User talk:Ling.Nut/Archives/2006/12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a discussion archive created in December 2006, though the comments contained may not have been posted on this date. Please do not post any new comments on this page. See current discussion, or the archives index.

[edit] hrvcoln template

See User:Ling.Nut

[edit] Phylum

re. your recent edit of Austronesian languages in which you change language family to phylum. The term phylum is usually used to refer to something taxonomically higher than a language family, and also something necessarily speculative (since a language family is the highest level which can be reconstructed using the comparative method). Austronesian languages are definitely a language family, not a phylum.

In the same edit you change one of the largest into the second largest. You should really note which is the largest. If the largest group that you have in mind is a phylum not a family then it doesn't count! (and I suspect that there is lots of speculation about bigger linguistic groups which could be considered instances of phyla)

Cheers, Ngio 10:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and welcome aboard! Nice to see somebody new working in the Austronesian languages.

That was quick. But I'm not sure your correction quite works. The components of Niger-Congo are properly established families according the comparative method, but Niger-Congo hasn't been (and probably can't be). That makes it a phylum, and comparing the size of the Austronesian family to the Niger-Congo phylum doesn't make sense. You could compare Austronesian to Bantu and the other big families that make up Niger-Congo (this kind of Guiness Book of Records factoid stuff is a bit silly, but interesting too).

The WP article does call Niger-Congo a family, but in the external links there is a paper (acknowledging Greenberg amongst others!) which shows that this is not true: An Evaluation of Niger-Congo Classification.

Cheers, Ngio 14:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hi, I responded to your comment on my talk page (this conversation was getting too spread out) -- Ngio 08:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requests for feedback

I was going to look at your Taiwanese Aborigines page, but would like to know whthere you want comments on your editing or on how the article as it stands now. Cheers, Yomangani^talk 10:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

[Barnstar moved to User page. Tks!]

Ling.Nut, Thanks for the edit/contribution to Synchronized Universe.PEACE TalkAbout 20:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] [pagename]

Hi. Thanks for letting me know about this. I closed the AfD, deleted the page and 'salted the earth', as they say. It's a page that has had its day in AfD and lost. The author is simply creating more login names and then recreating it. I've put a stop to it. - Richardcavell 12:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about Chen Guangcheng

Hi, I notice that you added "This is a Chinese name; the family name is 'Chen'" in Chen Guangcheng. I think that it's unnecessary to add that statement. There are so many articles about Chinese persons. No other such articles has such a statement.

Thanks for your reply. I can understand your concerns. But that statement in the head of the article does not look so good. Probably we may add family name to Template:Chinesename and use it, instead of using Template:Chinese name. For the articles like Jiang Jieshi and Mao Zedong, in which the family name has been clarified in the table, we do not need to add Template:Chinese name. --Neo-Jay 19:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] adopt a shroom

Hi Ling.Nut, I'll take a look at it, but I'm probably just as novice as you are. (I've kind of become addicted to Wikipedia, and so I've started disambiguating pages.) Probably RussBlau is the best person to get some ideas from. -- Jeff3000 22:15 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Robert William Lawrence

I added the following comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert William Lawrence

• Keep. According to the article, Lawrence was Tasmania's first botanist. Sir William Jackson Hooker, the Regius Professor of Botany at the University of Glasgow, named a species of flower ‘Correa lawrenciana’ in honour of Lawrence. -- TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 02:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taiwanese aborigines

thanks for the reply, when I get the time to, I'll translate the German to English, I don't think it warrants enough to be a seperate article on the English wikipedia, however a section mentioning them in the article should be sufficient enough. Abstrakt 15:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ling.Nut - per request I've reviewed this article, and for my money I'd say an "A" project rating is quite justified. I think that with only a few more revisions of prose tightening and the like, the article would have a very fair chance of passing FA muster (the claimed 'fair-use' map might possibly be an obstruction to this, if challenged). Nice work and congrats!--cjllw | TALK 00:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm no expert in copyright law, but the govt site has an explicit copyright statement on it, and the fact that they no longer have the img on their website would not invalidate the copright. Even so, it may well be OK to use under the terms of 'fair use', I'm just noting that one of the FA reviewers when it comes to that may (or may not) question it. I suppose the only real way to find out is to try...--cjllw | TALK 01:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ling.Nut, following out your remarks at WikiProject Ethnic groups talk page, it occurs to me to wonder if you've crossed paths with Doug Fix? He's a historian (& friend & former colleague of mine, teaches at Reed College in Portland, Oregon) who works on the history of indigenous Taiwanese nationalism, among other things. Cheers Ngwe 18:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Identification of the varieties of Chinese

It is a mishmash because I created it by gathering content scattered all over various articles and mashed them together. It certainly is not the smoothest or most consistent article in existence.

Feel free to tear it up as much as you want. -- ran (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adopting a disambiguation page (Any Wikignomes in the House?)

copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anglicanism

It seems your page count may be increasing, which is good... If you look at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links you'll see that Episcopal Church (462 links) (+352 in the last month or so!) is a fairly hefty (and rapidly-expanding) repeat offender in the Disambiguation link repair queue. Recently there has been talk of Wikipedia:Adopting disambiguation pages.

There are many possible options for linking to "Episcopal Church," and a non-Anglican (such as myself) might be a little lost. This sort of topic really requires people with specific knowledge of the content's domain... It would probably only take a few vigilant editors to keep this particular aspect of Wikipedia neat & tidy, if you think it's a good idea... Thanks for your time --Ling.Nut 19:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

We don't have lots of new Anglicanism articles, but we do have several hundred new incoming links. These appeared because Episcopal now redirects to Episcopal Church. (My doing, I'm afraid.)

80% of the articles are bios linking to Episcopal to try to identify the denomination of the subject. Only someone with detailed knowledge of the bio would know for sure, but it would be reasonable to guess that a U.S. person should be Episcopal Church in the United States of America, and a Scottish person would be Scottish Episcopal Church.

The rest of the Episcopal links should probably be changed to Bishop, and very rarely to Episcopal polity or Anglicanism

Episcopal Church should always go to the nationality of the article in question. If there is a very rare link like Reformed [[Episcopal Church]] then it will go to the wrong place, but that is tough luck.

Are there any tools that Wikignomes use to make this work faster?

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hroðulf, some people use bots to help them in the task of disambiguating links. I haven't quite gotten that far, myself... can I copy/paste your remarks, minus the mea culpa, to a page that people who do disambigaution link repair would see? It might be helpful to them. Oh and thank you kindly for the response! --Ling.Nut 15:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

copy and paste them wherever you want - just make sure you ask people to send any personal questions to my talk page, as the page you past it to won't be on my watchlist.

I have downloaded CorHomo, but I won't have the time to try it any time soon. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk)

• I do think that "Pages for adoption" is a great idea, and I wish you the best of luck with it. I am trying to reduce my level of involvement with Wikipedia right now, so I don't think I'll be able to contribute much to your project. In terms of automation, the key thing would be to adopt a consistent and unchanging format for the tables, since a script would need to parse the raw wikitext of the page to locate the adopted pages and update their link counts. Once the format is set, writing the script would actually be quite easy. --Russ Blau (talk) 12:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

RussBlau,

No need to reply -- but I do hope you see this. In my short time on Wikipedia, I've seen that you are a true pillar of the dab page link removal project. (You're probably as important in other areas too, but I haven't been around long enough to see). So goodbye, good luck, hope to see you again, and above all thanks for all your hard work!--Ling.Nut 15:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation

Hey Ling.Nut, you are right that I said there was a lot of help, but I don't know exactly who it was. The way I know is that the numbers of links was going down quickly, much more than I was doing, plus sometimes when I tried to fix a dab link, it was done just immediatly before by another editor (and then I could figure out who it was). I found two other editors in that manner, but it was just luck. -- Jeff3000 13:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation Discussion

I put it on three different pages at first, the page for adopting articles (the one you initially responded to), the list of dab pages that had too many links (no response) and the finally the WikiProject Disambiguation page (this one had all of the responses). You can find the discussion here. For the most part, the majority was against the idea. I realize how extreme the idea was, so I attempted to settle on a lesser template, but people are still focused on the first one I proposed. The second one I proposed would include a link to here and here, which would benefit both pages. Plus, there would be no declared ownership of dab pages on their talk pages. Perhaps if you want to propose it, it would help in the discussion. I don't know how to make this template, so I was hoping one of the people in the discussion would. Thanks for your previous feedback. Nehrams2020 18:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dialects

Could you explain a little more on my talk page please? I have only seen the language/dialect debate become heated in political contexts, but do not follow debate among language experts, so I would be interested to hear more. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! Very illuminating indeed. I wonder if those insights will help clean up the Ulster Scots language page. How did you get on in your language exam? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hroðulf, I forgot to mention the idea of a dialect continuum. It's an interesting phenomenon: in some cases.. hmm.. imagine a coastline no more than a couple hundred miles long (maybe less). Imagine five distinct linguistic groups living alongside each other on that coastline -- let's say from north to south the groups are [A,B,C,D and E]. It's not at all unusual for A to be largely mutally intelligible with B, B to C, C to D, and D to E... So perhaps a series of linguistic innovations has occurred, and each group shares a number of innovations with the groups next to it, but the number of innovations begins to pile up as you move along the continuum. At the far ends, then, A and E are only slightly mutually intelligible. So someone could make the case that A and E are separate languages... but are they, really? Moreover, don't get the idea that mutuall intelligibility is the only criterion one would use. It's just the first step...

