User talk:Nick Green

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Nick Green! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Kukini
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

Kukini 03:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Ptraj.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Ptraj.png. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

To my shame I don't recall my connection with this image --Nick Green 23:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Analogy.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Analogy.gif. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 19:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Hetar. Not sure how to review these messages. Sorry for delay. Can you email me? nickgreen.cyb@gmail.com.
Anyway have recently added more details. The image was self made, adapted from Pask's book as stated. Uses a notation he used on the now defunct UK Viewdata system.--Nick Green 21:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Variety refs

Nick, thanks for the refs. They would be much more useful as citations if tied as footnotes to what they support. Let me know if you need help learning how to do this. Dicklyon 22:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Tks Dicklyon will do --Nick Green 21:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Dicklyon have done refs to [Variety (cybernetics)]] and all ok. But same procedure has not promulgated refs in No Doppelgangers. Why might that be?--Nick Green 23:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah the mysteries of Wiki made plain ( and the empty element references tag).
Or you could use the Template:reflist. It would be best to put the footnotes after statements that they support; footnotes on headings is something I've never seen done before. Also, please explain what the heck that article is trying to say, by starting with some context, like what field it pertains to. Dicklyon 02:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Hopefully the penny has now dropped for you re the heck. Tks for template suggestion. --Nick Green 03:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories in alphabetical order

In all systesm and cybernetic related articles I try to put Categories in alphabetical order. Maybe you can do the same? - Mdd 20:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

thanks Mdd. Will endeavour to comply --Nick Green 21:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
So you are going to take a look at the Input article. - Mdd 21:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
OK--Nick Green 21:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks - Mdd 21:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gordon Pask and Conversation Theory

You did nice work on the Gordon Pask and about Conversation Theory. I hope you like and understand that I made Conversation Theory a separate article. In this way it's much easier to expand the information about CT and add info about other CT applications and related subjects. - Mdd 21:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Re Conversation Theory from a very quick look that looks good. I'll give it the once over. BTW an over zealous ex- student removed the Venn diagram representation of three interacting participant/concepts. We found the published reference but it is still unreinstated. There is a slightly more modern form Pask used but not very "seeming like much". We'll see. Something similar for Interactions of Actors, perhaps?--Nick Green 21:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Ah ok just seen above. Cyberneticist is unusual in Europe. Guess well muddle through. I did a chat piece on this. Not sure how to contact you guys.

I guess you are here refering to the move User:Paulpangaro made 23 februari, see [1]. He claimed that the Venn diagram in that version was misleading. I guess if you clearify that some more, you can just put back the image (maybe with a subscript). - Mdd 22:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No persons in the Category:Cybernetics

I guess you missed my message here Talk:Gordon Pask#No persons in the Category:Cybernetics!? - Mdd 21:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Got it now there seemed be some kind of contention thing.--Nick Green 21:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Ah ok just seen above. Cyberneticist is unusual in Europe. Guess well muddle through. I did a chat piece on this. Not sure how to contact you guys.--Nick Green 21:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I still wonder if you understand what I mean? This is about you just adding Category:Cybernetics to the Gordon Pask article and that is not allowed...!? I removed it once before, I have explained this on the talk page, but I have the feeling that you don't understand. Sorry if maybe I don't explain these thing right - Mdd 21:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

No its quite clear, Thanks. --Nick Green 21:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Are you going to remove the category yourselve? - Mdd 22:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure- give me a chance working on Variety at the moment. There maybe other instances too which need attention. Trying to remember but I promise when I see it I'll fix it. OK?--Nick Green 22:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't want to push you. I fixt it already because I had to fix an other thing also. I'm going to look at bit more to the current moves made in the cybernetics field, so maybe I get back to you. - Mdd 22:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Suggest you check Norbert Wiener and Stafford Beer --Nick Green 22:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Just done Gregory Bateson and Wiener and Beer seem ok. Can't think of any others. Will include Alfred Wallace as Cyb because of his centrifugal governor is like evolution remark. Hope you think that is reasonable i.e. not anachronistic. Worked with some Evolutionary Computing people and they were unaware -they thought the genetic algorithm was all there was to it. Negative feedback rules!--Nick Green 23:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - Mdd

[edit] No (see also ..) notes in the text

I removed the (see also ..) notes in the text in the Variety (cybernetics) article. They are highly unusual. Better you find an other way to make this kind of cross references. - Mdd 09:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean here. Seems unchanged to me.--Nick Green 10:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems

I don't know if you know, but I'm running the Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems and Portal:Systems science. For the past six weeks I've been improved (over 100) articles that need attention, who were in a bad shape. Most of the time it is not the content, but the form and lay-out I'm improving... and all kind of other things. - Mdd 22:39, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah cool! Indeed excellent. There is a problem with whether Cybetnetics is part of systems or vice versa. All I can say is Wiener came before Bertalanffy. Happy to help I've been mostly in industry/business with some years in Academia and nearly 30 years a card carrying (FCybS) cybernetician. Surprised there are apparently so few cybs active in Wiki. If I don't know I will say.--Nick Green 22:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Thats a good question: Is Cybetnetics is part of systems or vice versa? I'll get back on this. - Mdd 23:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you cannot say that Cybetnetics is part of systems or visa versa. It is very questionable if a scientific field called systems even exit. I see systems as the collection of all kind of systems. And I am focussed on the overall concept of Systems science. Now I think systems science is still an evolving concept at the moment (and for the last 50 years). With my work on the Wikipedia I even want to give it some more solid

I have emailed cyb colleagues
A user called Mdd is running the Wikipedia Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems and Portal:Systems science.
He is asking "what do you think about cybernetics being represented in Wikipedia as being part of the systems sciences.?"
--Nick Green 10:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Suggested options 1. Argue Systems science is part of Cybernetics 2. Cybernetics is a separate discipline 3. Accept classification as part of Systems Science- any others you can think of... My guess they'll accept class in Sys Sci. I'll post the CYBCOM and Metaphorum list to see what Am Soc for Cyb etc think.--Nick Green 10:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
It's going your way Mdd. Initial response from two leading cybs is happy with Cyb as subset of Sys. Will advise if any interesting dissent. Count on me as an amused critic in the sidelines. Might encourage higher standards all round.--Nick Green 14:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
14 emails and much learned discussion on CYBCOM and a new definition of Cybernetics(!) from a leading authority not a bad response. No major dissent yet. --Nick Green 23:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I have read part of the discussion on CYBCOM and it's quit impressive. Some of the responces are really inspiring. It seems to me however that little references are made directly to the Wikipedia and it's way of representations.
One of the things is that in the current state cybernetics isn't a part of systems science. And cybernetics being part of the scope of the WikProject Systems and the WikiPortal Systems doesn't make it a part. Cybernetics is relatively autonmous. Like most parts which for example are captitured in the systems-template. In the near future it's possible to start an own WikiProject Cybernetics and a Cybernetics Portal. - Mdd 22:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll post this--Nick Green 01:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I was actualy interested in your ideas about this? - Mdd 23:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes thanks Mdd. I have just recommended our own portal. Everyone is still at it. The Wiki article on Cybernetics started pretty badly. None of us knew who started it and this K1,K2 stuff put a lot of people off, I suspect. But getting contributions? Well once they get into the habit I'd say it will go fine. How long will that take? They will want to get a consensus on a modern definition so some of the minority views can be put in perspective, for example. Our position on other disciplines: Some of us were critical of the Sante Fe institute re-inventing the cybernetic wheel without much acknowledgment, but, of course, using improved techniques but denying our firmer (hopefully) methodological foundations. Perhaps we are finding complexity less complex now- largely IMHO because of Google and Wikipedia. Time to get to grips with biology now and proteomics looks good. Instrumenting the earth, improving justice and accountability. But how do we depict our relationships to these disciplines? We have to see what the profession says. We see ourselves as one day becoming rigorously inter-disciplinary but one might add only sentient as a species because of what we don't know. You have all these problems in Systems, how do you deal with them?--Nick Green 01:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
These are a lot of questions and no really a direct answer to my question. But it is good to know a little about these backgrounds. It seems that you are playing an intermediar role here (as spokesman of the Cybernetic community), beside your work here just as an Wikipedia editor. Maybe I didn't express myselve right. I'm still getting used to communicating in English. I was actually refering to you in the role of Wikipedia editor. I am wondering if you are interested in working together more formally (with me (and others)) in some kind of Wikipedia:WikiProject? If your interested we can further discust possible options to begin with? - Mdd 15:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Direct answer Yes. And you are right I am acting as an intermediary with the Cybernetics community.--Nick Green 16:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. However, for the past weeks I have been so all into improving, writing and discussing articles... that your answer here kind of struck me. I got to clear my mind first to get a clearer idea about the further options. I will get back on this. - Mdd 00:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
OK no sweat.--Nick Green 00:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Cybernetics and Portal:Cybernetics

