still in english or german, but I can always rename them afterwars. Could you assist me in this if you are not to busy, or if yes, but not now could you tell me when? Many thanks and all best.--Bjankuloski06en 01:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your considerate comments, they certainly did help me understand how Conrad did all that. In case you're not watching (which I doubt) I copied the thread from my talk over to WP:FC's talk and have added to the discussion at Conrad's talk. See you wherever, hydnjo talk 04:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I seem to have clicked the wrong username :-) --Bjankuloski06en 02:13, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick. Thank you for your comments and support vote on my RFA. The final result was a successful request based on 111 support and 1 oppose. --CBDunkerson 17:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick, I have been watching your edits at MH. The 3Apr edit reword the three possibilities was a definite improvement, greater clarity with fewer words. Flipping the image was a good idea, I have no idea how you did that! Providing the actual Mueser and Granberg quote is probably a good idea but the bulleted paraphrase was a bit easier to follow. I agree with dropping Another way of getting the solution..., for some reason I always tended to skip over it while reading through. The edit Although ignoring the past... the elimination of the card counting reference is also a good idea, I find myself stumbling a bit towards the end of that paragraph but can't think how to improve it at this time. Ah, JethroElfman's edit helps with that.
On the talk page, Talk:Monty Hall problem#Article Rewrite, I agree with the anon's concern about the losing the Bayes' theorem and his argument for keeping it. Also, there will be no end to the long line of Double Thinks and I commend Antaeus' and your patience, this page will always be a target. hydnjo talk 14:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rick, thanks for the heads-up. I've been kind of out of the loop lately, as I haven't been very active. So, I wasn't aware of the new e-mail validation. I fixed it though. Thanks, and take care. Acetic Acid 03:29, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
You voted for Denver, Colorado as US Collaboration of the Week. Please help improve it to Featured Article Status.PDXblazers 01:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Huh, yes. I agree. I find this on IMDb which says he has worked in the "art department" of one film. Maybe you could do the deed since I already talked to the editor? -Splashtalk 23:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, My article was deleted for being not substantial or whatever the term on the site is.In other words the music group I was attempting to place in the garage rock catagory was deleted by a user as being less than significant which is untrue when one looks at the facts regarding this genre which is covered on the site. My question about this issue would be, what is this persons expertise in regard to this genre of music? Can they just decide, eh this looks insignificant... lets delete it without knowing anything about this music?
I only began posting on the site as a result of every tom, dick and harry self serving reference I have found on the music pages. The band I was trying to enter is internationally known and every bit as valid from a reference source standpoint as most of the bands listed in the garage rock catagory.The records are very collectible and are on many folks want lists on the web. The band I referenced is also listed on the All Music Guide which is one site recommended by Wikipedia for substantiation of musical groups.
The problem is I'm a newcomer and I redily admit that I am fairly ignorant as far as the exact format. I'm finding it confusing to navigate the site and I seem to have even lost the deletion notes on the article I created.
To be honest, I started off on this site by deleting lines from an article which I found and know to be self serving and untrue. The person who entered the information was deliberately puffing up an image and had virtually no proof for their claims.I have legal contracts to prove the contrary ! My deletions were termed vandalism and reversed, so I added an additional statement at the end of the article with quoted sources rather than attempt to delete again and get blocked for vandalism.
I am not too satisfied with that solution as the false information still remains, but I have moved on as it seems this is an argument of "he said she said".
I would appreciate it if someone could point me in the proper direction for submission and what I may be doing wrong.
Thanks
Do you know how to fix the infobox title so that the Kanji and English transliteration always break onto the second line? E.g. see Ishikawa Prefecture; like other similar infoboxes it would look better and clearer if it showed as
I can't figure out how to make this happen with my extremely limited command of HTML... any thoughts? Seann 12:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience with me on my deleted page issue. I am unsure as to whether I properly submitted this on the correct page for deletion review.
I understand that I am to notice the user who deleted it? Do I do that on that users talk page?
I didn't receive a follow up from the admin who deleted after I posted even more specific info regarding why the contents meet the standard for notability under several of the current requirements for notability.
Am I correct in also assuming that I am now prevented from ever rewriting this article with additional verifiable sources quoted?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Hamilton Styden 21:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I overheard your comment on Beland's talk page regarding bots and the cfd backlog. I had been working on it myself until this happened. I hope to continue when the matter is put to rest. — Apr. 18, '06 [07:42] <freakofnurxture|talk>
Rick, as I said to the author of 1313 Mockingbird Lane, you've been nothing but helpful, courteous, and accurate in your assessment of Wiki policies, IMO. Thank you for your assistance. Truly, JDoorjam Talk 13:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed that you've done a lot of Japan-related edits, so I thought you might be interested in joining WikiProject Japan and combining your efforts with those of us there. (^_^) --日本穣 Nihonjoe 21:21, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello Rick,
I haven't noticed any movement on my entry on the deletion review page and am not sure how it works from here. There appear to be two votes to keep deleted. The one vote from Zoe does contain misinformation(the All Music Guide lists the band but the listing is deficient and only contains a few of the many releases) and I followed up with a link showing a complete discography w/photos and catalog numbers etc. including the two required full length releases on well known idie labels.
I haven't heard back from Jdoorjam on any of my last responses and am unsure what he meant by this statement about this band: "If the 1313 Mockingbird Lane drummer played with Link Wray, as the WP:MUSIC criteria suggest, there should be a redirect from the drummer's name to the Link Wray article." How could I do this if the band article doesn't exist? I was hoping to work on this article but can't find instructions on how to keep a "working version" on my page. I made a request for help further down on the deletion review page but didn't receive any response.
Jdoorjam did delete the other band "Mockingbird Lane"(no connection) that I mentioned in my response on the deletion review page.
Is this the end of the line for this article for me or do I have any other options of appeal?
I would be most grateful for any insight on this. Your past guidance has been greatly appreciated !
Best Regards,
Hamilton Styden 06:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Seems like a made a mistake removing the request for the Wapasha article. Alot that I have removed have any relevant material covered in other articles, or were overly specific or POV titles. It's good to see that someone's keeping an eye on my deletions, some may be slightly over enthusiastic. Feel free to re-add any requests, I won't remove them again. -- Tompsci 12:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Howdy! Thanks for the message. I think that the way it is worded now is the best. Without the prefatory language that I added, some people (who happen to be both intelligent and mathematically-trained) found the three possibilities confusing. The language "Switching wins the car." does not make it explicit enough, and the three possibilities that are listed do not explicitly handle the player not switching his choice. Therefore, the three possibilities listed do assume that the player will switch.
I originally even bothered to read this article when a friend brought it up yesterday afternoon and another friend was confused by it. The confused friend said that the changes I made cleared things up perfectly for him. Therefore, I think that it was a valuable change.
Valuable or not, I am all for reducing unnecessary redundancy within a single paragraph (because of the nature of the problem itself, the redundant explanations are "necessary" to a sufficient degree to keep them in). However, I do not feel that it is unnecessarily redundant to have both the prefatory language that I added and the language at the end of each bullet point.
It may be possible to word it better, but I think that it is best to keep it around. On a side note, thank you for polishing up the other paragraph that I added. I did it in a hurry and it is easier to read now. Ari 14:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Rick,
I must say this has all been an exercise in patience,but a postive one at that. I again thank you for your time and concern for pointing me in the right direction. I really like the idea of this project and what a valuable source of information it can be. I am still somewhat unsure as to all of the hoops an article should pass before being deemed a good article. I am reading as I go and hopefully, one of these days, I will get it. One thing that I did notice in my travels that I found puzzling was the page on the group "Flamin Groovies". There was a pink flag saying it needed a little clean up. It seemed not too bad, although I didn't comb it with a fine tooth comb. I would be interested to know just what about it wasn't so good.