I think I aced the exam, thanks!--Ling.Nut 20:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Handy Wiki abbreviations

Good news about the exam. I hope WP didn't distract you too much. Was it on Mandarin?

As far as I recall ‘rv’ at WP means 'revert' (not 'remove'). ( I don't know of a list of definitions of these things ) Best! --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 05:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry, just evesdropping on this. There's a list of these things (rv, rvv, rm and so on) at Wikipedia:Edit summary legend. HTH. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Austronesian languages

That's probably a good idea. I didn't write Austronesian people article, and I don't know how much I'll be able to contribute to it either. I did, however, include a link to it in the "see also" section, as it's a related topic.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proto-Austronesian

Ling.Nut: I won't be writing an article about PAN - I was just adding its abbreviation to the disambiguation page because I felt it was needed.

Superbfc 10:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your wikipost. Your propositions of improvements are good ideas in the whole. I add them to the list of improvements for CorHomo2.0. Escaladix 07:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mellat Park

Could you disambiguate the Mellat Park. There is an editor who keeps undoing my disambiguation, and I can't revert anymore. -- Jeff3000 17:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jeff, I'll take a look at it and try to see what is going on. Have you tried "moral suasion"? Cheers! --Ling.Nut 17:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I'ved tried to be as nice as I can on his talk page, but he's been quite uncivil on my talk page. -- Jeff3000 17:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Forget it, he's fixed it himself. -- Jeff3000 17:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I saw the lack of civility; it did in fact very clearly cross the line into ad hominem. People take issues of ethnic identity personally, and sometimes even the slightest miscue is unacceptable to them. But his later edit seems just fine. Sorry you got hit by that!! Cheers --Ling.Nut 18:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Standard cross-cultural sample

The article Standard cross-cultural sample explains it fairly well, I think. I've added the category to help students using the SCCS learn the basics about each culture by browsing Wikipedia. --Anthon.Eff 15:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the template tip. Looks like a bit of work, but I'll try to use them. I see you are a linguistics PhD student, and are interested in Austronesian. I noticed the Peter Bellwood book in your demo bibliography--I very much enjoyed his book about the Neolithic, First Farmers. --Anthon.Eff 22:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Manila Science High School

I definitely agree with you for tagging Manila Science High School AFD since it is a non-notable high school in the Philippines. However, I'd just don't know the procedures in doing that. Is it required that an administrator would do that? And, can you help me tagging that article for AFD? Thanks! --Darth Narutorious 18:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

HI Darth,

You need to be aware that there's a fairly substantial debate going on at this very moment at Wikipedia talk:Schools about when schools should be deleted. I... dunno...whether AfD'ing a school is a sound practice..until that debate is finished... if it ever will be (sigh). I will say that I personally am not AfD'ing any schools at present, though I may change my mind at any time, depending on the thrust of aforementioned debate.

In general, though, anyone can nominate an AfD for almost any article, but only admins can delete it (the nomination for deletion is voted on, and anyone can vote). Instructions on the process of AfD'ing an article are at WP:AFD. You'll need to edit.. hmm... at least four different pages for every page you nominate:

1. The page itself
2. The specially-made discussion page for that article's deletion nomination.
3. The page where such nominations are posted publically.
4. The Talk page of the person who originally wrote the article, or perhaps its heaviest contributor (judgment call on where to go with that one).

That may sound like a lot, but once you get the hang of it, it becomes less intimidating... Please read WP:AFD.. you can ask me if you have questions. later, --Ling.Nut 19:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. I'll just wait for the right time to nominate that article. --Darth Narutorious 04:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Ref harv

Template:Ref harv is used in Retreat of glaciers since 1850 a featured article that was also on the Wikipedia main page. The Harvard citation style is an old style, but works well since the references can be sorted alphabetically and the editing window isn't cluttered with a lot of ref templates as is found in the cite template. The Harvard style of referencing is accepted for use on Wikipedia, but I believe the Template:Ref harv is only used in the one article I mentioned. It was developed so the citation is smaller in appearance and doesn't take up as much space in the reading format.[1]--MONGO 06:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!--Ling.Nut 14:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taiwanese languages

Thanks for your feedback! My college roommate and I were chatting about languages in Taiwan (was the original language a sort of Chinese or not?), so I decided to check out the pages to find out. I just saw a few small odd-sounding bits and — being one who is somewhat obsessed with good grammar and syntax — thought "That's easy!"

As you thought, Rifkin was the author of a book about entropy, and there's even an article about it, Entropy: A New World View. I only went to his lecture (on another topic) for extra credit for a class, and wasn't excited. Nyttend 03:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Nyttend, I'm happy you took a look at those pages. The mainstream position is that the Formosan languages are unrelated to the various Sino-Tibetan languages (including Mandarin Chinese), but there are a minority of linguists who disagree... depending on how interested you are, you can check out Formosan languages and Austronesian languages. Later --Ling.Nut 13:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh PS -- the language commonly referred to as "Taiwanese" is Min Nan. It is definitely related to Chinese (from the Fujian region of Southern China); but one's position in the debate about whether it is a dialect or a separate language depends largely upon whether one accepts political or linguistic arguments, respectively. --Ling.Nut 13:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome Template

Hello,

You can find the template at User:Kf4bdy/welcome just be sure to change all the info to you and copy it to your user talk page. I say that because I made the mistake of not doing so in the beginning. ;)

--Kf4bdy ^{talk contribs} 04:19, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I may have found your page based on your contributions or your link repair user box on your user page. If you are not a member, please consider including your name on the project page. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time.

I don't know how busy you are right now, but I appreciate you leaving a message on the page before you left. If you want to continue the discussion I left messages for every member, participants in link repair, and people who have the userbox on their page. Have a good break, and we hope to hear from you soon.Nehrams2020 23:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Schools

I've taken no offense, and I certainly don't mean anything I've said to be taken personally. The nature of disagreement too easily draws me into being belligerent, perhaps.

It is my belief that Wikipedia offers an opportunity to FAR exceed Britannica in scope and detail. I don't see any reason to limit the coverage of verifiable topics, nor any advantage in trying to predict what topics will suit researchers. Good data finds good uses. A detailed map is better than a diagrammatic one because you can lose yourself in it, or find yourself when you've lost the way. A good school article on Wikipedia is better than two dozen Google results that are scraped from public reports because we aren't just selling ads and there's some editing going on and a chance for endless improvement.

I'm not arguing that middle schools make great articles - but I do think they make useful ones. And as long as they're not misrepresenting themselves, they do more good than harm. Wikipedia excels at covering the obscure even as it struggles to come to a coherent presentation of the elemental. Let's let it grow unimpeded.

Now.. if you want my help going after "in universe" fancruft. I'm with you. That's much better off somewhere else. Schools, I believe, matter. They matter in the real world. Even if there are 20 million of them, they are documentable and real and somebody somewhere might really like to know something about one of them. --Dystopos 02:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnic groups

Hope it's OK with you that I've had a bit of a go at User:Ling.Nut/EthnicGroupsTemplateSandbox. If not, then revert me. - Jmabel | Talk 04:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Responded on my user talk page. - Jmabel | Talk 17:39, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

We haven't been using bots, but feel free. - Jmabel | Talk 18:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice work! Let's see how this goes, then look into what we can do next. - Jmabel | Talk 00:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:GA-Class Ethnic groups articles

Hi Ling.Nut (rhymes with wing nut? :)

That's an interesting question. I'm not sure how you could easily detect the intersection between two categories. It can be done within AWB by skipping articles that don't have both cats - but I'd suggest a more mundane method. I only touched the cat because I'm doing some minor category work, but I'm assuming your assessment work is just starting. If it was me I'd just take a more systematic approach of working through all the {{Ethnic groups}} articles and update the tag for all {{Grading scheme}} classes. Does the project have a complete assessment department, or is it a bit ad hoc? I'd suggest fleshing out the whole department; it'll make things easier in the long run. Cheers.--Bookandcoffee 18:58, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] to see the Ethnic groups sidebar on (not updated) version of page

Go here to see the Ethnic groups sidebar on (not updated) version of page: User:Ling.Nut/NewPageSandbox. --Ling.Nut 13:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks basically good. I think we should probably do something (like surround it in another layer of invisible table, just for margins) to get a little bit of space around it. - Jmabel | Talk 16:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey, thanks

Hey there, Ling.Nut, and thanks for your kind words. No problem at all if you wish to adopt aspects of the WP:MESO structure and layout to WP:ETHNIC, and I see you've made a fine start already in setting up the assessment scheme for that project. If I can help out, or there are aspects of the design which need clarification, please let me know. Keep up the good work, cheers! --cjllw | TALK 01:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Ref harv 2

In response to your question on my talk page, the motivation behind this reference style was to have Harvard-style citation, yet make the citations easier to read past in heavily cited articles. This style was used in the Featured Article Retreat of glaciers since 1850. The style was selected in favor of the non-superscripted Harvard citations through a consensus process based on improved readability.

As to the question of whether it should exist in template space, I would say that the Harvard style is in widespread use, but that the typewriters in use at the time the style was developed did not have the ability to easily superscript the citations. The superscripting isn't an attempt to create a new citation form, but merely to improve the readability of an existing one.

—Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 07:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I second Doug Bell's comments here. The usage on the FA mentioned made it not only appear scientific by kept the refs alpabetical, which is something cite.php doesn't do. I would actually prefer to see the harv template incorporated within the software better so that we can better maintain articles over time.--MONGO 07:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Doug Bell and MONGO,

• I am quite sincerely reflecting on and mentally taking apart and examining these comments (as well as other comments that other people have made on different topics) as I try to refine my stance on many issues. If I have adopted an uncompromising stance, I hope you will lower a curtain of grace over a philosophy that is still very much under construction.
• My problem was never with Harvard citation per se, but with the practice of recasting it in superscript form -- period. I have never seen that format before. If it is in use outside Wikipedia, then please completely wipe away all my comments, and "know them no more". If it is not in use outside of Wikipedia, then my first instinct is to suggest that we should "...follow the established practice for the appropriate profession or discipline that the article is concerning...", as mentioned in WP:CITE#How and where to cite sources.

Thanks,

--Ling.Nut 13:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

What happened in the course of wrting the article Retreat of glaciers since 1850 is that we went through ref|note, then I believe we tried cite.php for a few sources and then went to the standard harvard template. A few of us complained that the Harvard style looked too large and simply made the text harder to read than just a footnote...but we wanted the author name in the text instead of a footnote. Doug Bell wrote the harv template and that automatically superscripted the reference. Then we nominated the article for peer review and sent it through FA twice, and it sailed through the second time. I don't know if harv is used in areas outside of wiki, but it is the harvard style, just automatically superscripted so it doesn't blend into the article as much, which is something that can be done with the harvard style, just that it requires more key strokes to achieve. See:Wikipedia:Footnote3--MONGO 19:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Classifying articles:

How could you label something as large as African American a "stub"? (I've changed it to B-class, as a tentative rating). - Jmabel | Talk 16:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

And I notice that for Talk:Taiwanese aborigines you didn't note "needs infobox". Please, if you are going to go through and add these, fill them out correctly, or all it does is to give the illusion that the job has been done, making it less likely that someone will come through and do it right. - Jmabel | Talk 16:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Or are you just experimenting? It's really hard to tell.

In any case, I see one problem: If you look at Talk:Taiwanese aborigines, you'll see that the template doesn't show the "edit" button for the tasks list. I fixed one blatant syntax problem, but it didn't fix this. - Jmabel | Talk 16:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi JMabel,

Thanks for your comments.

I am experimenting with everything. For example, I set Taiwanese aborigines as "class=A" simply to see if "A-class" would show up in the summary box on the WikiProject Assessment page. It didn't occur to me to set "needs-template=yes." I was just seeing if the MathBot would pick up the assessments.

Regarding the African American rating of class=stub, I left a long note on the Talk page that explains this setting in detail. I left identical notes on each of the 16 pages I edited, but for example see Talk:African_American#New_Assessment_Criteria_for_Ethnic_Groups_articles. The real problem is that I didn't see the option to set custom edit-summary text on AWB. It was my first time to use AWB. Crucially, the edit summary text as it appeared did not give you any clue at all about what I was doing. I did a later test of 6 further edits using (New Assessment Criteria for Ethnic Groups articles using AWB) as the edit summary, which is much more to the point.. In retrospect, perhaps I should have manually done dummy edits on all of the 16 or so talk pages that I had earlier edited in my first test run with AWB, in order to display a more descriptive edit summary.

[The second run of 6 pages also included a slightly modified version of the Talk page note. The modification changed "don't feel slighted" to "don't be alarmed." As I was looking it over after the first edit run, I thought the first version sounded slightly negative.]

I apologize for the blatant syntax error. Thank you for pointing out that bug.

The reason that the drop-down task list does not have an edit button has nothing to do with the new version of {{Ethnic groups}}. That edit button is a feature of the task-list template itself; see Template:WP Mesoamerica tasklist. Since you desire that feature, I will look at it immediately. I anticipate being able to add that feature this evening.

Thanks,--Ling.Nut 18:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• "Show/hide" button working fine now. - Jmabel | Talk 02:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oooh, you know what it is? That button is the last thing on the page to show, so if the page loads slowly, it can be a long time until it appears. Not really something we can control. - Jmabel | Talk 02:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all you are doing, and I hope I am not being too critical; it's just that if I am being confused, you may really be confusing editors on these articles when they see their article given an inappropriate classification. May I assume that all of the places you are putting templates to test them, you will take responsibility for eventually leaving them in a reasonable state, so that I don't feel obligated to follow you around?

Sorry I didn't mean to say "edit button", I meant to say "show". The "show" button shows up on the template page itself, but not in the templates on the talk pages of articles. - Jmabel | Talk 18:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Jmabel,

• You're not being too critical.
• You don't ever need to follow me around. If I have made an error, tell me and I will fix it.
• I looked at the templates on 3 pages and saw the "show" button, and I am certain I saw it earlier...
• My plan was actually to change all unassessed pages to class=stub and reassess=yes in order to spur people to change them. The note on the talk page should alleviate hard feelings, assuming people notice it. But if you don't like that plan, I will not continue. I can hand-fix the 22 pages already so edited, if you like, but that will be a project that will need to be spread out over a couple days.
• I will put the "edit" button mod on hold, since you were talking about "show." Plus I have homework to do.

--Ling.Nut 19:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The thing is: I won't know you've made an error unless I follow you around! I just want to make sure you will do another pass.

Instead of making "stub" the default as you do this, could you possibly leave it out entirely, and just mark them as reassess? I'm just afraid that people will feel that their work is being disparaged. - Jmabel | Talk 20:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Will do. Will alter the talk text accordingly.--Ling.Nut 20:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The mystery of the no-show "show" button has been resolved, then.

I removed all the stub class labels I inserted earlier, and struck out the relevant text from the talk page entry... I think the next thing I'll do is put that on real stubs. I was thinking 75 words or less is a stub. I dunno how you feel about that.--Ling.Nut 02:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

A stub can be more than 75 words.

I'd tend to trust whether the page is tagged as a stub. - Jmabel | Talk 16:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism question

It was asked in an out-of-the-way place, so I moved it HERE, at the bottom and in its own section.Anchoress 23:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] time to remove the "Individual nationalities, ethnic groups, etc." assessment table...

On WP:ETHNIC, I was randomly clicking on links in the assessment table, and the assessments are outdated.. (see for example Ethnic German and Ethnic Japanese rated as stubs). The table is supplanted by the new ratings system, altho the latter is not really ramped up yet.. and the table takes up a considerable amount of vertical real estate on the project page.

I suggest retiring it. There's a copy of it on User:Ling.Nut/NewPageSandbox that we can refer to while updating assessments.--Ling.Nut 14:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't have any general problem with this. How, though, do we generate some type of assessment remarks that can be found without having to look at each individual talk page? - Jmabel | Talk 16:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

All of the topics you mention are probably worth keeping in the sidebar.- Jmabel | Talk 23:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move

One more illustration of why not to do cut-and-paste moves.

Anyway, where should I be editing if I want to keep working on it? - Jmabel | Talk 00:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You are here--Ling.Nut 00:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "pages needing attention " section; midterms

[copied]

Hi Jmabel,

Yeah, I've always wondered about that "pages needing attention" section too. There was never any text under the highest-level heading, then the section below is about archaeology. I think this and a few other sections can easily (and fruitfully) be removed from the project page... it will make the page crisper, cleaner etc.

I have midterms now, then papers to write. This afternoon I will put up a wikilink to the page on Wikipedia 1.0 that discusses having "Articles about blahbahblah with comments" structure. Beyond that, I may need to stop for a while. I will be checking my talk page for messages.--Ling.Nut 11:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[end copied]

"So pages needing attention" wasn't one of your experiments in this process? I'll get rid of what is there. I think the section is potentially useful, but the present content is worse than useless. - Jmabel | Talk 15:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Great work! Thanks! See you in a few months. - Jmabel | Talk 16:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Failed"

Ling.Nut, what exactly is it that you are saying failed? Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethnic groups articles by quality looks basically right to me, in terms of the work I've been doing towards this. The "Assessment" values look right, as does the comment I put in for Taiwanese aborigines. - Jmabel | Talk 06:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply:

Hi, thanks for letting me know about the assessment scheme, I never noticed it :-( --Rudjek 22:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question about a worrisome image

HI Jmabel,

My pet project includes a fair use image, taken from a non-US, quasi-governmental website (national park, actually). This image and the accompanying fair use argument were posted long before I entered the picture... I'm afraid that the "fair use" argument will be stricken down if I try to put the page up for GA or FA. The page it is on bears no copyright notice, but I doubt that argument would carry much weight.

I fear that asking a bureaucratic org. to put GFDL or other licensing verbiage on a particular page will be an uphill struggle. Moreover, English would not be their native language, and that might further hinder communication.

However, there is another possibility. The website in question has a free download page for images, and perhaps I could persuade them to copy the desired image to that page.. Full details are here. I don't know whether this fact provides an exception to the rule about free licensing etc. If you happen to know of anyone who is knowledgeable about these issues, I would be eternally grateful if you would send them my way.

Thanks, --Ling.Nut 03:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Not having an overt copyright claim on a page means nothing. Pictures and written works are copyrighted by default. Unless one explicitly relinquishes one's rights, one still has them.
2. In any event, fair use doctrine applies only to copyrighted images. If a copyrighted image is, indeed, irreplaceable, then you have a fair use justification; if it is replaceable, you should elicit a free use equivalent. Wikipedia policy is against making fair use claims on replaceable images.
3. The link you supplied to the Image copyright tags talk page does not lead to a section on that page. However, the answer is: the fact that they offer a free download does not mean that they are relinquishing any rights about reproducing the image, just that they welcome people to use the image non-commercially on their own computer.
4. You might want to contact the site in question and ask for GFDL permission to use the photo. That would make it abundantly clear one way or another whether they would be happy to have the image used this way. See Wikipedia:Example requests for permission.