The idea is to start a Wikipedia:WikiProject Cybernetics and/or a Portal:Cybernetics. Both have a different aim:

  • a WikiProject is a kind of cooperation between editors to improve the represention in Wikipedia of a specific field (Cybernetics) and to initiate and coordinate further innovations.--Nick Green 23:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
  • a Portal is main pages for specific topics or areas; a kind of homepage; a general representation of the field; a introduction of the existing articles, facts, images, persons in the field and new developments.

Some general information can be found on (or look at some examples)

Now WikiProjects can fulfill multiple tasks (it can start with the first).

  1. Platform to discuss, initiate, coordinate, control, etc.
  2. Assessment
  3. Peer Review Collaboration
  4. Portal(s)

Now it that some hours till days to initiate it, but it can take for ever to run it. After a while WikiProjects and Portals can become inactive (and even can get deleted). And last but not least it takes some people and good will to initiate and run it.

So far for the general introductions? Any questions? Ideas? - Mdd 19:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

(P.S. We could move this discussion to the Talk:Cybernetics page to see if anybody else is interested?)

I'll move this to Talk:Cybernetics and post to CYBCOM. Then I suppose we wait and see.--Nick Green 19:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok I have seen it on Talk:Cybernetics. If you move it to CYBCOM maybe you can do something about the lay-out. I couldn't really read the last thing you copied. It seems one long sentence? - Mdd 19:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Click jkl (icon at top of page) to sort out format when viewing archive in web. Seems to post all right as email.--Nick Green 20:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I still don't know how it works. If I push proportional fonts I get the text on one page, but no more original listings. If I push the non proprotional I get the listing and the text walks way...? I am working with Windows Vista. Maybe that doesn;t help. - Mdd 21:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I note some odd behaviour myself, now (although the prop spacing trick still works in my Firefox under XP). I tried pasting into Word/notepad/notepad++/wordpad to no effect. You would have to insert carriage returns by hand! I post below and will keep you advised.
Dear All
Mdd has suggested setting up an autonomous area for Cybernetics. Clearly we will need an article on Systems from the cybernetic perspective at some stage. My understanding is we cover most areas and once you get into it, if you haven't already, you'll find it fairly straight forward. You can register anonymously or in your own name. Usual standards for academic publishing apply.
Some have said "Wiki" should stand for "What I know Is".
Best
N.
Mdd writes:
The idea is to start ... your text follows (as above) with url to Cybernetics discussion. If I think of anything else will advise.--Nick Green 22:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually the pasting in a text editor seems to work for my posting of your last but not in general.--Nick Green 22:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CYBCOM

I am wondering about two things.

  • Can one change (edit) the original message in CYBCOM
  • I haven't looked yet but can I contribute myselve directly?

I also noticed you made an editorial note about an article on Systems from the cybernetic perspective at some stage. Maybe you should also add this at the talk:cybernetics page. I would like to invite you to contribute there yourselve. - Mdd 23:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I made some articles about those "leading cybs" of yours... and on Management cybernetics, a subject you gave a presentation last year, I read somewhere. Now I'm no expert in this field and kind of made those articles to get better acquainted ((the article on Loet Leydesdorff was rather a shot in the dark)). Now I'm interested in your expert opinion? - Mdd 23:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok I'll put something on Cyb Discussion, yes I have used management cybernetics (partic of Beer) a lot in my work. You can join the CYBCOM list may take 24 hours to get approved and you can't edit once posted. Last paper on selecting an Upper ontology (computer science) with a protolanguage supporting a metalanguage. Still under development. I've mostly applied cybernetics rather than published and pleased to say Beer and Pask were both my teachers, friends and colleagues. Last talk was three short papers 2005 to the Cybernetics Society Pask's Last Theorem, Safe Diagnosis and World Citizen Contracts There are a lot of useful pointers into cybernetics on the CybSoc homepage e.g. Left hand column. Happy to guide.--Nick Green 23:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Your quite fortunate to have know such outstanding persons. I've just been reading Beer's Cybernetics and management (1959) and Decision and control (1966) and I'm quite imprested by the clear lanquage and concepts he expresses here in that time allready. In the last years I have been reading more of the original works of those time, Wiener, Shannon, Weaver, Ashby, Churchmann, Boulding and Bertalannfy... Only this week I realized that Beer was the only one close related to the systems engineering I learned in the 1980s at the Delft University. I'm personly very interested in visualizing society and I found some realy nice examples in Part IV of Decision and Control (Eighth printing 1988). I would love to investigate this further. I the mean time working at the Wikipedia clears my mind and give me some more insides.

