User talk:Neutrality/Archive 14

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Keeping "In the news" NPOV and credible

Following various attempts to add partisan and fringe stories to Template:In the news, I've proposed a new criterion to keep such stuff out. Could you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:In the news section on the Main Page and let me know what you think? -- ChrisO 17:10, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The arbitration matter of Rex071404 is closed

Excerpt:
2) Rex071404, Bkonrad and others who have committed petty offenses are admonished to consult Wikipedia:Wikiquette and to conform their edits to that standard.
Passed 6 to 0
3) Rex071404 is banned for 4 months from editing Wikipedia articles which concern United States politics.
Passed 6 to 0
4.1) Rex071404 is banned from reverting any article for six months.
Passed 5 to 0 with 1 abstain
5) In view of his demonstrated deficiencies in engaging in and interpreting the results of research Rex071404 is required to cite a relevant authority, either by footnote or by comment embedded in the text, which supports every [disputed] edit he makes.
Passed 5 to 1
For principles, findings of fact, and enforcement see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rex071404#Final decision. --mav 05:07, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Admin vote

Thank you for supporting my nomination for adminship. I really appreciate it. ClockworkTroll 05:56, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] China Collaboration of the Week

You showed interest in taking part in China-related topic development. I have just set up a China Collaboration of the Week. Please add one, or several, nomination(s) and tell others about it. You may access it via the COTW page at Wikipedia:China-related topics notice board/ZHCOTW or through the shortcut WP:ZHCOTW. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 11:21, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Complaint against you in the Wiki-ENl list

I thought you might want to know there has a been a complaint made against you in the Wiki-ENl list, apparently for blocking a user. Nobody appears to be taking it particularly seriously for now. What happened? Jayjg 14:57, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Where should I put the aditional links that were in Template:Opentask?

I recently added more links to the list of "more tasks" at the bottom of Template:Opentask. (See this historical version) You reverted them, with no explanation. While I have no problem putting them elsewhere, this appeared to be the right place for them, and if it is not, I would like to know where else to put them, and/or why this is not right. Any comments appreciated... JesseW 21:58, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

About breaking CP on some browswers; that makes a lot of sense. How do I go about not doing that, while adding the links? Is it the line length? Should I use <br> to seperate the lines into safely small chunks?
About cluttering up the template; where else should links to those pages go? I agree it makes the template bigger, but we need a central place for people do go to find tasks to do, and Template:Opentask seems like the obvious right place. Why is it not? Thanks for responding so quickly. JesseW 22:08, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Culture of the United Kingdom

You voted for Culture of the United Kingdom, this week's UK Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 01:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Ayn Rand

Thanks for the Ayn Rand material on Wikisource. Although it's obvious that she is testifying before some committee of the House of Representatives, nowhere is tha committee identified. We would appreciate if that could be done, and the date of the testimony noted. I also see that ther are numbers scattered throughout the text. These are presumably to footnotes. Could you also please supply the footnotes. Eclecticology 04:08, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. embargo against Cuba

You voted for U.S. embargo against Cuba, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

[edit] Wikipedia:Forum for Encyclopedic Standards

I have drafted a proposal for a new voluntary association on Wikipedia (joining groups like the Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum and the Wikipedia:Harmonious editing club) to promote discussion of a sort of system of expert review on Wiki. Please take a look and add your ideas. 172 02:45, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bureaucratship

Thanks for your supportive vote of my bureaucratship. Unfortunately, the vote was judged to be too close, but I hope you'll support me when I run again. :) Andre (talk) 16:03, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Sakhalin Oblast

Hi, Neutrality!

Just wanted to drop a thank-you note for your interest in this article. Articles on federal subjects of Russia are pretty much neglected, so it's nice when someone takes an interest in them.

I did, however, wanted to let you know a couple of things regarding the Administrative division section. I am generally trying to separate this information into a standalone article (see, for example, Administrative divisions of Bashkortostan or Administrative divisions of Adygeya). This is done as a part of the Russian federal subjects WikiProject, but since I am the only active participant of the project (hint, hint!—sorry, I couldn't not do this :)), the conversion is progressing painfully slow. It is, however, my intent, to re-do the articles on all of the Russian federal subjects, so this is just a fair warning that the districts box you added will eventually be replaced with a separate article. I thought I need to let you know in case you plan to add more of those. I like the box you did a lot, but since the article it will eventually be replaced with will have much more information, I don't know if you decide to proceed with the boxes or not.

Anyway, thanks for your interest again, and let me know if you have any questions.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 15:02, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

Sure, that sounds good. I think we can have the stand-alone list and a separte article and a template footer to be in the articles about each district (none are written yet, but hopefully they will be. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 15:06, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I think I didn't quite get your idea. If a standalone article lists (and links to) all of the districts of a federal subject, what would the purpose of a template footer be? Or did you mean that the footer will be included into the main article? Could you, please, clarify this?
As for the articles on districts not having been written yet—whoever takes a go at those will get my full support and a barnstar. There are 1,866 districts in Russia, and less than a dozen have articles right now. It's just that I'd hate to see 1,800+ stubs or substubs added—almost each district can be expanded into an article, but that's sure helluva work.
Finally, just to let you know—the box header should read "Districts (районы)" instead of "Districts (районов)". That actually was a mistake on my part—in Russian, the word "districts" in the "consists of a number of districts" construction is used in Genitive (районов), and this was the form I put inside the parentheses and then copypasted it all over. I should have used Nominative instead—районы. I fixed it in the box you created and just wanted to point this out so you don't accidentally use the Genitive form in other boxes (should you go ahead and create any more of them). Also, if you could please deitalicize the Russian spelling in the list itself—it has been decided that italicized Russian text is difficult to read for non-native speakers. I didn't want to specifically deitalicize every instance, but I do so if I make other, more significant edits, at the same time.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 15:39, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bias

Let's see how neutral you are! I'd like your opinion at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Thanks. Chameleon 12:06, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)