Wikipedia talk:Zen Collaboration of the Month
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
just wanted to state that i'm in on the zen collaboration of the month Kennethtennyson 15:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hey Kenneth! (missed your post there at the very top, sorry!) Glad to have you on board too! Rentwa 10:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Interesting
I too would be interested in contributing something here. - Nearfar 15:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
- Glad to have you on board! :) Rentwa 09:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Housekeeping Tasks
(I'll put a more formal statement of this on the collab page when we're more clear about how this all works)
Anyone involved can always have a check to see if the following are up to date:
- Is the 'current leader' bit up to date?
- Have all the nominated articles had the template added? (to talk pages)
- Is any obvious vandalism removed, obvious mistakes corrected?
- Has last month's list been archived? Rentwa 06:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
(please add any more housekeeping tasks here)
Rentwa 10:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not clear how this will work
Perhaps its just me being stupid, but I can't easily see from the main page how or where votes for the Collaboration of the month page are supposed to be made. The voting procedure says "Nominate or vote on articles in the categories below", and then goes on to indicate that the current leader is 'SF Zen Center' with 1 nom + 1 vote = 2 votes. Are nominations different from or the same as votes? What's the basis for saying that 'SF Zen Center' is in the lead?
This looks a very interesting collaboration, and I'll happily contribute once I understand what to do. --MichaelMaggs 17:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- Essentially, a nomination is the same thing as the first vote for that article. The vote isn't really an election; it's purpose is more to see how many people are willing to work on what. By voting for an article, you are promising to work to improve that article should it be selected as the collaboration of the month. As for the the current leader, it appears that several articles are currently tied with two votes each, but SFZC is, as it says, "winning tie by date of nomination", i.e. it was nominated first.—Nat Krause(Talk!) 18:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- To vote just add your name under the article(s) you favour, but as Nat says, be prepared to make some edits on the articles you vote for. I'm all for nominating every article we polish for 'Good' status, whether or not they strictly meet the criteria at the end of the month, but if you aren't don't let it worry you. If you've got any comments you want to add like how to improve, or what to delete, or anything at all really, put them on too. Rentwa 22:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
If you think the sort of voting used in RfAs would be better, just say here. I've tried to make things simple and more informal so the bureacracy doesn't get in the way of the task, but if a more traditional wiki approach is better/more popular, I don't have any personal investment in the current set-up. Rentwa 06:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- The way you've set it up looks fine to me. It's pretty simple once you know how, and avoids a lot of the bureacracy that appears elsewhere. If you've no objections, perhaps I'll just tweak the wording explaining what users have to do.--MichaelMaggs 15:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- Tweak away! :)
- And thanks for nominating (looks like a good candidate btw). Rentwa 18:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Here but not here
It was nice of you folks to ask me to contribute, but I'm not sure how much I can do. I have to watch myself carefully or I spend too much time on Wikipedia, get too upset by the endless task of combatting vandals and POV-pushers, get involved in edit wars, and lose my balance. This is a very difficult practice! Zora 19:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- All part of the Zen path ... --MichaelMaggs 21:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Template location
Templates have so far been added to the actual articles, rather than to the talk pages. But I see that there's now a suggestion they should properly be on the talk pages, as they are addressed to editors rather than to readers of the encyclopedia. If that's right, the existing pages need to be altered, and the instructions on the collaboration page tweaked. Is there general agreement that that should be done?--MichaelMaggs 07:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- I say yes as Saposcat says we have to!. He scares the pants off me, so I'm not arguing :) . But I don't see why we can't have a vote and be different if we want? Or do article and talk page. Or keep it a secret? Sorry, I'm in a silly mood :D . What's your opinion? Rentwa 10:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Sorry, I don't mean to scare the pants off you. But anyhow, I've started doing some of the moving in question ... —Saposcat 09:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Only kidding :) . Take it easy :) .Rentwa 12:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- I suppose (having taken my pill now) we do the orthodox thing - can you update the project page and I'll move the templates? Rentwa 15:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Done. Hope you think it's ok.--MichaelMaggs 16:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Fine, nice work :) . I did a stub of Ten Bulls, which presumably is the sames as bull pictures/oxherding pictures - I should have left a note on the stubs section - false modesty ;) . If you know of a link explaining how to do redirects (which I, for one, don't know how to do) it would be a useful addition to the project page (possibly a small section on basic editing tips and tricks?) . Rentwa 12:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Winner
October's Zen Collaboration is San Francisco Zen Center. I'll update the collaboration page, and paste the existing article into sandbox 1 to allow experimental rewrites without upsetting the encyclopedia entry. Rentwa 09:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to email S F Zen Center tomorrow evening. I'll ask if they can point us to any sources for history, biographies of notable personalities, daily life on retreat, photos, permission to use photos at their website, also any other information they think is relevant, particularly details of the scandal referred to and its aftermath. If there's anything else you think I should include please say below. Rentwa 11:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Did you get any response to your email?--MichaelMaggs 21:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A new article ...
Just thought I'd let whoever might look at this page know that I've created an article on Layman Pang; it's terribly dry text and nothing else right now (since I couldn't find any pictures/paintings/etc. of the man), but it's at least a beginning. Any help anyone might be able to give in improving the page would be much appreciated. Cheers. —Saposcat 21:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Procedure here
Is there going to be enough ongoing interest to blank all the old nominations each month, in the expectation that editors will vote again for articles they have previously nominated? Would it not be better to leave all the votes in place, and simply remove articles that have been elected to Collaboration of the Month? --MichaelMaggs 21:42, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Another new article ...
Again, just thought I'd let whoever might look at this page know that I've created an article on Katsu (Zen); and again, it's a bit dry and academic I guess, but so it goes. Any help in improving the page would, again, be greatly appreciated. Cheers. —Saposcat 22:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikibreak
Things have come up in RL and I can't continue editing at the moment. Thanks for all the effort on the Zen Collaboration. Best wishes. Rentwa 16:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