- Jmabel | Talk 03:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ling.Nut - re your query at my talk pg, I can only echo Joe's suggestion above that you approach the site directly with a usage request per WP:COPYREQ process, to circumvent any concerns. As for general assistance/advice on copyright matters, the places to go would be WP:CV and WP:RFCA. Some copyright-savvy folks there can probably assist. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 06:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Translate GFDL Request letter into Traditional Chinese

Re: [2].

I'm a bit busy in real life at the moment, but if you'd like I can take a crack at translating the letter this weekend. -Loren 01:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] assessment of Abayudaya

You are very welcome, Ling.Nut. For additional help with expansion of the article, you might want to visit WikiProject Ethnic groups. That project has developed a sort of standard article format for ethnic group articles. Basically, it suggests sections that ethnic group articles should include in order to be comprehensive. This was what I had in mind when I commented on the article's potential for expansion. I'm a participant in the Project, so if you have any questions about it, feel free to ask. Good work with this article! --Fsotrain⁰⁹ 16:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Hawaii

Thanks for clarifying the tasks on my talk page. Yes, I will work on them. —Viriditas | Talk 01:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

As I said previously, it's been somewhat inactive. I'll go through it in the next few day and update it where necessary. Thanks for keeping me informed. —Viriditas | Talk 00:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject directory

Please keep in mind that the department fields (assessment, peer review, collaboration, etc.) need a raw link, not just "yes", to work correctly. The full instructions, and some samples, can be found here. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 03:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ‎Ethiopia articles needing attention

Heads up ! I suspect that you didn't mean to create a mainspace article ‎Ethiopia articles needing attention (from the description it looks like it should be a category). Cheers ! Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not an admin, so I can't zap the pages for you. The easiest thing to do is to add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Hope this helps and good luck with the Wikiproject. I'll have to have a look around as Ethiopia has always fascinated me, although I've never managed to find time to visit. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation Adopted Pages

At first, I had no idea what you were talking about, since I did the edits several hours ago. I was fearful that I did blank the whole page and rushed to my watchlist to see what was up. I was relieved to see that I had only sorted it from a-z to the recent edition. Hopefully the people that are reverting my edits, should be a little more cautious as they make their edits. I'm sure it was just a simple mistake. But thanks for checking up on me. Don't ever hesitate to contact me if I do make a mistake. --Nehrams2020 23:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment system for WikiProject Kentucky

I'd love to see an assessment system like the one you proposed for WikiProject Kentucky. I haven't been editing on Wikipedia that long, so I'm not sure I know how to create one myself, but I'll be glad to help (and therefore learn). Let me know when you want to get started. Thanks for your offer! Acdixon 15:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Christmas works for me. I have a number of days off around then. Gotta love higher education! Thanks again. Acdixon 16:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You have mail

You have a reply waiting for you at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Admin coaching  The Transhumanist   19:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editor review

I took a look, but I'm not familar with the process in detail. I'll take a look at how it works and leave you some comments when I get a chance... Despite our disagreements on the Schools issue, I can see you care about the project, and I'll give you some constructive feedback. Georgewilliamherbert 05:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] El Vez

Thanks for fixing the <ref> issue! adavidw 09:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taiwanese aborigines

As you wish, if you don't want other contributors in the article. There are just so many redundancies. — Indon (reply) — 16:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Indon, am replying on your talk page.

But of course I want you to contribute to the article! Please don't think I don't value your contribution. And I see your point about redundancies. You just made so many changes, and some of them were not about redundancies. I would like to discuss them one by one, or at least by small groups of related changes, on the article's talk page. Thanks --Ling.Nut 17:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Review

• Thanks for the invitation to contribute to your editor review. You have been generous in our dealings and I appreciate the invitation. However, as a matter of principle, I prefer to evaluate Wikipedia's contents, not its participants. --Dystopos 18:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The revert at Taiwanese aborigines...

...doesn't seem like a big deal. In general, given that this was a good faith edit and not blatantly wrong, it might have been better to leave it in place while discussing and certainly would have been better to raise your specific issues with it on the talk page at the time you reverted. Probably should not have been reverted entire, in any case. But, again, not a particularly big deal. - Jmabel | Talk 23:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

No matter what the basis of your disagreement, you have to address the matter directly. If it's about style, revert the stylistic edits you disagree with and say that it is about style, but some of these were substantive, and you reverted those as well. - Jmabel | Talk 00:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Somewhat apropos joke, vis a vis those edits: Three men were traveling on a train, a philosopher, an engineer, and a sociologist. The philospher looked out the window and said, "It would appear that the side of the cow that is facing us is brown." The engineer said, "The cow is brown." The sociologist said, "All cows are brown." - Jmabel | Talk 00:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you've already alienated the person, all you can really do now is whatever you think is best for the article. - Jmabel | Talk 00:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] November Esperanza Newsletter

Program Feature: Admin Coaching (needs coaches!) Admin Coaching needs coaches!!! If you are an administrator, or even a generally experienced user, do consider signing up to be a coach. Admin Coaching, now being coordinated by HighwayCello, is a program for people who want help learning some of the more subtle aspects of Wikipedia policy and culture. People are matched with experienced users who are willing to offer coaching. The program is designed for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. What's New? The Tutorial Drive is a new Esperanza program! In an effort to make complicated processes on Wikipedia easier for everyone, Esperanza working to create and compile a list of tutorials about processes here on Wikipedia. Consider writing one! A discussion on how Esperanza relates to the encyclopedia has been started; please add your thoughts. Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.

The last AC meeting (full log) The list of proposed programs has been updated, with some proposals being archived. There is now a new program: the Tutorial Drive! Consider writing a tutorial on something you are good at doing on Wikipedia. The suggestion of adding a cohesive look to all the Esperanza pages is being considered; join the discussion if you are interested! In order to make a useful interlanguage welcome template, those involved in translation projects will be asked what English Wikipedia policies are most important and confusing to editors coming from other language Wikipedias. A discussion of Esperanza's role in Wikipedia is being held, with all thoughts of all Esperanzians wanted! Shreshth91 informed everyone that he will be leaving the Esperanza council as life is rather busy; his spot will be filled by the runner up from the last election, HighwayCello. Signed... Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, The Halo, Shreshth91 and HighwayCello 20:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.

[edit] Embryonic Basque Portal and (maybe) Wikiproject. Interested?

Hi. I have noticed that you have been recently noticeably active in the discussion/edition on some pages of Basque theme. If you are interested in adding up to this project, please visit my talk page (and check this draft for the portal contents). --Sugaar 21:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Esperanza Template Tutorial

I noticed you volunteered (saying pick one) for the tutorial for creating templates. Do you mind if I do that instead and you choose one of your other options, or at least collaborate on the tutorial? Thanks in advance. -- tariqabjotu 01:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Go for it! :-) I'm busy now.. and perhaps I can chip in a little comment here and there after you finish. Thanks!--Ling.Nut 01:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:Anatomy of a template; tell me what you think about it and make changes at will. I tried not to go overboard and just provide the basics of a template, as we already have two extensive template tutorials (Help:Template and m:Help:Advanced templates). -- tariqabjotu 00:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Will do so whenever I have time (not now & maybe not soon). Thanks!!! --Ling.Nut 00:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: A useful tutorial... :-)

That's awesome - thanks! Now it's fixed. Much better. :) Thanks for pointing out it out. And we're just happy to have you around Esperanza anytime that you get the chance! -- Natalya 17:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your question

I actually noticed this one get passed myself and wondered about the references, but looking at the talk page, several different GA reviwers seem to of looked at it, so I just let it go by. But I do think there might be reasons to change the decision, I probably wouldn't of passed it, but then again, I normally don't like to review articles where I think it can go either way :/. (Which, annoyingly enough, seems to happen alot.) If you feel strongly enough about it you can open a dispute on WP:GA/R, there's actually been a fairly large amount of nominations for review lately anyway. Homestarmy 00:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not that there aren't any checks, people can look at the GA page as things happen and stop people (and we have before), its just not really fool proof. But even though its not really secure like the FA list might be, anyone can delist any article instantly, so I think that mitigates that somewhat. Homestarmy 16:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citation question

I've responded on my talk page. Cheers! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 14:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Treatment of TS

Thanks for the review of Treatment of Tourette syndrome: I've left a response on the talk page. I wasn't thrilled when someone nominated four of my articles for GA just as I was preparing to travel (since I wrote them, and no other editors are currently working on them): I won't be home until next week, and I have limited, slow, and sporadic internet access right now. Thanks again, Sandy (Talk) 16:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cats and Dogs Portals

Hi, Ling.Nut. If you can offer some tips on the respective portal talk pages about how to improve Cats and Dogs up to "featured" quality, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Rfrisbie^talk 18:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Endangered languages

How do you decide that something should go in Category:Endangered languages? You added the category to Maa languages, for example, but neither Maasai nor Samburu is currently considered endangered. I have removed the category there, but I wonder if there will be other cases of miscategorization. Thanks, — mark ✎ 07:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

All is well. replied on your talk page.--Ling.Nut 20:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! — mark ✎ 21:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Late reply

Hi Ling.Nut,

If you ever have any questions about the Kurds fell free to ask. :-) As for the controversial edits, the best thing is to ask the user(s) to discuss, mind the 3RR, and cite sources. If I ever spot any more incidents I'll let you know. Ciao, Khoikhoi 00:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding ede Yorùbá, you are correct. Someone who comes to Wikipedia solely for the purpose to promote/advertise their website can be called a spammer. Once your revert them, please add {{spam}} to their talk page (then {{spam2}}, {{spam3}}, etc.). I've also added the page to my watchlist so I can help out as well. ;-) Cheers, Khoikhoi 01:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've added that page to my watchlist as well. BTW, always remember to subst these templates, i.e. instead of using {{spam}} use {{subst:spam}}. Adios, Khoikhoi 03:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Romanians and Roma people

After a cursory review, I'd rank Roma people a high B-class, mainly because of the cleanup tag on the article as a whole as well as on the "Genetics" section. There are also many {{fact}} tags. Romanians does not have so many {{fact}}s or any clean-up tags. Both articles need major improvements in their lead sections so that they summarize the articles completely. There is a bulleted list in the "Population" section of Romanians; each item is meaty enough that I wonder why the section isn't prosefied. The similar list in Roma people should have its redlinks evaluated: do they have a reasonable chance of having stubs written for them? If not, please black (dewikify) them. That's my assessment. -Fsotrain⁰⁹ 21:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Got Cruft?

