Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Issue 001

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Third Box

Should we have a little list of ongoing stuff like; "Stick a The Beatles Project template on relevant articles." "Use British/English grammer and spelling per Policy" "A few moments checking other editors contributions is always appreciated" "Don't be shy on using the talk pages"

and anything else deemed suitable. Just a little footnote at the bottom, so that everyone is singing from the same songsheet (likely to be "Fool on the Hill"). Damned if I could copy over the box format (and get the text in it) when I tried!LessHeard vanU 23:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

If you think that's necessary, certainly. My take on this (and God knows I'm getting sick of hearing my own voice - it comes from being a bit of a Wikiaddict, I have no desire to be "boss guy") is that the main focus should be celebrating what we've done and crucially drumming up a bit of interest in working on some of the Project tasks. At the moment we have one or two editors creating new content (notably the excellent Steelbeard), 3 or 4 of us chipping in on policy and structure, a few of us reverting vandalism, but I feel we're not really doing a lot to move forward at the moment (we got off to a great start though). I am genuinely worried that the Project will founder. (Let's imagine for instance that tommorow I'm run over by a bus - or less melodramatically - I decide Wikipedia stinks. Lar is called away on urgent business and can't get to Wikipedia for a few weeks. Would it all grind to a halt? I think so)...
Anyrode! Get stuck in mate, sign yourself as a co-editor if you add anything substantial. Same goes for anyone else who's reading this. --kingboyk 06:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I like the idea of a third box with a quick tip list (each tip could link to deeper content) as you suggest vanU. Good idea! I've given it a go, see what you think! still need more linking, a couple do link but some don't. I played with the colors too... I can't think of what's missing. I'll copyedit again later this weekend. Let's plan for an AWB run either late sunday or monday? Or do you think we need more time to sit? I don't. I can do the AWB if no one else wants to, I can stand to increase my userpage edit count I guess. Snicker. ++Lar: t/c 12:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Looks fine to me. Send it out instantly if you like. --kingboyk 14:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I've done what I wanna, if somebody would care to copyedit/throw in what I missed/cut down on verbosity please go right ahead. --kingboyk 07:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I've done my little bit of spell-spotting (note to self; use preview to avoid multi edits in History). I have not removed my username from the editorship - but I was tempted.LessHeard vanU 15:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
You totally should leave it in as you are the tipster. If anyone should be removed it should be me (or maybe I get a "technical credit" for setting things up)... ++Lar: t/c 17:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
A serious note, I think that it should be someone elses decision who gets editor credit. Let others be the judge - false modesty is a facade I can only keep up for a while. If someone does a bit of good work, then they should get a credit (I'm certain they will be pleased, I was.)LessHeard vanU 20:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
That's good to know! Talking of credit, Mal ripped off a huge load of our (mostly my) work for his new Project and didn't give any edit summary credit... bah! --kingboyk 07:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
"Not Serious!" Drop in on the relevant talk page and criticize the layout or whatever he ripped off! See him try to defend THAT! (har! har!)LessHeard vanU 15:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
That would be totally classic. If someone starts, I'll come in and nitpick too. (I can pick on the Article Classification stuff I think...) :) ++Lar: t/c 15:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I gave him a ribbing about the name. He has chosen the bizarre name "WikiProject Northern Irish articles". So, I asked, what's the articles category gonna be called? WikiProject Northern Irish articles articles?? hehe --kingboyk 15:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hehe, quite amusing (more because someone who's clearly new at the whole WikiProject idea has chosen a rather... contentious... area to start with). At the same time, there's no need to be too harsh; borrowing from other projects is a time-honored tradition, and he probably didn't know what the best way to give credit was ;-) Kirill Lokshin 16:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I should point out that Mal is (I hope!) a "wiki mate" of mine, and he did good work here too. (And I hope will do so again in the future!) --kingboyk 16:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Ya, don't worry Kirill... we're just taking the piss out of him a bit in absentia. This project is pretty jocular. Unlike you serious warlike lot over at MILHIST! Snicker! ++Lar: t/c 16:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Likewise. The suggestion for one of us to "critique" something which he had sourced from ourselves originally was tongue in cheek.LessHeard vanU 18:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Heh. Maybe I'm just too staid. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A bit wide