Best Regards
Hamilton Styden 21:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
I just want to offer a huge thank you for fixing my template issue (User talk:PageantUpdater#template request from WP:HD). Its working perfectly - much appreciated :) PageantUpdater 14:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I left Wikipedia on 18 March and marked myself as inactive on WP:LA [5]. Apparently, you'd changed me back to active a few days later [6] for some reason...? - ulayiti (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Looks Good! Better than the way I was doing it. Thanks —MJCdetroit 23:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick, I think I'm getting closer to finishing this article(although I could be wrong !) and would appreciate it if you could take a peak whenever you have an extra minute or so. Thanks, Hamilton Styden 03:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Again,
Yes, I agree although I think this clearly also qualifies under Music Notability bullet 4(two full length releases on well known or notable indies) and Bullet 6(at least one member is documented as being part of a notable group). I'm sure I can track down more documentation, but I feel there is enough here for now(but I may be wrong !). Thanks ! Hamilton Styden 19:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rick, thanks for the update at HD about how CK fixed the CAPs sensitivity, that's one I'll definitely remember for redirecting multi-worded article titles. About indexing, It seems that it's probably time for WP to consider a "crawler" for updating rather than the current scheme of a "bulk" indexing event "now and then". If you noticed my comments somewhere then, good. I've commented here and there at every opportunity (the one at the VP received zero attention) and I had no clue about Brion being the "decider". So, as there seems to be some unease about how infrequently WP gets indexed by WP, I'm glad that you've brought the subject up with Brion. And, thanks for keeping me informed. hydnjo talk 19:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the help.
Do you know who Jimbo Wales is?—G.He 00:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I left a polite message with Jdoorjam about possibly taking a look at my revised article. I have received no response, but then again this is not the first time I received no response on follow ups regarding this situation.
Is there anything more I can do about this article at this point? There was another person (brenneman(?) on my user page who offered to take a look and I sent him a message but also got no response.
I have looked around and have found many articles that I think I can spruce up, but don't want to proceed until I can get a true feel about whether or not I can submit an article without getting blown off the Wiki map.
Any help would be great...Thanks in advance
Hamilton Styden 04:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder; the past couple weeks have been hectic and it slipped my mind. I've left a message on his talk page saying his current version looks good to go to the article space. JDoorjam Talk 15:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I'm no CSS expert, but I've recently updated template:Infobox U.S. state so that the "grouped" rows are actual rows but without row borders (but with vertical cell separators). Doing this in a specific template seems a little ugly (and, sigh, border-top doesn't seem to work with IE in a TR). Do you think toprow and mergedrow styles might be generally useful additions to common.css (like borderless)? If you could easily do this (or can think of other alternatives), I'd appreciate it. I also asked user:Ed g2s who apparently added the boderless infobox style (no response yet). Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I've now commented there, breaking the "utter silence". Thanks, Rick, for your useful comments on my proposal — and thanks also to cesarb for that guidance. Cheers, CWC(talk) 15:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh....well, I created Template:linkless to solve the problem, and I've already added it to the cleanup template page. It looks like this:
Of course, it needs to be reworded, but it's better than nothing.--The ikiroid (talk)(Help Me Improve) 14:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
—G.He has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
—G.He 23:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I wrote and got History of merit badges (Boy Scouts of America) to FA status but I don't show up on your list. Then I added myself and saw I should notify you. Rlevse 16:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. You closed the CfD debate here, and I've started a discussion about this at Category_talk:Storms. Any comments would be welcomed. Carcharoth 11:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Would you want to help me fix articles about Miyazaki prefectures? It is on Category:Miyazaki geography stubs. Thanks! Englishfun (talk)
I thought they were appropriate given the subject matter.Solveforce 02:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your speedy response to my query at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Links_to_pages_containing_no_original_content. It is much appreciated, although not by the owner of the site who keeps adding his spurious link. - Stevecov 11:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rick. Let me start by acknowledging that your suggestion about our having admin status is flattering at the least but more importantly an overwhelming vote of confidence in us. The duality of Heidi's and my presence under one combined username is something that we do for almost all signature opportunities and I'm glad that you mentioned it. More to the point about your observation about our activity level, it's true that my enthusiasm with this project waned lately. I've not given up interest but rather find myself in a more observational mode perhaps to assess the goings on here from a more neutral (not involved) position. It does bother me some that so many good proposals are met with opposition, sometimes it seems only for the sake of opposing and that is frustrating. But, the reward of getting something done in spite of the sometimes frivolous opposition is tremendously gratifying. Your helping hand with some of our ventures is more in keeping with what I'd like to see more of. Folks like yourself have extended yourselves and have had a major influence in our own confidence in our contributions. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be controversy, only that I've lost some of my patience with some of it, and I'm certainly not bored.
At this time I don't have the "fire in the belly" to be an admin. I'm flattered that you in particular see us as candidate for that and for that I'll sleep with a bigger smile on my face tonight. You have no idea how much Heidi and I appreciate your confidence in us. Please stay in touch, -- Heidi and Joe.
Rick. Sounds like your suggestion for the infobox changes is a good idea. Do you mind if I make a couple of edits to your demo template? If you take a look at User:Harpchad/ofallon I have several test infoboxes that I've been using during the rewrite. I think some of the errors that are showing up are related to some things I fixed in Infobox City earlier today (probably after you took your working copy). harpchad 02:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
He responded to my email. Based on the content, I wasn't sure what, if anything he wanted me to reveal. I asked him if he wanted me to post something on his userpage, but he went ahead and did it himself. From what I gathered, he probably won't be back. Situations may change, of course, but if I were a betting man... --Kbdank71 13:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Bhadani has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
--Bhadani 16:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I posted a few things at the discussion on semi-active status' you may want to look at. Cheers! The King of Kings 04:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Nah, 'salright. :) --Golbez 18:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I have been working on trying to include more optional government officals into the Infobox city. I have been messing with adding city counsel members and MP's (for a future Canadian option). But I have been having some problems. My experimental infobox city is at User:MJCdetroit/Template Sandbox2 and it displays Windsor, Ontario at User:MJCdetroit/Sandbox3. Problems as best as I can convey: I would like the City Counsel title to span all colums, not just the first cell. I would like the first name if counsel president to be center across the columns under that. All other names to be in two columns (two per row) under that. I think that the MP section needs to have virtual row eliminated, but I am not sure how. Can you take a look at this and let me know if there is anything that can be done?—MJCdetroit 02:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Just prior to your infobox ubdate for Afghanistan, the page had been vandalized.(an Anon keeps replacing valid info with Taliban data) I was not familiar enough with the new parameters of the updated infobox to do a proper fix. All I could do was restore the last correct box - 1 edit previous to the Anons. Perhaps if you have a minute you could backtrack to that article and update the box with the new parameters....hopefully the correct information will still be intact. Cheers and take care! Anger22 23:25, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
For fixing Súmate ... much appreciated! Sandy 02:00, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
A pedantic but, right now, relevant point.
What is meant by "2nd Round" or "Round 2" of the FIFA World Cup. Is it:
If 1, "2nd Round" can be mentioned accordingly on page FIFA World Cup. If 2, someone needs to edit this pic →
Cheers. Abut 15:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Dear Rick,
I asked information about my proposed external link a few days ago, and on the discussion section I was addressed to you. This was the question I sent:
---- ---- ----
Dear Friends,
I'm confused. I wanted to contribute by adding - as external link to "Zen" and "Buddhism" - the link to www. bodhidharma.it or in the English version: http: //users.libero.it/seza/indexgb.html - The Flower of Bodhidharma
I noticed that the link was systematically removed. Now, it even seems to be blacklisted. Please note The Flower of Bodhidharma is a web site of an Italian Monastery (Musang Am) associated with UBI (Italian Buddhist Union) and linked with many important Temples around the world.
On the web site are available not only examples of what zen teachings are, but also original teachings of our Master Tae Hye sunim, a Zen Monk ordained in Korea and now resident in Italy, probably one of the most credited Teacher in Europe. I wonder if I made any mistake in proposing the link the way I did, maybe there was a misunderstanding due to my inexperience? In this case I am awfully sorry. Thank you for your help.
Sergio Zaccone (Upasaka Tae Bi)
_/|\_
---- --- ---- --- ---
And this was the suggestion:
What should and shouldn't be added to the external links sections of articles is discussed at Wikipedia:External links. After reading this, if you still feel this link should be added to these articles please discuss it on the articles' talk pages. -- Rick Block (talk) 13:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
---- --- --- --- ----
So I tried to read (I’m not English mother tongue) the instructions about what should and what should not be linked.