Want more? Here's a place to find it User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard. Happy editing! Morton Devonshire^Yo 01:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Australian Aboriginal languages

This is the correct list I wanted to present to you, so maybe just edit this one, it would be outstanding. Enlil Ninlil 05:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thanks for the compliment. Kukini 02:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Related changes

Hi Ling.Nut, in response to your query at my talk pg: the "related changes" is a feature of the wikimedia software. Dunno specifically how it works but what it does is compile on the fly a sort of watchlist of recent changes for all articles which appear as links on some particular page in wikipedia (also works on all articles in some given category). Thus, when you have an article, list or category page open and you hit "related changes" (should be in the general toolbox, normally to the left of the page if you are using the classic default skin), it will generate a list of the last x number of recent changes over y period (configurable, just like a watchlist) for the articles/pages which have links on the page/category you are viewing at the time.

You can also code this feature as a link on a page, such as I have done on WP:MESO/ALIST, you can go there to see the syntax. That's how I keep tabs on recent changes to WP:MESO-related articles (I do the same with their corresponding talk pages, which the project banner places in an overall category). The list of mesoamerica-related articles I generate/maintain manually from an exported list generated by AutoWikiBrowser, so it's not that hard to set up. Are you asking in terms of how such a thing might be useful for WP:ETHNIC? Regards, --cjllw | TALK 04:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Replied on cjll's talk page. --Ling.Nut 11:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, well if you want to keep an eye on the recent changes for a number of articles associated with some particular wikiproject, then you can either compile a single project list containing links to all these articles, or alternatively have all of these articles in a single category, and run the 'related changes' function from there. Probably the easiest is to have a project banner on all the relevant articles' talk pages which (among other things) assigns all to some single high-level project category (for WP:MESO, that is category:WikiProject Mesoamerica articles). A 'related changes' view on that category will give you the changes on the talk pages, to get the changes on the article pages you'd just need to do a category dump (AWB exports this easily) into a text file, strip away the prefixed Talk: string and then import the result as a list of links to some project page, from which a 'related changes' view will give you the wether eye on what's been happening for your project's charges. Keep up the good work, --cjllw | TALK 23:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFA Thanks

Thanks!
Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation.
Georgewilliamherbert 06:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Endangered languages

Man, you are so back and forth about whether you want to start new projects or don't have time for the ones you are already doing!

Why exactly would this be a separate WikiProject rather than a focus within Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages? If you've got a good answer to that, sure, go for it; if you don't get the critical mass of participants you can always say "oops" and just roll it back into WikiProject Languages. - Jmabel | Talk 19:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply!--Ling.Nut 23:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Considering ther is not much done on endangered language than maybe a new project focusing on it is needed, maybe include extinct languages too that can be revitalized like the Prussian language. Enlil Ninlil 06:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arabian horse--thank you and questions

Thanks for your very useful comments on Arabian horse I have made some fixes per your suggestions (some citation will take a while), and had some questions: First, what does one do with information that is so common within the field (though not necessarily known by newcomers) that almost every basic book on the topic mentions it? Does is still need a specific cite, just pick a standard reference, or can it remain uncited? In the article, this would be the case of the reference to the "mitbah" and "jibbah" Second, because I am too close to the horse world to catch all unfamiliar terms, would you eyeball the article and note if there are other undefined terms that people need a link for? I pretty much cross-referenced to the horse anatomy article for the parts of the horse questions, hope that worked. At any rate, your comments were constructive, positive, helpful, USEFUL, and I would appreciate your further remarks. Montanabw 08:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Confirming that for GA status, proper wikilinks and definitions were what you were looking for, the citation issues are more what is needed for consideration as a FA?? Montanabw 18:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm making a judgment call here. It seems that a large number of your statements have been cited.. but far from all of them. So the answer is YES. You have satisfied the requirements for GA, in my opinion, but I strongly suggest that you get to work on the rest of those citations.

Congratulations!--Ling.Nut 18:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

OK! Thanks! Citations will take a while. Thoughts on web sites versus textbooks? In particular, links to web sites that partially quote textbooks or magazine articles? Montanabw 19:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

(remove indents) This is a deep question. :-) Books and especially refereed journals are almost always better than websites. Blogs are definitely out. Geocities and other such personal webpages are out too. The official website of a well-known and respected professional organization.. hmm.. judgment call, but has a good chance of being OK. If the website quotes a book, giving page numbers etc.. ideally you should go to the library and double-check. That's easy for me to say, since I'm here at the university. :-). But if the book itself is well-known.. again, judgment call, but it has a good chance of being OK. In that case, quote the book, not the website's quote of the book (if you know what I mean). Does that help?--Ling.Nut 19:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

OH PS Google Scholar (not regular Google) is the student's bestest best friend! :-) --Ling.Nut 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar! It's heavily appreciated. LuciferMorgan 21:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Well...

I have to say, concentrating too much on the GA/R page might be a bit of a problem :/. The thing is, the GA/R page as a whole normally doesn't get the flood of activity there is lately, because more people (Well, mostly LuciferMorgan) are trying to enforce the 2B criterion. Normally its relatively slow, and i've mostly archived and enforced everything myself for the past few months or so. (Its kind of funny, the process sounds all nice, but in the end, only one user is actually managing the important stuff in the backgound mostly :D ) There's not too much to do by spending much time on it, many times i'll come across articles that I really don't want to comment on because it would be too hard for me, and so I don't comment on them :/. I would like to see the GA system become stable and yet flexible, and I think the opinion garnering on the GA/R page is an important thing to keep going for that sort of goal. As for notability, as far as I know there's no reason at all anyone should fail an article for not being "notable" enough, if it passes notability criteria to be on Wikipedia, then it should be notable enough for a GA review. I can't remember any reviews which had notability of the topic become an over-riding concen :/. And yes, I did read Worldtraveller's essay there, I could understand that he really wanted the GA system to be something very different than what it has become, but now many other language Wiki's have picked it up more or less the same way we have, so I guess Worldtraveller's vision didn't come to pass :/. But in the end, I don't really give my full attention to the GA process, I want it to succeed because I think it will become very useful for improving articles because of its informal yet somewhat mandatory review process that has to proceed to review any article, but most of my contributions have focused on Christianity related articles. (Look at my user page, you might see why :) ) Homestarmy 04:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

In response to the above, 2. b. is there to be enforced. It should be removed if it isn't to be enforced. LuciferMorgan 21:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, all the articles I've delisted immediately were actually notified two months ago. Some editor went around leaving a notice on all the talk pages concerning inline cites which means they've had sufficient warning. LuciferMorgan 21:17, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Yea, when Agne hit some of the scientific type articles that's when the argument started :/. But really, almost every time i've seen an article have a lack of inline citations its poorly referenced overall, so i'm not saying you're doing something wrong Lucifer. Homestarmy 21:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• I think that everyone is unanimous that delisting articles with no inline cites, as well as longer articles with less than ten or a dozen at the very least, is extremely & unquestionably legitimate.
• My own ideas about 2b are evolving with time. For example, two months from now I might not necessarily pass an article like Arabian horses. Much of my "pass" decision was based on the good faith of the editor; maybe I wouldn't do it quite the same way in the future (but I don't think it should be taken away; I have seen more than a few edits since the passing.. it was a judgment call, and perhaps this time I was right...
• plus I didn't know about the earlier (two months ago) warning..
• plus the waiting period is flexible...
• plus I don't want anyone to have for one second the impression that I was arguing anything; just discussing. :-)
• --Ling.Nut 21:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean to sound rude, only saying that Agne had notified them. Also, they can always renominate an article. LuciferMorgan 01:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• I didn't think you were being rude. :-) I also replied on your talk page, but now am afraid it got lost in later posts. --Ling.Nut 19:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought you ought to know, I can't read my e-mail during the week at this time of day, so if you've sent me anything, I can't read it right now :/. Homestarmy 21:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maroon (people) and Cimaroons

Well normally for a people I would say, for example, Batin people to distinguish them from the place. But in this case where they are not a uniform people, but rather a name that has been placed upon various distinct peoples, I think that the parenthesis is appropriate, meaning the usage of the word as applied to people rather than a distinct ethnicity. You are quite welcome for the merge, but the article Maroon (people) still needs more work, but not tonight by me. Take care, Bejnar 01:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] table format changed!

Hey jmabel,

Look at the sidebar of the project page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups. The statistics table has a new, wider format, that has kinda hosed the layout within the sidebar (I looked at it in both Firefox and MSIE; both look bad)....--Ling.Nut 02:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

So let's take it out of the sidebar, and put it in the page directly. - Jmabel | Talk 02:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "doesn't speak good English" on a list of sytematic biases...?