I have posted some comment on the Talk:Cybernetics page... just for the record. There is no response so far and I wonder if there will be sone. I guess it's all to abstract. There are still a view minor points we have to discuss about some articles your working. But I'll make this new talk items sone. - Mdd 23:08, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

OK Mdd I look forward to hearing from you. Stafford was an amazing guy (quite different to Pask). We first worked on the Liverpool Cable TV project together (1972 which became Compunet ten years later). There's an audio tape of him talking to Cybsoc (1990) about his 40 years in Cybernetics. You might enjoy. Let's discuss "Decision and Control" some time- magisterial! But read "Brain of the Firm" that's something else. The VSM is a quite extraordinairly powerful systems/cybernetics model. I'm personally less fond of the later syntegrity work.--Nick Green 01:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Cybernetics

Hi Nick, I made some rather mayor point on the Talk:New Cybernetics about the article itselve. You probably would like to take a look at it. - Mdd 21:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mdd. Yes I have responded. Just discovered the Wiki Category: Ecological cycles Should this not go into Category:Cybernetics too? Predator/prey/homeostasis/Lotka-Volterra equations /Logistic map should receive that attention too in due course. The homeostat work of Ashby was foundational in this respect (also von Bertalanffy great fan of Lotka and V equns). --Nick Green 20:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I saw your responce, thank you, and I asked you a new question about it allready. Maybe you can take a look. I wonder if you know how the watch-list works on the Wikipedia editor? - Mdd 20:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

What you have done with New Cybernetics is somewhat radical but OK by me. Didn't pick it up through my Watchlist tho.--Nick Green 19:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I moved your New Cybernetics article to New Cybernetics (Gordon Pask). This must have shown on your watchlist. Your Watchlist probably kept tracing that page, but didn't see the new New Cybernetics article I wrote. I think? - Mdd 20:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Tks Mdd. Guess I'll figure it out one of these days. --Nick Green 21:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:No Doppelgangers

The discussion on Talk:No Doppelgangers has proceeded. You might want to take a look. Good luck. If you have any questions, please let me know? - Mdd 15:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I have been following the ongoing discussion, but haven't partipated lately. I know it is sometimes difficult to establish notability of a relatively new subject. I have already proposed to merge the article, but I do understand that that is not what you want. Now I think there is one other option: and taht is to expand the article, with some related stuff that is notable. I don't know how? But you probably will. - Mdd 00:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gordon Pask pictures

Hi Nick, I wanted to ask you if you by any change own any picutures of Stafford Beer‎ or Gordon Pask, or do you know anybody who does? Lot's of the image of systems scientists in Wikipedia are at the moment shown on the base of fair-use, but this is something I like to change. - Mdd 20:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

And would you like me to add a (fair use) picture at the Gordon Pask article? - Mdd 20:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes please! If in doubt the pic of Gordon at Gordon at Cybsoc is ok- Pask's eldest daughter has waived copyright on all archive material. I note there is one on Beer now. BTW note the Chileans have obtained a video of Stafford talking in 1974 at Manchester Business School (he was prof there) about his work in Chile. Very good and clear. External link at Stafford Beer and Viable System Model. You'll also see two of Gordon's quirky drawings at Cybsoc. Help yourself if you think suitable for Wiki.--Nick Green 21:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this good news. But taking any image and uploading here or in commons will need some preparation. Allthough I have been uploading pictures for the past months, I still don't know exactly how to proceed. - Mdd 22:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The illustrations in the your article on Pask are very nice. I like a lot both Pasks portrait, and Pasks drawings on the "Mind model" and the "desktop computer". I also took a look at Pasks portraits at the Pask archive, and found two portrets of a younger and an older Pask. Before taking any action however, maybe we should taken some time to determine where we could use these kind of pictures. I can tell you about some of the ideas and ideals I have here!? - Mdd 23:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Ps. One of those ideals I just realized. I completly rewrote the article about wetenschap (science) in the Dutch wikipedia. Allthough you probably can't read it, its nice to look at.