Well, if I take the first point:
• Articles about any organization, person, or other entity should link to their official site, if they have one.
From this point of view there is no reason why www.bodhidharma.it should not be included in the external links of “Zen” or “Buddhism”.
In fact it is the official site of the Comunità Bodhidharma – Bodhidharma Community which is an organisation recognized by Italian Law and regularly included in the UBI (Buddhist Italian Union). We also have contacts with many European Zen Organizations, for example in Hannover (Germany) and Helsinki (Finland).
On the other hand, please note I did not find any reason why it should not be included in the external links. We have nothing to sell, there are no banners to click, even the activities like retreats are completely free (and believe me, I think this is really rare!).
The only goal is to communicate our existence to explain better the Zen teaching.
Of course the last decision is yours, and we shall accept and respect it.
Thank you for your time and your answer,
Upasaka Tae Bi
you say:
The quoted point (links to official site should be added) means this link should be added to Bodhidharma Community, not Zen or Buddhism.
Funny what you say, Rick, the Bodhidharma Community is indeed nothing but a Buddhist Zen Monastery!
Please just look: http://www.tricycle.com/business-directory/173.html
No problem, anyway, I think your links are already almost exhaustive about the subject.
All the best
Tae Bi
Hi - I'm trying to come up with a somewhat simpler version of template:Infobox Country, see User:Rick Block/Template:Infobox Country. I'm having trouble getting the padding to look similar. It appears that the padding specified in the infobox style in common.css can't be overridden globally for the infobox. Does this make sense to you? If you could take a look at this I'd appreciate it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
.infobox
.infobox th
.infobox td
table
inherit
class="infobox infobox-country"
.infobox-country th, .infobox-country td { padding: 0.4em 1em 0.4em 0 }
What I'm trying to do is emulate the look of the existing Country infobox, but in a way that might be (easily) reusable in other infoboxes (like template:Infobox City and the numerous country subdivision templates like Template:Infobox U.S. state). It seems relatively insane to me that a city's infobox, the infobox for its national subdivision, and the infobox for its country each have dramatically different looks. The "new" look of the country infobox is (I think) the newest one, but it uses a ton of stuff that makes it difficult to reuse. Rather than .infobox-country th (and td), perhaps we could do a .infobox-geography th/td. My preference would really be for all infoboxes to use the vanilla infobox style, which seems to be the point of styles in the first place. Having these heavily customized infoboxes seems like a problem to me. -- 01:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
.infobox-country th
.infobox-geography th/td
class="infobox-country"
border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 1em 0.4em;
border-spacing
border-collapse: collapse;
Hey Rick, Can you speedy delete this Template:MJCdetroit Test Template for me? There's no point in TfD since I am the one who created it. Thanks, —MJCdetroit 01:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
would you please unwatch my talk page? --Ostrich11 18:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rick, take a look at the Many Doors problem stub. Perhaps after it's fleshed out some we can make it required reading for the doubters. ;-) --hydnjo talk 20:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Greetings Rick, Before I list all the Template:infobox country_data_s for TfD, can you look at User:MJCdetroit/Sandbox to make sure that I am listing all those templates correctly. Is there any problem with listing them as such? Please comment on my talk page: User talk:MJCdetroit. Thanks, MJCdetroit 17:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi - There seem to be an increasing number of daily maintenance related activities that various bots perform (archiving Village Pump discussions, new day headers for CFD, TFD, VFD, etc.). I suspect Pearle (or, shudder, PyWikipediaBot) could be given a tasklist to do these things. Rather than have each of these tasks done purely on the good will of some bot owner, do you think it might be a reasonable idea to ask Brion (or Jamesday, or any other developer) to schedule an "at" job to run <pick one> bot with a tasklist specified in a protected file? The idea is to provide a mechanism for the daily maintenance tasks to run, effectively unattended, and without the need for the tasks to be picked up by some bot owner. I'm willing to run this by Brion as well. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
no why?--Ostrich11 00:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
huh? I didnt create any articles like that. How do you mean i created them? --Ostrich11 02:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
oh it must have been a mistake. there is no issue. --Ostrich11 02:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick, I hear that you are looking for "an honest, omniscient oracle." Looks like we have found each other? I simply knew that we would find each other sooner or later. Now... if I asked "How can I help?" would that discredit my powers of foreknowledge... - Abscissa 02:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I really have no citation, other than that I live in Denver during semester and used to have a gay roommate who would brag about how Denver had the third largest gay population in the country for a major city(next to san fran and minneapolis), other than this there really is not citation, but I know the statement about their location where they are most concentrated is fairly accurate. As you probably know, there isn't really a way to determine sexual orientation statistics other than by reputation, so if you feel its necessary you can delete my comment for the diversity section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.239.147.92 (talk • contribs).
Made a partial revert of your change, as the prohibition against violating copyright applies to all namespaces. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I am intending to add the value, the median household incme for all 50 states and their rank. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 17:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't reply to your previous post (1 May) on my website because I was hideously busy. Your message didn't really call for a reply, but I found your suggestion helpful, so I thought it'd be nice to drop a thankyou line. I looked up the article on pitch correction, and it was exactly what I'd been wondering for many years. cheers The Mad Echidna 09:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I'm not sure if there's a way to do this, but I thought if anyone might know you would. Various infoboxes have entries that really should wrap if the width computed by the rest of the entries warrants it. I've looked for some way to effectively say "don't use this entry's width in the width computation" but haven't found anything (seems like "width=0" should work, but it doesn't seem to). Anyway - if you know or can think of anything, please let me know. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
width: 1px
width: 0px
width: 0
First
Second
Yeah, no problem. By the way, if you'd look a little closer at the Village pump (technical) article, the whole thing is sort of out-of-order. That's why I got confused. The article at the top is dated July 6th. The lowest one (above mine) is July 5th. So, I thought it was in reverse-order. If you want, you could reformat the whole thing. I'd do it, but I'm a new editor. --Robocracy 17:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Two penguins are standing on an ice floe. The first penguin says, you look like you're wearing a tuxedo. The second penguin says, what makes you think I'm not??
I thought you would love that :-) - Abscissa 04:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I've heard some folks have had to do a forced reload to get their browsers to know about some styles I recently (like a week ago) added to common.css. Any ideas what might be causing this? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
$wgSquidMaxage
smaxage=2678400
Cache-control: s-maxage=2678400
Sure Rick. I made an hour-long film with Earl Hines in Blues Alley in Washington in 1975 over about a week. I must have done about 3 hours of "interview" with Earl but his playing was so just great that in the final film, we didn't - just didn't have time for - use much of the interview stuff. I've still got the transcripts of it and the film itself [with all the other unused numbers we recorded] is in the BFI [British Film Institute] library. They don't keep many things but wanted this.
Hines then used to come and stay with me when he was in London and he was a great talker.
Making it with him does remain one of the great experiences of my life. I feel I've met three people who I'd call "geniuses" in my life and Earl Hines was sure one of them. c.n.
I'm having some trouble confirming my e-mail address, so I'll reply here for now.
You're absolutely right. I should have thought of that. Running some numbers, though, it seems to start out less stringent than what I suggested, and become progressively even less so as i goes up. For instance, evaluating it for i=29 indicates that the span is less than Π(p(i))/3.686651584, whereas the other indicates it's less than Π(p(i))/29. I can't improve its curve much, but I think I can make the details somewhat more accurate. The actual number of pairs of twin prime candidates less than Π(p(i)) is equal to Π(p(i)-2), leaving out 2-2=0. The number of pairs of candidates four apart is the same. So, any others must be at least six apart. The number of candidates six apart is 2(Π(p(i)-2) - Π(p(i)-3)), this time leaving out primes 2 and 3. Any not covered by those formulas must be at least eight apart. The counts of gaps larger than six get complicated, but I'm working on it.