Hi jmabel,

I could swear I thought I saw you post something somewhere, perhaps a while back, about there being a list of biases towards contributors on Wikipedia, among which was "doesn't speak good English." Can you point that out to me?

Thanks --Ling.Nut 21:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Huh? I think you got that exactly backwards. At User:Jmabel#On systemic bias I wrote that "Wikipedia is disproportionately white and male; disproportionately American; disproportionately written by people from white collar backgrounds. We do not think this is a result of a conspiracy — it is largely a result of self-selection — but it has effects not all of which are beneficial, and which need to be looked at and (in some cases) countered." I also wrote "Wikipedia is biased toward over-inclusion of certain material pertaining to (for example) science fiction, contemporary youth culture, contemporary U.S. and UK culture in general, and anything already well covered in the English-langauge portion of the Internet."

Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias has a much-modified and expanded version of this essay (by no means mainly mine in this version), which says., among other things, "The average Wikipedian on English Wikipedia (1) is male, (2) is technically-inclined, (3) is formally educated, (4) speaks English to an extent, (5) is White, (6) is aged 15-49, (7) is from a predominantly Christian country, (8) is from an industrialized nation, (9) is from the Northern Hemisphere, and (10) is more likely to be employed in intellectual pursuits than in practical skills or physical labor." Perhaps you misread "speaks English to an extent" as "speaks English only to a minor extent"? The point (which is not elaborated) appears to be that when the pool is narrowed to English-speakers, some areas of the globe will be poorly covered, with which I agree. - Jmabel | Talk 22:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Good articles/Review

Thank you for speaking up for me on that page (or at least I got the impression you did). It means a lot to me.

Fred-Chess 22:44, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I made a post at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#24_November_2006 about the discussions and accusations of the review page. Reviewers should feel safe to review articles without getting jumped on, or the GA system will not be able to survive. / Fred-Chess 23:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Which Page?

I have most of the GA pages on my watchlist, but the only one I see having highly important discussion is the What is a Good Article? page right now :/. Homestarmy 17:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Answer

Hi Ling, I answered your 11 September question on my talk page. Greetings, Belgian man 23:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Online journals

Sure, if you want to. That'd be great. There might be some good stuff there. Folantin's just added in cites from Viking. The article is less reliant now on one source, so for GA I think it'll be fine, BUT I do have half-formed plans to push for FA once this whole GA saga is over. Then the stuff would be useful, so please, by all means! Cheers, Moreschi 18:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

(Edit conflict of sorts) Thanks for the offer. If you mean we should add some more references to "Agrippina", then I've already put another three from a reputable source on the page today. I could also add some from "Gramophone" magazine if necessary and (possibly) Jonathan Keates's biography of Handel. But IIRC they all tend to say the same thing as Dean, the guru of Handelians. This is not a particularly controversial topic, so I don't think massive referencing is needed, but it's Moreschi's call. --Folantin 18:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Basically, that is a very kind offer, and for the purposes of FA I would like to accept. Thanks again. Cheers, Moreschi 19:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hope it's OK to reply to both of you here. Since your need is more long-term (FA-wise) then I'll just trickle an article here and there to whomever, over time. The file size may occasionally be large.. does anyone wanna be the designated recipient?--Ling.Nut 19:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm probably the better bet, and I can easily forward them to Folantin as and when necessary. Thanks again for this extremely generous offer. Best, Moreschi 19:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I've replied. You can send the attachment at your convenience. Thanks again. Cheers, Moreschi 21:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Ling. Just a quick note saying I just finished sorting out all the stuff, and it looks pretty darn useful. Even better, some of the stuff on Resurrezione will be great when I have to fill in those pesky redlinks, and some of the criticism is a nice counterpoint to Dean when I have to represent different viewpoints. So, basically, thanks a lot! I also appreciate all your work on Agrippina, and my apologies if the whole business has been a bit strenuous at times. Cheers, Moreschi 17:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MESO citations

Hi there Ling.Nut, I'd just noticed your question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mesoamerica/Citations which you'd posted a little while back. By all means, if you've some templates you think would be useful then by all means list them there, that would be great. If you are talking about ref templates rather than actual sources, probably the best place would be in the see also, or maybe make a new section. Regards, --cjllw | TALK 01:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I appreciate your concern. I am just taking a break from GA reviewing.

Fred-Chess 17:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA discussion

Ling Nut, I'd be ever so grateful if you'd actually discuss the matter instead of accusing me of trying to destroy the entire process. That's not my intention at all - I think that the GA process is massively inefficient, bureaucratic, and somewhat redundant. However, I think that some reform can easily fix this. Walking away with only a passing slight neither services the discussion nor does it reflect well on your confidence to defend what I'm criticizing. I'm not saying that my suggestions are perfect, but I am very frustrated that very few people involved with the GA process want to discuss the matter when I bring it up. All I'm asking for is some discussion and critique. :) Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 21:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Just to reply to your comment on my talk. I'll be quite happy to wait around a bit for your input. My ideas for prose - to be brief - good grammar, good spelling, and an appropriate style - one that isn't fantastically flowery and/or laden with Archaisms. Re the architecture article if that's what you have in mind - I wholeheartedly agree with you on the need for cites for the more POV statements. The prose - weel, it could use a minor clean-up, but IMO it's just about alright for GA. Anyway, we can discuss this at greater length once you're less busy. Thanks again for the articles. Cheers, Moreschi 21:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Операция Кoльцo

Hi, I addressed all the issues regarding the citations and minor issues on the article Operation Ring; care for another look?

Cheers --MarshallBagramyan 00:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Nevis

Hi. I've tried to address the PoV issue you mentioned in your review of this article. Let me know if you think I've missed anything. SP-KP 19:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, thanks for your reply. I'm afraid I don't have the reference material available to deal with the citations issue - I'll leave that to the main contributors to the article. On the PoV front, you are correct, I only removed one word, but that was the only one I could find. Do you think there are others? If so, can you point them out, and I will happily fix them. Probably best if you post your comments about the lead to the article's talk page - if no-one else deals with it I don't mind, but I'll let others have first shout. SP-KP 20:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] the Template:Languages of South America

What do y ou think we should do about this extremely incomplete and misleading template that someone has started putting on all pages relating to languages of south america?Maunus 10:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good luck!

Good luck with your exams and papers, and we'll see you when you get back! Cheers, --A R King 16:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AN/I, or just find an admin?

Hi jmabel,

What sould I do about User talk:70.88.224.253? Thanks --Ling.Nut 16:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Dealt with. For the future: WP:VIP - Jmabel | Talk 16:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kurdish people

Well, it's true that the Kurds are an Iranian people (see the respective article), but it's already mentioned in the infobox and I don't think it needs to be the second word in the article. Cheers, Khoikhoi 05:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rumsfeld Commission

Thanks for the pass on the Rumsfeld Commission. If you're curious, I just added a decent bit more to the Background section on how the group was formed, based on an article from 2004. Frankly the toughest part is finding sources that actually describe what goes on in specific instances like these, because most books gloss over background and activities and go straight to a report's conclusions and/or effects. Thanks again, Joshdboz 20:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments on rankings

Do you have any objections to removing the request for comments explaining assessments on the WikiProject Hawaii template? It's a handy feature, but the talk page seems to work just as well. I would like to see assessment disputes handled on a project subpage so that the project can review ranking disputes in one place. I understand that can also be accomplished with the present category feature, grouping comments in a central location, but I'm unsure if this project requires that level of detail. What do you think? I would like to finish assessing the articles. —Viriditas | Talk 21:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah-ha! You answered my question. The comments are indeed useful and important, but I may change the wording about the comments around a little bit. Thank you for the explanation. —Viriditas | Talk 21:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Any thoughts on enabling automatic assessment of stub-class articles to populate the lists/cats like the Military WikiProject? —Viriditas | Talk 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. WP:AWB. --Ling.Nut 02:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Tamony

I am interested in expanding Peter Tamony, as his accomplishments will help improve two related articles. Do you know if there are style guidelines for biographical articles on linguists I should observe? —Viriditas | Talk 21:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. There is a related issue I need your opinion on when you have time. See Talk:Hippie and the controversy over the origins of the word "hippie". [3] Tamony appears to have contributed to this debate, but it is difficult tracking down primary and secondary sources regarding etymology. As you can see from the link above, Adam Carr (logged out) removed the controversial assertions from the main article and left his explanation on talk. Do you have access to obscure linguistic sources (like Tamony) that would support discussing the origin of the word "hippie" in the article? If not, could you recommend some? The current etymology section seems to fail to inform the reader as to the extent of the debate, and is probably inaccurate in many respects. Thanks again. —Viriditas | Talk 00:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the e-mail; I really appreciate your help with this topic. —Viriditas | Talk 02:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Thanks

Thanks for reviewing (and passing) Maserati MC12. I have been working on this for some time now, and I was waiting for the result of the GA nomination to put it up for peer review (here) and so I have improved the article since. Thanks again. James086^{Talk | Contribs} 14:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:GA/R

I was going to try to archive them today, but you certainly can, the instructions are simple and are in the archive page. I just sort of go by a "greater than 66 percent" rule, so at the most basic level, a 2 to 1 vote won't be a consensus either way. Homestarmy 17:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you very much for your support. I greatly appreciate it, and will be sure to take your comments into account. Biruitorul 18:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Homotopy groups of spheres on WP:GA/R