Yes it looks nice- you're right I don't read Dutch. Re Pask's drawings perhaps the desktop computer is a little rich for Wiki but the mind model has real teaching value- constructivism and all that. No hurry- let's get things right. Try and watch Beer's video- he gave good talks. --Nick Green 00:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I have listened to Beer's speech some weeks ago, and that was very inspiring. Thanks. I however can't get that video running on my new computer, because I don't have the specific mediaplayer yet.

It's a good thing that you question the use of Pasks images. It all depends on how far we want to go. Now we can first take a look at some numbers. That's why I mentioned the "wetenschap" article: that article is now 13 pages. The Pask article 4.5 pages. I think that an article, can go up to 20 pages if you want. This of cause also depents on how much information there is. But it seems to me that there is lot's of information. So how far to do want to go? - Mdd 00:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Well I could write a lot more, expand and include more quotes etc but I'd rather put it off until March next year when the new collection of his papers is out. Rudolf Peierls pointed out in calculating the momentum of a refracted photon Minkowski put the refractive index on the top line and Abrahams a year later the bottom- this, believe it or not, is still unresolved (I have asked the current expert to contribute to Wiki Talk:Refraction). Rather disarmingly Peierls then talks about the peer reviewed mistakes he made in discussing this problem- I think many are hoping to find Pask has made mistakes too- but none found yet. This is where Wiki Criticism sub headings can be so useful!--Nick Green 00:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking about doing some research and writing myselve... investigating the current sources and extract some extra information here and there. In the mean time you must have gotten an idea about how I work and use the sources. But if you want to wait...!? - Mdd 21:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead. I'll help if I can.--Nick Green 21:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do. This may take a while. - Mdd 23:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anthony Stafford Beer‎

Hi Nick. One question... is it "Beer, Anthony Stafford" of "Stafford Beer,‎ ‎Anthony". - Mdd (talk) 23:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Beer's full name is Anthony Stafford Beer but he was always known in articles books etc as Stafford Beer. The "Anthony" will come as a surprise to most people, Beer is his surname. --Nick Green (talk) 23:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks now I know. Someone made this change to the Template:Cybernetics, and now I guess this is allright. - Mdd (talk) 23:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UK Budget see also

Hi Nick. Nice article on the budget. I see you've been adding it as a see also to UK Govt Department articles. I don't think this is the right place to add it as the budget is no more relevant to the departmental articles than any other of the many UK Government articles in existence. I've added a UK Govt category to the budget article - I'm sure there are more cats that can be applied and these are probably the best option for including it. MLA (talk) 10:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, good point but the hope is that someone will come along and describe what current (politically set) policy on operations, regulation and development are for each Department and giving a real world constraint (the budget) on those Departments might encourage this! Well we can always hope. Might make things more transparent, easy to understand, and after all we (in UK) only pay for it all. There's still a lot of opposition to openness in the Public Service here in UK. There is the problem of the Home Office "not fit for purpose" and just yesterday 25 million child records were lost by Treasury Departments, Hospitals are filthy and nurses won't wash their hands and doctors won't isolate patients -crazy and huge increase in budget over last few years. Somewhere between party manifestos and pending legislation, then recently enacted legislation (becoming reg, dev and op policy for a dept) we have a standard good area for Wiki to cover. Any further thoughts welcome. Do you have any Political Scientists/lawyers might get on this? Systems approach to govt?--Nick Green (talk) 11:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I think systems & regulations for UK Government Depts is an interesting area that haven't yet been fully developed on wikipedia. I'd suggest that the UK Budget article might be well served by being on the see also section of HMT and HMRC rather than each Department individually.
Separately, I see you've got an email address on your userpage. It's often a good idea to take that off as it's quite easy for spammers to pick it up through a crawler and for you to receive spam as a result. You can set your account to be able to receive email in my preferences. MLA (talk) 12:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Definitely a link to HMT needed but I'd rather keep the links to Depts to encourage reality! No spam prob yet- but I'll check options. Thanks. The details on spending plans for forthcoming year as a topic for each Dept (laid out in Chancellors Budget statement) might do the trick. Unless you have a better idea!--Nick Green (talk) 12:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)