I've managed to prove that, if there exist any gaps of length 2k*p(n) in p(n-1), I'm wrong about #6. For each that exists less than Π(p(n-1)), there will be one instance less than Π(p(n)) where it gets both its edges lopped of - where each of the prime candidates bordering it is a multiple of p(n). (As it happens, I simultaneously proved that there will be p(n)-1 instances where it sits untouched.) So, if gaps of that length exist, I was wrong.
Another thing I've been working on: Each Π(p(n)) can be divided into a relatively large number of equal-length sections, each of which contains the same number of prime candidates. I'm working now on the largest number of such sections each one can be broken into.
Your response is, as before, awaited with eagerness. Black Carrot 21:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Wassup. If you're still interested, I've come up with a lot more formulas along the same lines, and a general system for calculating all others. I think I'm closing in on the upper bound. Let me know if you want anything I've worked out.
Ex: The number of gaps of length 28 is 162 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 2 ) − 740 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 3 ) + 1368 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 4 ) − 1300 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 5 ) + 662 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 6 ) − 168 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 7 ) + 16 ∏ p = 13 i ( p − 8 ) {\displaystyle 162{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-2)}-740{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-3)}+1368{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-4)}-1300{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-5)}+662{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-6)}-168{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-7)}+16{\prod _{p=13}^{i}(p-8)}} Black Carrot 20:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Could you possibly weigh in on the discussion regarding the 2005 in baseball article (principally discussed here)? Kingjeff insists on shifting principal content to a separate article (which I find unnecessary) on the basis of the 66K article size, with no discussion by others editors. I have others ideas for reducing the article size, but seems uninterested in working this out. MisfitToys 21:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Just a little joke. Raul654 is an outspoken opponent of the little top-right FA star (and all other article-space metadata). —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I thank one and all - Jarandal, Antandrus, Titoxd, Xaosflux, TenOfAllTrades, mboverload, PseudoSudo, Knowledge Seeker, Haukurth, Deathphoenix, Zzyzx11, Tyrenius, Zscout370, AnnH, Rick Block, Tyrenius (again), Zscout370 (again) and NoSeptember for your support.
To Jeffrey O. Gustafson who initiated this block request I ask why? We have had no interaction until now so how do you come to this requested action at WP:AN? Did you come across my account during your own research or are you acting as a proxy for another admin/user with whom I've caused to be angry with me? In reviewing your contributions I see no such "letter of the law" before now and so I feel singled out by you and I have no clue as to why - that to me is most disturbing. If you've come to this action on your own then should I be always wary of another admin challenging the legitimacy of my account?
For TenOfAllTrades who advised me not to worry and Rick who made me laugh I give special thanks, you've helped me to not take this so personally. And to Jeff, thanks for being courteous in informing me of your action and for letting me feel that your heart wasn't for blocking me. Except for my one explanation above, I haven't edited for a few days now so as to allow y'all to comment about this based on my history of contribution rather than my reaction to it.
I wanted to say all of this before it all goes to archive heaven. I still have a lingering concern that this may arise again and don't want to go through WP life looking over my shoulder or worrying that I might piss-off some admin and cause another inquiry about the legitimacy of my account. If any of you who have been so gracious as to take the time to support me here have any suggestions to prevent such an action, please drop your thoughts on my talk or by email.
Finally, on a personal note to all, I never ever expected so much supportive response from all of you. I know that I've been moody at times and have spoken in ways that I have regretted the next day. I hoped otherwise but it seemed that those unfortunate responses might end up being my legacy as they were the foremost in my mind. And so far as this being a "role account", I think that I'll let the descriptions of AnnH and NoSeptember (both above) stand as the most intuitive descriptions of this account. My (and our) warmest regards to all of you for your understanding and outward support for the continuation of hydnjo's user account and future contributions. Again, my delighted and humble thanks :-) --hydnjo talk 02:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
addendum: Jeff, I was confused at the outset in that I wasn't aware of the "role account" policy and then after becoming aware I was frustrated that I had made so many edits which could mislead someone to the conclusion that my account was a role account. I'm sorry that in my zeal to understand your actions that I posed the possibility that you were acting at someone else's behest. I have no evidence of that and it was improper of me to even mention that such a bizarre conspiracy was possible. I find myself guilty of "blaming the messenger" and posting an inappropriate comment about your motivation.
As for my account, I want to state that it is not a role account and I apologize for leaving the impression that it is one. "hydnjo" is the signature that I commonly use for much of my correspondence and thought it to be appropriate when I first started my WP account. The portmanteau is an acknowledgment of our shared existence and not an indication that Heidi and I share in editing at WP.
I thank you for your courtesy in informing me at the outset of the discussion at WP:AN and for your compliments about my contributions. The comments in my response were made in the shadow of my own frustration with my having left a trail of edits that could easily be construed as having come from either Heidi or myself. I sincerely apologize to you for making any suggestion as to your motivation in bringing up a legitimate policy question. You have a genuine concern for the orderly behavior of our editors and I thank you for initiating this discussion and providing me the opportunity to explain the nature of my account. --hydnjo talk 19:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi - Do you know if there's any reason not to use absolute CSS positioning to put dots on locator maps (as is done by some geographical templates, I'm not sure of any current examples but template:Infobox U.S. City used to do this)? I've asked this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps#Locator dots with no response. And, BTW, while I'm here, do you know why the featured article star recently stopped working in classic skin? I can't find the change that did this (not template:Featured article or any change to common.css). Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick, Haven't talked to you for a while. I'd like your opinion about something I've been thinking about quite a bit recently. As you probably know, I've been pushing for wider acceptance of duplication of articles in parents and their children for quite a while. Here's my present thinking about this, and what I'd like to propose to the developers:
To address all of these things I propose the following:
Here's how it would work:
[[Subcategory:American people:Film directors]]
This markup would be added to the page Category:American film directors. The markup would initiate a database comparison of the categories listed to find the articles and subcategories listed in both categories. The page would be displayed as a "Sub-category" instead of as a "Category" which would indicate that it was dynamically created. There might be automatically generated text that would say something like, "This sub-category contains all the articles in Category:American people that are also in Category:Film directors. Additional text for the page could be created as normal, and the subcategory could be categorized as normal.
Articles could be placed in the category directly. For example List of American film directors could still be put in the category. There should be some visual indicator of the articles that are in the category directly and those that were from the intersection of the parents to help alert editors of miscategorized articles.
Articles would only list Categories on the bottom and not list all the Subcategories that they may be found in (unless they have been put in these categories directly by mistake). Perhaps, each category listed might have a check box, by clicking on some of the check boxes and then clicking on a link to "display subcategory" the user could go directly from the article to the dynamically created subcategory.
Does this sound like a good idea to you? Comments? Suggestions? Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 10:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Rick, it's great that you got the Dance book and have begun to use it. As for your reformatting the references, I notice that the format you are using, from Wikipedia:Citing_sources/example_style (which does not actually enforce one specific format) is the APA--American Psychological Association--format. That would suggest that it would be more suitable for scientific articles. On the other hand, I see that Wikipedia usage varies so widely, even within a given field, that I am not inclined to argue about this for now. I guess most important right now is expanding and neatening the article itself; we can always revisit the formatting issue at a later time. As always, just "thinking out loud." Regards, Alan W 00:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you're interested in changing the design of Template:Infobox City. I agree with you, I like the look of the country and US states infoboxes, which all have the same idea. I had been working in an infobox in Template:Infobox City/Proposed until I noticed you already had your own version ready. So the change can happen I suggest that we do a an agree/oppose poll, because the discussion isn't going anywhere. You can move your version and replace mine at Template:Infobox City/Proposed and we could also use that same page so people can vote and discuss. --Enano275 22:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Here is the Two Ants Problem. Apparantly it's the devilish work of Martin Gardiner:
A rectangular room has dimensions 12´12´30. That is, the floor and ceiling and both the side walls are 12´30 and the two end walls are 12´12. In the room there are two ants, a male and a female. The male ant is on the floor at one of the corners. Now the female has positioned herself to be as far as possible from the male. That is, she has located herself at a point so that the male will take the longest possible time to get to her, given that he has to crawl along the walls, floor or ceiling of the room and will (of course) choose his path so that he gets to the female in the shortest possible time. The question is: where is the female?
