User talk:TonyW

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Tony, welcome to Wikipedia. You might like to start by reading the tutorial and introducing yourself at the new users page. For ideas of what to put on your user page, see Wikipedia:User page.

If you have any questions, you can ask at the help desk or on my talk page. Two useful tips are that you can sign your name using four tildes (~~~~) and you can preview your changes before you save using the show preview button. You can regularly find new tips on the Community Portal. I look forward to reading your great articles and I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. :) Angela. 14:07, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Category tags

When adding a category, make sure you add a tag so that it sorts alphabetically correctly.

For the article John Doe,

[[Category:XYZ]]
gets sorted under "J"

[[Category:XYZ|Doe, John]]
gets sorted under "D"

Curps 04:12, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)


I went over the list of your recent category additions, and I think they're all alphabetically sorted now (at least the astronomers and physicists).

One other thing, if the name has accented letters, then the sorting tag added to the Category should usually omit those accents, because in English an accented letter sorts the same as an unaccented letter.

Curps 04:31, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yes, the mathematicians need to be in surname order too. That's how real-life lists of names are ordered. It's a lot of work.

There's no way to simply automate it either. You can have a Chinese name like "Zhang Yuzhe" (file under Z), a Spanish name like "Josep Comas Sola" (file under C), names like "Galileo Galilei" and "Tycho Brahe" which are traditionally abbreviated to "Galileo" and "Tycho" (and sort accordingly), and so on. So each name has to be on a case-by-case basis.

Curps 05:25, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Stowe re-entered onto June 14

I just reentered the Harriet Beecher Stowe entry onto the June 14 article. I don't know why I got rid of it in the first place. JB82 00:30, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Category alterations

What's the rationale behind piping the category links for cryptography articles? — Matt 15:34, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out. Sorry if I sounded terse, I'm having trouble with intermittent connectivity at the moment, so I have to be brief. I was a bit confused as to changes like [[Category:Cryptography|Torus]] for Torus based cryptography surely that's not necessary (unless I missed sometimg), and causes out-of-sequence listings for, e.g., Type 2 product. Similarly, XTEA is piped as [[Category:Cryptography|X]] .. surely that causes it to be incorrectly sorted? — Matt 15:57, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Ah, note that if you don't specify a sort tag, it defaults to the page name; I'll try and fix some of your changes. — Matt 16:04, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Note that (e.g.) [[Category:Crypto|XTEA]] sorts identically to [[Category:Crypto]], so adding the full page name isn't needed. — Matt 16:15, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks again for doing all those "C" articles! — Matt 17:31, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi again! Just one thing; Category:Cryptographers is a subcategory of Category:Cryptography, so you only need the "Cryptographers" one. — Matt 20:15, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

No problem, I'm glad to have you helping out! You might want to have a glance at the "Subcategories" section in Category:Cryptography; some are more specific than the general "cryptography" topic. The "rule" is (I think) to place the article in the most specific subcategory you can find. — Matt 20:21, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, I think that's right. If an article will fit in "Crypto attacks", then it should only list that as the category, and not "Crypto" as well. — Matt 20:28, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Yes, I think so; if I remember correctly, many of the other block ciphers are. — Matt 20:39, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your help in categorising the cryptography articles! Much appreciated. — Matt 11:48, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] VfD nominations

Good afternoon. On Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Michelle Bass, you suggested that we should maintain the same standards and nominate all the unnotable participants from Big Brother (USA TV series). I think that's a great idea. If you nominate them, you will have my support. Biographies of living people are a troublesome area for our encyclopedia. They are very difficult to maintain in a way that stays NPOV, unambiguous and verifiable. I would much rather see minor celebrities mentioned as an aside in a main article. The endless breakouts just seem to have too much potential for abuse. Thanks for your thoughts. Rossami 16:04, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I would rather much make a compromise. In the IRC chat we were discussing making either a page dedicated to the contestants of the show, or just splitting up the pages into seasons, not unlike what is being done to The Amazing Race. One thing I did wish, however, was to be consulted before the mass listing. It's just common courtesy, I think. Mike H 01:10, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)
Look at the format of The Amazing Race. That is what I'm considering. If there are Big Brother 3 (USA) kind of articles, then there will be no need for separate articles on people themselves. The stories of the people can be told in one place as well as what happened in the house, as with separate articles, one has to isolate information dealing with one character and shelve everything else. Mike H 01:29, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)
That's what I'm saying. If individual series run articles are given to each season of a show, contestant articles would be obsolete. This could have been cleared up much more easily had you talked to me about it first, you know. Mike H 01:43, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)
Oh, I see who nominated these kinds of articles first, and it wasn't you. Okay. My bad. Mike H 05:35, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] WikiMagic

I found you on the Wikipedian by field of interest listing.
I'd like to invite you to participate in my project WikiMagic. The Magic Collaboration of the Week has just been set up and I could use some help from people who aren't just interested in exposure. Do you happen to know any specifics on copyright law when magic effects are concerned? Hope to hear from you soon. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 21:17, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] MacGyverMagic for adminship

I've decided to take the plunge and self-nominate for adminship to make the work I do a lot easier. Please head over to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#MacGyverMagic and let your voice be heard. There's no hard feelings if you oppose, just make sure you let me know how I can improve. -- [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 10:38, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Breakup of date pages

I don't know that this is the way "we're" going, but here are my thoughts on the matter: 1. Many of the date pages were getting unwieldy and hard to edit and access. 2. This is bound to get worse with time as more entries are made. 3. The year pages are easy to break up into months. 4. The day pages are harder to deal with, but I have been breaking them up as follows: earliest century-1899, 1900-1999, 2000-2099. This at least gives a little bit of a break, although eventually we will probably have to break them into smaller pieces, especially 1900-1999 births. 5. I have been making these changes as I touched each page, but I have no official status. I'm not an admin or anything, but I have been doing quite a bit of work on this. If there is a good reason, I could be convinced that this is not the best way to go. But I hope these changes won't be reversed without some discussion. Let me know what you think. Ksnow 21:29, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)ksnow

Thanks for you response. Then I'll continue with what I've been doing until someone has a better idea. Ksnow 19:12, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)ksnow

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 15:31, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Dates

My understanding is that it is Wikipedia policy for all dates to be linked. Also, I know I for one find it more aesthetically pleasing when reading pages with lots and lots of dates in lists. Kind regards, jguk 16:17, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, though there is a tradition on anniversary pages of not linking the year if it's the same year as the previous event/birth/death. I do think this should be changed however, and seeing as I haven't found the style documented anywhere I think it needn't be discussed and fixing it can be done whenever one happens to run into such a page. --fvw* 14:13, 2005 Jan 5 (UTC)

[edit] Spam

I've no idea why that URL is being blocked and it doesn't seem to be in the spam filter. I've left a message about it at m:Talk:Spam blacklist. Angela. 00:04, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Theatre

Hi! This is a note to let you know that I have just established WikiProject Theatre. Please come and join us in building up Wiipedia’s articles relating to theatre! Ganymead 18:06, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] lots of edits, not an admin

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:40, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BB

Why shouldn't the link to Derek Laud go direct to his article? If people want to find out about Derek, Derek Laud would be more useful. --Celestianpower talk 21:51, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes - I see you're point. I just thought that it means more clicks for the user but it isn't all that important really. --Celestianpower talk 07:29, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tony Banks

Thanks for pointing out the disambiguation on the link on my personal page. I have now corrrected it. Mikeroberts 11:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

  1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
  2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
  3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BDAbramson T 02:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/o/n/User_talk%7ETonyW_18cc.html"