Please don't worry about it. I realised after your comment that I probably didn't know enough about the history of the GA process to be able to make informed suggestions, and took your comment as a joke rather than sarcasm. Still, I do appreciate the apology. I hope that your exams go well. MLilburne 19:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you were fine; probably better than I was. I do not care for GA; but I hope you will continue to take a look at Homotopy groups of spheres - mathematical articles do need, and most of them do not get, detailed review by a non-mathematician. Septentrionalis 20:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Likewise no worries. Your contribution have helped improve the article. What are your PhD classes in? --Salix alba (talk) 22:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Lebanon

I've recieved your other emails so it should work. LuciferMorgan 16:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Disruption on Operation Downfall

That's a long story that one - go to the FAR page discussion on that specific article. and the FAR talk page. Feel free to form an opinion afterwards. I hope all is well on GAR by the way. LuciferMorgan 22:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm keeping low for now lol - otherwise I'll get blocked! LuciferMorgan 01:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Downfall FAR

It's not an issue of prettiness versus verifiability. I would have no objection to him adding a reasonable number of fact tags (which he did earlier, and all of which had been replaced by citations with no futher comments). However, adding them to every uncited sentence in the article (and to some which were cited) was clearly not done as a way of encouraging verifability - there is no citation standard anywhere that requires every sentence to be cited. It was a case of trolling, pure and simple. That's why I threatened to block him. Raul654 18:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The above is BS and he abuses his power, "pure and simple". I'm rather sick of his slander to be honest - I've noticed his poor behaviour numerous times on talk pages, and I'm glad I had the courage to stand up for every other normal Wikipedian who's had to put up with him trying to bully them around with his admin rights. LuciferMorgan 01:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm pulling an all-nighter and can not — not — not get involved in a discussion. I'll offer a couple thoughts and disappear:

1. WP:TROLL says "Trolling refers to deliberate and intentional attempts to disrupt the usability of Wikipedia for its editors, administrators, developers, and other people who work to create content for and help run Wikipedia." Knowing how crazy you are about ref tags (crazier than I am, and I'm as crazy as a bedbug), I am inclined to think that you wanted ref tags there, just as you said. By extension, I don't believe you were trying to be deliberately disruptive.
2. I looked at the diffs of the exchange, and frankly I think both of you had more than one instance of breaking more than one point listed on Safe behaviours
3. If I counted the violations, though, in my opinion, he has more than you. Plus his feel more serious to me, in my subjective opinion. [Details withheld in the name of relative peace and sanity.]
4. BUT Homestarmy said that he believes admins have a track record of considering it "disruptive" when people place a relatively large number of {{fact}} tags on a given page. Like it or not, whether that's fair or just or not, that seems to suggest that he can fairly readily rally support for his position.
5. BOTH of you violated guidelines (again, in my opinion), but his position has a track record of coming out the winner. Moreover, he is a very trusted member of the community (not saying that you aren't). Even though his offenses seem relatively worse than yours, they still seem kinda relatively minor or at worst moderate, in the grand scheme of things.
6. SO if your argument relies on your incident alone, I think you may be likely to lose the argument, in my subjective opinion. I'm sorry to say that.

That's all I can say. Sorry. I hope it didn't seem inappropriate to you. :-(

I will try to catch up with things in a few days, after exams.

--Ling.Nut 02:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

PS IMO, it would be good to find peace and move on, if that is possible. But it's your battle, not mine, and thus your call, not mine. --Ling.Nut 02:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

There's more than my incident that can be referred to if we went through the archives. Having said that, I entirely agree with your comments - after all, the FA director looking bad wouldn't make Wikipedia look good in the eyes of the media now would it? Also, he's a key member of the arbitration committee which deals with resolving issues. The bottom line is that Wikipedia's public image would be slightly tarnished if he was treated the same as everyone else, which frankly is rather sad.

As for him being a trusted member of the community, I'm inclined to disagree and say this is only due to his position as FA director - without that it'd be a different matter. He's a belligerent buffoon, and I'm sticking to that opinion.

As for moving on, it doesn't help when my name's being slandered and he's saying I'm trolling on your page - he's a liar and not a good one at that. I refuse to let him undermine the FAR process in the pathetic, downright ludicrous manner he's attempted to - I don't care who he is, and I'm not the first person to say his tenure as FA director is a shambles. LuciferMorgan 02:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

(undent) I asked Raul654 to comment on my page, see this. Maybe it was kinda obtuse of me. It wouldn't be the first time I was obtuse. ;-) But I actually and truly wanted to know the reasoning behind his threat to block you. But his words are his own. --Ling.Nut 02:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Asian people

Ling, why did you clasified Asian (people) as belonging to Wikiproject Ethnic groups? Asians are not an ethnic group but many. It talks of Asians as if they were a unity and it does so from and excluyent POV that excludes West Asians and Siberians, but has no problems mixing Gujaratis with Koreans.

In my opinion, you are legitimizing patent nonsense. And the rating is wrong: how can it be classified as "top", when it is not a generalistic article about concepts such as ethnicity, anthorpology and so? I don't want to step on your toes but it really looks ultra-POV in its very conception. --Sugaar 21:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Don't worry about my toes. I have recently decided that having hurt feelings is too much hard work for a lazy person like me. :-)
• My memory is vague, but I don't believe I added it to the Wikiproject. I merely attempted to review it; it was already a member of the project. In fact, I reviewed it twice, I believe. I raised concerns at the time about its... content.. if I recall correctly.
• There are many discussions on the WikiProject's talk page about reifying non-homogeneous groups. Some may be archived.
• I agree that there are... questions... regarding the content of pages such as Asian (people). I'm just not as actively concerned about it as you seem to be... I suppose that I have occasional flashes of Eventualism. It is possible that a page such as that may have more than a little redeemable content, and could be turned into a genuinely high-quality article.
• You should consider whether editing the thing to improve its quality is an option. It would be hard work, I believe. Otherwise, you can start a thread on the project's talk page about removing it from the project. I certainly won't argue either direction, since in fact I believe you raise some valid points. However, I think many people are busy; such a thread may not gather any responses. Or if you wanna be really bold, you could just remove it w/out discussion. But that seems a little unilateral to me...
• --Ling.Nut 22:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought you were on vacation so I opened a thread in the WP's talk page. The case is that two "old friends" (i.e. people with a very high ideological bias I met before in another article) have come by the project asking for "permission" to start an article called European people (when you see that blue, the real trouble will have started) and alleging that article and another one (African people) as reasoning to do it. My feeling is that they have already been displaced from White people and are looking for an alternative space to use as propaganda platform for their POVs. I really became very surprised to discover that such articles actually exist (though they are very young) and I suspect they merit an AFD or at least a merge with their respective continental articles.

In my opinion the very concept of Asian people is just too POV to merit an article but in any case it does not deserve to be godfathered by WikiProject Ethnic groups, as they are not one.

But we better discuss this in the project, so we can have other opinions. --Sugaar 22:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Graniteville train disaster

The person guilty of this violation is an admin... I think he should be reported. How does one do this? LuciferMorgan 22:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Check this one: Bourbonnais train accident. Deja vu? LuciferMorgan 22:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Algoma Central Railway - is this another, or not? I can't tell LuciferMorgan 22:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that all the GA articles under Railroad transport need further investigation - more edit histories throw up some info. LuciferMorgan 22:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure this guy's behaviour was dodgy from Day 1. LuciferMorgan 00:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, in most cases it's too much trouble to worry about who did what to whom. Just find old articles that wouldn't pass today, leave a message on their talk page, wait one day, and then delist them. End of story. If someone contests the delisting, then check to see who nominated it, who passed it, who contributed to it (and how much) before passing, etc. --Ling.Nut 01:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

So your telling me that the whole train section just about (30 odd articles), of which he's falsely promoted, should be ignored? Frankly, he's an admin and should be subject to scrutiny like the rest of us. LuciferMorgan 01:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

(undent). Not ignored — examined and potentially delisted. As for Slambo — once again, it certainly wasn't against the rules before 24 December 2005 and probably not before 1 March 2006. Besides, I'm not thinking people are gonna get too offended/excited about self-promotion of GAs. In the grand scheme of things, it's mostly harmless, if kinda yukky. At least, that's what most people will say, I believe. --Ling.Nut 01:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lebanon

Hello Ling.Nut! It's been a while. Could you please comment on our progress with Lebanon? I'm thinking of putting the article through peer review. What do you think? LestatdeLioncourt ^talk 09:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Algoma Central Railway

My mistake. Sorry. LuciferMorgan 20:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be my week on Wikipedia - I've gotten into three separate arguments. One at GAR with that Rlverse bloke (an asshole to be frank) and two others at FAR. I might lie low for a while further. LuciferMorgan 23:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah the argument does seem tedious, and I agree they want free GAs. I don't think they like it when the status is removed, and then take it out on nominators and reviewers. LuciferMorgan 23:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Using one source can be seen as NPOV. It's an argument that's been used in the past. LuciferMorgan 00:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

(undent) yeah.. but.. yawn... I'm not interesting in arguing. It was very very stupid of my to even try to respond (or to help.. people say they want feedback.. then scream when they.. get... it... yawn....--Ling.Nut 00:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Lol. Anyway I retracted the RFC, but a ton of those Train related articles need GARing rather soon. LuciferMorgan 00:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting bored by the GAR discussion too. LuciferMorgan 01:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin coaching, etc.

Are you ready to get started?

The waiting time over at Admin coaching is long (some people have been waiting in line since July). I'm an admin coach with the project, and for my students I set up a group discussion page so that we could all learn from each other. The scope of this concept has expanded into the Virtual classroom, which is an open forum for the teaching and learning of advanced Wikipedia skills.