Well there's an obvious answer--the diametrically opposite corner. That's certainly the point which is farthest from the ant as the crow flies. But an ant is not a crow.
I don't know the answer. So far as I know there are no tricks (there is no such thing as a female ant lol!!!) and it's a valid problem....
-Abscissa 02:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick Block I'm sorry to get back to you so late, and I sorry to have not clarified where I got the pictures of the east Asain cities skyline's from. The exact web page where I found the photos of tokyo skyline- [8] a forum user Sonie took these pictures and I sent a message to the user asking if I could post these pictures on Wikipedia. I don't quite on how to expressed that when placing licensing information about the picture. The Hong Kong and shanghai pictures were from a website I can quite recall and listed as desktop backgrounds. All of the pictures were slightly altered to fix the resolution requirements on Adobe photo shop elements.--Astuishin 02:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Where oh where have my emails gone? I hope not to Hotel California (You can check out any time you want but you can never leave...). ;-)) --hydnjo talk 21:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
You just have to type several words to get the intersections. However you can only have one word tags. If you type "China Suspension Bridges" all you get is things tagged with "China" "Suspension" and "Bridge". This doesn't seem like it would work for us without changing things rather dramatically. -- Samuel Wantman 05:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
What's the deal with you fixing the same problem twice in User:Rick Block/update after; did I somehow manage to edit and save the old version of the page? --Scott McNay 03:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Rick, I can put some work into getting what we have into a proposal. I'd like any comments you might have on what I last wrote before you go. Also, it would probably be good to get some more people's feedback before we approach developers and the larger community. I met Jimmy Wales this past spring (I had him over for dinner), and would like to send him an e-mail to take a look when we are ready. I can't think of anyone in particular to approach for now, and am wondering if you have any ideas? Radiant! woulod be my first choice, but he's no longer with us. I also realize that this will be hard for people to get a handle on, so I'm thinking that we should mock up some pages so people will get a better idea what we're talking about. -- Samuel Wantman 05:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll put some effort into polishing it up, and then invite some people to look at it, your list of people and any others that I can think of. I plan on making it clear that it is not yet a proposal for the general public. -- Samuel Wantman 01:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
...as in valuable or reward? :) --Scott McNay 12:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Eeeek!! A ghost!!! <grin> Tinkering with it. I gave up and reverted it. About to try again, in my talk page, to see if I can isolate the problem. --Scott McNay 04:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
What was it you wanted to know about my reasons. I'll gladly talk them out with you, but my passion for editing the pedia seems to be waning. Anyway, let me know once you return from your break, and keep well. Steve block Talk 22:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I've been editing up a storm at CI. I'm about 3/4 done. It was more work than I expected. I realized a few things fleshing it out which you will notice. I've changed the deliniation of the CIs to Intersection:xxxx&:yyyy&:zzzz which makes more wiki-sense, though I don't know if it will create any problems. I still have to write a section about how this will affect categorization policy, ect... Jump in whenever you want. BTW, someone noticed our page and left a comment (it is now archived on the talk page). I was quite surprised that anyone found the page because I have removed all links to it as well as all the discussion about it. It turns out that by putting the proposal template on it, it was categorized in Category:Wikipedia proposals. So that is gone for now. -- Samuel Wantman 10:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Would Intersection:xxxx+:yyyy+:zzzz be alright? What about Intersection:xxxx^:yyyy^:zzzz or Intersection:xxxx/:yyyy/:zzzz which seems to imply that there is a natural hierarchy to the pages? -- Samuel Wantman 20:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't mind ::, but I just though that +: might be a little more intuitive. Ther are categories that use "+" in a name (Category:C++ for example), so it probably should be an unlikely double combination. I'll use "::" for now. -- Samuel Wantman 22:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I've responded at CI talk. We might as well use that talk page! -- Samuel Wantman 07:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Rick, We're really not that far away from each other. Perhaps we can invite some people to take a look and get some more opinions? I get the impression you are loosing intrest? or perhaps you are very busy? I'm going away for a month starting mid-September, so I want to get this rolling before I go. -- Samuel Wantman 03:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Well I knew the day had to come that we disagree (not about Bush!) I wouldn't be at all surprised if you came up with something quite wonderful if you put some more effort into working out all the details of your CI vision. Whenever I start down that path I end up back where I started.
One thing I've come to realize about Wikipedia is that it is impossible to make any large overhaul to how it works. If you want to change things in a big way, you have to make a series of small steps to get there. For instance, shortly after we came up with CategoryTOC, I wanted to abandon the policy that said "articles with eponymous categories would only be put in that category and no others". It took about a year of discussion and small changes until people started making that change in a big way. I've recently talked to people that have no idea of the previous policy and wonder why so many eponyomous articles are miscategorized.
My point in bringing this up is that there is a political process for making CI a reality. If we can introduce it slowly, without the wholesale deletion of hundreds of categories, pehaps a year or so from know it will become clear that the categories no longer serve a purpose, and should be deleted. In the interim, people will be adjusting to CIs and understanding what can be done with them. Without the inbetween steps I don't see how it can happen. It sort of like the evolution of birds. Before they left the ground, lots of details had to evolve. The flip side of this is that as the details evolve, the ultimate solution changes as well.
So how about if we contact BRION and ask him his opinion? I've noticed in past interactios with him that he seems to make very quick judgements so we need to make our request pretty short and brilliant. So would you edit my attempt below for posting on his talk page?
-- Samuel Wantman 08:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Check it out when you get bored for a moment. :) Wikipedia:Updating_information --Scott McNay 23:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
At the rate that we're going, a little more tweaking, and there won't be any pages at all. <grin />
I cleaned out the old hidden text in the page Updating Information page (can pull it out of history if needed). I also cleared these pages; they need to be deleted: Template:Update year Template:Update after3 Template:Update after2 Template:Update 2008 Wikipedia:Updating information/2006 Wikipedia:Updating information/2006/9 Template:Update 2007 Template:As of 2007. I've already removed or nowiki'd all of the links to them.
> Looks good. Seems like it's time for more publicity, perhaps WP:VPP and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Style issues
Done! I was gonna pass the buck to you, but figured that saying so would be "weasel words". <grin /> --Scott McNay 06:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I made the change to MediaWiki:Standard.css we talked about a while ago, but it doesn't seem to work (see MediaWiki talk:Standard.css#Change to div.tleft. Do you have any ideas why it might not be working? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
0.5em
ul
ol
1.5em
Window$ is now in the blacklist -- Tawker 04:52, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I put a copy of the proposal in Jimmy's hand on the meetup on Friday night before he left for the airport. He said he'd read it on the plane. I haven't heard back from him yet. I only got to talk to him about it for about 2 minutes, but he seemed very interested and also called over a Wikia programming intern to listen. I'd like to get a response from him before we call more people into the mix.
I've responded to the changes in your mockup. Have you looked at my mockups recently? -- Samuel Wantman 07:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Forgot to mention, that someone mentioned on Friday that the German Wikipedia has already decided to remove all categories that were intersection and fully populate primary categories. So they will love what we are doing. -- Samuel Wantman 07:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand why you have a problem with me. I'm donating my time to write articles and try to work out disputes and I get verbally abused. --NE2 05:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
We have what seems to be an uneasy standoff between the side backed by naming conventions and the side backed by numbers. I'm still not sure what to do. --NE2 18:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I'm slowly easing myself back in, but thanks for the comments. Sorry to drift out of the debate we were having, I pretty much agree with your thoughts on article stability and the governing of wikipedia. That said, what troubles me is that whilst WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:NOR are agreed as the basic immutables by consensus, the interpretation of them is open to such huge debate it seems like there is no consensus. They've become bloated and almost like religious tracts. The basic immutable seems to be that every article must reference a secondary source that has been subject to review by an editor or peers, and summarise that information as presented there-in. That would seem to be a statement worth declaring as the basic principle. Steve block Talk 11:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
http://www.usgs.gov/state/state.asp?State=KY
This source is good enough for me, it has to be good enough for you.