At 800x600 screen resolution, what looks to be about a centimeter to the right extends past the screen horizon, and is thus not visible. This wouldn't be such a problem except I inexplicably can't scroll that way. Maybe it's just my browser that won't let me scroll, who knows. Anybody else noticing anything similar? Danthemankhan 16:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Seems alright in a downsized Firefox window... ? --kingboyk 17:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
For me, FF is fine... IE seems to have the same issues with this page that it does with just about any WP page, there's a bit trimmed off at the far right table margin. Resizing doesn't bring it back. It looks OK even scrolled down. Maybe check the milhist newsletter I cribbed this from. see also the esperanza nl, do we want headings like they have? (if so, waht would the headings be?) ++Lar: t/c 17:24, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I set the width of the section to the right at "89%" and it fit perfectly for me, though if it messes it up for other browsers I can live with the other version. Danthemankhan 18:15, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

At the time of posting this appears fine using Firefox.LessHeard vanU 20:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving Newsletters

As I mentioned, I'm new to newsletters so this may already have been considered; I assume that we will want to archive the content of each Newsletter once it is sent, for our own records and as a source in itself, so the template is available to be used for the next edition. Can this be done? I would suggest that the newsletter remain visible for some time after sending, but not be able to be edited (what would be the point?), so we can use it as part of the introduction to the project for new members. My query should indicate that, as ever, I am not the candidate for this task.LessHeard vanU 20:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Totally agree. I've tried to set up the structure here to make archiving easy. Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach already has the first issue transcluded and a (dead) link to the second issue. If we get enough issues we can make up a little archive box (like my user talk page one: user:Lar/TalkArchiveTemplate... This being a wiki there is no way to prevent someone from changing the newsletter after we send it out (But that's why subst: is the way to go... it gives you a snapshot) short of page protection which typically is not done. However I expect enough people would watch it that it would be reverted. Hope that helps. Good questions! ++Lar: t/c 21:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's the logic behind subst'ing it. People might want to change links later on for dab purposes etc so protection wouldn't be right (unless it got vandalised). I for one will leave it on my watchlist. I've also created a category for the newsletters to live in. --kingboyk 07:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
I put a request box up on it asking people not to change it any more... if anyone does we should revert it so that the archive looks right (it's just transcluded) ++Lar: t/c 01:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Complete Todo List

has been added (in a show/hide div)... hopefully meets with everyone's approval. Wonder if it should be subst'd in just before we go live so that it's static instead of dynamic. Thoughts? ++Lar: t/c 22:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Up to you. I'm happy with the newsletter as it is now so consider my involvement done. Send it out when you're ready my friend :) --kingboyk 07:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Run is underway

...and a fix for next time... at least one project member has a style somewhere that causes stuff to get centered... we have to add tagging to the issue so that for the duration of the issue it's not centered, but that doesn't mess up formatting elsewhere on their page. ++Lar: t/c 15:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

It's an IE/FF difference due to using a center on the table that's nested with project tips. Next issue I am totally going to do that a different way because... grr at IE!!! but I am going to let it go for now. ++Lar: t/c 15:27, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Release of Newsletter

Um... I just got a copy of the newsletter subst'd into my talk page, but it looks to me like it's not finished yet. If that's the case, then my talk page won't be updated with any of the changes. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 20:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