Anyone and everyone is welcome to participate, as a student, as a coach, or both. Every week or two a new major topic of discussion or classroom assignment is introduced, usually with a guest writer who presents his or her expertise on the current subject and who remains on hand to answer questions. Everyone is encouraged to participate in the discussions, such as sharing your expertise, asking and answering questions, etc.

The current topic of discussion is vandalism, and our guest writer is Budgiekiller.

All discussions are open-ended, so all previous discussion topics and classroom assignments are still there for viewing and further participation. There are also sections for posting miscellaneous topics and questions, requesting coaching assistance, etc.

In addition to inviting those who would like to learn, I routinely invite experts from all over Wikipedia to come and contribute for the benefit of all. The VC is rapidly turning into a clearing house of the best resources, methods, and techniques known for working on Wikipedia.

You are cordially invited to participate.

Here's an announcement box which you can place on your userpage or at the top of your talk page for keeping up to date with classroom assignments.

Tutorials
Introduction to Wikipedia
Introduction to editing
Scartol, on template use and design
Dweller, on Featured Article Candidates
Yuser, on fighting linkspam
Learning the ropes
Elaragirl, about deletion and deletionism
The Rambling Man, on vandalism
Grutness's guide to stubbing
External interfaces - let's compare
Internal interfaces - what do you use?
Getting an article to featured article status
Basic dispute resolution
Adding citations
Reporting and dealing with vandals
Fundamentals of editing

I hope to see you there. Sincerely,  The Transhumanist    07:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] So, speaking of the GA backlog...

What expertise level do they want for people to review articles for GA status? Is there any sort of formal training? I have put up a couple nominees, and notice you do have a backlog. I'd like to help out, but not sure if I'm qualified to just dive in and label stuff...so is there a procedure or training offered? (answer on my talk page if you could??) Thanks Montanabw 19:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, since Ling asked me to help basically, I thought i'd just say that there's no training at all, the instructions are meant to be relatively straightforward. (Though they are starting to get annoyingly complex with hold rules this and delisting times that :/) My advice would be to read the sorts of reviews other users give, the point is just to demonstrate whether an article does or does not comply with the GA criteria. (And maybe give advice on anything else you notice.)Homestarmy 19:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

There's a few articles under the "Physics" subsection in "Physics and Astronomy" heavily lacking cites and having the Agne warning from September. Delist them if you want. LuciferMorgan 20:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

No fears, you haven't scared me away! I'm just busy with a couple other things. I shall poke my head in pretty soon.Montanabw 20:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] small option for template

The option of making templates small seems to be gaining popularity. I put the option in the template {{Ethnic groups}}. If the small=yes option is not set, nothing changes. If it is set, then you get what you can see on Talk:Popora people.

If we adopt this option, we may need to reduce the verbiage on the template.

let me know what you think. --Ling.Nut 04:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Largely a good idea, but looks (on Firefox, at least) like the toggle at the lower right gets messed up, because it overwrites text. - Jmabel | Talk 05:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks good now! - Jmabel | Talk 16:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quick query regarding The Orb

• Hiyas, you previously reviewed and passed The Orb for GA status. You noted that there was much content that was not entirely necessary. If you get a chance, could you perhaps point out a couple such sentences/subjects in the article that you feel could/should be cut? Just a few examples so that I can figure it out from there. Thanks a bunch! Wickethewok 17:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Small option of template

No objection to small option; I don't consider that a major change. Thanks for the heads-up. —Viriditas | Talk 02:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for the brevity. Clear as in crystal clear. Many templates make use of the transparent, Crystal icons. I would like to see a similar icon on the WP Hawaii tag. —Viriditas | Talk 00:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello there. Yeah, perhaps passing me the occasional question about South African languages might be a good idea. Please note, that I'm not a linguist and I seem to be getting notorious for not being a very big fan of citations and verifiability (I've seen more than my fair share of psychoceramics theories which totally contradict my everyday experiences and common knowledge) and I tend to be rather pessimistic about them.

I'm always available if you ever need the first-hand perspective of someone with a good-ish grasp of linguistics (or even matters relating to society and African Traditional Religion).

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 09:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thanks for those wonderful papers. I've downloaded two of three files you sent me, but I'm having trouble logging in to my mailbox (that's why I'm replying here). The ones I have taken a look at seem to be very useful. Many thanks for your helpful comments as well. Happy editing~ — LestatdeLioncourt 17:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, why not? I'm sure George will find them just as useful. I've fixed the problem with my email though (admission decisions are emailed tonight, so I had to that), so no worries. —LestatdeLioncourt 18:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Thanks

Thanks for the thanks on my GA help! I really appreciate that you took the time to thank me. Green451 02:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnic groups project

Answered you on my talk page. - Jmabel | Talk 00:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Activism at OWU

I have to say I found it interesting... on the activism at OWU page you care calling for a very speedy delist... on the very next article you write: "I for one will not delist any GA without such notification." I found that quite entertaining ;-) Balloonman 10:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Self reference category on articles

Hello. I agree with your adding these articles to the "good articles..." category, but please could you put Wikipedia administrative categories such as Category:Good articles needing attention on articles' talk pages, not on the articles themselves? Thanks. --RobertG ♬ talk 17:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Thanks. Yeah it was a bit of a brew ha and I have to admit it did burn me out on GA for a while. But your barnstar did put a smile on my face so thank you. Agne 23:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sigh

What a silly palaver - complete waste of time. The words "Not got a" and "leg" and "to" and "stand" and "on" spring to mind. I tried to improve Agrippina, here not even that. Yawn. I'm off back to more Deletionist Cabal work.

BTW, I've filled in most of the redlinks at Agrippina. Only 2 left, and once that's done I'll start more work on the actual article with your stuff. Cheers, Moreschi ^Deletion! 16:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Waste of time

The fact that this comment happens to reply to you is an accident of timing. You and Homestarmy are the only delist proponents who have come out of this at all well; and your comments on the Homotopy were very useful. Pleas keep on. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Your remarks suggest one of the problems here: neither deletionists nor inclusionists have set up rules in their own favor, as Moreschi and company believe they have. (In fact, they have not; the in-line citation business is so widely unpopular that the criteria have been rewritten to acknowledge that their position is disputed, as I noted - but this seems to make no difference.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

They do; but in so doing they violate WP:CONSENSUS. I'm serious; rename this waste of time Wikipedia:inline-citation cabal, and you will get much less flack. You will be, and will deserve to be, ignored; but you could edit instead. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I will discuss very peaceably - a half-dozen cranks excepted. But the present activities of GA are "divisive and inflammatory" (as Eusebeus' reaction should show) and filling articles with pointless footnotes (like Autobianchi Primula) is a dubious advantage to Wikipedia. A reader should not need footnotes when he has four obvious, listed sources to look at.

Incidentally, you may be right Autobianchi Primula 's advertising. Try searching on the "favorable reaction in the marketplace" sentence, and you may just find it's copyvio; which should end its presence on GA once and for all. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

My apologies for the second paragraph; I wrote it hastily while finding the name for the article I remembered; the first paragraph is intended for you. I will bear it as a lesson in humility. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trees

In this chastened spirit, I ask you, both as an editor and a linguist, whether the assessment of an article on Bach by editors to whom musicologist and counterpoint are unknown strikes you as in any way odd. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• Extremely well put. Eusebeus 18:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Sorry to interject but I have to ask, do you sincerely believe that every reader to the Bach article will be familar with the terms musicologist and counterpoint (which aren't even wiki-linked in the article)? It's really a matter of who the average reader will be--the school kid writting the paper or the musicologist--and whether we are writing the article to their benefit and understanding. I don't think "experts" really would find much need to reference a Wikipedia entry, do you? An expert can easily verify info with their back realm of knowledge and can easily distinguish between OR and established scholarship. The average reader can't. The only thing the average reader has is trust in Wikipedia to follow the guidelines laid out at WP:V and WP:NOR. That's a big leap of faith in an encyclopedia that "anyone can edit". However, with the "papertrail" that in-line cites provide you can give the average reader more cause for confidence in that trust. Agne 20:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Oh, anyone is welcome to join the discussion. Yes, some readers will not understand counterpoint (which is linked; musicologist occurs only in the notes, as a description of one of the authors of a standard reference. Link it if you think necessary.) That's why we link to it. But I would not want those readers making or overseeing substantive revisions to the article either; would you? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Heiße Magister, heiße Doktor gar

Und ziehe schon an die zehen Jahr

Herauf, herab und quer und krumm

Meine Schüler an der Nase herum-

Und sehe, daß wir nichts wissen können!

Faust

I'm sorry to hear you're ill, especially at Christmas and with a thesis to begin.

I regret the grappling; we were converging until RelHistBuff began his ill-informed reversions (the criterion said "Not mandatory" until three months ago, and the change is what's disputed).

No, I appreciate the warning, but I don't think this is a crusade; if I can help stir up enough attention that GA is reformed, or at least respected, that will be enough. I took a walk for a while, and came back to find 2b altered; I will again soon.

I don't see that GA has done much good; it has at least four of the hallmarks of bad process, and it looks like threats of review have been used to POV-push; if it were not rejecting patently good articles, or (as a second choice) were not referred to in any other process, it would be harmless. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brandon Bowman

I believe this is now properly cleaned up. I restored what appears to be a pre-attack version. - Jmabel | Talk 00:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Overhaul

I will be in the US from 12/22-12/31, so after that I will begin working on the page.

Happy holidays!