I have an idea for a new project after we've finished CI. I'm thinking about starting a forum to discuss the internal contradictions of Wikipedia's policies and practices. For example, there is the idea that red-links are good because they stimulate the creation of new articles, on the other hand they are discouraged in Featured Lists, so authors write stubs on subjects that probably will never be mentioned anywhere else leading to the creation of stubs on non-notable subjects which is discouraged. Or the idea that policies are descriptive, but when people, after discussion and consensus, decide to experiment with different ways of doing things they are accused by others of not following policy. As we've seen, the lack of CI has led to contradictory view on what categorization is and how it should work. If some more of these contradictions were discussed perhaps it would lower tensions, lessen conflicts and lead to some creative ideas. I realized that I was fighting a hopeless battle with categorization, and that led me to think more about a technological fix. As for a name for this project, I'm thinki of Wikipedia:Wikipedian dialectics. -- Samuel Wantman 07:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Rick, I think it is time to get some more people involved in CI. I've tried making it clear that all the differences you and I have are different options for how it could be. To be honest, I'm not sure which one I like the most. I suspect that this will continue to evolve as more people get invovled.
Could you add to the description of your view of the design (option 3), and make any other changes you think are necessary? I'd also like to add something to try and focus the debate to whether the overall concept is a good one, and ask people to add to the list of options and features. Then we can bring in all the people you mentioned, perhaps mention it at Wikipedia:Categorization. Also, are you ever on IRC chat? I've never figured out how to get to the administrators chat, but it might be good to mention it there, when Jimmy is on-line, so he could comment. -- Samuel Wantman 10:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Great work. I'll take another pass at it and hopefully finish it. We're close. -- Samuel Wantman 03:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm ready to show it to people. Every time I look it over, I find things to fix and edit and improve, but I think it is in good enough shape to show to others. Shall we start with the list of people you mentioned and Brion? I'm going to send an e-mail to Jimmy mentioning that it is ready to be seen and perhaps he could mention something over IRC or post a comment on the talk page. Are you ready? -- Samuel Wantman 08:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it's a contrived use of BLP, I should have been clear that this is an a fortiori inference from BLP - if we restrict critical information in articles, where it belongs, surely the project needn't publish inflammatory statements about living people in userspace. I stand by the edit. - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Rick, thanks for the note about my answer to your question on naming of cities in Japan. I was indeed confused, but I'm not sure where the confusion came from. The original question seemed clear enough, so I don't know why I used "Tokyo City" in my answer... I'll think it through some more and post a clarification. Thanks again Fg2 22:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I like the design for the Bedfordshire template you did, is there a way to make it automatically or does someone have to hand code every one? Lcarsdata (Talk) 19:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
You wrote on Radiant's talk page that "Template parser functions have arrived (see m:ParserFunctions) and have let any number of folks go truly nuts with templates that are completely inscrutable" [9]. I'm just curious, which folks/templates did go truly nuts? --Ligulem 13:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, it does sound like a good idea. But maybe it could benefit from a more concrete proposal? The project page currently reads "we want to standardize" but it doesn't give any sample standards or anything. Just pick two or three and ask people to comment, that might work. Also, advertising at WP:RFC or WP:CS could work. I've reverted my tag, I'll watchlist it and see what happens. >Radiant< 17:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Nice to hear you're also technically inclined (of course I did not mean to imply that other people did not qualify, I hope my remark didn't read as such). I've downloaded the WP source code and am examining what's feasible here. A few design decisions are important (e.g. namespace vs specialpage; do we want 'or' and 'not' queries; what about subsets by namespace; limits on depth; etc). Please take a similar look and tell me what you think! >Radiant< 21:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey, Rick :) When I first looked at the changes you've been making to the town infoboxes, I thought you were deleting the second (and later) "leaders" and nearly had a fit! Then I figured out what was going on and calmed down :) Looks good - I should have done that when I was adding that info. Sorry for the extra work! But Thanks for doing it! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 03:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I've requested a bot flag now, to be able to run faster. See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Ligulembot for the discussion. --Ligulem 16:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
... with a couple of responses to what it was that you said. BTW, I did study very hard the list of tags and so think I might know which one would be the best one for the picture should I ever get the chance to actually use it, but I still really need help with the rest. And the link you provided me was only useful if I'd been interested in copying information from one website, which I have never been interested in. I wrote my text as an original product, created after doing lots of careful research of the band's history. That was the easy part. The whole photography thing is what's giving me a massive headache. Owie. I need extra-strength Tylenol AND Advil now. (Krushsister 06:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC))
I was wondering if you could help me out? I am trying to move the location of the postal code in the box to the bottom. I have moved it and aligned it to the left, but I can't figure out how to place a line between the postal fields and the footnotes section. Here's my sandbox for it: User:MJCdetroit/Template Sandbox1 and these are the two sandboxes I've been using to compare with and without the postal codes: With codes and Without codes. Thanks. MJCdetroit 12:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good. Wikipedia has way too many announcement boards, but the main one I'd suggest you add it to is WP:RFC (and possibly, but arguably less so, WP:CENT). >Radiant< 22:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
If I add a category into my watchlist, the 'recent edits' of the pages that I watch shows only the edits that are made to the category page itself but does not show recently added subcategory/page to this category. Adding this feature will help those who are working on better categorization of wikipages and other readers as well who are interested on the pages related to a category but some of which do not exist in wikipedia as of now. Should I added this request to bugzilla as well, pls suggest. Vjdchauhan 06:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Rick. I didn't mean to offend by adding the link to Tokyo Architecture Info. While I can understand why you would see it as a purely self-serving move, TAI isn't any more commercial than the Japan-Guide link already on the page, and is certainly more useful than the Japan Times link which is 404. I don't know of another English language resource that has so many photographs (300+) of Tokyo, or such accurate statistics on the city's buildings. I think TAI should be accepted on its merits, and is certainly worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia's Tokyo page.
Primarily a template update (see edit summary). Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
No idea what happened there. I use an addon for firefox to show me what it thinks are spelling errors with a red line underneath but I make all changes by hand. I have no idea where the white space deletion has come from. I'll keep an eye on it though. Cheers. SeanMack 01:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. I saw that you were the major editor of Template:Japanese prefecture so I thought I would ask for your help. I've been macronising the pages in Ōita Prefecture recently (per WP:MOS-JP) and I noticed that the "Districts" link in the Japanese prefecture brings up a red link to the [[Category:Districts in Ōita Prefecture]] (with the macronised Ō) which doesn't exist. The MOS says that we shouldn't macronise categories, so this page will never exist. Any way of doctoring the template so that we can get rid of this red link and get it to point to [[Category:Districts in Oita Prefecture]]? Cheers, Bobo12345 11:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Although I feel that my mind is not ready for such a leap, I will humbly accept your offer/nomination and thank you immensely for it. I also enjoyed our cordial discourse regarding the country infobox, and hope to put the past "conflict" behind us. With regards, 210physicq (c) 02:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
User:AzaToth did some major changes as we all know and shit-storm safely passed by, but I am confused on one of the #if:'s he did. Under total area at first glace it looks like s/he made {{{areami²}}} optional by enclosing it in the {{#if:______}} structure. However it doesn't seem to work like it's optional. If you go to any country and remove the '|areami²= ####.#' and hit "show preview", it will not remove the square miles as if it was optional, it will place a '{{{areami²}}} sq mi' in the missing fields place as if it is not optional. I thought #if: was always for optional parameters. Take a look and see what I'm talking about. —MJCdetroit 03:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
It was not optional before and I was going to put it back that way, but I guess I didn't see the missing {. Anyway it looks like it was AzaToth that first changed it. I put it back to non-optional. Thanks. —MJCdetroit 04:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
your edit comment confuses me. were you referring to my edit? did i miss something? sorry in advance if i did. ... aa:talk 04:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Had a great trip and did get a few bridge pictures. Anything interesting happen while I was gone asside from the CI stuff?