? No, it's finished. Why did you think it wasn't, what did we flub up? Grin. I had no plans to change it further. For next time if you want it transcluded instead of subst'd, you can sign the list and we'll do it that way for you. ++Lar: t/c 21:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, it just seems incomplete. I mean, the "Complete Todo List" is... completely empty. Sorry if my previous comment seemed ill-mannered. I know that it was blunt, but I didn't really know how to say what I wanted. Also, when I saw the newsletter, I saw some spots that I wanted to fix or change, but then I forgot or something. When I came back the next day (that's all it took), it was already released. I don't know. Seems like it was kinda rushed. I suppose now we have all month to do it better. No biggie. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 23:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like we have a volunteer for next month's lead editor! :-) I'm looking forward to it! (not kidding, it would be nice to hear from someone else for a change) :) --kingboyk 05:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I have no problem editing and assembling the data given to me, but I won't likely come up with much on my own. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 20:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, what Wikipedia skin are you using? Kirill Lokshin 00:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Monobook, I think. Whatever the default is. But that's not really relevant to the changes I had in mind. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 03:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. I know that the navForm in which the to-do list is hidden won't work right on some skins; but I'm pretty sure it should be properly expandable in Monobook. Kirill Lokshin 03:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
The todo list is done with a show/hide div... it is collapsed by default. What happens when you click on the "show" link at the right of the complete todo list? If you don't see it expand to show you the entire list, please let us know (and include what skin, browser with version, and OS with version you are running)... Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 04:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, I missed the show link, but this kinda proves my point. It's not clear that the To Do list is hidden. Normally, when you see a colon, you expect stuff to follow. If I even saw the "show" link when I was looking, then I must have thought it was merely an "edit" link, as both are enclosed in square brackets. So... yeah. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 20:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Show/hide is a fairly standard (and growing) convention here. But if someone missed it, let's change what the heading says so it's more obvious. What do you suggest? Perhaps "Show/Hide complete Todo list:" ?? That may be clearer, and it brings the wording of the title itself closer to the link making it more obvious you click on "[show]" to get something to show. ++Lar: t/c 20:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Ease of use for a Newsletter should be a priority, I suggest. As it is going out to editors of all standards of familiarity with Wiki generally then anything that would make it easier to navigate is likely to return a higher response.LessHeard vanU 21:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History and the changeing thereof

Steve: I won't revert war over this but I think you're looking at this wrong.

Once the newsletter went out that's it. Why change it? Especially over style? Fix the style in the next issue. (and I've raised the issue on the talk page there, I don't actually agree that "project" should be capitalised in the next issue, lets talk about it there)... My analogy is with printed newsletters. Once they're out, they're out. You don't go around and fix up copies in people's mailboxes (the subst'd copies) and you don't change the master either (the copy on the page that was subst'd). It is what it is. History is history.

As for protecting the page... I had thought of asking you to do it, actually. I'd have done it myself except I don't have that authority, as you may know. But now that you've reverted my reversion I am definitely NOT going to ask for protection from anyone till we work out the right thing to do, not my style. And maybe never because it's not the wikiway. Making any sense? ++Lar: t/c 16:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that changing the capitalisation of a letter or fixing a link does any harm :) Anyone else care to chip in? --kingboyk 17:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Fixing what link? Missed that, all I saw was the capitalisation change. Can that be fixed with the creation of a judicious redirect? But I think the principle is what matters more, you just don't change history, it's not done. Major or minor, it doesn't matter. ++Lar: t/c 17:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Blimey! "History"?! I guess I didn't attach the same level of importance to it that you do. Change it back! --kingboyk 18:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Tomorrow. Maybe, I subscribe to 1RR, so won't revert unless you actually agree, and I don't want you to go along because you're humoring me! Grin. ++Lar: t/c 18:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
So do I. I'm not really very bothered about this particular edit, but it does seem to bother you, so in the interest of cordial relations I've reverted myself. :) --kingboyk 18:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I see that the two of you have sorted it out, and I concur. My opinion that once sent it should remain as is - it could be a useful reference point so changing it alters that - warts and all.LessHeard vanU 20:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I third the decision to leave already-released issues as they were released. Once they're out, focus on the future, not the past. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 19:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

My copy of the newsletter seems to have been hacked. The format has changed - most boxes have disappeared and a little note "the beetles suck..." appended. It appears someone was in my talk page, but I don't know if it was a one-off or if it was hacked at source and then sent out. Has anyone else reported this?LessHeard vanU 12:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I've had a look, and it was your user page that was vandalised. The edit in question came from an AOL address a few hours ago now, so I can't block them. Just one of those things we have to live with :) --kingboyk 12:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Wunnerful. I've got me a troll. Okay, I'll revert my own talk page.LessHeard vanU 20:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_The_Beatles_Outreach_Newsletter_Issue_001_9cce.html"