Since I've been back I've been looking through the wikitech-l postings to read the discussion. I'm halfway through, but I've seen no discussion on that list or on the CI talk page that says even hints that CI should not happen. The sole question has been how to make it happen technically. Since this is already done by sites like flikr, I have to assume that it is possible, and if it is currently a problem for us to implement it, it will eventually be possible in a few months or years. So assuming it will eventually happen, there are still questions to be answered:
hi, sounds like a good idea. i'd like to see the end result.
have a look at template:panorama simple too, which is similar but does work in IE i think. —Pengo talk · contribs 06:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I came across your name on the Monty Hall recent edits so naturally I "looked you up" but my reason for contacting you is that I have noticed several editors mentioning "recent edits made by a specific editor blah-de-blah": how do they do that? I am asking you because I see on your user page you have made your edits public thus: *My contributions. Is that how one editor can see the edits made by another editor or is there a simpler way I have missed? Also is it considered OK to investigate edits in this way? As you will have guessed I am pretty new to this but very keen on the whole concept.Abtract 20:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Using the 802.11n discussion as an example, do you think it would be ok to use the template in this example or should it wait for Review_after?
In this case, we have an event which should have occurred by Jan 1 2007, but did not, and the AS OF date should be updated at regular intervals to ensure that readers are not exposed to obviously-stale content. --Scott McNay 01:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi - Do you have any idea how to make Template:NavigationBar look different when "printable version" is selected? As it stands, the scrollable version is displayed which is not appropriate for printing. I could make it a non-printing style, but if there's some way to make the "white-space: nowrap" and "overflow: auto" conditional I think that'd be a better solution. I'm interested in any other comments you might have about this template as well. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
print
screen
projection
@media print
.noprint
class="toccolours noprint"
Pardon my taking the title style from Michael Ende but I couldn't help myself. Although we've not been as WP active lately for reasons beyond our control, it is always a comfort to come and find the MH article and its talk as lively as ever. Damn, is there any other article (other than political or religious ones of course) that have shown this kind of staying power? Amazing, and we love it! Shoot, maybe you should write a book; those royalties would continue to trickle in forever. ;-) --hydnjo talk 00:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Grr! I seem to be getting nowhere so far at embedding a banner; I expected it to be straightforward, but nesting it within a conditional seems to be a problem. Want to take a look at it and see if you have any ideas? The template page is here and the test page is here; feel free to tinker with them. --Scott McNay 04:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Psst! See Q up there under User talk:Rick Block#Update after documentation. --Scott McNay 03:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Deliberate, for the time being, to avert spam. I'll reconsider it, though. >Radiant< 12:05, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello Rick,Do you think you could address this question for Krm500. I couldn't figure it out the other night and I ran out of time tonight. —MJCdetroit 01:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick Block. First, thanks for updating the list :) Next, I wanted to ask you something. Me and NoSeptember were just discussing this as a thought.. What if we could just merge the Active and Semi-active. I know thats a big change, but we were just thinking that there is hardly a barrier to manually update this list. If it was just Active and Inactive, there would be a set barrier to go by. Can I get your thoughts? — Moe 13:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I am still somwhat baffled as to how our VPRLC page differs to many pages that currently exist and are deemed suitable for the site. If you have a look at the Oxford Cavaliers (Rugby) page, you will see we have used the same format as them e.g History, Honours etc. Why is there page OK and ours is not? Our Club and Police Rugby League in Victoria has featured in many newspapers, police magazines and journals, Rugby League Weekly, the National Rugby League web site and more. We are not an 'unheard' of association and have broken ground in rugby league in Victoria and Australia. Our players have been involved in international test matches and helped paved the way for the sport in developing states. I have perused many of the pages covering various topics and fail to see why ours is not suitable. Cheers, VPRLC Committe.
RE POLICE RUGBY LEAGUE CLUB.
Can you tell me please how I can view my page (any of the three I have created, saved and had deleted. I have checked log but can't find it with a search. If I can make changes to one of these as you have suggested, then it should be suitable. VPRLC 08:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I prefer the new version, it offers a smaller version of the template I originally created, tanks for your hard work. Lcarsdata (Talk) 18:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I have awarded you The Template Barnstar on your userpage. Feel free to format it in any manner that you wish to match the others. Thanks for helping to improve all of Wikipedia's city pages. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 03:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Looks great. So perhaps it is time to use it to make {{LargeCategoryTOC}}. I'm going out of town for two weeks, but perhaps I'll undertake the task if you or someone else have not when I return. -- Samuel Wantman 06:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I started making it, but I don't understand how plainlinks work and how to make your template work with them. Perhaps you can take a look. I don't think I have enough time right now to finish the template, (I'm on a computer with a one hour limit). Once it is done we can try it on Category:Living people -- Samuel Wantman 18:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I have made some changes to the clubs page, particularly the beginning. Can you check it and see what you think. If it is okay, how do I get it back on to the site as a proper page?
Thanks. VPRLC 22:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps someone has an issue with it being a 'police' club! There is no reason it should not be allowed to go ahead as it is clearly no different to other existing pages. I have questioned the user who deleted it and await a reply. Thanks for your help. VPRLC 11:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Rick, can you please give me an idea of where things are at with my page? I am not too sure what happens now, or what else I need to do, other than throw the idea into the too hard basket. Could you check the talk page for the other user to see the latest. Thanks VPRLC 01:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC) Hi Rick,
I have followed up some of your suggestions but I am not having much joy. I will do what you said about putting it forward to have a consensus done re deletion. Can you please help me with this at all? Thanks VPRLC 03:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
see above request please. VPRLC 17:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Please do not remove my posts from RD. Thanks--Light current 03:25, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know of any method which works well on the Wiki other than to lead by example. Let's hope it works out in the long run. --HappyCamper 00:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rick Dont start deleting peoples comments! Thanks! Otherwise maybe you could find yours deleted.--Light current 03:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm having discussions at RD/talk with some of the regulars that I wouldn't have expected. I don't understand why the environment there has become hostile lately and certainly hope that I haven't inadvertently messed with someone's head. Any ideas? --hydnjo talk 09:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Just thought I'd drop a note to express appreciation for your efforts to improve the tone of the Reference Desks. I like a bit of wit as much as the next person, but some of the comments – particularly over the last little while – were getting a bit rude. As you've noted, the RD is a very public part of Wikipedia, and it's frequently visited by new editors who may be unfamiliar with our policies, our practices, our formatting, or for that matter with the English language. Mocking newcomers has all too often been mistaken for a sense of humour; I'm glad that you're helping to keep an eye on things. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I didn't even notice that yet, as I was about to post on the Reference-desk. You can delete it if you can. 68.39.174.238 01:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, Rick, my mistake. I shouldn't have done it! --SunStar Net 09:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing a really annoying problem. Moving that footer back down to the bottom after every time someone posted a message was driving me nuts! I was going to have to lose my sanity or lose the footer. You saved me from doing either. Thanks man. The Transhumanist 14:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Rick.
Thanks for helping out The Transhumanist and me with that pesky smiley talk page footer problem! Even when I was reading along with a CSS tutorial, I still couldn't follow exactly how the three divs were working together. Oh well, I stumbled across how to do a slight modification for my talk page anyway. :-)
When I came over here to thank you for that and noticed you're an admin, I thought I might as well hit you up for some other help while I'm at it. A discussion at Talk:Main Page#Proposal: add one or more of these links to the main page seems to show consensus to add a link to Contents at the top of the Main Page. To keep 800X600 displays on one line, this can be accomplished by removing the link to Searching, then adding the Contents link just to the left of Categories. However, no admin has stepped forward to add the link. David Levy suggested to me some other admins to ask, but so far no takers. Thanks for your consideration. Rfrisbietalk 18:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
p.s. If you could say a thing or two about what each div does, I might learn something. :-) Rfrisbietalk 00:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
How do I add the following tag
<a name="Contents">
immediately before the Contents of the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Mathematics
As a regular visitor, I want to jump to the Contents as soon as possible but I do not know how to achieve this unless an HTML-tag is added OR a button is added at the top of the page BY YOU. Twma 01:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I've added a DIV with id="Contents", which makes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Mathematics#Contents link to the spot I think you want. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I clicked your above link four times with two different machines all indpendently, it went to the top of the required page, nowhere near the Contents table. Please try it yourself. Thanks. Twma 01:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick, I left the above user a message, per your request on the EA talk page. Hopefully it'll be of some use to him. Take care, riana_dzasta 11:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering if it might make sense to subst the subtemplate in {{LargeCategoryTOC}}. It would make it much longer, but I'm guessing that it would speed things up. The list could then be shortened by removing combinations that rarely or never happen (like JX and QZ). What do you think? -- Samuel Wantman 06:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
If you were to block User:84.68.125.122 for disruption, I would support you. JBKramer 13:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Caould you add featured lists to your script, or create a separate page? It would be nice to honour those editors as well. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Left comments on the template talk page. --MZMcBride 03:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick, that's much better, thanks! I think I did something almost exactly like that earlier but I missed out the |'s on the end of the lines containing the formatting... oops. Thanks a lot for helping out, much appreciated. --YFB ¿ 19:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I've been thinking of some templates to aid in navigating categories and categorization of articles. It is Radiant's talk page so perhaps you could take a look? Respond there if you feel like it.
I'm guessing you've been pretty busy recently. You seem to have missed my recent posting on your talk page which you archived without responding!
I hope all is well. -- Samuel Wantman 08:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, one of your user scripts uses the addLoadEvent( func ) function (see [10]). This function will be removed from MediaWiki:Common.js soon. Please modify your scripts to use addOnloadHook( func ) instead. —Ruud 18:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
addLoadEvent( func )
addOnloadHook( func )
There wasn't much more to it than I mentioned in the article. The full text will be available on-line on Tuesady here. This version of the problem seems even more counter intuitive, since the same exact scenario has different odds depending upon what Monty Hall knew before he opened a door. The most disconcerting part of it was that the odds go from 2/3 to 1/2 because there are times when he guesses and opens the door on the car. In the example in the paper, that did not happen. So this is a good case for how the odds for something that could have happened in the past but didn't can still have an effect on what will happen next. I'm sure there'll be lots of discussion about it on the talk page. -- Samuel Wantman 09:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The new US court template is wonderful. Thank you. Ratherhaveaheart 18:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
No, I really don't have any way to check that automatically. I'll remove this user, and when I get time I'll look all the users manually. Ral315 (talk) 05:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I think Samuel's idea has merit; it worked fine for tagging cats as "self-reference" and such. I've created Wikipedia:Category structure for central discussion on the topic; please participate. Yours, (Radiant) 16:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Like most metropolitan areas in the United States, the extent of the Denver Metropolitan Area is largely contextual and the subject of lively debate.
Most Colorado counties are extensive. The three suburban counties adjacent to the City and County of Denver are long and narrow, with high population densities at the end of county near Denver and very low population densities at the opposite end:
There are several overlapping, officially designated Denver metropolitan regions:
There are many additional unofficial and quasi-official definitions of the Denver Metropolitan Area.
The Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area article started life as a Denver Metropolitan Area article. While the label Denver Metropolitan Area is almost universally used in the metro area, the name of the article was changed to Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area to coincide with the United States Census Bureau designated Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area. Unfortunately, the Census Bureau also designated a Denver-Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area. The definition of the Denver Region used by the Denver Regional Council of Governments is the most common used locally.
I recommend that the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area article be retained (and possibly renamed to the more popular Denver Metropolitan Area) for general information about Metropolitan Denver. The portions of the article that deal with a specific regional entity such as the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area or the Denver Regional Council of Governments should be moved to those articles. --Buaidh 22:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh I had no idea. I hope by making the list I didn't annoy you since some people enjoy performing some tasks themselves. I don't wanna take any work away from you if you enjoy doing it. If you wish for me to take over this process for any reason, I would be glad to use your scripts. Thanks. - Tutmosis 17:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello Rick, It's been a while. Can you do me a favor and please proofread this infobox template before I implement it. You can make comment about it and see an example of it here. Thanks. —MJCdetroit 02:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
As a user who has expressed interest in dealing with misuse of the reference desk, you may be interested in my comments at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Where we stand and my new strategy for dealing with the problem at User:SCZenz/Reference desk comments. It will take help from many people in order to make it clear which behaviors aren't appropriate. -- SCZenz 03:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I speak Albanian, and I'll translate Wikipedia talk:Searching#alban skenderaj for you by the end of the day. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I found you in the Wikipedia talk:Image use policy page and I just wanted some input on a photo I recently uploaded. You can find it here. I used the "work of a US gov't" fair-use tag but I think that might be incorrect. Could you let me know what you think? Thanks alot. Naufana : talk 00:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
Q: Is there some reason you need a link to your contribs, or your current focus article?
A: I don't really care much either, and if you find it makes to code for the sig too large then I'd be happy to remove it. Really it's just a copycat thing: I've seen many people use 'contribs' links in their sigs, so I did the same.
Q: You're presumably trying to drum up interest in your current focus article with the other link.
A: I've just removed it.
Cheers, Yuser31415 06:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Are you complaining that I removed the same advertisement text that you removed (though I also removed the link to YouTube). Let's be clear. We get a spam link every three seconds. We are not even beginning to catch the ads that are going into articles posing as encyclopedic content. Perhaps if we were to deal with the problem instead of worrying about the feelings of spammers, we would make some headway. Danny 21:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
I was'nt thinking straight when i did that. 12hernn 01:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC) P.S. my account name is now User:Animine, and your unknown origonal source quote came from Mark Twain.
As long as this kind of attitude continues, I see little hope for being able to move forward. I asked a couple questions I consider relevant- depending on the answers, maybe this needs to go to RFC or something. Friday (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Howdy RB,
We are having a minor problem with the Template:Infobox City and I was wondering if you could give it a look. I detailed the problem on my talk page and have some sandboxes set-up too. For the sake of a continous discussion could you please reply over there. Thanks, —MJCdetroit 01:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rick. Thanks for your message. I tried working on this but the current complexity of Template:Infobox City is too high for my brain to handle. I tried some transformations but failed. I can't fix it. For my taste, this is out of control. --Ligulem 00:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
It looks like a reasonable way to handle the large TOC problem without using scroll bars. What do you think? -- Samuel Wantman 22:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I have removed this from the stylesheet. There is no reason why a couple of infoboxes need their own separate styling. The infobox class is to give infoboxes a consistent look. We should also not be overriding skin colours. Feel free to create more semantic classes such as the "mergedrows" subclasses to create the layout you need, but don't use subject-specific names. All colours should be put in monobook.css (these will be grey, grey and grey...). ed g2s • talk 17:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rick, happy xmas/holidays !! - Abscissa 12:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
When, exactly, are you going to do something to stop them from harassing Friday, I wonder? Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
If you wish me to disengage from the users in question, I call on you to enforce my ban on them from taunting me on my talk page. Failure to enforce this will likley result in me reengaging. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
You know, I unwatched all of the pages this was going on at - I unwatched friday, unwated the reference desk talk page, unwatched everything. But, even after all of that, I still get to see this, because I didn't unwatch the actual reference desks themselves (which I will not do). I am considering acting agressively, but would like your opinion on the appropriate level of agression. Thanks. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Rick, I got your message on my talk page and will respect it. However, I do not understand why User:Hipocrite is allowed to behave the way he does and I believe that the comment you removed was truthful and I will be glad to provide diffs as evidence if you will ban him from harassing Reference Desk editors. There are multiple administrators that see his comments and attacks and do nothing, giving the appearance of approval of his actions. -THB 23:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I will also say it's about time someone started commenting on Hipocrite's behavior. He's out of control, a rogue editor. -THB 02:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I thought he had promised to stay out of things yet postings from him are appearing. So why did you delete my post to his page/--Light current 02:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey... You removed some content I put on the MH problem page despite the fact that it was being discussed, your questions were addressed, and you offered no counter argument.
I'm still thinking about this, and thought of a way to handle the server problems. I've posted the idea on Radiant!'s talk page. Comment there if you'd like. Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 09:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Speaking of CI, take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Categorization. They are going wide with the desire to chop all the categories into tiny bits. I don't know if I can restrain them. This is maddening! -- Samuel Wantman 10:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
